Of stumps and stipes: comparisons between the cultures and identities of Yorkshire cricket and mycology at the turn of the twentieth century

Mycology, the study of fungi, is a relatively young and underexplored discipline with a strong culture of field collection and study. The Yorkshire Mycological Committee (YMC) of the Yorkshire Naturalist's Union, formed in 1892, became the first permanent mycological organization within Great Britain. Well renowned and highly competent, the members of the YMC espoused a distinctive philosophy and practice of science that led them into a drawn-out conflict with the newly established British Mycological Society that continues to impact the practice of British field mycology today. This paper explores the philosophy, practice, and hierarchy of the Yorkshire mycologists and fungal collectors through the lens of their regional identity. To do so, it examines similarities and differences between the Yorkshire expressions of mycology and cricket around the turn of the twentieth century, with the latter already well established as a major vehicle for expressions of the region's identity. It argues that both activities stem from a distinct Yorkshire identity and culture that both superseded and intersected with other factors such as class and authority. In doing so, it highlights the importance of provincial identities and scientific movements in informing and influencing wider disciplinary philosophies and practices.

Narrative histories in mycology and the legacy of George Edward Massee (1845–1917)

Mycology is a relatively small and young discipline that has yet to achieve the institutional presence of similar disciplines such as botany and zoology. Because of this, mycological histories are often written by practitioners aiming to establish a narrative of professionalization that confirms mycology as a scientific discipline instead of a natural history pursuit. George Edward Massee (1845–1917) was one of the foremost mycologists of the late nineteenth century, achieving the top position in the field as Principal Assistant (Cryptogams) at the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, and publishing over 250 books and articles. Providing a link between the great Victorian mycologists Mordecai Cubitt Cooke (1825–1914) and the Revd Miles Joseph Berkeley (1803–1889) and the more modern school that included the likes of Elsie Maud Wakefield (1886–1972), he achieved this position without a university education. However, since his death, his achievements have been subject to multiple negative assessments and, as a result, he has become increasingly obscured in the history of British mycology. The majority of these unfavourable appraisals originated from the publications of Dr John Ramsbottom (1885–1974), a mycologist and historian who was a key member of the British Mycological Society and a founding member of the Society for the Bibliography of Natural History. These articles were published across the first half of the twentieth century, and Ramsbottom's works have since become standard texts in both the biography of Massee and the history of British mycology. Here I question the validity of the substance of Ramsbottom's claims against Massee, given the circumstances under which Ramsbottom's articles were written and the relationship between Massee and the fledgling British Mycological Society, initially run by Carleton Rea (1861–1946) and of which Ramsbottom was a senior member. I examine wider reasons for such strong criticism of Massee and explore the professional differences and relationships between Massee and Ramsbottom, placing the analysis firmly in the context of changing scientific practice occurring in the early twentieth century.