The poems which constitute Leopardi's principal title to immortality

are only forty-one in number, and some of these are merely

fragmentary. They may for the most part be described as odes,

meditative soliloquies, or impassioned addresses, generally couched in

a lyrical form, although a few are in magnificent blank verse. Some

idea of the style and spirit of the former might be obtained by

imagining the thoughts of the last book of Spenser's _Faerie Queene_

in the metre of his _Epithalamium_. They were first edited complete by

Ranieri at Florence in 1845, forming, along with the _Operette

Morali_, the first volume of an edition of Leopardi's works, which

does not, however, include _The Sequel to the Battle of the Frogs and

Mice_, first printed at Paris in 1842, nor the afterwards discovered

writings. Vols. ii.-iv. contain the philological essays and

translations, with some letters, and vols. v. and vi. the remainder of

the correspondence. Later editions are those of G. Chiarini and G.

Mestica. The juvenile essays preserved in his father's library at

Recanati were edited by Cugnoni (_Opere inedite_) in 1879, with the

consent of the family. See Cappelleti, _Bibliografia Leopardiana_

(Parma, 1882). Leopardi's biography is mainly in his letters

(_Epistolario_, 1st ed., 1849, 5th ed., 1892), to which his later

biographers (Brandes, Bouché-Leclercq, Rosa) have merely added

criticisms, excellent in their way, more particularly Brandes's, but

generally over-rating Leopardi's significance in the history of human

thought. W. E. Gladstone's essay (_Quart. Rev._, 1850), reprinted in

vol. ii. of the author's _Gleanings_, is too much pervaded by the

theological spirit, but is in the main a pattern of generous and

discriminating eulogy. There are excellent German translations of the

poems by Heyse and Brandes. An English translation of the essays and

dialogues by C. Edwards appeared in 1882, and most of the dialogues

were translated with extraordinary felicity by James Thomson, author

of _The City of Dreadful Night_, and originally published in the

_National Reformer_. (R. G.)

LEOPARDO, ALESSANDRO (d. c. 1512), Italian sculptor, was born and died

at Venice. His first known work is the imposing mausoleum of the doge

Andrea Vendramini, now in the church of San Giovanni e Paolo; in this he

had the co-operation of Tullio Lombardo, but the finest parts are

Leopardo's. Some of the figures have been taken away, and two in the

Berlin museum are considered to be certainly his work. He was exiled on

a charge of fraud in 1487, and recalled in 1490 by the senate to finish

Verrocchio's colossal statue of Bartolommeo Colleoni. He worked between

1503 and 1505 on the tomb of Cardinal Zeno at St Mark's, which was

finished in 1515 by Pietro Lombardo; and in 1505 he designed and cast

the bronze sockets for the three flagstaffs in the square of St Mark's,

the antique character of the decorations suggesting some Greek model.

(See VENICE.)

LEOPOLD (M.H. Ger. _Liupolt_, O.H. Ger. _Liupald_, from _liut_, Mod.

Ger. _Leute_, "people," and _pald_, "bold," i.e. "bold for the people"),

the name which has been that of several European sovereigns.

LEOPOLD I. (1640-1705), Roman emperor, the second son of the emperor

Ferdinand III. and his first wife Maria Anna, daughter of Philip III. of

Spain, was born on the 9th of June 1640. Intended for the Church, he

received a good education, but his prospects were changed by the death

of his elder brother, the German king Ferdinand IV., in July 1654, when

he became his father's heir. In 1655 he was chosen king of Hungary and

in 1656 king of Bohemia, and in July 1658, more than a year after his

father's death, he was elected emperor at Frankfort, in spite of the

intrigues of Cardinal Mazarin, who wished to place on the imperial

throne Ferdinand, elector of Bavaria, or some other prince whose

elevation would break the Habsburg succession. Mazarin, however,

obtained a promise from the new emperor that he would not send

assistance to Spain, then at war with France, and, by joining a

confederation of German princes, called the league of the Rhine, France

secured a certain influence in the internal affairs of Germany.

Leopold's long reign covers one of the most important periods of

European history; for nearly the whole of its forty-seven years he was

pitted against Louis XIV. of France, whose dominant personality

completely overshadowed Leopold. The emperor was a man of peace and

never led his troops in person; yet the greater part of his public life

was spent in arranging and directing wars. The first was with Sweden,

whose king Charles X. found a useful ally in the prince of Transylvania,

George II. Rakocky, a rebellious vassal of the Hungarian crown. This

war, a legacy of the last reign, was waged by Leopold as the ally of

Poland until peace was made at Oliva in 1660. A more dangerous foe next

entered the lists. The Turks interfered in the affairs of Transylvania,

always an unruly district, and this interference brought on a war with

the Empire, which after some desultory operations really began in 1663.

By a personal appeal to the diet at Regensburg Leopold induced the

princes to send assistance for the campaign; troops were also sent by

France, and in August 1664 the great imperialist general, Montecucculi,

gained a notable victory at St Gotthard. By the peace of Vasvar the

emperor made a twenty years' truce with the sultan, granting more

generous terms than his recent victory seemed to render necessary.

After a few years of peace began the first of three wars between France

and the Empire. The aggressive policy pursued by Louis XIV. towards

Holland had aroused the serious attention of Europe, and steps had been

taken to check it. Although the French king had sought the alliance of

several German princes and encouraged the Turks in their attacks on

Austria the emperor at first took no part in this movement. He was on

friendly terms with Louis, to whom he was closely related and with whom

he had already discussed the partition of the lands of the Spanish

monarchy; moreover, in 1671 he arranged with him a treaty of neutrality.

In 1672, however, he was forced to take action. He entered into an

alliance for the defence of Holland and war broke out; then, after this

league had collapsed owing to the defection of the elector of

Brandenburg, another and more durable alliance was formed for the same

purpose, including, besides the emperor, the king of Spain and several

German princes, and the war was renewed. At this time, twenty-five years

after the peace of Westphalia, the Empire was virtually a confederation

of independent princes, and it was very difficult for its head to

conduct any war with vigour and success, some of its members being in

alliance with the enemy and others being only lukewarm in their support

of the imperial interests. Thus this struggle, which lasted until the

end of 1678, was on the whole unfavourable to Germany, and the

advantages of the treaty of Nijmwegen (February 1679) were with France.

Almost immediately after the conclusion of peace Louis renewed his

aggressions on the German frontier. Engaged in a serious struggle with

Turkey, the emperor was again slow to move, and although he joined a

league against France in 1682 he was glad to make a truce at Regensburg

two years later. In 1686 the league of Augsburg was formed by the

emperor and the imperial princes, to preserve the terms of the treaties

of Westphalia and of Nijmwegen. The whole European position was now

bound up with events in England, and the tension lasted until 1688, when

William of Orange won the English crown and Louis invaded Germany. In

May 1689 the grand alliance was formed, including the emperor, the kings

of England, Spain and Denmark, the elector of Brandenburg and others,

and a fierce struggle against France was waged throughout almost the

whole of western Europe. In general the several campaigns were

favourable to the allies, and in September 1697 England and Holland made

peace with Louis at Ryswick. To this treaty Leopold refused to assent,

as he considered that his allies had somewhat neglected his interests,

but in the following month he came to terms and a number of places were

transferred from France to Germany. The peace with France lasted for

about four years and then Europe was involved in the War of the Spanish

Succession. The king of Spain, Charles II., was a Habsburg by descent

and was related by marriage to the Austrian branch, while a similar tie

bound him to the royal house of France. He was feeble and childless, and

attempts had been made by the European powers to arrange for a peaceable

division of his extensive kingdom. Leopold refused to consent to any

partition, and when in November 1700 Charles died, leaving his crown to

Philip, duke of Anjou, a grandson of Louis XIV., all hopes of a

peaceable settlement vanished. Under the guidance of William III. a

powerful league, the grand alliance, was formed against France; of this

the emperor was a prominent member, and in 1703 he transferred his claim

on the Spanish monarchy to his second son, the archduke Charles. The

early course of the war was not favourable to the imperialists, but the

tide of defeat had been rolled back by the great victory of Blenheim

before Leopold died on the 5th of May 1705.

In governing his own lands Leopold found his chief difficulties in

Hungary, where unrest was caused partly by his desire to crush

Protestantism. A rising was suppressed in 1671 and for some years

Hungary was treated with great severity. In 1681, after another rising,

some grievances were removed and a less repressive policy was adopted,

but this did not deter the Hungarians from revolting again. Espousing

the cause of the rebels the sultan sent an enormous army into Austria

early in 1683; this advanced almost unchecked to Vienna, which was

besieged from July to September, while Leopold took refuge at Passau.

Realizing the gravity of the situation somewhat tardily, some of the

German princes, among them the electors of Saxony and Bavaria, led their

contingents to the imperial army which was commanded by the emperor's

brother-in-law, Charles, duke of Lorraine, but the most redoubtable of

Leopold's allies was the king of Poland, John Sobieski, who was already

dreaded by the Turks. On the 12th of September 1683 the allied army fell

upon the enemy, who was completely routed, and Vienna was saved. The

imperialists, among whom Prince Eugene of Savoy was rapidly becoming

prominent, followed up the victory with others, notably one near Mohacz

in 1687 and another at Zenta in 1697, and in January 1699 the sultan

signed the treaty of Karlowitz by which he admitted the sovereign rights

of the house of Habsburg over nearly the whole of Hungary. Before the

conclusion of the war, however, Leopold had taken measures to strengthen

his hold upon this country. In 1687 at the diet of Pressburg the

constitution was changed, the right of the Habsburgs to succeed to the

throne without election was admitted and the emperor's elder son Joseph

was crowned hereditary king of Hungary.

During this reign some important changes were made in the constitution

of the Empire. In 1663 the imperial diet entered upon the last stage of

its existence, and became a body permanently in session at Regensburg;

in 1692 the duke of Hanover was raised to the rank of an elector,

becoming the ninth member of the electoral college; and in 1700 Leopold,

greatly in need of help for the impending war with France, granted the

title of king of Prussia to the elector of Brandenburg. The net result

of these and similar changes was to weaken the authority of the emperor

over the members of the Empire, and to compel him to rely more and more

upon his position as ruler of the Austrian archduchies and of Hungary

and Bohemia, and Leopold was the first who really appears to have

realized this altered state of affairs and to have acted in accordance

therewith.

The emperor was married three times. His first wife was Margaret Theresa

(d. 1673), daughter of Philip IV. of Spain; his second Claudia Felicitas

(d. 1676), the heiress of Tirol; and his third Eleanora, a princess of

the Palatinate. By his first two wives he had no sons, but his third

wife bore him two, Joseph and Charles, both of whom became emperors. He

had also four daughters.

Leopold was a man of industry and education, and during his later years

he showed some political ability. Extremely tenacious of his rights, and

regarding himself as an absolute sovereign, he was also very intolerant

and was greatly influenced by the Jesuits. In person he was short, but

strong and healthy. Although he had no inclination for a military life

he loved exercises in the open air, such as hunting and riding; he had

also a taste for music.

Leopold's letters to Marco d'Aviano from 1680 to 1699 were edited by

O. Klopp and published at Graz in 1888. Other letters are found in the

_Fontes rerum Austriacarum_, Bände 56 and 57 (Vienna, 1903-1904). See

also F. Krones, _Handbuch der Geschichte Österreichs_ (Berlin,

1876-1879); R. Baumstark, _Kaiser Leopold I._ (1873); and A. F.

Pribram, _Zur Wahl Leopolds I._ (Vienna, 1888). (A. W. H.*)

LEOPOLD II. (1747-1792), Roman emperor, and grand-duke of Tuscany, son

of the empress Maria Theresa and her husband, Francis I., was born in

Vienna on the 5th of May 1747. He was a third son, and was at first

educated for the priesthood, but the theological studies to which he was

forced to apply himself are believed to have influenced his mind in a

way unfavourable to the Church. On the death of his elder brother

Charles in 1761 it was decided that he should succeed to his father's

grand duchy of Tuscany, which was erected into a "secundogeniture" or

apanage for a second son. This settlement was the condition of his

marriage on the 5th of August 1764 with Maria Louisa, daughter of

Charles III. of Spain, and on the death of his father Francis I. (13th

August 1765) he succeeded to the grand duchy. For five years he

exercised little more than nominal authority under the supervision of

counsellors appointed by his mother. In 1770 he made a journey to Vienna

to secure the removal of this vexatious guardianship, and returned to

Florence with a free hand. During the twenty years which elapsed between

his return to Florence and the death of his eldest brother Joseph II. in

1790 he was employed in reforming the administration of his small state.

The reformation was carried out by the removal of the ruinous

restrictions on industry and personal freedom imposed by his

predecessors of the house of Medici, and left untouched during his

father's life; by the introduction of a rational system of taxation; and

by the execution of profitable public works, such as the drainage of the

Val di Chiana. As he had no army to maintain, and as he suppressed the

small naval force kept up by the Medici, the whole of his revenue was

left free for the improvement of his state. Leopold was never popular

with his Italian subjects. His disposition was cold and retiring. His

habits were simple to the verge of sordidness, though he could display

splendour on occasion, and he could not help offending those of his

subjects who had profited by the abuses of the Medicean régime. But his

steady, consistent and intelligent administration, which advanced step

by step, making the second only when the first had been justified by

results, brought the grand duchy to a high level of material prosperity.

His ecclesiastical policy, which disturbed the deeply rooted convictions

of his people, and brought him into collision with the pope, was not

successful. He was unable to secularize the property of the religious

houses, or to put the clergy entirely under the control of the lay

power.

During the last few years of his rule in Tuscany Leopold had begun to be

frightened by the increasing disorders in the German and Hungarian

dominions of his family, which were the direct result of his brother's

headlong methods. He and Joseph II. were tenderly attached to one

another, and met frequently both before and after the death of their

mother, while the portrait by Pompeo Baltoni in which they appear

together shows that they bore a strong personal resemblance to one

another. But it may be said of Leopold, as of Fontenelle, that his heart

was made of brains. He knew that he must succeed his childless eldest

brother in Austria, and he was unwilling to inherit his unpopularity.

When, therefore, in 1789 Joseph, who knew himself to be dying, asked him

to come to Vienna, and become co-regent, Leopold coldly evaded the

request. He was still in Florence when Joseph II. died at Vienna on the

20th of February 1790, and he did not leave his Italian capital till the

3rd of March. Leopold, during his government in Tuscany, had shown a

speculative tendency to grant his subjects a constitution. When he

succeeded to the Austrian lands he began by making large concessions to

the interests offended by his brother's innovations. He recognized the

Estates of his different dominions as "the pillars of the monarchy,"

pacified the Hungarians and divided the Belgian insurgents by

concessions. When these failed to restore order, he marched troops into

the country, and re-established at the same time his own authority, and

the historic franchises of the Flemings. Yet he did not surrender any

part that could be retained of what Maria Theresa and Joseph had done to

strengthen the hands of the state. He continued, for instance, to insist

that no papal bull could be published in his dominions without his

consent (_placetum regium_).

If Leopold's reign as emperor, and king of Hungary and Bohemia, had been

prolonged during years of peace, it is probable that he would have

repeated his successes as a reforming ruler in Tuscany on a far larger

scale. But he lived for barely two years, and during that period he was

hard pressed by peril from west and east alike. The growing

revolutionary disorders in France endangered the life of his sister

Marie Antoinette, the queen of Louis XVI., and also threatened his own

dominions with the spread of a subversive agitation. His sister sent him

passionate appeals for help, and he was pestered by the royalist

emigrants, who were intriguing both to bring about an armed intervention

in France, and against Louis XVI. From the east he was threatened by the

aggressive ambition of Catherine II. of Russia, and by the unscrupulous

policy of Prussia. Catherine would have been delighted to see Austria

and Prussia embark on a crusade in the cause of kings against the

Revolution. While they were busy beyond the Rhine, she would have

annexed what remained of Poland, and would have made conquests in

Turkey. Leopold II. had no difficulty in seeing through the rather

transparent cunning of the Russian empress, and he refused to be misled.

To his sister he gave good advice and promises of help if she and her

husband could escape from Paris. The emigrants who followed him

pertinaciously were refused audience, or when they forced themselves on

him were peremptorily denied all help. Leopold was too purely a

politician not to be secretly pleased at the destruction of the power of

France and of her influence in Europe by her internal disorders. Within

six weeks of his accession he displayed his contempt for her weakness by

practically tearing up the treaty of alliance made by Maria Theresa in

1756 and opening negotiations with England to impose a check on Russia

and Prussia. He was able to put pressure on England by threatening to

cede his part of the Low Countries to France, and then, when secure of

English support, he was in a position to baffle the intrigues of

Prussia. A personal appeal to Frederick William II. led to a conference

between them at Reichenbach in July 1790, and to an arrangement which

was in fact a defeat for Prussia. Leopold's coronation as king of

Hungary on the 15th of November 1790, was preceded by a settlement with

the diet in which he recognized the dominant position of the Magyars. He

had already made an eight months' truce with the Turks in September,

which prepared the way for the termination of the war begun by Joseph

II., the peace of Sistova being signed in August 1791. The pacification

of his eastern dominions left Leopold free to re-establish order in

Belgium and to confirm friendly relations with England and Holland.

During 1791 the emperor continued to be increasingly preoccupied with

the affairs of France. In January he had to dismiss the count of Artois,

afterwards Charles X., king of France, in a very peremptory way. His

good sense was revolted by the folly of the French emigrants, and he did

his utmost to avoid being entangled in the affairs of that country. The

insults inflicted on Louis XVI. and Marie Antoinette, however, at the

time of their attempted flight to Varennes in June, stirred his

indignation, and he made a general appeal to the sovereigns of Europe to

take common measures in view of events which "immediately compromised

the honour of all sovereigns, and the security of all governments." Yet

he was most directly interested in the conference at Sistova, which in

June led to a final peace with Turkey. On the 25th of August he met the

king of Prussia at Pillnitz, near Dresden, and they drew up a

declaration of their readiness to intervene in France if and when their

assistance was called for by the other powers. The declaration was a

mere formality, for, as Leopold knew, neither Russia nor England was

prepared to act, and he endeavoured to guard against the use which he

foresaw the emigrants would endeavour to make of it. In face of the

agitation caused by the Pillnitz declaration in France, the intrigues of

the emigrants, and the attacks made by the French revolutionists on the

rights of the German princes in Alsace, Leopold continued to hope that

intervention might not be required. When Louis XVI. swore to observe the

constitution of September 1791, the emperor professed to think that a

settlement had been reached in France. The attacks on the rights of the

German princes on the left bank of the Rhine, and the increasing

violence of the parties in Paris which were agitating to bring about

war, soon showed, however, that this hope was vain. Leopold met the

threatening language of the revolutionists with dignity and temper. His

sudden death on the 1st of March 1792 was an irreparable loss to

Austria.

Leopold had sixteen children, the eldest of his eight sons being his

successor, the emperor Francis II. Some of his other sons were prominent

personages in their day. Among them were: Ferdinand III., grand duke of

Tuscany; the archduke Charles, a celebrated soldier; the archduke John,

also a soldier; the archduke Joseph, palatine of Hungary; and the

archduke Rainer, viceroy of Lombardy-Venetia.

Several volumes containing the emperor's correspondence have been

published. Among these are: _Joseph II. und Leopold von Toskana. Ihr

Briefwechsel 1781-1790_ (Vienna, 1872), and _Marie Antoinette, Joseph

II. und Leopold II. Ihr Briefwechsel_ (Vienna, 1866), both edited by

A. Ritter von Arneth; _Joseph II., Leopold II. und Kaunitz. Ihr

Briefwechsel_ (Vienna, 1873); and _Leopold II., Franz II. und

Catharina. Ihre Correspondenz nebst einer Einleitung: Zur Geschichte

der Politik Leopolds II._ (Leipzig, 1874), both edited by A. Beer; and

_Leopold II. und Marie Christine. Ihrand Briefwechsel 1781-1792_,

edited by A. Wolf (Vienna, 1867). See also H. von Sybel, _Über die

Regierung Kaiser Leopolds II._ (Munich, 1860); A. Schultze, _Kaiser

Leopold II. und die französische Revolution_ (Leipzig, 1899); and A.

Wolf and H. von Zwiedeneck-Südenhorst, _Österreich unter Maria

Theresa, Joseph II. und Leopold II._ (Berlin, 1882-1884).

LEOPOLD I. (1790-1865), king of the Belgians, fourth son of Francis,

duke of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld, and uncle of Queen Victoria of England,

was born at Coburg on the 18th of December 1790. At the age of eighteen

he entered the military service of Russia, and accompanied the emperor

Alexander to Erfurt as a member of his staff. He was required by

Napoleon to quit the Russian army, and spent some years in travelling.

In 1813 he accepted from the emperor Alexander the post of a cavalry

general in the army of invasion, and he took part in the whole of the

campaign of that and the following year, distinguishing himself in the

battles of Leipzig, Lützen and Bautzen. He entered Paris with the allied

sovereigns, and accompanied them to England. He married in May 1816

Charlotte, only child of George, prince regent, afterwards George IV.,

heiress-presumptive to the British throne, and was created duke of

Kendal in the British peerage and given an annuity of £50,000. The death

of the princess in the following year was a heavy blow to his hopes, but

he continued to reside in England. In 1830 he declined the offer of the

crown of Greece, owing to the refusal of the powers to grant conditions

which he considered essential to the welfare of the new kingdom, but was

in the following year elected king of the Belgians (4th June 1831).

After some hesitation he accepted the crown, having previously

ascertained that he would have the support of the great powers on

entering upon his difficult task, and on the 12th of July he made his

entry into Brussels and took the oath to observe the constitution.

During the first eight years of his reign he was confronted with the

resolute hostility of King William I. of Holland, and it was not until

1839 that the differences between the two states, which until 1830 had

formed the kingdom of the Netherlands, were finally settled at the

conference of London by the treaty of the 24 Articles (see BELGIUM).

From this date until his death, King Leopold spent all his energies in

the wise administration of the affairs of the newly formed kingdom,

which may be said to owe in a large measure its first consolidation and

constant prosperity to the care and skill of his discreet and fatherly

government. In 1848 the throne of Belgium stood unshaken amidst the

revolutions which marked that year in almost every European country. On

the 8th of August 1832 Leopold married, as his second wife, Louise of

Orleans, daughter of Louis Philippe, king of the French. Queen Louise

endeared herself to the Belgian people, and her death in 1850 was felt

as a national loss. This union produced two sons and one daughter--(1)

Leopold, afterwards king of the Belgians; (2) Philip, count of Flanders;

(3) Marie Charlotte, who married Maximilian of Austria, the unfortunate

emperor of Mexico. Leopold I. died at Laeken on the 10th of December

1865. He was a most cultured man and a great reader, and did his utmost

during his reign to encourage art, science and education. His judgment

was universally respected by contemporary sovereigns and statesmen, and

he was frequently spoken of as "the Nestor of Europe" (see also

VICTORIA, QUEEN).

See Th. Juste, _Léopold I^er, roi des Belges d'après des doc. inéd.

1793-1865_ (2 vols., Brussels, 1868), and _Les Fondateurs de la

monarchie Belge_ (22 vols., Brussels, 1878-1880); J. J. Thonissen, _La

Belgique sous le règne de Léopold I^er_ (Louvain, 1862).

LEOPOLD II. [LEOPOLD LOUIS PHILIPPE MARIE VICTOR] (1835-1909), king of

the Belgians, son of the preceding, was born at Brussels on the 9th of

April 1835. In 1846 he was created duke of Brabant and appointed a

sub-lieutenant in the army, in which he served until his accession, by

which time he had reached the rank of lieutenant-general. On attaining

his majority he was made a member of the senate, in whose proceedings he

took a lively interest, especially in matters concerning the development

of Belgium and its trade. On the 22nd of August 1853 Leopold married

Marie Henriette (1836-1902), daughter of the archduke Joseph of Austria,

palatine of Hungary, by his wife Marie Dorothea, duchess of Württemberg.

This princess, who was a great-granddaughter of the empress Maria

Theresa, and a great-niece of Marie Antoinette, endeared herself to the

people by her elevated character and indefatigable benevolence, while

her beauty gained for her the sobriquet of "The Rose of Brabant"; she

was also an accomplished artist and musician, and a fine horsewoman.

Between the years 1854 and 1865 Leopold travelled much abroad, visiting

India and China as well as Egypt and the countries on the Mediterranean

coast of Africa. On the 10th of December 1865 he succeeded his father.

On the 28th of January 1869 he lost his only son, Leopold (b. 1859),

duke of Hainaut. The king's brother Philip, count of Flanders

(1837-1905), then became heir to the throne; and on his death his son

Albert (b. 1875) became heir-presumptive. During the Franco-Prussian War

(1870-1871) the king of the Belgians preserved neutrality in a period of

unusual difficulty and danger. But the most notable event in Leopold's

career was the foundation of the Congo Free State (q.v.). While still

duke of Brabant he had been the first to call the attention of the

Belgians to the need of enlarging their horizon beyond sea, and after

his accession to the throne he gave the first impulse towards the

development of this idea by founding in 1876 the _Association

Internationale Africaine_. He enlisted the services of H. M. Stanley,

who visited Brussels in 1878 after exploring the Congo river, and

returned in 1879 to the Congo as agent of the _Comité d'Études du Haut

Congo_, soon afterwards reorganized as the "International Association of

the Congo." This association was, in 1884-1885, recognized by the powers

as a sovereign state under the name of the _État Indépendant du Congo_.

Leopold's exploitation of this vast territory, which he administered

autocratically, and in which he associated himself personally with

various financial schemes, was understood to bring him an enormous

fortune; it was the subject of acutely hostile criticism, to a large

extent substantiated by the report of a commission of inquiry instituted

by the king himself in 1904, and followed in 1908 by the annexation of

the state to Belgium (see CONGO FREE STATE: _History_). In 1880 Leopold

sought an interview with General C. G. Gordon and obtained his promise,

subject to the approval of the British government, to enter the Belgian

service on the Congo. Three years later Leopold claimed fulfilment of

the promise, and Gordon was about to proceed to the Congo when the

British government required his services for the Sudan. On the 15th of

November 1902 King Leopold's life was attempted in Brussels by an

Italian anarchist named Rubino. Queen Marie Henriette died at Spa on the

19th of September of the same year. Besides the son already mentioned

she had borne to Leopold three daughters--Louise Marie Amélie (b. 1858),

who in 1875 married Philip of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, and was divorced in

1906; Stéphanie (b. 1864), who married Rudolph, crown prince of Austria,

in 1881, and after his death in 1889 married, against her father's

wishes, Elemer, Count Lonyay, in 1900; and Clémentine (b. 1872). At the

time of the queen's death an unseemly incident was occasioned by

Leopold's refusal to see his daughter Stéphanie, who in consequence was

not present at her mother's funeral. The disagreeable impression on the

public mind thus created was deepened by an unfortunate litigation,

lasting for two years (1904-1906), over the deceased queen's will, in

which the creditors of the princess Louise, together with princess

Stéphanie (Countess Lonyay), claimed that under the Belgian law the

queen's estate was entitled to half of her husband's property. This

claim was disallowed by the Belgian courts. The king died at Laeken,

near Brussels, on the 17th of December 1909. On the 23rd of that month

his nephew took the oath to observe the constitution, assuming the title

of Albert I. King Leopold was personally a man of considerable

attainments and much strength of character, but he was a notoriously

dissolute monarch, who even to the last offended decent opinion by his

indulgences at Paris and on the Riviera. The wealth he amassed from the

Congo he spent, no doubt, royally not only in this way but also on

public improvements in Belgium; but he had a hard heart towards the

natives of his distant possession.

LEOPOLD II. (1797-1870), of Habsburg-Lorraine, grand-duke of Tuscany,

was born on the 3rd of October 1797, the son of the grand-duke Ferdinand

III., whom he succeeded in 1824. During the first twenty years of his

reign he devoted himself to the internal development of the state. His

was the mildest and least reactionary of all the Italian despotisms of

the day, and although always subject to Austrian influence he refused to

adopt the Austrian methods of government, allowed a fair measure of

liberty to the press, and permitted many political exiles from other

states to dwell in Tuscany undisturbed. But when in the early 'forties a

feeling of unrest spread throughout Italy, even in Tuscany demands for a

constitution and other political reforms were advanced; in 1845-1846

riots broke out in various parts of the country, and Leopold granted a

number of administrative reforms. But Austrian influence prevented him

from going further, even had he wished to do so. The election of Pope

Pius IX. gave fresh impulse to the Liberal movement, and on the 4th of

September 1847 Leopold instituted the National Guard--a first step

towards the constitution; shortly after the marchese Cosimo Ridolfi was

appointed prime minister. The granting of the Neapolitan and Piedmontese

constitutions was followed (17th February 1848) by that of Tuscany,

drawn up by Gino Capponi. The revolution in Milan and Vienna aroused a

fever of patriotic enthusiasm in Tuscany, where war against Austria was

demanded; Leopold, giving way to popular pressure, sent a force of

regulars and volunteers to co-operate with Piedmont in the Lombard

campaign. His speech on their departure was uncompromisingly Italian and

Liberal. "Soldiers," he said, "the holy cause of Italian freedom is

being decided to-day on the fields of Lombardy. Already the citizens of

Milan have purchased their liberty with their blood and with a heroism

of which history offers few examples.... Honour to the arms of Italy!

Long live Italian independence!" The Tuscan contingent fought bravely,

if unsuccessfully, at Curtatone and Montanara. On the 26th of June the

first Tuscan parliament assembled, but the disturbances consequent on

the failure of the campaign in Lombardy led to the resignation of the

Ridolfi ministry, which was succeeded by that of Gino Capponi. The riots

continued, especially at Leghorn, which was a prey to actual civil war,

and the democratic party of which F. D. Guerrazzi and G. Montanelli were

leading lights became every day more influential. Capponi resigned, and

Leopold reluctantly agreed to a Montanelli-Guerrazzi ministry, which in

its turn had to fight against the extreme republican party. New

elections in the autumn of 1848 returned a constitutional majority, but

it ended by voting in favour of a constituent assembly. There was talk

of instituting a central Italian kingdom with Leopold as king, to form

part of a larger Italian federation, but in the meanwhile the

grand-duke, alarmed at the revolutionary and republican agitations in

Tuscany and encouraged by the success of the Austrian arms, was,

according to Montanelli, negotiating with Field-Marshal Radetzky and

with Pius IX., who had now abandoned his Liberal tendencies, and fled to

Gaeta. Leopold had left Florence for Siena, and eventually for Porto S.

Stefano, leaving a letter to Guerrazzi in which, on account of a protest

from the pope, he declared that he could not agree to the proposed

constituent assembly. The utmost confusion prevailed in Florence and

other parts of Tuscany. On the 9th of February 1849 the republic was

proclaimed, largely as a result of Mazzini's exhortations, and on the

18th Leopold sailed for Gaeta. A third parliament was elected and

Guerrazzi appointed dictator. But there was great discontent, and the

defeat of Charles Albert at Novara caused consternation among the

Liberals. The majority, while fearing an Austrian invasion, desired the

return of the grand-duke who had never been unpopular, and in April 1849

the municipal council usurped the powers of the assembly and invited him

to return, "to save us by means of the restoration of the constitutional

monarchy surrounded by popular institutions, from the shame and ruin of

a foreign invasion." Leopold accepted, although he said nothing about

the foreign invasion, and on the 1st of May sent Count Luigi Serristori

to Tuscany with full powers. But at the same time the Austrians occupied

Lucca and Leghorn, and although Leopold simulated surprise at their

action it has since been proved, as the Austrian general d'Aspre

declared at the time, that Austrian intervention was due to the request

of the grand-duke. On the 24th of May the latter appointed G.

Baldasseroni prime minister, on the 25th the Austrians entered Florence

and on the 28th of July Leopold himself returned. In April 1850 he

concluded a treaty with Austria sanctioning the continuation for an

indefinite period of the Austrian occupation with 10,000 men; in

September he dismissed parliament, and the following year established a

concordat with the Church of a very clerical character. He feebly asked

Austria if he might maintain the constitution, and the Austrian premier,

Prince Schwarzenberg, advised him to consult the pope, the king of

Naples and the dukes of Parma and Modena. On their advice he formally

revoked the constitution (1852). Political trials were held, Guerrazzi

and many others being condemned to long terms of imprisonment, and

although in 1855 the Austrian troops left Tuscany, Leopold's popularity

was gone. A part of the Liberals, however, still believed in the

possibility of a constitutional grand-duke who could be induced for a

second time to join Piedmont in a war against Austria, whereas the

popular party headed by F. Bartolommei and G. Dolfi realized that only

by the expulsion of Leopold could the national aspirations be realized.

When in 1859 France and Piedmont made war on Austria, Leopold's

government failed to prevent numbers of young Tuscan volunteers from

joining the Franco-Piedmontese forces. Finally an agreement was arrived

at between the aristocratic constitutionalists and the popular party, as

a result of which the grand-duke's participation in the war was formally

demanded. Leopold at first gave way, and entrusted Don Neri Corsini with

the formation of a ministry. The popular demands presented by Corsini

were for the abdication of Leopold in favour of his son, an alliance

with Piedmont and the reorganization of Tuscany in accordance with the

eventual and definite reorganization of Italy. Leopold hesitated and

finally rejected the proposals as derogatory to his dignity. On the 27th

of April there was great excitement in Florence, Italian colours

appeared everywhere, but order was maintained, and the grand-duke and

his family departed for Bologna undisturbed. Thus the revolution was

accomplished without a drop of blood being shed, and after a period of

provisional government Tuscany was incorporated in the kingdom of Italy.

On the 21st of July Leopold abdicated in favour of his son Ferdinand

IV., who never reigned, but issued a protest from Dresden (26th March

1860). He spent his last years in Austria, and died in Rome on the 29th

of January 1870.

Leopold of Tuscany was a well-meaning, not unkindly man, and fonder of

his subjects than were the other Italian despots, but he was weak, and

too closely bound by family ties and Habsburg traditions ever to become

a real Liberal. Had he not joined the conclave of autocrats at Gaeta,

and, above all, had he not summoned Austrian assistance while denying

that he had done so, in 1849, he might yet have preserved his throne,

and even changed the whole course of Italian history. At the same time

his rule, if not harsh, was enervating and demoralizing.

See G. Baldasseroni, _Leopoldo II._ (Florence, 1871), useful but

reactionary in tendency, the author having been Leopold's minister, G.

Montanelli, _Memorie sull' Italia_ (Turin, 1853); F. D. Guerrazzi,

_Memorie_ (Leghorn, 1848); Zobi, _Storia civile della Toscana_, vols.

iv.-v. (Florence, 1850-1852); A. von Reumont, _Geschichte Toscanas_ (2

vols., Gotha, 1876-1877); M. Bartolommei-Gioli, _Il Rivolgimento

Toscano e L'azione popolare_ (Florence, 1905); C. Tivaroni, _L' Italia

durante il dominio Austriaco_, vol. i. (Turin, 1892), and _L' Italia

degli Italiani_, vol. i. (Turin, 1895). See also RICASOLI;

BARTOLOMMEI; CAPPONI, GINO; &c. (L. V.*)

LEOPOLD II., a lake of Central Africa in the basin of the Kasai affluent

of the Congo, cut by 2° S. and 18° 10´ E. It has a length N. to S. of

about 75 m., is 30 m. across at its northern end, tapering towards its

southern end. Numerous bays and gulfs render its outline highly

irregular. Its shores are flat and marshy, the lake being (in all

probability) simply the lowest part of a vast lake which existed here

before the Kasai system breached the barrier--at Kwa mouth--separating

it from the Congo. The lake is fed by the Lokoro (about 300 m. long) and

smaller streams from the east. Its northern and western affluents are

comparatively unimportant. It discharges its waters (at its southern

end) into the Mfini, which is in reality the lower course of the

Lukenye. The lake is gradually diminishing in area; in the rainy season

it overflows its banks. The surrounding country is very flat and densely

wooded.

See KASAI; and articles and maps in _Le Mouvement géog._, specially

vol. xiv., No. 29 (1897) and vol. xxiv., No. 38 (1907).

LEOTYCHIDES, Spartan king, of the Eurypontid family, was descended from

Theopompus through his younger son Anaxandridas (Herod. viii. 131), and

in 491 B.C. succeeded Demaratus (q.v.), whose title to the throne he had

with Cleomenes' aid successfully challenged. He took part in Cleomenes'

second expedition to Aegina, on which ten hostages were seized and

handed over to the Athenians for safe custody: for this he narrowly

escaped being surrendered to the Aeginetans after Cleomenes' death. In

the spring of 479 we find him in command of the Greek fleet of 110

ships, first at Aegina and afterwards at Delos. In August he attacked

the Persian position at Mycale on the coast of Asia Minor opposite

Samos, inflicted a crushing defeat on the land-army, and annihilated the

fleet which was drawn up on the shore. Soon afterwards he sailed home

with the Peloponnesians, leaving the Athenians to prosecute the siege of

Sestos. In 476 he led an army to Thessaly to punish the Aleuadae of

Larisa for the aid they had rendered to the Persians and to strengthen

Spartan influence in northern Greece. After a series of successful

engagements he accepted a bribe from the enemy to withdraw. For this he

was brought to trial at Sparta, and to save his life fled to the temple

of Athena Alea at Tegea. Sentence of exile was passed, his house was

razed and his grandson Archidamus II. ascended the throne (Herod. vi.

65-87, ix. 90-114; Thucydides i. 89; Pausanias iii. 4. 3. 7. 9-10;

Plutarch, _De malignitate Herodoti_, 21, p. 859 D; Diodorus xi. 34-37).

According to Diodorus (xi. 48) Leotychides reigned twenty-two, his

successor Archidamus forty-two years. The total duration of the two

reigns, sixty-four years, we know to be correct, for Leotychides came

to the throne in 491 and Archidamus (q.v.) died in 427. On this basis,

then, Leotychides's exile would fall in 469 and the Thessalian

expedition in that or the preceding year (so E. Meyer, _Geschichte des

Altertums_, iii. § 287). But Diodorus is not consistent with himself;

he attributes (xi. 48) Leotychides's death to the year 476-475 and he

records (xii. 35) Archidamus's death in 434-433, though he introduces

him in the following years at the head of the Peloponnesian army (xii.

42, 47, 52). Further, he says expressly that Leotychides [Greek:

eteleutêsen arxas etê eikosi kai duo], i.e. he lived twenty-two years

after his accession. The twenty-two years, then, may include the time

which elapsed between his exile and his death. In that case

Leotychides died in 469, and 476-475 may be the year in which his

reign, though not his life, ended. This date seems, from what we know

of the political situation in general, to be more probable than the

later one for the Thessalian campaign.

G. Busolt, _Griech. Geschichte_, iii. 83, note; J. B. Bury, _History

of Greece_, p. 326; G. Grote, _History of Greece_, new edition 1888,

iv. 349, note; also abridged edition 1907, p. 273, note 3. Beloch's

view (_Griech. Geschichte_, i. 455, note 2) that the expedition took

place in 476, the trial and flight in 469, is not generally accepted.

(M. N. T.)

LEOVIGILD, or LÖWENHELD (d. 586), king of the Visigoths, became king in

568 after the short period of anarchy which followed the death of King

Athanagild, whose widow, Goisvintha, he married. At first he ruled that

part of the Visigothic kingdom which lay to the south of the Pyrenees,

his brother Liuva or Leova governing the small part to the north of

these mountains; but in 572 Liuva died and Leovigild became sole king.

At this time the Visigoths who settled in Spain early in the 5th century

were menaced by two powerful enemies, the Suevi who had a small kingdom

in the north-west of the peninsula, and the Byzantines who had answered

Athanagild's appeal for help by taking possession of a stretch of

country in the south-east. Their kingdom, too, was divided and weakened

by the fierce hostility between the orthodox Christians and those who

professed Arianism. Internal and external dangers alike, however, failed

to daunt Leovigild, who may fairly be called the restorer of the

Visigothic kingdom. He turned first against the Byzantines, who were

defeated several times; he took Cordova and chastised the Suevi; and

then by stern measures he destroyed the power of those unruly and

rebellious chieftains who had reduced former kings to the position of

ciphers. The chronicler tells how, having given peace to his people, he,

first of the Visigothic sovereigns, assumed the attire of a king and

made Toledo his capital. He strengthened the position of his family and

provided for the security of his kingdom by associating his two sons,

Recared and Hermenegild, with himself in the kingly office and placing

parts of the land under their rule. Leovigild himself was an Arian,

being the last of the Visigothic kings to hold that creed; but he was

not a bitter foe of the orthodox Christians, although he was obliged to

punish them when they conspired against him with his external enemies.

His son Hermenegild, however, was converted to the orthodox faith

through the influence of his Frankish wife, Ingundis, daughter of King

Sigebert I., and of Leander, metropolitan of Seville. Allying himself

with the Byzantines and other enemies of the Visigoths, and supported by

most of the orthodox Christians he headed a formidable insurrection. The

struggle was fierce; but at length, employing persuasion as well as

force, the old king triumphed. Hermenegild was captured; he refused to

give up his faith and in March or April 585 he was executed. He was

canonized at the request of Philip II., king of Spain, by Pope Sixtus V.

About this time Leovigild put an end to the kingdom of the Suevi. During

his last years he was engaged in a war with the Franks. He died at

Toledo on the 21st of April 586 and was succeeded by his son Recared.

LEPANTO,[1] BATTLE OF, fought on the 7th of October 1571. The conquest

of Cyprus by the Turks, and their aggressions on the Christian powers,

frightened the states of the Mediterranean into forming a holy league

for their common defence. The main promoter of the league was Pope Pius

V., but the bulk of the forces was supplied by the republic of Venice

and Philip II. of Spain, who was peculiarly interested in checking the

Turks both because of the Moorish element in the population of Spain,

and because he was also sovereign of Naples and Sicily. In compliment to

King Philip, the general command of the league's fleet was given to his

natural brother, Don John of Austria. It included, however, only

twenty-four Spanish ships. The great majority of the two hundred galleys

and eight galeasses, of which the fleet was composed, came from Venice,

under the command of the proveditore Barbarigo; from Genoa, which was in

close alliance with Spain, under Gianandrea Doria; and from the Pope

whose squadron was commanded by Marc Antonio Colonna. The Sicilian and

Neapolitan contingents were commanded by the marquess of Santa Cruz, and

Cardona, Spanish officers. Eight thousand Spanish soldiers were

embarked. The allied fleet was collected slowly at Messina, from whence

it advanced by the passage between Ithaca and Cephalonia to Cape

Marathia near Dragonera. The Turkish fleet which had come up from Cyprus

and Crete anchored in the Gulf of Patras. It consisted in all of 273

galleys which were of lighter build than the Christians', and less well

supplied with cannon or small arms. The Turks still relied mainly on the

bow and arrow. Ali, the capitan pasha, was commander-in-chief, and he

had with him Chulouk Bey of Alexandria, commonly called Scirocco, and

Uluch Ali, dey of Algiers. On the 7th of October the Christian fleet

advanced to the neighbourhood of Cape Scropha. It was formed in the

traditional order of the galleys--a long line abreast, subdivided into

the centre or "battle" commanded by Don John in person, the left wing

under the proveditore Barbarigo, and the right under Gianandrea Doria.

But a reserve squadron was placed behind the centre under the marquess

of Santa Cruz, and the eight lumbering galeasses were stationed at

intervals in front of the line to break the formation of the Turks. The

capitan pasha left his anchorage in the Gulf of Patras with his fleet in

a single line, without reserve or advance-guard. He was himself in the

centre, with Scirocco on his right and Uluch Ali on his left. The two

fleets met south of Cape Scropha, both drawn up from north to south, the

land being close to the left flank of the Christians, and the right of

the Turks. To the left of the Turks and the right of the Christians,

there was open sea. Ali Pasha's greater numbers enabled him to outflank

his enemy. The Turks charged through the intervals between the

galeasses, which proved to be of no value. On their right Scirocco

outflanked the Venetians of Barbarigo, but the better build of the

galleys of Saint Mark and the admirable discipline of their crews gave

them the victory. The Turks were almost all sunk or driven on shore.

Scirocco and Barbarigo both lost their lives. On the centre Don John and

the capitan pasha met prow to prow--the Christians reserving the fire of

their bow guns (called _di cursia_) till the moment of impact, and then

boarding. Ali Pasha was slain and his galley taken. Everywhere on the

centre the Christians gained the upper hand, but their victory was

almost turned into a defeat by the mistaken manoeuvres of Doria. In fear

lest he should be outflanked by Uluch Ali, he stood out to sea, leaving

a gap between himself and the centre. The dey of Algiers, who saw the

opening, reversed the order of his squadron, and fell on the right of

the centre. The galleys of the Order of Malta, which were stationed at

this point, suffered severely, and their flagship was taken with great

slaughter. A disaster was averted by the marquess of Santa Cruz, who

brought up the reserve. Uluch Ali then retreated with sail and oar,

bringing most of his division off in good order.

The loss of life in the battle was enormous, being put at 20,000 for the

Turks and 8000 for the Christians. The battle of Lepanto was of immense

political importance. It gave the naval power of the Turks a blow from

which it never recovered, and put a stop to their aggression in the

Eastern Mediterranean. Historically the battle is interesting because it

was the last example of an encounter on a great scale between fleets of

galleys and also because it was the last crusade. The Christian powers

of the Mediterranean did really combine to avert the ruin of

Christendom. Hardly a noble house of Spain or Italy was not represented

in the fleet, and the princes headed the boarders. Volunteers came from

all parts of Europe, and it is said that among them was Sir Richard

Grenville, afterwards famous for his fight in the "Revenge" off Flores

in the Azores. Cervantes was undoubtedly present, and had his left hand

shattered by a Turkish bullet.

For full accounts of the battle, with copious references to

authorities and to ancient controversies, mostly arising out of the

conduct of Doria, see Sir W. Stirling Maxwell, _Don John of Austria_

(1883); and Jurien de la Gravière, _La Guerre de Chypre et la bataille

de Lepanto_ (1888). (D. H.)

FOOTNOTE:

[1] For Lepanto see NAUPACTUS.

LE PAUTRE, JEAN (1618-1682), French designer and engraver. He was

apprenticed to a carpenter and builder and in addition to learning

mechanical and constructive work developed considerable facility with

the pencil. His designs, which were innumerable in quantity and

exuberant in fancy, consisted mainly of ceilings, friezes,

chimney-pieces, doorways and mural decorations; he also devised

fire-dogs, sideboards, cabinets, console tables, mirrors and other

pieces of furniture; he was long employed at the Gobelins. His work is

often excessively flamboyant and over-elaborate; he revelled in amorini

and swags, arabesques and cartouches. His chimney-pieces, however, were

frequently simple and elegant. His engraved plates, almost entirely

original, are something like 1500 in number and include a portrait of

himself. He became a member of the academy of Paris in 1677.

LEPCHA, the name of the aboriginal inhabitants of Sikkim (q.v.). A

peace-loving people, the Lepchas have been repeatedly conquered by

surrounding hill-tribes, and their ancient patriarchal customs are dying

out. The total number of speakers of Lepcha, or Rong, in all India in

1901, was only 19,291. Their rich and beautiful language has been

preserved from extinction by the efforts of General Mainwaring and

others; but their literature was almost entirely destroyed by the

Tibetans, and their traditions are being rapidly forgotten. Once free

and independent, they are now the poorest people in Sikkim, and it is

from them that the coolie class is drawn. They are above all things

woodmen, knowing the ways of beasts and birds, and possessing an

extensive zoological and botanical nomenclature of their own.

See Florence Donaldson, _Lepcha Land_ (1900).

LE PELETIER (or LEPELLETIER), DE SAINT-FARGEAU, LOUIS MICHEL

(1760-1793), French politician, was born on the 29th of May 1760 at

Paris. He belonged to a well-known family, his great-grandfather, Michel

Robert Le Peletier des Forts, count of Saint-Fargeau, having been

controller-general of finance. He inherited a great fortune, and soon

became president of the parlement of Paris and in 1789 he was a deputy

of the _noblesse_ to the States-General. At this time he shared the

conservative views of the majority of his class; but by slow degrees his

ideas changed and became very advanced. On the 13th of July 1789 he

demanded the recall of Necker, whose dismissal by the king had aroused

great excitement in Paris; and in the Constituent Assembly he had moved

the abolition of the penalty of death, of the galleys and of branding,

and the substitution of beheading for hanging. This attitude won him

great popularity, and on the 21st of June 1790 he was made president of

the Constituent Assembly. During the existence of the Legislative

Assembly, he was president of the general council for the department of

the Yonne, and was afterwards elected by this department as a deputy to

the Convention. Here he was in favour of the trial of Louis XVI. by the

assembly and voted for the death of the king. This vote, together with

his ideas in general, won him the hatred of the royalists, and on the

20th of January 1793, the eve of the execution of the king, he was

assassinated in the Palais Royal at Paris by a member of the king's

body-guard. The Convention honoured Le Peletier by a magnificent

funeral, and the painter J. L. David represented his death in a famous

picture, which was later destroyed by his daughter. Towards the end of

his life, Le Peletier had interested himself in the question of public

education; he left fragments of a plan, the ideas contained in which

were borrowed in later schemes. His assassin fled to Normandy, where, on

the point of being discovered, he blew out his brains. Le Peletier had a

brother, Félix (1769-1837), well known for his advanced ideas. His

daughter, Suzanne Louise, was "adopted" by the French nation.

See _Oeuvres de M. le Peletier de Saint-Fargeau_ (Brussels, 1826) with

a life by his brother Félix; E. Le Blant, "Le Peletier de St-Fargeau,

et son meurtrier," in the _Correspondant_ review (1874); F.

Clerembray, _Épisodes de la Révolution_ (Rouen, 1891); Brette, "La

Réforme de la législation universelle, et le plan de Lepelletier

Saint-Fargeau," in _La Révolution française_, xlii. (1902); and M.

Tourneux, _Bibliog. de l'hist. de Paris ..._ (vol. i., 1890, Nos.

3896-3910, and vol. iv., 1906, _s.v._ Lepeletier).

LEPIDOLITE, or LITHIA-MICA, a mineral of the mica group (see MICA). It

is a basic aluminium, potassium and lithium fluo-silicate, with the

approximate formula KLi [Al(OH, F)2] Al(SiO3)3. Lithia and fluorine are

each present to the extent of about 5%; rubidium and caesium are

sometimes present in small amounts. Distinctly developed monoclinic

crystals or cleavage sheets of large size are of rare occurrence, the

mineral being usually found as scaly aggregates, and on this account was

named lepidolite (from Gr. [Greek: lepis], scale) by M. H. Klaproth in

1792. It is usually of a lilac or peach-blossom colour, but is sometimes

greyish-white, and has a pearly lustre on the cleavage surfaces. The

hardness is 2½-4 and the sp. gr. 2.8-2.9, the optic axial angle measures

50°-70°. It is found in pegmatite-veins, often in association with pink

tourmaline (rubellite) and sometimes intergrown in parallel position

with muscovite. Scaly masses of considerable extent are found at Rozena

near Bystrzitz in Moravia and at Pala in San Diego county, California.

The material from Rozena has been known since 1791, and has sometimes

been cut and polished for ornamental purposes: it has a pretty colour

and spangled appearance and takes a good polish, but is rather soft. At

Pala it has been extensively mined for the preparation of lithium and

rubidium salts. Other localities for the mineral are the island of Utö

in Sweden, and Auburn and Paris in Maine, U.S.A.; at Alabashka near

Mursinka in the Urals large isolated crystals have been found, and from

Central Australia transparent cleavage sheets of a fine lilac colour are

known.

The lithium-iron mica _zinnwaldite_ or _lithionite_ is closely allied to

lepidolite, differing from it in containing some ferrous iron in

addition to the constituents mentioned above. It occurs as greyish

silvery scales with hexagonal outlines in the tin-bearing granites of

Zinnwald in the Erzgebirge, Bohemia and of Cornwall. (L. J. S.)

LEPIDOPTERA (Gr. [Greek: lepis], a scale or husk, and [Greek: pteron], a

wing), a term used in zoological classification for one of the largest

and best-known orders of the class Hexapoda (q.v.), in order that

comprises the insects popularly called butterflies and moths. The term

was first used by Linnaeus (1735) in the sense still accepted by modern

zoologists, and there are few groups of animals as to whose limits and

distinguishing characters less controversy has arisen.

[Illustration: After Edwards, Riley and Howard's _Insect Life_, vol. 3

(U.S. Dept. Agr.).

FIG. 1.--e, _Crytophasa unipuctata_, Donov., Australia. a, Larva; c,

pupa, natural size; b, 2nd and 3rd abdominal segments of larva; d,

cremaster of pupa, magnified.]

_Characters._--The name of the order indicates the fact that the wings

(and other parts of the body) are clothed with flattened cuticular

structures--the scales (fig. 7)--that may be regarded as modified

arthropodan "hairs." Such scales are not peculiar to the

Lepidoptera--they are found also on many of the Aptera, on the Psocidae,

a family of Corrodentia, on some Coleoptera (beetles) and on the gnats

(Culicidae), a family of Diptera. The most distinctive structural

features of the Lepidoptera are to be found in the jaws. The mandibles

are mere vestiges or entirely absent; the second maxillae are usually

reduced to a narrow transverse mentum which bears the scale-covered

labial palps, between which project the elongate first maxillae, grooved

on their inner faces, so as to form when apposed a tubular proboscis

adapted for sucking liquid food.

All Lepidoptera are hatched as the eruciform soft-bodied type of larva

(fig. 1, a) known as the caterpillar, with biting mandibles, three pairs

of thoracic legs and with a variable number (usually five pairs) of

abdominal prolegs, which carry complete or incomplete circles of

hooklets. The pupa in a single family only is free (i.e. with the

appendages free from the body), and mandibulate. In the vast majority of

the order it is more or less obtect (i.e. with the appendages fixed to

the cuticle of the body) and without mandibles (fig. 1, c).

[Illustration: From Riley and Howard, _Insect Life_, vol. 7 (U.S. Dept.

Agr.).

FIG. 2.--a, Feeler of Saturniid Moth (_Telea polyphemus_). b, c, Tips of

branches, highly magnified.]

[Illustration: After A. Walter (_Jen. Zeits. f. Naturw._ vol. 18).

FIG. 3.--A, Mandible, and B, 1st maxilla of _Micropteryx_

(_Eriocephala_). Magnified.

a, Palp.

b, Galea.

c, Lacinia.

d, Stipes.

e, Cardo of maxilla.]

_Structure._--The head in the Lepidoptera is sub-globular in shape

with the compound eyes exceedingly well developed, and with a pair of

ocelli or "simple eyes" often present on the vertex. It is connected

to the thorax by a relatively broad and membranous "neck." The feelers

are many-jointed, often they are complex, the segments bearing

processes arranged in a comb-like manner and furnished with numerous

sensory hairs (fig. 2). The complexity of the feelers is carried to

its highest development in certain male moths that have a wonderful

power of discovering their females by smell or some analogous sense.

Often the feelers are excessively complex in male moths whose maxillae

are so reduced that they take no food in the imaginal state. The

nature of the jaws has already been briefly described. Functional

mandibles of peculiar form (fig. 3, A) are present in the remarkable

small moths of the genus _Micropteryx_ (or _Eriocephala_), and there

are vestiges of these jaws in other moths of low type, but the minute

structures in the higher Lepidoptera that were formerly described as

mandibles are now believed to belong to the labrum, the true mandibles

being perhaps represented by rounded prominences, not articulated with

the head-capsule. Throughout the order, as a whole, the jaws are

adapted for sucking liquid food, and the suctorial proboscis (often

erroneously called a "tongue") is formed as was shown by J. C. Savigny

in 1816 by two elongated and flexible outgrowths of the first

maxillae, usually regarded as representing the outer lobes or galeae

(fig. 4, A, B, g). These structures are grooved along their inner

faces and by means of a series of interlocking hair-like bristles can

be joined together so as to form a tubular sucker (fig. 4, C). At

their extremities they are beset with club-like sense-organs, whose

apparent function is that of taste. The proboscis when in use is

stretched out in front of the head and inserted into the corolla of a

flower or elsewhere, for the absorption of liquid nourishment. When at

rest, the proboscis is rolled up into a close spiral beneath the head

and between the labial palps (fig. 4, A, p). Only in the genus

_Micropteryx_ mentioned above is the lacinia of the maxilla (as A.

Walter has shown) developed (fig. 3, B, c). The maxillary palp is

usually a mere vestige (fig. 4, B, p) though it is conspicuous in a

few families of small moths. A considerable number of Lepidoptera

take no food in the imaginal state; in these the maxillae are reduced

or altogether atrophied. The second maxillae are intimately fused

together to form the labium, which consists only of a reduced mentum,

bearing sometimes vestigial lobes and always a pair of palps. These

have two or three segments and are clothed with scales. The form and

direction of the terminal segment of the labial palp afford valuable

characters in classification.

[Illustration: FIG. 4.--Arrangement of the jaws in a typical Moth.

Somewhat diagrammatic and in part after E. Burgess and V. L. Kellogg

(_Amer. Nat._ xiv. xxix.).

A, Front view of head.

c, Clypeus.

e, Compound eye.

m, Vestigial mandible.

l, Labrum.

g, Galeae of 1st maxillae.

p, Labial palp. Magnified, B.

b, Base of first maxilla dissected out of the head.

p, Vestigial palp.

g, Galea. Further magnified.

C, Part transverse section showing how the channel (A) of the

proboscis is formed by the interlocking of the grooved inner

faces of the flexible maxillae.

t, Air-tube.

n, Nerve.

m, Muscle-fibres. Highly magnified.]

In the thorax of the Lepidoptera the foremost segment or prothorax is

very small, and not movable on the mesothorax. In many families it

carries a pair of small erectile plates--the patagia--which have been

regarded as serially homologous with the wings. The mesothorax is

extensive; its scutum forming most of the dorsal thoracic area and

small plates--tegulae--are often present at the base of the forewings,

as in Hymenoptera. The tegulae which are beset with long hair-like

scales are often conspicuous. The metathorax is smaller than the

mesothorax. The legs are of the typical hexapodan form with

five-segmented feet; the shins often bear terminal and median spurs

articulated at their bases and the entire limbs are clothed with

scales.

[Illustration: After A. S. Packard, _Mem. Nat. Acad. Sci._ vol. vii.

FIG. 5.--Wing-neuration of a Notodont Moth. 2, Sub-costal; 3, radial;

4, median; 5, cubital; 7, 8, anal nervures. a, Discoidal areolet or

"cell"; f, frenulum. Note that the forewing has five branches (1-5) of

the radial nervure, the hindwing one only. The first anal nervure (No.

6) is absent.]

The wings of the Lepidoptera may be said to dominate the structure of

the insect; only exceptionally, in certain female moths, are they

vestigial or absent (fig. 17). The forewing, with its prominent apex,

is longer than the hindwing, and the neuration in both (see figs. 5

and 6) is for the most part longitudinal, only a few transverse

nervures, which are, in fact, branches of the median trunk, marking

off a discoidal areolet or "cell" (fig. 5, a). The five branches of

the radial nervure (figs. 5, 6, 3) (see HEXAPODA) are usually present

in the forewing, but the hindwing, in most families, has only a single

radial nervure; its anal area is, however, often more strongly

developed than that of the forewing. The two wings of a side are

usually kept together during flight by a few stout bristles--the

frenulum--(fig. 5, f) projecting from the base of the costa of the

hindwing and fitting beneath a membranous fold or a few thickened

scales--the retinaculum--on the under surface of the forewing. In

butterflies there is no frenulum, but a costal outgrowth of the

hindwing subserves the same function. In the most primitive moths a

small lobate outgrowth--the jugum (fig. 6, j.)--from the dorsum of the

forewing is present, but it can be of little service in keeping the

two wings together. A jugum may be also present on the hindwing. The

legs, which are generally used for clinging rather than for walking,

have five-segmented feet and are covered with scales. In some families

the front pair are reduced and without tarsal segments.

[Illustration: After Packard, _Mem. Nat. Acad. Sci._ vol. vii.

FIG. 6.--Wing neuration of a Swift Moth (Hepialid). j, Jugum. Nervures

numbered as in fig. 5. Note that there are five branches to the radial

nervure (No. 3) in both fore- and hindwing, and that the median trunk

nervures (No. 4) traverse the discoidal areolet.]

Ten abdominal segments are recognizable in many Lepidoptera, but the

terminal segments are reduced or modified to form external organs of

reproduction. In the male, according to the interpretation of C.

Peytoureau, the lateral plates belonging to the ninth segment form

paired claspers beset with harpes, or series of ridges or teeth, while

the tergum of the tenth segment forms a dorsal hook--the uncus--and

its sternum a ventral process or scaphium. In the female the terminal

segments form, in some cases, a protrusible ovipositor, but the

typical hexapodan ovipositor with its three pairs of processes is

undeveloped in the Lepidoptera.

As already mentioned, the characteristic scales on the wings, legs and

body of the Lepidoptera are cuticular structures. A complete series of

transitional forms can be traced between the most elaborate flattened

scales (fig. 7, B) with numerous longitudinal striae and a simple

arthropod "hair." Either a "hair" or a scale owes its origin to a

special cell of the ectoderm (hypodermis), a process from which grows

through the general cuticle and forms around itself the substance of

the cuticular appendage. The scales on the wings are arranged in

regular rows (fig. 7, A), and the general cuticle is drawn out into a

narrow neck or collar around the base of each scale. The scales can be

easily rubbed from the surface of the wing, and the series of collars

in which the scales rest are then evident (fig. 7, A, c) on the

wing-membrane. On the wings of many male butterflies there are

specially modified scales--the androconia (fig. 7, C)--which are

formed by glandular cells and diffuse a scented secretion. In some

cases, the androconia are mixed among the ordinary scales; in others

they are associated into conspicuous "brands" (see fig. 66). The

admirable colours of the wings of the Lepidoptera are due partly to

pigment in the scales--as in the case of yellows, browns, reds and

blacks--partly to "interference" effects from the fine striae on the

scales--as with the blues, purples and greens.

[Illustration: FIG. 7.--A, Arrangement of scales in rows on wing of

Butterfly. n, Nervure; c, collar-like outgrowths of cuticle.

Magnified. B, single scale, and C, an androconium more highly

magnified.]

A few points of interest in the internal structure of the Lepidoptera

deserve mention. The mouth opens into a sub-globular, muscular pharynx

which is believed to suck the liquid food through the proboscis, and

force it along the slender gullet into a crop-like enlargement or

diverticulum of the fore-gut known as a "food-reservoir" or

"sucking-stomach." The true stomach is tubular, and beyond it lies the

intestine into which open the three pairs of excretory (Malpighian)

tubes. The terminal part of the intestine is of wide diameter, and in

some cases gives off a short caecum. The brain and the sub-oesophageal

ganglia are closely approximated; there are two or three thoracic and

four (rarely five) abdominal ganglia. In the female each ovary has

four ovarian tubes, in which the large egg-cells are enclosed in

follicles and associated with nutritive cells. There is a special

bursa which in the Hepialidae opens with the vagina on the eighth

abdominal sternum. In the Micropterygidae, Enocraniidae and the lower

Tineides, the duct of the bursa leads into the vagina, which still

opens on the eighth sternum. But in most Lepidoptera, the bursa opens

by a vestibule on the eighth sternum, distinct from the vagina, whose

opening shifts back to the ninth, the duct of the bursa being

connected with the vagina by a canal which opens opposite to the

spermatheca. In the male, the two testes are usually fused into a

single mass, and a pair of tubular accessory glands open into the vasa

deferentia or into the ejaculatory duct. In a few families--the

Hepialidae and Saturniidae for example--the testes retain the

primitive paired arrangement. These details have been worked out by

various students, among whom W. H. Jackson and W. Petersen deserve

special mention. Summing up the developmental history of the genital

ducts, Jackson remarks that there is "an Ephemeridal stage, which ends

towards the close of larval life, an Orthopteran stage, indicated

during the quiescent period preceding pupation, and a Lepidopteran

stage which begins with the commencement of pupal life."

[Illustration: FIG. 8 A.--_Cossus macmurtrei._ (MacMurtrie's Goat Moth.)

N. America.]

[Illustration: FIG. 8 B.--Larva of _Cossus cossus_. (Goat Moth.)

Europe.]

_Development._--Many observations have been made on the embryology of

the Lepidoptera; for some of the more important results of these see

HEXAPODA. The post-embryonic development of Lepidoptera is more

familiar, perhaps, than that of any other group of animals. The egg

shows great variation in its outward form, the outer envelope or chorion

being in some families globular, in others flattened, in others again

erect and sub-conical or cylindrical; while its surface often exhibits a

beautifully regular series of ribs and furrows. Throughout the order the

larva is of the form known as the caterpillar (fig. 1, a, b, fig. 8 B)

characterized by the presence of three pairs of jointed and clawed legs

on the thorax and a variable number of pairs of abdominal

"prolegs"--sub-cylindrical outgrowths of the abdominal segments,

provided with a complete or incomplete circle of hooklets at the

extremity.

[Illustration: FIG. 9.--Head of Goat Moth Caterpillar (_Cossus_) from

behind. Magnified. (From Miall and Denny after Lyonnet.)

At, Feeler.

Mn, Mandible.

Mx, First maxilla.

Lm, Second maxillae (Labium) with spinneret.]

There are ten abdominal segments--the ninth often small and concealed;

prolegs are usually present on the third, fourth, fifth, sixth and

tenth of these segments. The head of the caterpillar (fig. 9) is large

with firmly chitinized cuticle; it carries usually twelve simple eyes

or ocelli, a pair of short feelers (fig. 9 At) and a pair of strong

mandibles (fig. 9, Mn), for the caterpillar feeds by biting leaves or

other plant-tissues. The first maxillae, so highly developed in the

imago, are in the larva small and inconspicuous appendages, each

bearing two short jointed processes,--the galea and the palp (fig. 9,

Mx). The second maxillae form a plate-like labium on whose surface

projects the spinneret which is usually regarded as a modified

hypopharynx (fig. 9, Lm). The silk-glands whose ducts open on this

spinneret are paired convoluted tubes lying alongside the elongate

cylindrical stomach. In the common "silkworm" these glands are five

times as long as the body of the caterpillar. They are regarded as

modified salivary glands, though the correspondence has been doubted

by some students. The body of the caterpillar is usually cylindrical

and wormlike, with the segmentation well marked and the cuticle

feebly chitinized and flexible. Firm chitinous plates are, however,

not seldom present on the prothorax and on the hindmost abdominal

segment. The segments are mostly provided with bristle or

spine-bearing tubercles, whose arrangement has lately been shown by H.

G. Dyar to give partially trustworthy indications of relationship. On

either side of the median line we find two dorsal or trapezoidal

tubercles (Nos. 1 and 2), while around the spiracle are grouped (Nos.

3, 4 and 5) supra-, post-, and pre-spiracular tubercles; below are the

sub-spiraculars, of which there may be two (Nos. 6, 7). The last-named

is situated on the base of the abdominal proleg, and yet another

tubercle (No. 8) may be present on the inner aspect of the proleg. The

spiracles are very conspicuous on the body of a caterpillar, occurring

on the prothorax and on the first eight abdominal segments. Various

tubercles may become coalesced or aborted (fig. 10, B); often, in

conjunction with the spines that they bear, the tubercles serve as a

valuable protective armature for the caterpillar. Much discussion has

taken place as to whether the abdominal prolegs are or are not

developed directly from the embryonic abdominal appendages. In the

more lowly families of Lepidoptera, these organs are provided at the

extremity with a complete circle of hooklets, but in the more highly

organized families, only the inner half of this circle is retained.

[Illustration: B, after Grote, _Mitt. aus dem Roemer Museum_, No. 6.

FIG. 10.--Abdominal segments of Caterpillars, to show arrangement of

tubercles; the arrows point anteriorly. A, Generalized condition; B,

specialized condition in the Saturniidae. s, Spiracle; the numbering

of the tubercles is explained in the text. Note that in B No. 2 is

much reduced and disappears after the first moult. 4 and 5 are

coalesced, and 6 is absent.]

[Illustration: FIG. 11.--Pupa of a Butterfly (_Amathusia phidippus_).]

The typical Lepidopteran pupa, or "chrysalis," as shown in the higher

families, is an obtect pupa (fig. 11) with no trace of mandibles, the

appendages being glued to the body by an exudation, and motion being

possible only at three of the abdominal intersegmental regions, the

fifth and sixth abdominal segments at most being "free." A flattened

or pointed process--the cremaster--often prominent at the tail-end,

may carry one or several hooks (fig. 1, d) which serve to anchor the

pupa to its cocoon or to suspend butterfly-pupae from their pad of

silk (fig. 11). In the lower families the pupa (fig. 1, c) is only

incompletely obtect, and a greater number of abdominal segments can

move on one another. The seventh abdominal segment is, in all female

lepidopterous pupae, fused with those behind it; in the male

"incomplete" pupa this becomes "free" and so may the segments anterior

to it, in both sexes, forward to and including the third. The presence

of circles of spines on the abdominal segments enables the

"incomplete" pupa as a whole to work its way partly out of the cocoon

when the time for the emergence of the imago draws near. In the family

of the Eriocraniidae (often called the Micropterygidae) the pupa

resembles that of a caddis-fly (_Trichopteron_) being active before

the emergence of the imago and provided with strong mandibles by means

of which it bites its way out of the cocoon. The importance of the

pupa in the phylogeny and classification of the Lepidoptera has lately

been demonstrated by T. A. Chapman in a valuable series of papers.

Sometimes organs are present in the pupa which are undeveloped in the

imago, such as the maxillary palps of the Sesiidae (clearwing moths)

and the pectination on the feelers of female Saturniids. E. B. Poulton

has drawn attention to the ancestral value of such characters.

_Habits and Life-Relations._--The attractiveness of the Lepidoptera and

the conspicuous appearance of many of them have led to numerous

observations on their habits. The method of feeding of the imago by the

suction of liquids has already been mentioned in connexion with the

structure of the maxillae and the food-canal. Nectar from flowers is the

usual food of moths and butterflies, most of which alight on a blossom

before thrusting the proboscis into the corolla of the flower, while

others--the hawk moths (Sphingidae) for example--remain poised in the

air in front of the flower by means of excessively rapid vibration of

the wings, and quickly unrolling the proboscis sip the nectar. Certain

flowers with remarkably long tubular corollas seem to be specially

adapted for the visits of hawk moths. Some Lepidoptera have other

sources of food-supply. The juices of fruit are often sought for, and

certain moths can pierce the envelope of a succulent fruit with the

rough cuticular outgrowths at the tips of the maxillae, so as to reach

the soft tissue within. Animal juices attract other Lepidoptera, which

have been observed to suck blood from a wounded mammal; while putrid

meat is a familiar "lure" for the gorgeous "purple emperor" butterfly

(_Apatura iris_). The water of streams or the dew on leaves may be

frequently sought by Lepidoptera desirous of quenching their thirst,

possibly with fatal results, the insects being sometimes drowned in

rivers in large numbers. Members of several families of the

Lepidoptera--the Hepialidae, Lasiocampidae and Saturniidae, for

example--have the maxillae vestigial or aborted, and take no food at all

after attaining the winged condition. In such insects there is a

complete "division of labour" between the larval and the imaginal

instars, the former being entirely devoted to nutritive, the latter to

reproductive functions.

Of much interest is the variety displayed among the Lepidoptera in the

season and the duration of the various instars. The brightly coloured

vanessid butterflies, for example, emerge from the pupa in the late

summer and live through the winter in sheltered situations, reappearing

to lay their eggs in the succeeding spring. Many species, such as the

vapourer moths (_Orgyia_), lay eggs in the autumn, which remain

unhatched through the winter. The eggs of the well-known magpie moths

(_Abraxas_) hatch in autumn and the caterpillar hibernates while still

quite small, awaiting for its growth the abundant food-supply to be

afforded by the next year's foliage. The codlin moths (_Carpocapsa_)

pass the winter as resting full-grown larvae, which seek shelter and

spin cocoons in autumn, but do not pupate until the succeeding spring.

Lastly, many of the Lepidoptera hibernate in the pupal stage; the

death's head moth (_Acherontia_) and the cabbage-white butterflies

(_Pieris_) are familiar examples of such. The last-named insects afford

instances of the "double-brooded" condition, two complete life-cycles

being passed through in the year. The flour moth (_Ephestia kühniella_)

is said to have five successive generations in a twelvemonth. On the

other hand, certain species whose larvae feed in wood or on roots take

two or three years to reach the adult stage.

The rate of growth of the larva depends to a great extent on the nature

of its food, and the feeding-habits of caterpillars afford much of

interest and variety to the student. The contrast among the Lepidoptera

between the suctorial mouth of the imago and the biting jaws of the

caterpillar is very striking (cf. figs. 4 and 9), and the profound

transformation in structure which takes place is necessarily accompanied

by the change from solid to liquid food. The first meal of a young

caterpillar is well known to be often its empty egg-shell; from this it

turns to feed upon the leaves whereon its provident parent has laid her

eggs. But in a few cases hatching takes place in winter or early spring,

and the young larvae have then to find a temporary food until their own

special plant is available. For example, the caterpillars of some

species of _Xanthia_ and other noctuid moths feed at first upon

willow-catkins. On the other hand, the caterpillars of the pith moth

(_Blastodacna_) hatched at midsummer, feed on leaves when young, and

burrow into woody shoots in autumn. All who have tried to rear

caterpillars know that, while those of some species will feed only on

one particular species of plant, others will eat several species of the

same genus or family, while others again are still less particular, some

being able to feed on almost any green herb. It is curious to note how

certain species change their food in different localities, a caterpillar

confined to one plant in some localities being less particular

elsewhere. Individual aberrations in food are of special interest in

suggesting the starting-point for a change in the race. When we consider

the vast numbers of the Lepidoptera and the structural modifications

which they have undergone, their generally faithful adherence to a

vegetable diet is remarkable. The vast majority of caterpillars eat

leaves, usually devouring them openly, and, if of large size, quickly

reducing the amount of foliage on the plant. But many small caterpillars

keep, apparently for the sake of concealment, to the under surface of

the leaf, while others burrow into the green tissue, forming a

characteristic sinuous "mine" between the two leaf-skins. In several

families we find the habit of burrowing in woody stems,--the "goat"

(_Cossus_, fig. 8) and the clearwings (Sesiidae), for example, while

others, like the larvae of the swift moths (Hepialidae) live underground

devouring roots (fig. 12). The richer nutrition in the green food is

usually shown by the quicker growth of the numerous caterpillars that

feed on it, as compared with the slower development of the wood and

root-feeding species. Aquatic larvae are very rare among the

Lepidoptera. The caterpillars of the pyralid "china-mark" moths

(_Hydrocampa_, fig. 13), however, live under water, feeding on duckweed

(_Lemna_) and breathing atmospheric air, a film of which is enclosed in

a spun-up shelter beneath the leaves, while the larvae of _Paraponyx_,

which feed on _Stratiotes_, have closed spiracles and breathe dissolved

air by means of branchial filaments along the sides of the body.

[Illustration: FIG. 12.--Larva of _Hepialus humuli_ (ghost moth).]

[Illustration: FIG. 13.--_Hydrocampa aquatilis_ (water moth).]

We may now turn to instances of more anomalous modes of feeding. The

clothes moths (Tineids) have invaded our dwellings and found a congenial

food-stuff for their larvae in our garments. A few small species of the

same group are reared in meal and other human food-stores; so are the

caterpillars of some pyralid moths (_Ephestia_), while others (_Asopia_,

_Aglossa_) feed upon kitchen refuse. Two species of crambid moths

(_Aphomia sociella_ and _Galleria melonella_) find a home in bee-hives,

where their caterpillars feed upon the wax, while the waxy secretion

from the body of the great American lantern-fly (_Fulgora candelaria_)

serves both as shelter and food for the caterpillar of the moth

_Epipyrops anomala_. Very few caterpillars have developed a thoroughly

carnivorous habit. That of _Cosmia trapezina_ feeds on oak and other

leaves, but devours smaller caterpillars which happen to get in its way,

and if shaken from the tree, eats other larvae while climbing the trunk.

_Xylina ornithopus_ and a few other species are said to be always

carnivorous when opportunity offers; the small looping caterpillar of a

"pug" moth (_Eupithecia coronata_) has been observed to eat a larva

three times as big as itself. The caterpillars of _Orthosia pistacina_

live together in peace while their food is moist, but devour each other

when it dries up; this is true cannibalism--a term which should not be

applied to the habit of preying on another species. A few carnivorous

caterpillars do not attack other caterpillars, but prey upon insects of

another order; among these _Fenescia tarquinius_, which eats aphides,

and _Erastria scitula_, which feeds upon scale insects, must be reckoned

as benefactors to mankind. The life-history of the latter moth has been

worked out by H. Rouzaud. It inhabits the shores of the Mediterranean,

and its caterpillar devours the coccids upon various fruit-trees,

especially the black-scale (_Lecanium oleae_) of the olive. The moth,

which is a small noctuid, the white markings on whose wings give it the

appearance of a bird-dropping when at rest in the daytime, appears in

May, and lays her eggs, singly and far apart, upon the trees infested by

the coccids. when hatched, the young caterpillar selects a large female

coccid, eats its way through the scale, and devours the insect beneath;

having done this it makes its way to a fresh victim. As it increases in

size it forms a case for itself made of the scales of its victims,

excrement, &c., bound together by silk which it spins, and, protected by

this covering, which closely resembles the smut-covered bark of the

tree, it roams about during its later stages, devouring several coccids

every day. So nutritious is the food, that four or five successive

broods follow each other through the summer.

[Illustration: After Marlatt (after Riley), _Bull. 4, Div. Ent. U.S.

Dept. Agr._

FIG. 14.--Clothes Moth (_Tinea pellionella_), with larva in and out of

its case. Magnified.]

The habit just mentioned of forming some kind of protective covering out

of foreign substances spun together by silk is practised by caterpillars

of different families. The clothes moth larvae (_Tinea_, fig. 14), for

example, make a tubular dwelling out of the pellets of wool passed from

their own intestines, while the allied Tortricid caterpillars roll up

leaves and spin for themselves cylindrical shelters. The habit of

spinning over the food plant a protective mass of web, whereon the

caterpillars of a family can live together socially is not uncommon. In

the case of the small ermine moths (_Hyponomeuta_) the caterpillars

remain associated throughout their lives and pupate in cocoons on the

mass of web produced by their common labour. But the larger, spiny

caterpillars of the vanessid butterflies usually scatter away from the

nest of their infancy when they have attained a certain size.

[Illustration: FIG. 15.--Larva of _Orgyia gonostigma_. Europe.]

Spines and hairs seem to be often effective protections for

caterpillars; the experiments of E. B. Poulton and others tend to show

that hairy caterpillars (fig. 15) are distasteful to birds. Many

caterpillars are protected by the harmony of their general green

coloration with their surroundings. When the insect attains a large

size--as in the case of the hawk moth (Sphingid) caterpillars--the

extensive green surface becomes broken up by diagonal dark markings

(fig. 46b), thus simulating the effect of light and shade among the

foliage. A remarkable result of Poulton's experiments has been the

establishment of a reflex effect through the skin on the colour of a

caterpillar. Some species of "loopers" (Geometridae, fig. 43) for

example, if placed when young among surroundings of a certain colour,

become closely assimilated thereto--dark brown among dark twigs, green

among green leaves. These colour-reflexes in conjunction with the

elongate twig-like shape of the caterpillars and their habit of

stretching themselves straight out from a branch, afford some of the

best and most familiar examples of "protective resemblance." The

"terrifying attitude" of caterpillars, and the supposed resemblance

borne by some of them to serpents and other formidable vertebrates or

arthropods, are discussed in the article MIMICRY.

[Illustration: After Ratzeburg, _Insect Life_, vol. 2 (U.S. Dept. Agr.).

FIG. 16.--Pupa of Gypsy Moth (_Porthetria dispar_) sheltered in leaves

joined by silken threads. Below is the cast larval cuticle.]

The silk produced by a caterpillar is, as we have seen, often

advantageous in its own life-relations, but its great use is in

connexion with the pupal stage. In the life-history of many Lepidoptera,

the last act of the caterpillar is to spin a cocoon which may afford

protection to the pupa. In some cases this is formed entirely of the

silk produced by the spinning-glands, and may vary from the loose

meshwork that clothes the pupa of the diamond-back moth (_Plutella

cruciferarum_) to the densely woven cocoon of the silkworms (Bombycidae

and Saturniidae) or the hard shell-like covering of the eggars

(Lasiocampidae). Frequently foreign substances are worked up with the

silk and serve to strengthen the cocoon, such as hairs from the body of

the caterpillar itself, as among the "tigers" (Arctiidae) or chips of

wood, as with the timber-burrowing larva of the "goat" (_Cossus_). In

many families of Lepidoptera we can trace a degeneration of the cocoon.

Thus, the pupae of most owl moths (Noctuidae) and hawk moths

(Sphingidae) lie buried in an earthen cell. Among the butterflies we

find that the cocoon is reduced to a pad of silk which gives attachment

to the cremaster; in the Pieridae there is in addition a girdle of silk

around the waist-region of the pupa, but the pupae of the Nymphalidae

(figs. 11, 65) simply hang from the supporting pad by the tail-end.

Poulton has shown that the colours of some exposed pupae vary with the

nature of the surroundings of the larva during the final stage.

When the pupal stage is complete the insect has to make its way out of

the cocoon. In the lower families of moths it is the pupa which comes

out at least partially, working itself onwards by the spines on its

abdominal segments; the pupa of the primitive _Micropteryx_ has

functional mandibles with which it bites through the cocoon. In the

higher Lepidoptera the pupa is immovable, and the imago, after the

ecdysis of the pupal cuticle, must emerge. This emergence is in some

cases facilitated by the secretion of an acid or alkaline solvent

discharged from the mouth or from the hind-gut, which weakens the

cocoon--so that the delicate moth can break through without injury.

As might be expected, the conditions to which larva and pupa are

subjected have often a marked influence on the nature of the imago. An

indifferent food-supply for the larva leads to a dwarfing of the moth or

butterfly. Many converging lines of experiment and observation tend to

show that cool conditions during the pupal stage frequently induce

darkening of pigment in the imago, while a warm temperature brightens

the colours of the perfect insect. For example, in many species of

butterfly that are double-brooded, the spring brood emerging from the

wintering pupae are more darkly coloured than the summer brood, but if

the pupae producing the latter be subjected artificially to cold

conditions, the winter form of imago results. It is usually impossible,

however, to produce the summer form of the species from wintering pupae

by artificial heat. From this A. Weismann argued that the more stable

winter form must be regarded as representing the ancestral race of the

species. Further examples of this "seasonal dimorphism" are afforded by

many tropical butterflies which possess a darker "wet-season" and a

brighter "dry-season" generation. So different in appearance are often

these two seasonal forms that before their true relationship was worked

out they had been naturally regarded as independent species. The

darkening of wing-patterns in many species of Lepidoptera has been

carefully studied in our own British fauna. Melanic or melanochroic

varieties are specially characteristic of western and hilly regions, and

some remarkable dark races (fig. 43) of certain geometrid moths have

arisen and become perpetuated in the manufacturing districts of the

north of England. The production of these melanic forms is explained by

J. W. Tutt and others as largely due to the action of natural selection,

the damp and sooty conditions of the districts where they occur

rendering unusually dark the surfaces--such as rocks, tree-trunks and

palings--on which moths habitually rest and so favouring the survival of

dark, and the elimination of pale varieties, as the latter would be

conspicuous to their enemies. Breeding experiments have shown that these

melanic races are sometimes "dominant" to their parent-stock. An

evidently adaptive connexion can be frequently traced between the

resting situation and attitude of the insect and the colour and pattern

of its wings. Moths that rest with the hindwings concealed beneath the

forewings (fig. 34, f) often have the latter dull and mottled, while the

former are sometimes highly coloured. Butterflies whose normal resting

attitude is with the wings closed vertically over the back (fig. 63) so

that the under surface is exposed to view, often have this under surface

mottled and inconspicuous although the upper surface may be bright with

flashing colours. Various degrees of such "protective resemblance" can

be traced, culminating in the wonderful "imitation" of its surroundings

shown by the tropical "leaf-butterflies" (_Kallima_), the under surfaces

of whose wings, though varying greatly, yet form in every case a perfect

representation of a leaf in some stage or other of decay, the butterfly

at the same time disposing of the rest of its body so as to bear out the

deception. How this is effected is best told by A. R. Wallace, who was

the first to observe it, in his work _The Malay Archipelago_:--

"The habit of the species is always to rest on a twig and among dead

or dried leaves, and in this position, with the wings closely pressed

together, their outline is exactly that of a moderately sized leaf

slightly curved or shrivelled. The tail of the hindwings forms a

perfect stalk and touches the stick, while the insect is supported by

the middle pair of legs, which are not noticed among the twigs and

fibres that surround it. The head and antennae are drawn back between

the wings so as to be quite concealed, and there is a little notch

hollowed out at the very base of the wings, which allows the head to

be retracted sufficiently."

But the British Vanessids often rest on a bare patch of ground with the

brightly coloured upper surface of their wings fully exposed to view,

and even make themselves still more conspicuous by fanning their wings

up and down. Some genera and families of Lepidoptera, believed to

secrete noxious juices that render them distasteful, are adorned with

the staring contrasts of colour usually regarded as "warning," while

other genera, belonging to harmless families sought for as food by birds

and lizards, are believed to obtain complete or partial immunity by

their likeness to the conspicuous noxious groups. (See MIMICRY.)

[Illustration: FIG. 17.--Vapourer Moth (_Ocneria detrita_). S. Europe.

A, Male; B, Female.]

Sexual dimorphism is frequent among the Lepidoptera. In many families

this takes the form of more elaborate feelers in the male than in the

female moth. Such complex feelers (fig. 2) bear numerous sensory

(olfactory) nerve-endings and give to the males that possess them a

wonderful power of discovering their mates. A single captive female of

the Endromidae or Lasiocampidae often causes hundreds of males of her

species to "assemble" around her prison, and this character is made use

of by collectors who want to secure specimens. In many

butterflies--notably the "blues" (Lycaenidae)--the male is brilliant

while the female is dull, and in other groups (the Danainae for example)

he is provided with scent-producing glands believed to be "alluring" in

function. The apparent evidence given by the sexual differences among the

Lepidoptera in favour of C. Darwin's theory of sexual selection finds no

support from a study of their habits. The male indeed usually seeks the

female, but she appears to exercise no choice in pairing. In some cases

the female is attracted by the male, and here a modified form of sexual

selection appears to be operative. The ghost swift moth (_Hepialus

humuli_) affords a curious and interesting example of this condition, the

female showing the usual brown and buff coloration of her genus, while

the wings of the male are pure white, rendering him conspicuous in the

dusky evening when pairing takes place. But in the northernmost haunts

of the species, where there is no midsummer night, the male closely

resembles the female in wing patterns, the development of the conspicuous

white being needless. A very interesting sexual dimorphism is seen in the

wingless condition of several female moths--the winter moths (_Hybernia_

and _Cheimatobia_) among the Geometridae and the vapourers (_Orgyia_ and

_Ocneria_) among the Lymantriidae for example (fig. 17). It might be

thought that the loss of power of flight by the female would seriously

restrict the range of the species. In such insects, however, the

caterpillars are often active and travel far.

_Distribution and Migration._--The range of the Lepidoptera is

practically world-wide; they are absent from the most remote and

inhospitable of the arctic and antarctic lands, but even Kerguelen

possesses a few small indigenous moths. Many of the large and dominant

families have a range wide as that of the order, and certain species

that have attached themselves to man--like the meal moths and the

clothes moths--have become almost cosmopolitan. Interesting and

suggestive restrictions of range can, however, be often traced. Although

butterflies have been found in 82° N. latitude in Greenland, they are

unknown in Iceland, and only a few species of the group reach New

Zealand. Three large sections--the Ithomiinae, Heliconiinae and

Brassolinae--of the great butterfly family Nymphalidae are peculiar to

the Neotropical region, while the Morphinae, a characteristically South

American group, have a few Oriental genera in India and Indo-Malaya. The

Acraeinae, another section of the same family, have the vast majority of

their species in Ethiopian Africa, but are represented eastwards in the

Oriental and Australian regions and westwards in South America. A

comparison of the lepidopterous faunas of Ireland, Great Britain and the

European continent is very instructive, and suggests strongly that,

despite their power of flight the Lepidoptera are mostly dependent on

land-connexions for the extension of their range. For example, Ireland

has only forty of the seventy species of British butterflies. The range

of many Lepidoptera is of course determined by the distribution of the

plants on which their larvae feed.

Nevertheless certain species of powerful flight, and some that might be

thought feeble on the wing, often cross sea-channels and establish or

reinforce distant colonies. Caterpillars of the great death's head moth

(_Acherontia atropos_) are found every summer feeding in British and

Irish potato fields, but it is doubtful if any of the pupae resulting

from them survive the winter in our climate. It is believed by Tutt that

the species is only maintained by a fresh immigration of moths from the

South each summer. Hosts of white butterflies (_Pieris_) have been

frequently observed crossing the English Channel from France to Kent.

Migrating swarms of Lepidoptera have often been met by sailors in

mid-ocean; thus, Tutt records the presence around a sailing ship in the

Atlantic of such a swarm of the rather feeble moth _Deiopeia pulchella_,

nearly 1000 m. from its nearest known habitat. This migratory instinct

is connected with the gregarious habits of many Lepidoptera. For

example, H. W. Bates states that at one place in South America he

noticed eighty different species flying about in enormous numbers in the

sunshine, and these, with few exceptions, were males, the females

remaining within the forest shades. Darwin describes a "butterfly

shower," which he observed 10 m. off the South American coast, extending

as far as the eye could reach; "even by the aid of the telescope," he

adds, "it was not possible to see a space free from butterflies." Sir J.

Emerson Tennent, witnessed in Ceylon a mighty host of butterflies of

white or pale yellow hue, "apparently miles in breadth and of such

prodigious extension as to occupy hours and even days uninterruptedly in

their passage." Observations at Heligoland by H. Gätke have shown that

migrating moths "travel under the same conditions as migrating birds,

and for the most part in their company, in an east to west direction;

they fly in swarms, the numbers of which defy all attempts at

computation and can only be expressed by millions." The painted lady

butterfly (_Pyrameis cardui_) comes in repeated swarms from the

Mediterranean region into northern and western Europe, while in North

America companies of the monarch (_Anosia archippus_) invade Canada

every summer from the United States, and are believed to return

southwards in autumn. This latter species has, during the last

half-century, extended its range south-westwards across the Pacific and

reached the Austro-Malayan islands, while several specimens have

occurred in southern and western England, though it has not established

itself on this side of the Atlantic. It is noteworthy that the

introduction of its food-plant--_Asclepias_--into the Sandwich Islands

in 1850 apparently enabled it to spread across the Pacific.

_Fossil History._--Our knowledge of the geological history of the

Lepidoptera is but scanty. Certain Oolitic fossil insects from the

lithographic stone of Solenhofen, Bavaria, have been described as moths,

but it is only in Tertiary deposits that undoubted Lepidoptera occur,

and these, all referable to existing families, are very scarce. Most of

them come from the Oligocene beds of Florissant, Colorado, and have been

described by S. H. Scudder. The paucity of Lepidoptera among the fossils

is not surprising when we consider the delicacy of their structure, and

though their past history cannot be traced back beyond early Cainozoic

times, we can have little doubt from the geographical distribution of

some of the families that the order originated with the other higher

Endopterygota in the Mesozoic epoch.

_Classification._--The order Lepidoptera contains more than fifty

families, the discussion of whose mutual relationships has given rise to

much difference of opinion. The generally received distinction is

between butterflies or _Rhopalocera_ (Lepidoptera with clubbed feelers,

whose habit is to fly by day) and moths or _Heterocera_ (Lepidoptera

with variously shaped feelers, mostly crepuscular or nocturnal in

habit). This distinction is quite untenable as a zoological conception,

for the relationship of butterflies to some moths is closer than that of

many families of Heterocera to each other. Still more objectionable is

the division of the order into _Macrolepidoptera_ (including the

butterflies and large moths) and the _Microlepidoptera_ (comprising the

smaller moths). Most of the recent suggestions for the division of the

Lepidoptera into sub-orders depend upon some single character. Thus J.

H. Comstock has proposed to separate the three lowest families, which

have--like caddis-flies (Trichoptera)--a jugum on each forewing, as a

suborder _Jugatae_, distinct from all the rest of the Lepidoptera--the

_Frenatae_, mostly possessing a frenulum on the hindwing. A. S. Packard

places one family (Micropterygidae) with functional mandibles and a

lacinia in the first maxilla alone in a suborder _Laciniata_, all the

rest of the order forming the suborder _Haustellata_. T. A. Chapman

divides the families with free or incompletely obtect and mobile pupae

(_Incompletae_) from those with obtect pupae which never leave the

cocoon (_Obtectae_), and this is probably the most natural primary

division of the Lepidoptera that has as yet been suggested. Dyar puts

forward a classification founded entirely on the structure of the larva,

while Tutt divides the Lepidoptera into three great stirps characterized

by the shape of the chorion of the egg. The primitive form of the egg is

oval, globular, or flattened with the micropyle at one end; from this

has apparently been derived the upright form of egg with the micropyle

on top which characterizes the butterflies and the higher moths. These

schemes, though helpful in pointing out important differences, are

unnatural in that they lay stress on single, often adaptive, characters

to the exclusion of others equally important. Although it is perhaps

best to establish no division among the Lepidoptera between the order

and the family, an attempt has been made in the classification adopted

in this article to group the families into tribes or super-families

which may indicate their probable affinities. The systematic work of G.

F. Hampson, A. R. Grote and E. Meyrick has done much to place the

classification of the Lepidoptera on a sound basis, so far as the

characters of the imago are concerned, but attention must also be paid

to the preparatory stages if a truly natural system is to be reached.

_Jugatae._

Three families are included in this group having in common certain

primitive characters of the wings and neuration (see fig. 6), as well

as of the larva and pupa. There is a membranous lobe or jugum near the

base of the wing, and the neuration of the hindwing is closely like

that of the forewing, the radial nervure being five-branched in both.

The pupa has four or five movable segments, and the larval prolegs

have complete circles of hooklets.

The three families of the Jugatae are not very closely related to each

other. The _Micropterygidae_ (often known as _Eriocephalidae_),

comprising a few small moths with metallic wings, are the most

primitive of all Lepidoptera. They are provided with functional

mandibles, while the maxillae have distinct laciniae, well-developed

palps and galeae not modified for suction (see fig. 3). The larva is

remarkable on account of its long feelers, the presence of pairs of

jointed prolegs on the first eight abdominal segments, an anal sucker

beneath the last segment and bladder-like outgrowths on the cuticle.

These curious larvae feed on wet moss. The family has only a few

genera scattered widely over the earth's surface (Europe, America,

Australia, New Zealand).

The _Eriocraniidae_ resemble the Micropterygidae in appearance, but

the imago has no mandibles, and the maxillae, though short and

provided with conspicuous palps, have no laciniae and form a proboscis

as in Lepidoptera generally. The abdomen of the female carries a

serrate piercing process, and the eggs are laid in the leaves of

deciduous trees, the white larvae, with aborted legs, mining in the

leaf tissue. The fully-fed larva winters in an underground cocoon and

then changes into the most remarkable of all known lepidopterous

pupae, with relatively enormous toothed mandibles which bite a way out

of the cocoon in preparation for the final change. These pupal

mandibles of the Eriocraniidae, together with the nature of the

imaginal maxillae in the Micropterygidae (Eriocephalidae) and the

wing-neuration in both families, point strongly to a relationship

between the Lepidoptera and the Trichoptera.

The _Hepialidae_ or swift moths--the third family of the Jugatae--are

in some respects specialized. The moths are of large or moderate size

with the maxillae in a vestigial condition, no food being taken after

the attainment of the perfect state. The larvae (fig. 12) feed either

on roots or in the wood of trees and shrubs, not attaining their

growth in less than a year and some large exotic species living for

two or three. The family is world-wide in range, and Australia

possesses some almost gigantic and strangely coloured genera.

_Tineides._

A large assemblage of moths, mostly of small size, are included in

this group. The wings have no jugum, but there is a frenulum on the

hindwing, which has, as in all the groups above the Jugatae, only a

single radial nervure. Three anal nervures are present in the hindwing

in those families whose wings are well developed, but in several

families of small moths the wings of both pairs are very narrow and

pointed, and the neuration is consequently reduced. The sub-costal

nervure of the hindwing is usually present and distinct from the

radial nervure. The egg is flat except in the Cossidae and Castniidae

in which it is upright. The larval prolegs, with few exceptions, have

a complete circle of hooklets, and the larvae usually feed in some

concealed situation. The pupa is incompletely obtect, with three (in

some females only two) to five free abdominal segments, and emerges

partly from the cocoon before the moth appears. The cremaster serves

to anchor the pupa to its cocoon at the correct degree of emergence,

and thus facilitates the eclosion of the imago.

[Illustration: FIG. 18.--_Stygia australis._ S. Europe.]

[Illustration: FIG. 19.--_Zeuzera scalaris._ India.]

The _Cossidae_ are a small family of large moths (figs. 8, 18, 19)

belonging to this section, characterized by their heads with erect

rough scales or hairs, the pectinate feelers of the males, their

reduced maxillae so that no food is taken in the perfect state, and

their wings with the fifth radial nervure arising from the third, and

the main median nervure forking in the discoidal areolet. The larvae

feed in plant stems, often in the wood of trees, forming tunnels and

galleries, and usually taking a year or more to reach maturity. The

pupa which has three or four free segments in the male and four or

five in the female, rests in a cocoon within the food plant, often

strengthened by chips of wood, or in a subterranean cocoon. The family

is fairly well represented in the tropics; the British fauna possesses

only three species, of which the "goat" (_Cossus cossus_) and the

"leopard" (_Zeuzera pyrina_) are well known, the caterpillars of both

being often injurious to timber and fruit trees.

The _Tortricidae_ are a large family of small moths (see fig. 1),

nearly allied to the Cossidae. The fifth radial nervure does not

arise from the third, the maxillae are well developed, but their

palps are obsolete; the head is densely clothed with erect scales; the

terminal segment of the labial palp is short and obtuse. The female

pupa has three, the male four, free segments. All the larvae of these

moths have some method of concealing themselves while feeding. A

frequent plan is to roll up a leaf of the food-plant, fastening the

twisted portion with silken threads so as to make a tubular retreat;

this is the habit of the caterpillar of the green bell moth (_Tortrix

viridana_) which often ravages the foliage of oak plantations. The

larvae of the pine-shoot moths (_Retinia_) shelter in solidified

resinous exudations from their coniferous food-plants, while the

codlin-moth caterpillar (_Carpocapsa pomonella_) feeds in apples and

pears, growing with the growth of the fruit which affords them both

provender and home. The antics of "jumping-beans" are due to the

movements of tortricid caterpillars within the substance of the seed.

The _Psychidae_ are a small but widely-distributed family of moths

whose males have the head, densely clothed with rough hairs, bearing

complex, bipectinated feelers, but with the maxillae reduced and

useless. The larvae live in portable cases made of grass, pieces of

leaf or stick, with a silken lining, and these cases serve as cocoons

for the pupae which agree in structure with those of the Tortricidae.

But the most remarkable feature of the family is the extreme

degradation of the female, which, wingless, legless and without jaws

or feelers, never emerges from the cocoon.

[Illustration: FIG. 20.--_Castnia acraeoides._ Brazil.]

The _Castniidae_ are a small family of large, conspicuous, day-flying

exotic moths (fig. 20) whose clubbed feelers and bright colours give

them a resemblance to butterflies, although their wing-neuration is of

the primitive tineoid type; the smooth larvae feed on the stems or

roots of plants and the pupal structure agrees with that of the

Tortricidae and Psychidae. The distribution of the family is confined

to Tropical America and the Indo-Malayan and Australian regions.

[Illustration: FIG. 21.--_Neurosymploca concinna._ S. Africa.]

The _Zygaenidae_ (burnet moths) are a large family of day-flying moths

(fig. 21) adorned with brilliant metallic colours. The feelers are

long, stout in the middle and tapering, bearing numerous long or short

pectinations. The well-developed maxillae have vestigial palps. The

larvae--often very conspicuously coloured--are remarkable among the

Tineides in having incomplete circles of hooks on the prolegs, and

they feed exposed on the leaves of various plants. The pupa, enclosed

in a silken cocoon, has four or five free segments. The _Limacodidae_

are a small family of brownish nocturnal moths, allied to the

Zygaenidae and agreeing with them in the structure of the pupa. The

larva in this family also is an exposed feeder, but it is remarkable

in form, being flattened and slug-like, without prolegs and adorned

with curious spinous processes.

[Illustration: FIG. 22.--A, _Sesia asiliformis_ (Gad-fly Hawk Moth).

Europe. B, Larva.]

The _Sesiidae_ are a large family of small, narrow-winged moths, the

sub-costal nervure of the hindwing being absent and the wings being

for the most part destitute of scales (fig. 22). The maxillae are

developed but their palps are vestigial, while the terminal segment of

the labial palp is short and pointed. Many of these insects have their

bodies banded with black and yellow; this in conjunction with the

transparent wings makes some of them like wasps or hornets in

appearance. The larvae feed in the woody stems of various plants. The

pupa, with three or four free abdominal segments, remains within its

cocoon, formed with chips of wood, until the time for its final change

draws near; then it works itself partly out of the tree by means of

the spines on its abdominal segments.

The _Nepticulidae_ are the smallest of all the Lepidoptera, measuring

only 3-8 mm. across the outspread wings, which are all lanceolate and

pointed at the tip. The sucking portions of the maxillae are

vestigial, but the palps are long and jointed. The larvae, without

thoracic limbs or prolegs, but sometimes with paired rudimentary

processes on some of the segments, mine in the leaves of plants. The

pupa, with four free abdominal segments in the female and five in the

male, rests in a cocoon usually outside the mine.

[Illustration: FIG. 23.--_Adela degeerella._ Europe.]

[Illustration: FIG. 24.--_Euplocampus anthracinus._ Europe.]

[Illustration: FIG. 25.--_Tinea tapetzella_ (Clothes Moth). Europe.]

The _Adelidae_ are a family of delicate, but larger, moths with very

long feelers (fig. 23) especially in the males. The larvae feed, when

young, in flowers; later, protected by a flat case, they devour

leaves; the pupa resembles that of the Nepticulidae in structure. The

female has an ovipositor adapted for piercing plant tissues.

The _Tineidae_ are a large and important family of small moths (figs.

14, 24, 25) with rough-haired heads, and with the maxillae and their

palps usually well developed. Many of the genera have narrow pointed

wings with degraded neuration. The larvae differ in their habits,

some--_Gracilaria_ for example--mine in leaves, while others, like the

well-known caterpillars of the clothes moth (_Tinea_) surround

themselves with portable cases (fig. 14) formed by spinning together

their own excrement. The female pupa has three, the male four free

abdominal segments.

_Plutellides._