After the very general idea that I have attempted to embody for you of theSystem of Insects; of the groups in which nature has arranged them, and their mutual relations; it will not be out of place, if I next state to you what has been effected by Entomologists towards reducing them to order: or, in other words, if I give you some account of the variousMethodsandSystems[1316], beginning with the earliest, that have appeared and had their day, which will include ahistoryof the progress of our science from its commencement to its present era.
In writing the history of any science, two modes present themselves. We may either give a chronological review of all the circumstances and publications connected with it; or content ourselves with a rapid survey, dwelling only on the principal epochs, and those lights of the science who by their immortal labours gave birth to them. Thelatteris that on every account best suited to our present purpose, which I shall therefore here adopt.
There seem to me to besevenprincipal epochs into which the History of Entomology may be divided: viz.1. The Era of theAncients. 2. The Era of therevivalof the science after the darkness of the middle ages. 3. The Era of Swammerdam and Ray, or of theMetamorphotic System. 4. The Era of Linné, or of theAlary System. 5. The Era of Fabricius, or of theMaxillary System. 6. The Era of Latreille, or of theEclectic System. And 7. The Era of MacLeay, or of theQuinary System. All of these appear to form important points, or resting-places, in the progress of the science towards its acme; and of each of these I shall now proceed to give you a brief account.
1.The Era of the Ancients.To ascertain what attention was paid to insects in the earliest ages, we must have recourse to the most ancient of records, the Old Testament. In this sacred volume we are informed that after the CreationGodbrought the creatures to Adam that he might name them[1317]. Now the first man, in his unimpaired state of corporeal, mental, and spiritual soundness, under the divine guidance, doubtless imposed upon them names significant of their qualities or structure; which according to Plato was a work above human wisdom, and on account of which the ancient Hebrews deduced that Adam was a philosopher of the highest endowments[1318]. Whether on this great and interesting occasion he gave names to individual species, or only to natural groups, does not clearly appear. But probably as they were created, so were they brought before him "According to their kinds[1319]."
Subsequently Moses will be thought to have possessed no ordinary knowledge of insects, if we suppose, as theingenious remarks of Professor Lichtenstein[1320]render probable, that he distinguishes as clean insects the Fabrician generaGryllus,Locusta,Truxalis, andAcheta, which a person unobservant of these animals would have confounded together. This discrimination presupposes this knowledge of their general characters, not only in the Jewish lawgiver, but also in the people themselves to whom the precept was addressed, to whom it would otherwise have beende ignotis.
Allusion is made in Holy Writ to insects of almost every one of the modern Orders[1321]. They are represented as employeddivinitùssometimes to annoy the enemies of the Israelites, and at others to punish that people themselves when they apostatized from their God. The prophets frequently introduce them as symbols of enemies that lay waste or oppress the church: as theflyof the Ethiopians or Egyptians; thebeeof the Assyrians; and thelocustof the followers of Mahomet and other similar destroyers[1322]. That Solomon, amongst other objects to the investigation of which his divinely inspired wisdom directed him, did not deem insects, those "Little things upon the earth[1323]," unworthy of his attention, we know from Scripture[1324]; but as his physical writings are lost, we are ignorant whether he treated of their natural arrangement, their economy and history, or of the instruction they affordanalogicallyconsidered. Wherehe has referred to them incidentally, it is generally with this latter view.
If we turn from the word and people ofGodto theLovers of Wisdom(as they modestly styled themselves) of the heathen world, and their writings; we shall discern amongst them a great light shining, the beams of which illuminate even our own times. In the illustrious Stagyrite we recognize—"The father of philosophy, at least of our philosophy, who, rising superior to the darkness in which he lived, darted his penetrating glance through all nature, and established principles which a long course of ages of inquiry have but confirmed. With Aristotle begins the real History of science: and how much soever he may have erred upon particular points, the greatness of his conceptions and the justness of his ideas, on the whole entitle him to our high veneration. His labours in the investigation of the Animal Kingdom have laid the foundation of the knowledge we now possess[1325]." This language of the lamented and learned President of the Linnean Society is particularly applicable to what this great and original genius has effected inEntomology. We have seen upon a former occasion[1326], that Linné himself had not those precise ideas of the limits of the ClassInsecta, which Aristotle so many centuries before him had adopted. In stating the obligations of Entomology to this truesçavant, I shall begin by laying before you a tabular view of what may be called his system, as far as I have been able to collect it from his works, especially hisHistory of Animals.
It may be further stated, that Aristotle perceived also the distinction between theMandibulataandHaustellataof modern authors: for he observes, that some insects having teeth are omnivorous; while others, that have only a tongue, are supported by liquid food[1337]. He appears to have regarded theHymenoptera, or some of them, as forming athirdsubclass; since he clearly alludes to them, when he says that many have teeth, not for feeding, but to help them in fulfilling their instincts[1338].
From the above statement it will appear that this great philosopher had no contemptible notion,—though hehas only distinguished three of them as larger groups by appropriate names,—of the majority of the Orders of Insects at present admitted. HisColeoptera,Psychæ, andDipteraare evidently such. His idea ofHemipteraseems taken solely from theCicadaorTettix: but the manner in which he expresses himself concerning it, as having no mouth, but furnished instead with a linguiform organ resembling the proboscis ofDiptera[1339], proves that he regarded it as the type of a distinct group. Since he considers the saltatoriousOrthopteraas forming such a group, it is probable that he included the cursorious ones with theNeuropterain hismajorasection ofTetraptera; and the resemblance of many of theMantidæto theNeuropterais so great, that this mistake would not be wonderful. His division of theDipterais quite artificial.
How far Aristotle's ideas with regard to genera and species attained to any degree of precision, is not easily ascertained: in other respects his knowledge of insects was more evident. As to theiranatomy, he observes that their body is usually divided intothreeprimary segments,—head,trunk, andabdomen; that they have anintestinal canal,—in some straight and simple, in others contorted,—extending from the mouth to the anus; that theOrthopterahave aventricleor gizzard[1340]. He had noticed thedrumsofCicada, and that themalesonly are vocal. Other instances of the accurate observation of this great man might be adduced, but enough has been said to justify the above encomiums. His principal error was that of equivocal generation.
Little is known with regard to the progress of other
Greek Naturalists in entomological science. It appears probable, from an epithet by which Hesiod distinguishes the spider—air-flying[1341], that the fact of these insects traversing the air was at that time no secret. Apollodorus, as we learn from Pliny[1342], was the firstmonographerof insects, since he wrote a treatise upon scorpions, and described nine species. But like many other Zoologists, by mistaking analogy for affinity, he has included awingedinsect, probably aPanorpa, amongst his scorpions. From the time of Aristotle, however, to Pliny, no writer is recorded, with the exception of those before alluded to[1343], that appears to have attended much to insects. They are indeed incidentally noticed by Theophrastus, Dioscorides, Virgil, Ovid, &c., but without any material addition to the stock of entomological knowledge bequeathed to us by the Stagyrite. Even Pliny's vast compendium, as it professed to be, of the natural history of the globe, was in many respects little more than a compilation from that great philosopher. Still, however, though he does not appear to have paid much practical attention to insects,—which indeed, considering the extent of his views, was scarcely to be expected,—yet as a guide to the then state of entomological knowledge, and as an advocate for the study, which in the exordium of his eleventh book he has so eloquently and with so much animation defended from the misrepresentations of ignorance, Pliny has conferred a lasting obligation on the science. The last zoological writer of note was Ælian, who amongst other animalsoften mentions insects. He has, however, few original observations. One was, that scorpions are viviparous[1344]. From him we learn incidentally that artificial flies were sometimes used by Grecian anglers[1345].
2.The Era of the Revival of the Science.From the time of Pliny and Ælian 1400 years rolled away, in which scarcely any thing was done or attempted for Entomology or Natural History in general. During that long night the glimmer of only one faint luminary appeared to make a short and feeble twilight. In the middle of the thirteenth century Albertus Magnus (so called from his family name of Groot, and justly, if incredible labour could entitle a man to the appellation), devotedoneout oftwenty-onefolio volumes to Natural History. In this work he professes not so much to give his own opinions, as those of the Peripatetic philosophers[1346]. He occasionally, however, relates the result of observations made by himself, which prove him to have been no inattentive student of nature. He mentions a voyage that he made for the purpose of collecting marine animals, and that he found of them ten different tribes or genera, and several species of each. Amongst these he particularizes theCephalopoda, theCrustacea, the testaceousMollusca, and some of theRadiataandAcrita, &c.[1347]He gives a very correct account of the pitfalls ofMyrmeleon. Insects he distinguishes, excluding theCrustacea, by the denomination ofAnulosa(Annulosa), which he appears to employ as aknownterm[1348]. He also calls themworms, describing butterflies asflyingworms, flies asfly-worms, spiders asspider-worms; and what is still more extraordinary, thetoadand thefrog, which he includes amongst hisAnulosa, he callsquadruped-worms[1349]!! Though it may appear so absurd to speak of these animals as insects, yet he had perhaps a deeper and more philosophical reason for this than we may at first be disposed to give him credit for. This would be the case if he separated these from the other reptiles and placed them amongst insects on account of theirmetamorphoses, mistaking perhaps an analogical character for one of affinity[1350]. Some of theAnnelida, asFilariaandLumbricus[1351], he also regarded as insects. I cannot gather from his desultory pages that he had any notion of a systematical arrangement of hisAnulosa.
After the taking of Constantinople by the Turks in the middle of the fifteenth century, the light of learning, kindled by those of its professors who escaped from that ruin, appeared again in the West. The Greek language then began to be studied universally; and in consequence of the coeval invention of the art of printing, various editions of the great works of the ancients were published: amongst the rest those of the fathers of Natural History. From the perusal of these, the love of the sciences of which they treated revived in the West, and the attention of scientific men began to direct itself to the consideration and study of the works of theirCreator. In the latter part of that century, a work entitled theBook of Natureappeared in the German language, in which animals and plants were treated ofand rudely figured; as they were likewise most miserably in Cuba'sOrtus Sanitatis, published in 1485, in which insects andCrustaceawere described under the three different denominations of Animals, Birds, and Fishes; so that but little profit was at first derived from the writings of Aristotle, Invertebrate animals not being then even honoured with
"A local habitation and a name."
"A local habitation and a name."
This unpromising and apparently hopeless state of the science proved, however, the dawn of its present meridian brightness.
The first attempt at a separate and systematical arrangement of insects subsequent to the times of Aristotle, was made in the ponderous volumes of Ulysses Aldrovandus, who, disregarding the Stagyrite, arranged insects according to the medium they inhabit, as you will see in the subjoined table:
This artificial and meager system, which mixed insects withAnnelida, was adopted by Charlton and other authors; and even in the eighteenth century had a patron of great eminence, who, endeavouring to improve uponit, has rendered it still more at variance with nature and Aristotle: I mean the celebrated Vallisnieri, to whom in other respects, though in this he fell behind his age, the science was under great obligations. He divides insects into, 1. Those that inhabitvegetablesubstances living or dead. 2. Those that inhabit any kind offluidand in any state. 3. Those that inhabit anyearthyormineralsubstances,dead bones, orshells. And 4. Those that inhabitliving animals[1352].
The work that is usually called Mouffet'sTheatrum Insectorumwas produced in the present era, and was the fruit of the successive labours of several men of talent. Dr. Edward Wotton and the celebrated Conrade Gesner laid the foundation; whose manuscripts falling into the hands of Dr. Thomas Penny,—an eminent physician and botanist of the Elizabethan age[1353], much devoted to the study of insect,—he upon this foundation meditated raising a superstructure which should include a complete history of these animals; and with this view he devoted the leisure hours of fifteen years of his life to the study of every book then extant that treated of the science either expressly or incidentally, and to the description and figuring of such insects as he could procure; but before he had reduced his materials to order, in 1589 he was snatched away by an untimely death. His unfinished manuscripts were purchased at a considerable price by Mouffet, a contemporary physician of singular learning[1354], who reduced them to order, improved the style, added new matter, and not less than 150 additional figures; andthus having prepared the work for the press, intended to dedicate it to queen Elizabeth[1355]. Fate, however, seemed still to frown upon the undertaking, for before he could commit his labours to the press he also died, and his book remained buried in dust and obscurity till it fell into the hands of Sir Theodore Mayerne, baron d'Aubone, one of the court physicians in the time of Charles I., who at length published it, prefixing a Dedication to Sir William Paddy, baronet, M.D., in 1634; and it was so well received that an English translation appeared twenty-four years afterwards. The work thus repeatedly rescued from destruction was indisputably the most complete entomological treatise that had then appeared. And though the arrangement (in which there is scarcely any attempt at system) is extremely defective, the figures very rude, often incorrect, and sometimes altogether false,—yet as an introduction to the study of insects its value at that day must have been very considerable; and as a copious storehouse of ancient entomological lore, it has not even at present lost its utility.
One of the most remarkable works of the era we are upon was published at Lignitz in the year 1603, by Caspar Schwenckfeeld, a physician of Hirschberg, under the title ofTheriotrophium Silesiæ. This was probably the first attempt at a Fauna that ever was made. In it animals are divided into quadrupeds, reptiles, birds, fishes, and insects. TheCrustacea,Mollusca, andZoophytes, are included under fishes. He says of theSpongiæthat they aremovedby animalcula which inhabit them[1356]. Did he borrow this observation from Aristotle,or was it made by himself[1357]? It is singular that Linné should never allude to this work. Goedart, who belongs also to this era, is stated to have spent forty years of his life in attending to the proceedings of insects[1358]. But after this long study, his principal use to the science was the improvement he effected in the drawing and engraving of them,—for his figures, though sometimes incorrect and sometimes fabulous, were far superior to those of his predecessors.
3.The Era of Swammerdam and Ray, or of theMetamorphoticSystem. The great men whose names are here united, as they were cotemporary, so they agreed in founding their respective systems of insects on the same basis. To the former, however, is due the merit of being the first who assumed themetamorphosesof these animals as the basis of a natural arrangement of them; upon which the latter, in conjunction with his lamented friend Willughby, erected that superstructure which opened the door for the present improved state of the science. Swammerdam's system may be thus expressed in modern language:
It was a great point gained in the science to introduce the consideration of the metamorphosis, and to employ it in the extrication of the natural system: for though when taken by itself it will, as in the table just given, lead to an artificial arrangement, it furnishes a very useful clue when the consideration of insects in their perfect state is added to it. The tables contained in theProlegomenato Ray'sHistoria Insectorumdivide insects into those which undergo no change of form, and those which change their form. The arrangement of the former Αμεταμορφωτα was made by Willughby, who subdivided them intoApodaandPedata. As the only insects included in the former section were the grubs ofŒstri, the remainder beingAnnelida, they need not be included in our table. I have endeavoured to compress these tables into as small a space as possible, by using the Linnean terms for metamorphosis, and reducing Ray's tribes ofOrthoptera,Hemiptera, andNeuropterato their modern denominations.
Ray details at considerable length the various tribes belonging to the four classes of metamorphosis established by Swammerdam[1366]. Most of his tribes indicate natural groups of greater or less value: but some of his larger groups are artificial, as you will see by the mere inspection of the table.
This era produced several great and original geniuses, who enriched the science with a vast increment of real knowledge. The illustrious Zoologists whose names it bears,—the one by his dissections and anatomical researches, and the other by his concise and well drawn descriptions of numerous insects, by various interesting observations on their manners and characters, and by the purity of his latinity,—contributed greatly to its progress towards perfection. Leeuwenhoek also, the compatriot of Swammerdam, and Hooke of Ray, amongst other objects submitted to their powerful microscopes, did not neglect insects.—To the former we are indebted for the remarkable discovery that the flea belongs to those that undergo a metamorphosis. Ray had besides two coadjutors whose names ought not to be forgotten,—Willughby and Dr. Martin Lister. The former is characterized by his lamenting friend as one of the profoundest of naturalists, as well as one of the most amiable and virtuous of men. What advantage Entomology would have reaped from his labours may be inferred from the eminent services that he rendered that science, amongst other branches of Zoology, during his short life. It appears from Ray's Letters[1386], that he drew up a history of insects andexsanguia, which probably formed the groundwork of the posthumousHistoria Insectorumof that author; concerning which he says, "The work which I have now entered upon is indeed too great a task for me: I rely chiefly on Mr. Willughby's discoveries and the contributions of friends[1387]." And indeed Willughby's name and initials occur so frequently in that work, that it may be esteemed their joint production.Lister by his various writings elucidated many points relating to insects; and he may be regarded as the first modern who observed that spiders can sail in the air. But the most important of his works, and that on which his fame as an Entomologist is principally founded, is his admirable treatiseDe Araneis; in which his systematic arrangement of these animals leaves far behind all former attempts, and rivals that of the best modern Arachnologists. His specific descriptions are drawn with a precision till then unknown; and each is headed by a short definition of the species, which he calls theTitulus, synonymous with theNomen specificumof Linné, whose canon of twelve words it rarely exceeds.
One of the most important events of this era was the complete exposure and refutation of the absurd doctrine ofequivocal generation, which had maintained its ground in the schools of philosophy from the time of Aristotle. Our own immortal Harvey was the first who dared to controvert this irrational theory: and hisdictum—Omnia ex ovo—was copiously discussed and completely established by two of the ablest physiologists that Italy has produced, Redi and Malpighi.
Previously to the publication of theHistoria Insectorum, no other works of eminence, with the exception of Madam Merian's beautiful illustration of the metamorphosis of the insects of Surinam, made their appearance: but in the interval of twenty-five years, which elapsed between the publication of that work and of Linné's first outline of hisSystema Naturæ, Entomologists became more numerous and active. In England the pious and learned author of thePhysicoandAstro-Theologywas celebrated for the assiduity with which he studied insects; and in the former of these works has concentrated a vast number of interesting observations connected with their anatomy and history. No Englishman contributed more to the progress of Natural History, both as a writer and collector, than that disinterested physician and naturalist Sir Hans Sloane, whose extensive and valuable library and well-stored cabinets formed the original nucleus of the present vast collection of the British Museum. Amongst other departments, that of insects was not overlooked by him; and it is to be regretted that those which he had accumulated have either perished from neglect or are not accessible. Other Entomologists were eminent at this period in Britain. The principal of these were Petiver, Dale (to whom Ray bequeathed his collection of insects), Bobart, Bradley, and Dandridge; the last of whom, as Bradley tells us, delineated and described 140 species of spiders.
I must not omit here to observe that ourRoyal Society, the origin of which took place in this era, communicated a new and powerful impulse to the public mind in favour of Physical Science, and greatly accelerated the progress of Natural History. It acted not only as a centre of excitement which stimulated to exertion, but also as a focus to collect the scattered rays of light before they were dissipated. Insulated observations in every department of nature were thus preserved; and communications from the most eminent naturalists in various parts of Europe ornamented itsTransactions. So that from the establishment of this illustrious Society, the triumphant march of Physical Science of every kind towards its acme may be dated.
4.Era of Linné, or of theAlarySystem.We are now arrived at that period in the history of Natural Knowledge, especially of Entomology, in which it received that form, with respect to its general outline, which, amidst many lesser mutations, has been preserved ever since. Swammerdam had altogether deserted the system of Aristotle, and Ray mixed it with that of his predecessor. But a brilliant star soon appeared in the North[1388], which was destined to be the harbinger of a brighter day than had ever before illuminated the path of the student of the works of God. The illustrious philosopher whose name distinguishes this new era, imbibed a taste for Entomology almost as early as for Botany[1389]; and though the latter became his favourite, and absorbed his principal attention, he did not altogether neglect the former. In the first edition of hisSystema Naturæ, published in 1735, and contained in onlyfourteenfolio pages[1390], he began to arrange the three kingdoms of nature after his own conceptions. But this initiatory sketch, as might be expected, was very imperfect; and with respect to insects, instead of an improvement upon his predecessors, was extremely inferior to what Ray had effected; for he puts into one Order (to which he gives the name ofAngioptera) theLepidoptera,Neuroptera,Hymenoptera, andDiptera. In this work, however, Generic Characters were first given. In successive editions he continued to improve upon this outline: in thefourthhe finally settled thenumberanddenominationsof his Orders; andin the twelfth (uniting theOrthoptera, which he had at first considered as of aColeopteroustype, to theHemiptera) also theirlimits. His system, being founded upon the absence or presence and characters of the organs for flight, is in some degree a republication of the Aristotelian, and may be called theAlarySystem.
In considering this table, it must strike every one acquainted with the subject, that although the assumption of a single set of organs whereon to build a system can scarcely be expected to lead to one perfectly natural, yet that the majority of the groups here given as Orders merit that character. Thesecondindeed and thelastrequire further subdivision, and concerning thefourthno satisfactory conclusion has yet been drawn. With regard to hisseriesof the Orders, it is mostly artificial. Linné has the advantage of all his predecessors in giving clearer definitions of his Orders, and in their nomenclature; in which he has followed the path first trodden by Aristotle.
One of his most prominent excellencies, which led the way more than any thing else to a distinct knowledge of natural objects, was his giving definitions of his genera, or the groups that he distinguished by that name, since all preceding writers had merely made them known by the imposition of aname. His generic characters of insects were oftwokinds: A shorter, containing thesupposedessentialdistinction of the genus, given at the head of theClass; and another, generally longer, and includingnon-essentials, given at the head of theGenus. The first he denominated theessential, and the latter thefactitiousorartificialcharacter. He did not do for insects what he did for Botany,—draw up what he has called thenaturalcharacter of a genus, which included both the others, and noticed every other generic distinction[1391].
The older Naturalists used to treasure in their memories a short description of each species, by which when they wished to speak or write of it they made it known. Thus, in speaking of the common lady-bird they would call it "theCoccinellawith redcoleoptra[1392]having seven black dots." This enunciation of any object was at first called its Title (Titulus), and afterwards its Specific Name (Nomen specificum), and by Linné was restricted totwelvewords[1393]. But as the number of species increased to remember each definition was no easy task; that he might remedy this inconvenience, he invented what is called the Trivial Name (Nomen triviale), which expressed any species by a single term added to its generic appellation, asCoccinella septem-punctata; and thereby conferred a lasting benefit on Natural History. This convenient invention has rendered it less necessary to restrict theNomen specificumto twelve words: it is desirable, however, that the definition of a species should be as short as possible, and contain only itsdistinctivecharacters. In his definitions and descriptions Linné was often very happy; but sometimes, in studying to avoid prolixity, he forgets Horace's hint,