which you will be able to trace the improvements in his system made
by this learned Entomologist in the interval of eight years, I shall
proceed to give those of his subordinate groups arranged under each.
This I have already done, to save space, in the _Arachnida_ and
_Insecta aptera_.
Column Key: A = ORDER.
B = SECTION.
C = FAMILY.
D = SUBFAMILY.
E = TRIBE.
F = SUBTRIBE.
A. B. C. D. E. F.
{Cicindeletæ.
{Terrestres { {Truncatipennes.
{ { {Bipartiti.
{Adephagi { {Carabici {Thoracici.
{ { {Abdominales.
{ { {Subulipalpi.
{ {Aquatica {Hydrocanthari.
{ {Gyrinites.
{
{ {Fissilabres.
{Brachyptera {Longipalpi.
{ {Depressi.
{ {Microcephali.
{
{ {Sternoxi {Buprestides.
{Serricornes{ {Elaterides.
{Pentamera { {
{ { { {Cebrionites.
{ { { {Lampyrides.
{ { {Malacodermi{Melyrides.
{ { {Clerii.
{ { {Xylotragi.
{ { {Ptiniores.
{ {
{ { {Histeroida.
{ { {Peltoides.
{ { {Palpatores.
{ {Clavicornes {Dermestini.
{ { {Byrrhii.
{ { {Macrodactyli.
{ {
{ {Palpicornes {Hydrophilii.
Coleo-{ { {Sphæridiota.
ptera.{ { {Coprophagi.
{ { {Arenicolæ.
{ { {Xylophili.
{ { {Scarabæides {Phyllophagi.
{ {Lamellicornes { {Anthobii.
{ { {Melitophili.
{ {Lucanides.
{
{ {Pimeliariæ.
{ {Melasoma {Blapsides.
{ { {Tenebrionites.
{ {
{ { {Dioperiales.
{ {Taxicornes {Cossyphenes.
{ { {Crassicornes.
{Heteromera{
{ {Helopii.
{ {Cistelides.
{Stenelytra {Securipalpi.
{ {Œdemerites.
{ {Rhyncostoma.
{
{ {Lagriariæ.
{ {Pyrochroides.
{Trachelides {Mordellonæ.
{Anthicides.
{Horiales.
{Cantharidiæ.
ORDER. SECTION. FAMILY. TRIBE.
{Bruchelæ.
{Anthribides.
{Rhynchophora {Altelabides.
{ {Brentides.
{ {Curculionites.
{
{ {Scolitarii.
{Xylophagi {Bostrichini.
{ {Paussili.
{ {Trogossitarii.
{Platysoma.
{Tetramera { {Prionii.
{ { {Cerambycini.
{ {Longicornes {Necydalides.
{ { {Lamiariæ.
{ { {Lepturetæ.
{ {
{ {Eupoda {Sagrides.
Coleoptera { { {Criocerides.
{ {
{ { {Cassidariæ.
{ {Cyclica {Chrysomelinæ.
{ {Galerucidæ.
{ {Clavipalpi.
{Trimera {Aphidiphagi.
{ {Fungicolæ.
{ {Pselaphii.
{Monomera.
{Forficularia.
{Blattariæ.
{ I. {Mantides.
{ {Spectra.
Orthoptera {
{ II. {Gryllides.
{ {Locustariæ.
{
{ III. {Acridites. {Longilabra.
{Membranaceæ.
{Geocorisæ {Nudicolles.
{ {Oculatæ.
{Heteroptera { {Ploteres.
{ {
{ {Hydrocorisæ {Nepides.
{ {Notonectides.
Hemiptera {
{ {Stridulantes.
{ {Cicadariæ {Fulgorellæ.
{ { {Membracides.
{ { {Cicadellæ.
{ {
{Homoptera { {Psyllides.
{Hymenelytra {Physapi.
{ {Aphidii.
{Gallinsecta.
ORDER. SECTION. FAMILY. TRIBE. SUBTRIBE.
{Subulicornes {Libellulina.
{ {Ephemerina. {Panorpatæ.
Neuroptera { {Myrmeleonides.
{ {Hemerobini.
{ {Planipennes {Psoquillæ.
{Filicornes { {Termitinæ.
{ {Raphidinæ.
{Plicipennes. {Semblides.
{Perlides.
{Securifera {Tenthredinetæ.
{ {Urocerata.
{
{Terebrantia { {Evaniales.
{ { {Ichneumonides.
{ { {Gallicolæ.
{ {Pupivora {Chalcidites.
{ {Chrysides.
{ {Oxyuri.
{
{ {Heterogyna {Formicariæ.
Hymenoptera { { {Mutillariæ.
{ {
{ { {Scolietæ.
{ { {Sapygites.
{ { {Pompilii.
{ {Fossores {Sphegides.
{ { {Bembecides.
{ { {Larratæ.
{Aculeata { {Nyssonii.
{ {Crabronites.
{
{Diploptera {Vespariæ.
{ {Masarides.
{
{ {Andrenetæ.
{ { {Solitariæ.
{Mellifica { {Andrenoides.
{ {Dasygastræ.
{Apiariæ {Cuculinæ.
{Scobulipedes.
{Sociales.
{Hexapoda.
{Papilionides{Perlata.
{Diurna { {Argus.
{ {Hesperides.
{
{ {Hesper-sphinges.
{Crepuscularia {Sphingides.
Lepidoptera { {Zygænides.
{
{ {Bombycites.
{ {Pseudo-Bombyces.
{ {Tineites.
{ {Noctuælites.
{Nocturna {Tortrices.
{Phalænites.
{Crambites.
{Pterophorites.
ORDER. SECTION. FAMILY. TRIBE. SUBTRIBE.
{Culicides. {Culiciformes.
{Nemocera { {Gallicolæ.
{ {Tipulariæ {Terricolæ.
{ {Fungivoræ.
{ {Tabanii. {Florales.
{ {Sicarii.
{ {Mydasi.
{ {Leptides.
{ {Dolichopoda.
{ I. {Tanystoma {Asilici.
{ { {Hybotina.
{ { {Empides.
{ { {Anthracii.
{ { {Bombyliarii.
{ { {Vesiculosa.
{ {
Diptera { {Notacantha {Xylophagei.
{ { {Stratyomides.
{ {
{ { {Syrphiæ.
{ { {Conopsariæ.
{ {Athericera {Œstrides.
{ { {Cryptogastræ.
{ { {Creophilæ.
{ { {Carpomyzæ.
{ {Muscides {Dolichoceræ.
{ {Gonocephalæ.
{ {Scathophilæ.
{ {Apteræ.
{ II. {Pupiparæ {Coriaceæ.
{Phthiromyiæ[1432].
If you examine the _Orders_ as here given, you will find that they
mostly represent _natural primary_ groups of his Classes, though
with regard to their _distribution_ you may perhaps feel disposed to
differ from him. You will also think that his _secondary_ and _minor_
groups[1433], with the exception of some of his sections, merit the
same character. Indeed, he has left far behind all his predecessors
in the progress that he has made towards extricating the true system.
Setting out from a common centre he holds on his unwearied course,
endeavouring to trace every set of objects that branches from it
to its extreme term. But though he studied insects _analytically_
with unrivalled success, he was not always equally happy in his
_synthetical_ arrangement of them. I do not here so much speak of
the result which must necessarily follow from any arrangement in a
_series_, and which cannot well be avoided; but I allude particularly
to his intire adoption of the Geoffroyan system in the _Coleoptera_,
which has prevented him in many instances from seeing the natural
distribution of his groups.
In 1798, two years after the publication of Latreille's first
enunciation of his system, M. Clairville, a very acute and learned
Swiss Entomologist, drew up the following analytical table of insects.
SECTIONS.
{ 1. Elytroptera
{ (_Coleoptera_).
{ 2. Deratoptera
{ Mandibulata { (_Orthoptera_).
{ { 3. Dictyoptera
{ { (_Neuroptera_).
{ Pterophora { { 4. Phleboptera
{ { { (_Hymenoptera_).
{ {
{ { { 5. Halteriptera
{ { { (_Diptera_).
Insecta { { Haustellata { 6. Lepidioptera
{ { (_Lepidoptera_).
{ { 7. Hemimeroptera
{ { (_Hemiptera_).
{ Aptera {Haustellata 8. Rophoteira.
{Mandibulata 9. Pododunera.
Every one will think that the change of the received names of the
Orders, here denominated Sections, is perfectly needless. The
principal merit of this system is the division of insects, tacitly
pointed out by Fabricius, into two groups or subclasses, from the
mode in which they take their food.
Lamarck,--whose merits as a Zoologist, except in one point[1434],
are of the highest order,--in his _Système des Animaux sans
Vertèbres_, which was published in 1801, adopts the above division
of insects; but, after Aristotle[1435], he makes the _Hymenoptera_
an intermediate Order between the masticators and those that take
their food by suction; he places the _Lepidoptera_ at the head of the
latter, and the _Aphaniptera_, which he denominates _Aptera_, at the
end[1436]: the Hexapod, Octopod, and Polypod _Aptera_ he considers as
_Arachnida_[1437]. In his last great work (_Histoire Naturelle des
Animaux sans Vertèbres_) he includes the _Hymenoptera_ amongst the
masticators, and reverses the disposition of his Orders, beginning
with his _Aptera_ and ending with the _Coleoptera_[1438].
M. Le Baron Cuvier, in his _Anatomie Comparée_ (1805) divided _Insecta_
into two subclasses, from the presence or absence of _maxillæ_: thus--
_With Maxillæ._ _Without Maxillæ._
1. Gnathaptera. 1. Hemiptera.
2. Neuroptera. 2. Lepidoptera.
3. Hymenoptera. 3. Diptera.
4. Coleoptera. 4. Aptera.
5. Orthoptera.
His _Gnathaptera_ include the Isopod _Crustacea_, the _Arachnida_,
the Polypod, and some of the Octopod and Hexapod _Aptera_; and
his _Aptera_--_Pulex_, _Pediculus_, and the _Acarina_, with the
exclusion of _Hydrachna_[1439]. It is remarkable enough that his
Class as it stands, with a slight alteration, returns into itself,
thus forming a circle; for his first Order (_Gnathaptera_) contains
_Hydrachna_ and the _Thysanura_, and his last (_Aptera_) ends with
the _Anoplura_, and _Acarina_.
All the French Entomologists have followed Olivier and Latreille in
adopting, with some variation, Geoffroy's system with regard to the
_Coleoptera_, which has rendered them all more or less artificial.
Dumeril has constructed a table of the Order, arranged differently
from that above given[1440] of Latreille; but not more natural, for
the very same reason.
Our learned countryman, Dr. Leach, by his zoological labours has
thrown much light on the natural distribution of the Animal Kingdom,
and no department of that kingdom is more indebted to him than the
_Annulosa_; of which I have before stated to you his _Classes_[1441].
I shall now give a table of his _Orders_ of _Arachnida_ and _Insecta_
Latr. and also his families, &c. of his Classes _Myriapoda_ and
_Arachnides_[1442].
CLASS. ORDER. FAMILY.
{ Glomerides.
{ Chilognatha { Iulides.
{ { Polydesmides.
Myriapoda {
{ { Cermatides.
{ Syngnatha { Scolopendrides.
{ Geophilides.
{ Podosomata { Pycnogonides.
{ { Nymphonides.
{
{ { Sironides.
{ Polymerosomata { Scorpionides.
{ { Tarantulides.
{
{ { Solpugides.
Arachnides { Dimerosomata { Phalangides.
{ { Araneïdes.
{
{ { Trombidides.
{ { Gammasides.
{ Monomerosomata { Acarides.
{ Cheyletides.
{ Eylaïdes.
{ Hydrachnides.
{Ametabolia { Thysanura.
{ { Anoplura.
{
{ { Coleoptera.
{ { Dermaptera.
Insecta { { Orthoptera.
{ { Dictyoptera.
{ { Hemiptera.
{ { Omoptera.
{Metabolia { Aptera.
{ Lepidoptera.
{ Trichoptera.
{ Neuroptera.
{ Hymenoptera.
{ Rhiphiptera.
{ Diptera.
{ Omaloptera.
I have before expressed my sentiments upon several of these
Orders[1443]: I shall not here repeat them, but shall merely observe,
with respect to those I have not adopted, that, though perhaps not
entitled to rank as _Orders_, most of them form natural groups. His
Orders, however, of _Arachnida_ must be excepted from this remark,
since they are evidently artificial. His analyses of his Orders,
though in general they give natural groups, are usually not carried
so far as those of M. Latreille, so as seldom to indicate what may
properly be denominated _families_. He has made his nomenclature for
his so-called families more uniform and satisfactory than that of
the French Entomologist: and we may say, with respect to the extent
and effect of his zoological labours,--_Nihil non tetigit, et omnia
quæ tetigit ornavit_.
7. _Era of MacLeay, or of the_ Quinary _System._ I have more than once
stated to you in my former letters the bases upon which the system
which I am in the last place to explain to you is built. You know
the Sub-kingdoms and Classes into which its learned and ingenious
author, upon a novel and most remarkable plan, has divided the Animal
Kingdom[1444]. I shall now copy for you his diagram of the _Annulosa_.
[Illustration: ANNULOSA]
I have before sufficiently noticed these Classes, or _Orders_ as
Mr. MacLeay terms them, of the Sub-kingdom _Annulosa_: I shall here
therefore only throw out a few remarks on their composition. With
regard to their _circular_ distribution in the _Crustacea_, Mr.
MacLeay thinks the series runs from the Branchiopods or _Monoculus_
L. to the Decapods or _Cancer_ L.; and so on, till by means perhaps
of the genus _Bopyrus_, which Fabricius regards as a _Monoculus_, it
returns to the Branchiopods again. This circle, through _Porcellio_,
a kind of wood-louse, &c., which has only a pair of antennæ and at
first but six legs, is connected with the _Ametabola_ Class, which
beginning with _Glomeris_ goes by the other _Chilognatha_ (_Iulus_
L.), having also six legs at first, and certain _Vermes_ to the
_Anoplura_, and terminates in the _Chilopoda_ (_Scolopendra_ L.)
their cognate tribe[1445]. From the _Ametabola_ Mr. MacLeay proceeds
to the _Mandibulata_, between which two groups he has discovered
no osculant one, but he takes the _Anoplura_ of the former as the
transit to the _Coleoptera_ in the latter; from whence passing to
the _Orthoptera_, &c., he finally returns by the _Hymenoptera_.
Between the _Mandibulata_ likewise and _Haustellata_ he finds no
osculant class: but as the affinity between the _Trichoptera_ and
_Lepidoptera_ is evident, proceeding by the _Homoptera_ he returns
to the _Lepidoptera_ by certain _Diptera_, as _Psychoda_, &c. From
the _Aptera_ Lam. or _Pulex_ L. he passes by the osculant class
_Nycteribida_ to the _Arachnida_; and beginning with the _Acaridea_,
he goes to the _Scorpionidea_, and so to the _Aranidea_ or spiders,
which he connects with the Decapod _Crustacea_;--thus forming his
great circle of _five_ smaller ones, each of which, as well as that
which they form, returns into itself[1446].
We next take his Circles of _Mandibulata_: thus--
[Illustration: MANDIBULATA]
In this arrangement of the _tribes_, as he calls them, of
_Mandibulata_, Mr. MacLeay sets out from the _Coleoptera_, which
he distributes, according to the supposed typical forms of their
_larvæ_, into five minor groups, sufficiently noticed on a former
occasion[1447]. From this tribe or Order he proposes to pass by
_Atractocerus_ to the osculant Order _Strepsiptera_, and from thence
by _Myrmecodes_ and the Ants to the _Hymenoptera_. From hence he next
proceeds to his _Trichoptera_; in which, as we have seen[1447], he
places not only _Phryganea_ L., but also _Tenthredo_ L. and _Perla_
Geoffr., making his transit by _Sirex_ L.; forming an osculant
Order which he denominates _Bomboptera_. From this his way to the
_Neuroptera_ is by the _Perlides_, with _Sialis_ as an osculant Order
under the name of _Megaloptera_: he enters by _Chauliodes_, and
leaves it by _Panorpa_ or _Raphidia_ by means of _Boreus_, forming
also an osculant Order (_Raphioptera_) for the _Orthoptera_; which
he enters by _Phasma_, _Mantis_, &c., and leaves by _Gryllus_,
entering the _Coleoptera_ again by the osculant Order _Dermaptera_
formed of _Forficula_ L.: and thus returning to the point from
which he set out[1448]. He has not, however, made this return of
the series into itself so clear in each order, excepting in the
_Orthoptera_, as he has done in the whole Class or Sub-class. Thus
in the _Coleoptera_ there appears no particular affinity between the
Predaceous and Vesicant beetles, his first and fifth forms[1449], or
his Chilopodimorphous _Coleoptera_, and his Thysanurimorphous.
To enter fully into his doctrine of Analogies would lead us into
a very wide field, and occupy a larger space than I can afford;
I must therefore refer you to his work for more particular and
detailed information on that subject. With regard to the analogy
between opposite points of contiguous circles, you may get a very
good idea of it from his diagram of Saprophagous and Thalerophagous
Petalocerous beetles, which I here subjoin.
[Illustration]
It is a very singular circumstance that in these two circles we have
two sets of insects,--one _impure_ in its habits and feeding upon
_putrescent_ food, and the other _clean_ and nourished by food that has
suffered no _decay_,--set in contrast with each other, and that in each
of the opposite groups, the one has its counterpart in some respect
in the other. In none is this more striking than the _Scarabæidæ_ and
_Cetoniadæ_, both remarkable for having soft membranous mandibles unfit
for mastication, and both living upon juices, the one in a putrescent
and the other in an undecayed state[1450].
Our learned author in subsequent works has stated every circle to be
resolvable into _two_ superior groups, which he denominates _normal_
or typical, and _three_ inferior ones, which he calls _aberrant_ or
annectent[1451].
Before I conclude this account of the various _general_ systems
that have distinguished the different entomological eras, i must
say a few words on those _partial_ ones which have been founded
on the _neuration_ of the _wings_ of insects. Frisch, who died
in 1743, attempted something in this way[1452]: Harris, in his
_Exposition of English Insects_ published in 1782, had arranged his
_Hymenoptera_ and _Diptera_ according to characters derived from this
same circumstance[1453]: Mr. Jones in the _Linnean Transactions_
had made good use of it in dividing the _Diurnal Lepidoptera_ into
groups[1454]: and in the _Monographia Apum Angliæ_, the characters
exhibited by the various groups into which Linné's genus _Apis_ was
resolvable, as to the neuration of their wings, were described[1455].
But M. Jurine was the first Entomologist who made that circumstance
the keystone of a system; which indeed he restricted to Hymenopterous
and Dipterous insects, but which might be extended much further. As
this system has been before sufficiently enlarged upon[1456], I need
here only mention it.
* * * * *
To particularize the various entomological works in every department of
the science, that have appeared since the commencement of the era of
Fabricius, would require a volume. Such was its progress and spread,
that in every corner of Europe the pens and pencils of able and eminent
men, whose works have almost all been quoted in the course of our
correspondence, have been employed to illustrate it[1457].
I may observe, however, that the _Internal Anatomy_ of Insects,
a branch of Entomology which on account of its difficulty, from
the extreme nicety required in dissecting them, had before been
cultivated by scarcely more than a single student in an age, has
now attracted numerous votaries. In Germany--Carus, Gaede, Herold,
Posselt, Ramdohr, Rifferschweils, Sprengel, and others, have
distinguished themselves in this arena: and in France, besides the
illustrious Baron Cuvier (himself a host), Marcel de Serres, Leon
Dufour, and very recently, by his elaborate essays _On the Flight
of Insects_ and its wonderful apparatus, one of the most acute of
anatomical physiologists, M. Chabrier,--have all contributed greatly
to the elucidation of this interesting part of the science. In our
own country very little has hitherto been effected in this line; but
a learned Oxford Professor (Kidd) has presented to the Royal Society
an account of the anatomy of the Mole-cricket, which entitles him to
an eminent station amongst the above worthies.
I may likewise further observe, that the _pictorial_ department of
Entomology was, during the period I am speaking of, carried to its
greatest perfection. Painters of insects formerly were satisfied
with giving a representation generally correct, without attempting
a faithful delineation of all the minor parts, particularly as to
_number_;--for instance, the joints of the antennæ and tarsi, the
areolets of the wings, &c.: but now no one gives satisfaction as an
entomological artist unless he is accurate in these respects.
I am, &c.
FOOTNOTES:
[1316] See above, p. 364--.
[1317] _Genes._, ii. 19--.
[1318] _Pol. Synops._ on _Genes._ ii.
[1319] _Genes._ i. 25.
[1320] _Linn. Trans._ iv. 51--. See _Levit._ xi. 20--.
[1321] The _Neuroptera_ appears to be the only Order not so
signalized. It is worthy of notice that insects are usually noticed
_generically_ and not _specifically_ in Scripture. On the insects of
Scripture see Bochart _Hierozoic._ ii. 1. iv.
[1322] _Isai._ vii. 18. _Joel_ ii. _Rev._ ix. 3.
[1323] _Prov._ xxx. 24--.
[1324] 1 _Kings_ iv. 33.
[1325] _Linn. Trans._ i. 5.
[1326] VOL. III. p. 6.
[1327] _Ibid._ l. i. c. 5.
[1328] _Ibid._ l. iv. c. 7.
[1329] _Ibid._
[1330] _Ibid._ l. v. c. 19.
[1331] Aristotle calls winged insects _Pterota_ when he would
distinguish them from those that are apterous, and _Ptilota_ when he
contrasts them with birds. (Comp. _Hist. Anim._ l. iv. c. 1. with l.
i. c. 5.) Sometimes he calls birds thus contrasted _Schizoptera_, and
insects _Holoptera_. _De Anim. Incess._ c. 10.
[1332] _Ibid._ l. i. c. 5.
[1333] _Ibid._ and l. iv. c. 7.
[1334] _Ibid._
[1335] _Hist. Anim._ l. iv. c. 1.
[1336] _Ibid._
[1337] _Ibid._ l. viii. c. 11.
[1338] Gr. Ον τροφης χαριν εχει οδοντας αλλ' αλκης. Αλκη means
_Strength of mind_, _Fortitude_, _Strenuousness_, also _Help_:--it
here probably signifies their strenuous use of their oral organs in
fulfilling their instincts. _De Partib. Anim._ l. iv. c. 5.
[1339] _Hist. Anim._ l. iv. c. 7.
[1340] _Ibid._
[1341] Gr. Αερσιποτητος αραχνη. _Dies._ lin. 13.
[1342] _Hist. Nat._ l. xi. c. 25.
[1343] VOL. I. p. 481. VOL. II. p. 121--.
[1344] _De Natur. Animal._ l. vi. c. 20.
[1345] _Ibid._ l. xv. c. 1.
[1346] _Opera_ vi. 683.
[1347] _Ibid._ 153--.
[1348] _Ibid._ 154, 233, 265, &c.
[1349] _Opera_ vi. 676, 679, 680.
[1350] See above, p. 428.
[1351] _Opera_ vi. 682--.
[1352] _Esperienz. ed Osserv._ i. 42--.
[1353] Pultency's _Sketches of Botany in England_, i. 86.
[1354] _Theatr. Insect. Epist. Ded._ i.
[1355] _Theatr. Insect. Epist. Ded._ i.
[1356] _Theriotroph. Siles._ 455.
[1357] Aristotle (_Hist. Anim._ l. i. c. 1.) says, "The sponge seems
to have some sensation: as a proof, it is not easily plucked up,
unless, so they say, the attempt is concealed."
[1358] Lister's Goedart, _Præf._ ii.
[1359] See VOL. I. p. 65--, where these terms are explained.
[1360] Swamm. _Bibl. Nat._ i. 38--.
[1361] _Ibid._ 92--.
[1362] _Ibid._ 119--.
[1363] _Ibid._ ii. 1--.
[1364] _Ibid._ 31--.
[1365] _Ibid._ 30.
[1366] _Hist. Ins._ Prolegom. ix.--
[1367] These are all _Annelida_.
[1368] Larvæ.
[1369] Various _Aptera_ and the Bed Bug.
[1370] _Nymphon._
[1371] _Scorpio._
[1372] Spiders, _Phalangia_, and Mites.
[1373] _Iulus._
[1374] _Scolopendra._
[1375] _Annelida._
[1376] This section is divided by the author into thirteen tribes.
[1377] _Lepidoptera._
[1378] _Apis_, _Bombus_, &c.
[1379] _Vespidæ._
[1380] _Andrena_, _Halictus_, _Nomada_, &c.
[1381] _Crabro_, _Philanthus_, _Cerceris_, &c.
[1382] _Serifera_? _Ichneumon_, &c.
[1383] _Trichoptera._
[1384] _Pimpla Manifestator_, and other _Ichneumonidæ_, with a long
ovipositor.
[1385] Our author has followed Swammerdam in this unnatural separation
of those _Diptera_ whose metamorphosis is coarctate from the rest; and
in associating with them the _Chalcidites_, whose metamorphosis is
really different. Into this error both were led by system.
[1386] _Philos. Lett._ &c. 141.
[1387] _Ibid._ 343.
[1388] Ray died in 1705, and Linné was born in 1707.
[1389] When a boy he attempted to introduce wasps and bees
into his father's garden, to the great annoyance of the old
gentleman.--Stœver's _Life of Linnæus_, 4.
[1390] _Ibid._ 75.
[1391] Linn. _Philos. Botan._ n. 87, 188, 189.
[1392] See above, p. 342, n. 5.
[1393] Linn. n. 291.
[1394] _Fn. Suec._ Præf.
[1395] VOL. III. p. 681--.
[1396] _Histoire abrégée des Insectes._
[1397] See the opposite page.
[1398] The first volume of his _Mémoires_ was published in 1752.
[1399] The first volume of this work was published in 1734, the sixth
and last in 1742.
[1400] Reaum. i. Mém. vi. vii. and Mém. ii. 68--.
[1401] Smith's _Tour_, iii. 150.
[1402] VOL. I. p. 175. Also see above, p. 166--.
[1403] Bonnet i. 19--.
[1404] We have been informed that these valuable remains are at
length likely to be rescued from oblivion, and given to the public.
[1405] VOL. II. p. 48, note^a.
[1406] Since the former edition of these volumes was published, another
and most important association has been formed, having for its object
the Animal Kingdom solely; which not only has a museum to receive
specimens of dead animals (by the liberal donation of its present
learned secretary, of his own rich collection, and from other sources,
already most interesting both as a spectacle and to the student),
but also a Vivarium, in which a considerable and curious assemblage
of living animals may be seen. This association, which is named THE
ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY, is principally indebted for its formation to the
efforts of a great, amiable, and lamented character, the late Sir
Thomas Stamford Raffles, whose merits were equally conspicuous both as
a Politician and a Naturalist, and who was its first President.
[1407] Linné is recorded to have said, "Si Dominus Fabricius venit cum
aliquo _Insecto_, et Dominus Zoega cum aliquo _Musco_, tunc ego pileum
detraho et dico: Estote doctores mei." Stœver's _Life of Linnæus_. 186.
[1408] Fab. _Philos. Entomolog._ Præf.
[1409] VOL. III. p. 416.
[1410] _Philos. Entomolog._ vi. §. 2. _Syst. Ent._ Prolegom.
[1411] From Ελευθερος, Free.