Chapter 15

... "Brevis esse laboroObscurus fio—"

and makes his definitions of species, without adding a description, so extremely short as to suit equally well perhaps a dozen different insects. The minor groups into which he has divided some of his Orders and Genera are sometimes natural, sometimes artificial. Those of theColeoptera, from characters drawn from their antennæ (as is evident from his arrangement of the genera in that Order), are of the latter description; while those of hisApteraare more natural. The genera that he has most happily laboured in this respect are his Hemipterous ones ofGryllus,Cicada, andCimex, and all hisLepidoptera. He had such a tact for discovering natural groups in general, that in him it seems almost to have been intuitive.

But in no respect were the labours of Linné more beneficial to the science and to Zoology in general, than when he undertook to describe the animals of his own country. HisFauna Suecicais an admirable exemplar, which ought to stimulate the Zoologists of every country to make it one of their first objects that its animal productions shall no longer remain unregistered and undescribed. Botanists have almost every where been diligent in effecting this with respect to plants, but other branches of Natural History have been more neglected. In hisSystema NaturæLinné attempted this for all the productions of our globe. The idea was a vast one; and the execution, though necessarily falling far short of it, did him infinite honour: and in it he has laid a foundation for his successors to build upon till time shall be no more.

Such were the services rendered to Entomology by the labours of the immortal Swede; services so extensive as well as eminent, that had they been the fruit of a whole life devoted to this single object, they would have entitled him to a high rank amongst the heroes of the science. But how much more astonishing are they when considered but as gleanings from his hours of relaxation, snatched from labours infinitely greater, the produce, as he himself tells us, of moments consumed by others in "venationibus, confabulationibus, tesseris, chartis, lusibus, compotationibus[1394]." It is not so much in original discovery that the merits of Linné lie,—though considered in this view they are pre-eminent,—as in the unrivalled skill with which he sifted the observations of his predecessors, separating the ore from the dross, and concentrating scattered rays of light into one focus.

This era produced other systematists who adopted various methods, but none that merit particular notice except Geoffroy and De Geer. The former in this view is principally celebrated as the author of the method generally adopted by modern Entomologists, of dividing theColeopterainto primary sections, according to the number of the joints of their tarsi. This method, though in many instances, as was formerly observed[1395], it leads to artificial results, in others affords a clue to natural groups; it can only therefore be applied subject to frequent exceptions. Geoffroy's work[1396], which was published in 1764, was further serviceable by indicating many genera not defined by Linné.

We next come to one of the greatest names in Entomology, the celebrated De Geer, who united in himself the highest merit of almost every department of that science. Both as a systematist, anatomist, and physiologist, and as the observant historian of the manners and economy of insects, hisMémoires pour servir à l'Histoire des Insectesare above all praise. His system[1397]is contained in a posthumous volume published in 1778[1398].

This system, though built upon the instruments of flight; in its ternary groups, equivalent to the Orders of Linné, adds likewise the instruments of manducation, and is thus intermediate between that of Linné and Fabricius, who perhaps from the consideration of it might derive the first idea of assuming the last-mentioned organs as the basis of a new method. But, though partaking of both, it is nearer to nature than either; and had its illustrious author laid less stress upon the number and substance of the organs of flight, it would probably have been as near perfection in this respect as most that have succeeded it. But following too strictly these characters, he has been led to place in different Classes, or rather Orders, insects that ought not to have been so separated,—as in the case of the two sections of theHemiptera, and theCoccidæ. In other respects the whole of De Geer'sMémoiresare a storehouse of valuable observations, in which he has furnished many a clue for threading the labyrinth of nature, and given most complete and interesting histories of the whole economy and habitsof many tribes and genera,—as of theTrichoptera,Aphides,Ephemerina, &c.

In this latter department of the science a light shone during part of the era we are now considering, which eclipsed every one that appeared before it, and has scarcely been equalled by any one that succeeded it. The date of its first appearance, indeed, was a year before that of Linné's first outline of hisSystema Naturæbefore alluded to; but it may properly be regarded as belonging to his era, since it did not disappear till some years after that had begun. A volume indeed would scarcely suffice to do justice to the preeminent merits of Reaumur, as exhibited in his admirableMémoires pour l'Histoire des Insectes[1399]: I must therefore content myself with observing, that in judgement and ingenuity in planning his experiments; in patient assiduity in watching their progress; in the elegance of his language, and the felicity of his illustrations, he has rarely, if ever, been equalled. Every subject that he undertook was thoroughly investigated, and in the true spirit of philosophical inquiry. Every where you see him the same unprejudiced and profound observer, attached to no system, anxious only for truth and the advancement of science. If he has any fault, it is, perhaps, that of being sometimes too prolix; but we must recollect that from the nature of his subject much diffuseness was often necessary to render his meaning clear. A greater objection is his total inattention to all system, except with regard toLepidopteraand their larvæ[1400], so that it is often difficultto ascertain the insects whose history he gives. But with these exceptions, no observer of nature, who wishes his discoveries to be at once profound and interesting, can copy a better model or one nearer to perfection.

Next to that of Reaumur, the name of his admiring correspondent Bonnet may be mentioned. This great physiologist, though still more deficient in systematical knowledge[1401], was also an admirable observer of the economy and manners of insects. In this sense he became an Entomologist before he was seventeen years of age, in consequence of an impression made upon him by the account of the Antlion in that attractive work theSpectacle de la Nature. From verifying its wonderful history with his own eyes, he entered with enthusiasm upon the study of other insects, his observations on which he regularly communicated to Reaumur. Amongst other interesting inquiries, his experiments on that singular anomaly in nature the generation ofAphides[1402]do him the highest credit, and have set that question perfectly at rest[1403].

In another department of the science this period was distinguished by a work which may almost be deemed a prodigy. I am speaking of Lyonet's admirable treatise on the anatomy of the caterpillar of the Cossus,—a work which will uphold his reputation as long as Entomology shall be cultivated as a science, or the comparative Anatomist be delighted to trace the footsteps of Divine Wisdom in the gradually varying structure of animals. The plates to this publication, executed by the hand of itsexcellent author, are as wonderful as the work itself; and together, to use Bonnet's words, form ademonstrationof the existence ofGod. It is infinitely to be regretted that the author of this incomparable monument of scientific ardour and patient industry should have died before the full completion of his anatomical description of thepupaandimagoof the same insect; of which he had prepared a considerable portion of the manuscript, and engraved upwards of twenty of the plates[1404].

Numerous other writers in various departments of the science appeared during this era; but it would be useless to enter into a particular detail of their works and merits. I cannot however omit noticing, on account of his inimitably accurate and chastely coloured representations ofLepidoptera, Sepp's beautifulNederlandsche Insecten, in which the whole history of these animals, from the egg to the fly, is described and portrayed. In our own country this era was distinguished by no entomological work of any great eminence. Albin, Wilks, and Harris produced the principal. Gould, however, without having any thing of system, gave an admirable account of English ants, which I formerly noticed[1405].

One of our first poets, the celebrated Gray, was also much devoted to Entomology. From his interleaved copy of theSystema Naturæ, that venerable and able naturalist, Sir T. G. Cullum, Bart. copied the following characters of the genera of insects of Linné, drawn up in Latin Hexameters, which he kindly communicated to me.

Coleoptera.

Alas lorica tectasColeopterajactant.

Serra pedum proditScarabæumet fissile cornu.Dermestiantennæ circum ambit lamina caulemQui caput incurvum timidus sub corpore celat.In pectus retrahens caput abdit clavigerHister.OcciputAttelabiin posticum vergit acumen.Curculioingenti protendit cornua rostro.Silphalæves peltæ atque elytrorum exporrigit oras.Truncus apex clavæ, atque antennulæCoccionellæ.

Cassidasub clypei totam se margine condit.Chrysomelainflexa loricæ stringitur ora.Gibba caputMeloëincurvat thorace rotundo.Oblongus frontem et tenues clypei exerit orasTenebrio. AbdomenMordellælamina vestit.Curta elytra ostentatStaphyliscaudamque recurvam.

***

Tubere cervicis valet, antennisqueCerambyx.PectoreLepturaest tereti corpusque coarctat.FlexileCantharidistegmen, laterumque papillæ.AstElaterresilit sterni mucrone supinus.Maxillâ exsertâ est oculoqueCicindelagrandi.Buprestiantennæ graciles, cervice retractâ.NecDytiscusiners setosâ remige plantâ.Effigiem cordisCarabusdat pectore trunco.Necydaliscurto ex elytro nudam explicat alam.Curtum, atForficulætegit hanc, cum forcipe cauda.

Hemiptera.

Dimidiam rostrata geruntHemipteracrustamFœmina serpit humi interdum, volat æthera conjux.

DepressumBlattæcorpus venterque bicornis.Dente voraxGryllusdeflexis saltitat alis.RostroNeparapax pollet chelisque.CicadaFastigio alarum, et rostrato pectore saltat.TelaCimexinflexa gerit, cruce complicat alas.Notonectacrucem quoque fert remosque pedales.CornuaAphiscaudæ et rostrum, sæpe erigit alas.Deprimit hasChermes, dum saltat pectore gibbo.Coccusiners caudæ setas, volitante marito.Thripsalas angusta gerit, caudamque recurvam.

Lepidoptera.

Squamam alæ, linguæ spiramLepidopterajactant.

Papilioclavam, et squamosas subrigit alas.PrismaticasSphinxantennas, medioque tumentes:At conicas gravis extendit sub noctePhalæna.

Neuroptera.

Rete alæ nudum atque hamosNeuropteracaudæ.

Dente alisque potens secat æthera longaLibella.Caudâ setigerâ erectis statEphemerapennis.Phryganeaelinguis rugosas deprimit alas.Hemerinusque bidens planas tamen explicat ille.Et rostro longo et caudâPanorpaminatur.Raphidiaextento collo setam trahit unam.

Hymenoptera.

At vitreas alas, jaculumqueHymenopteracaudæ.Fœmineo data tela gregi, maribusque negata.

Telum abdit spiraleCynips, morsuque minatur.MaxillasTenthredomovet, serramque bivalvem.Ichneumongracili triplex abdomine telum:Et valde aurato resplendet corporeChrysis.HauritApislinguâ incurvâ, quod vindicat ense.Sphexalam expandit lævem, gladiumque recondit.Alæ ruga notatVespam, caudæque venenum.SquamulaFormicamtergi, telumque pedestrem,Dum minor alata volitat cum conjuge conjux.Mutillaimpennis, sed cauda spicula vibrat.

Diptera.

Dipterasub geminis alis se pondere librant.

OsŒstronullum, caudâque timetur inermi.Longa caputTipulaest, labiisque et prædita palpis.PalpisMuscacaret, retrahitque proboscida labris.QuaTabanusgaudet pariter, palpis subacutis.OsCulicismolli e pharetrâ sua spicula vibrat.RostrumEmpisdurum et longum sub pectore curvat.Porrigit articuli de cardine noxiaConops.Porrigit at rectum et conicum sitibundusAsilus.Longum etBombyliusqui sugit mella volando.UnguibusHippoboscavalet, vibrat breve telum.

Aptera.

Apterase pedibus pennarum nescia jactant.

Exit tres setas cauda extendenteLepisma.Saltatrix est caudaPoduræinflexa bifurca.ArmanturTermismaxillis ora duabus.Fert telum quod ab orePediculusedat acutum.Pulicisinflexum rostrum est, telumque recondit.OctoAcaruspedibus duplicique instructus ocello est.Lumina bis binaoctipedata Phalangiagestant.Octo oculis totidem pedibusque seAraneajactat.His etiam adjungit chelatosScorpiopalpos.Dena pedum natura dedit fulciminaCancro.Unoculobissena (duosque ambobus ocellos).Quorum his chelatos gerit, ille gemellos.Ovalis pedibus bis septem inceditOniscus.Innumeris pedibusScolopendraangusta movetur.Secernit reliquis structura cylindricaIulum.

During this era, and by the influence of Linné, in the year 1739 the Royal Academy of Sciences at Stockholm was established, which did for Natural History in Sweden what our own Royal Society had done for it in England. Other societies, with a similar object, were formed in different parts of Europe, and were attended by similar good effects. At Paris, at Berlin, at St. Petersburg, at Moscow, at Turin, at Lisbon, &c., the lovers of Nature, at that time and subsequently, have associated for this purpose; and I may mention here, that I may not revert to the subject, the great Natural History association of our own country,The Linnean Society, named after the illustrious Swede, which was first instituted in 1788, and incorporated by royal charter in 1802. In theTransactionsof this learned body, the Zoologist in general, and particularly the Entomologist, will find much useful information and many interesting observations connected with his science. This flourishingsociety consists at this time of above 600 members, of whom more than 500 are Fellows;—a gratifying proof how widely Natural History is cultivated in the British Empire[1406].

5.Era of Fabricius, or of theMaxillarySystem.—We are now arrived, if its consequences be considered, at one of the most important epochs of the science. Fabricius, a pupil of Linné, who highly estimated his entomological acquirements[1407], thinking that the system of his master was not built upon a foundation sufficiently fixed and restricted[1408], conceived the idea of doing for Entomology what the latter had done for Botany. As the learned and illustrious Swede had assumed theFructificationfor the basis of his system in that science, so the emulous and highly-gifted Dane, observing how happily those organs were employed as characters in extricating the genera of Vertebrate animals, assumed theinstrumentsofmanducation, far more numerous and various in insects, for the basis of a new system ofEntomology; which, from themaxillæbeing principally employed to characterize theClassesor ratherOrders, may be called theMaxillarySystem. De Geer, indeed, as we have seen above, had, in the majority of his Classes, to the organs of flight added the parts of themouth: but Fabricius pursued the idea much further, and made theTrophi[1409], orInstrumenta Cibariaas he called them, the sole corner-stone of his whole superstructure. Though nothing seems to have been further from his intention than to followNature, since he complains that Linné by following her too closely had lost the Ariadnean thread of system[1410], yet it is singular that, by building upon this seemingly narrow foundation, he has furnished a clue, by the due use of which, instead of deserting her, his successors have been enabled with more certainty to extricate her groups: since the parts in question being intimately connected with the functions and economy of these animals, where they differ materially, indicate a corresponding difference in their character and station.

Thefirstoutline of his System, I believe, appeared in hisSystema Entomologiæpublished in 1775; and thelast, in hisSupplementto hisEntomologia Systematicain 1798. In this the series and characters of his Classes (for so, after De Geer, he denominates his primary groups) were as follows:—

1.Eleutherata[1411]. (ColeopteraL.)Maxillanaked, free, palpigerous.2.Ulonata[1412]. (OrthopteraOliv.)Maxillacovered by an obtuse galea or lobe.3.Synistata[1413]. (NeuropteraL., excluding theLibellulina, and taking inTermesL. andThysanuraLatr.)Maxillageniculate at the base and connate with the labium.4.Piezata[1414]. (HymenopteraL.)Maxillacorneous, compressed, often elongate.5.Odonata[1415]. (LibellulinaMcL.)Maxillacorneous, toothed, two palpi.6.Mitosata[1416]. (MyriapodaLeach.)Maxillacorneous, vaulted, not palpigerous.

1.Eleutherata[1411]. (ColeopteraL.)Maxillanaked, free, palpigerous.

2.Ulonata[1412]. (OrthopteraOliv.)Maxillacovered by an obtuse galea or lobe.

3.Synistata[1413]. (NeuropteraL., excluding theLibellulina, and taking inTermesL. andThysanuraLatr.)Maxillageniculate at the base and connate with the labium.

4.Piezata[1414]. (HymenopteraL.)Maxillacorneous, compressed, often elongate.

5.Odonata[1415]. (LibellulinaMcL.)Maxillacorneous, toothed, two palpi.

6.Mitosata[1416]. (MyriapodaLeach.)Maxillacorneous, vaulted, not palpigerous.

7.Unogata[1417]. (Pulmonary ArachnidaLatr.)Maxillacorneous, armed with a claw.

***

8.Polygonata[1418]. (IsopodandBranchiopod CrustaceaLatr.)Palpimostly six;Maxillæmanywithinthe labium.9.Kleistognatha[1419]. (Brachyurous Decapod CrustaceaLatr.) ManyMaxillæ withoutthe labium, closing the mouth.10.Exochnata[1420]. (Macrurous Decapod CrustaceaLatr.)Maxillæmanywithoutthe labium, covered by palpi.

8.Polygonata[1418]. (IsopodandBranchiopod CrustaceaLatr.)Palpimostly six;Maxillæmanywithinthe labium.

9.Kleistognatha[1419]. (Brachyurous Decapod CrustaceaLatr.) ManyMaxillæ withoutthe labium, closing the mouth.

10.Exochnata[1420]. (Macrurous Decapod CrustaceaLatr.)Maxillæmanywithoutthe labium, covered by palpi.

****

11.Glossata[1421]. (LepidopteraL.)Mouthwith a spiral tongue between reflexed palpi.12.Ryngota[1422]. (HemipteraLatr.)Mouthwith a rostrum, having a jointed sheath.13.Antliata[1423]. (DipteraL.,AnopluraLeach.,Trachean ArachnidaLatr. &c.)Mouthwith a haustellum without joints.

11.Glossata[1421]. (LepidopteraL.)Mouthwith a spiral tongue between reflexed palpi.

12.Ryngota[1422]. (HemipteraLatr.)Mouthwith a rostrum, having a jointed sheath.

13.Antliata[1423]. (DipteraL.,AnopluraLeach.,Trachean ArachnidaLatr. &c.)Mouthwith a haustellum without joints.

TheOrdersof Fabricius are equivalent usually to theprimarygroups of the Linnean Orders, and are regulated chiefly by theantennæ.

In estimating the value of the above system, we must bear in mind that, according to the statement of its author, it was intended to be partly artificial and partly natural: artificial as to itsClassesandOrders; natural as to itsgenera,species, andvarieties[1424]. He admitted, however, that natural Classes, &c. do exist; but he contended that artificial ones should be substituted for them, till further discoveries had cleared the way for their satisfactory development[1425]. As therefore his system, in its primary and secondary groups, was confessedly artificial, and the only use of anartificialsystem being to facilitate the study of any department of Natural History, its value must be estimated by the facilities it affords to the entomological student. But here, it must be allowed, that instead of enlarging the entrance to the temple of his science, it has made it narrower, and has placed most discouraging impediments in his way.

If you examine the definitions of his Classes, you will find them in a variety of cases calculated rather to mislead than to instruct a learner. Thus that of theEleutheratawould equally well suit thePiezataand several others: that of thePiezatais scarcely to be found in it; since in this the maxilla, instead of beingcorneous, is usuallycoriaceous[1426], and its lobe sometimes nearly membranous. In theUnogatahe even mistakes the mandibles for maxillæ. Let any young Entomologist endeavour to make out the Fabrician class of aCicindelafor instance; and finding its maxillæ corneous and armed with a claw, he would conclude that it belonged to theUnogatarather than to theEleutherata. Besides all this, the necessity of examining minute parts not easily come at without dissection, is very discouraging to a beginner.

From hence it is evident, that the system of Fabricius, considered as anartificialone or amethod, was no improvement upon the classification of his master Linné, but rather a retrograde movement in the science.

As to that part of his system in which he professes to takenaturefor his guide, hisgenera,—though even with respect to them he seems fearful of following her too closely[1427],—he certainly has rendered most essential services to Entomology, and laid the foundation of all that has since been done for its improvement. But it must be observed, that the series of his genera is often altogether artificial; as where he separates and places far asunder the Saprophagous and Thalerophagous Petalocerous beetles.

Entomology, however, in other respects was deeply indebted to this great man. He first, as was lately observed, directed the attention of her votaries to parts which enabled them better to follow the chain of affinities, and to trace out natural groups. In hisPhilosophia Entomologica, drawn up on the plan of Linné'sPhilosophia Botanica, he bequeathed to the science a standard work that ought to be studied by every Entomologist. His incredible labours in defining new genera and describing new species, with which view he travelled into various parts of Europe, andseventimes into Britain, have been of infinite service[1428], and placed the science upon a footing much nearer to that of Botany than it had ever before attained.

6.Era of Latreille, or of theEclecticSystem. The system of Fabricius, though generally adopted in Germany and Switzerland, did not meet with auniversalreception. It seems to have gained no permanent footing in the North of Europe, Britain, or France. In the latter country the Linnean phraseology and characters of the Orders were retained by the celebrated Olivier; while at the same time his definitions of genera were constructed, after the Fabrician model, upon the antennæ and the oral organs. But a new and brilliant genius had now appeared in France, whose indefatigable labours and singular talents have thrown more light over entomological science than those of all his predecessors. In 1796, about two years after Fabricius had completed hisEntomologia Systematica emendata et aucta, M. Latreille published hisPrécis de Caractères Génériques des Insectes;in which important work, walking in the steps of his great compatriot Bernard de Jussieu, he disregarded allartificialsystems of Entomology, and attempted to construct one upon anaturalbasis: and to this end, uniting the consideration of the instruments of manducation with that of the organs for flight and motion, and of other external characters,—or the system of Linné with that of Fabricius,—he became the founder of the modern orEclecticsystem[1429]; for he judiciously adopted that sensibledictumof Scopoli, "Classes et Genera naturalia, non solainstrumenta cibaria, non solæalæ, nec solæantennæconstituunt, sed structuratotius, ac cujusque vel minimi discriminis diligentissima observatio[1430]." His object has been in the above and subsequent works, by dividing his Classes intonaturalGroups, from the Order to the Genus, to trace out in all its windings, to its inmost recesses, the perplexing labyrinth of the true system of theCreator:—of what he has effected, the subjoined tables will give you a sufficient idea[1431].

1817.

1825.

Back to Index Next