Chapter 15

Besides the histories of Egypt, see J. H. Breasted,Ancient Records of Egypt; Historical Documents ii. 4, 125; G. Maspero,Contes populaires, 3me éd. p. 236; W. M. F. Petrie,Hyksos and Israelite Cities, p. 67; Golénischeff inRecueil de travaux, xv. p. 131.

(F. Ll. G.)

HYLAS,In Greek legend, son of Theiodamas, king of the Dryopians in Thessaly, the favourite of Heracles and his companion on the Argonautic expedition. Having gone ashore at Kios in Mysia to fetch water, he was carried off by the nymphs of the spring in which he dipped his pitcher. Heracles sought him in vain, and the answer of Hylas to his thrice-repeated cry was lost in the depths of the water. Ever afterwards, in memory of the threat of Heracles to ravage the land if Hylas were not found, the inhabitants of Kios every year on a stated day roamed the mountains, shouting aloud for Hylas (Apollonius Rhodius i. 1207; Theocritus xiii.; Strabo xii. 564; Propertius i. 20; Virgil,Ecl.vi. 43). But, although the legend is first told in Alexandrian times, the “cry of Hylas” occurs long before as the “Mysian cry” in Aeschylus (Persae, 1054), and in Aristophanes (Plutus, 1127) “to cry Hylas” is used proverbially of seeking something in vain. Hylas, like Adonis and Hyacinthus, represents the fresh vegetation of spring, or the water of a fountain, which dries up under the heat of summer. It is suggested that Hylas was a harvest deity and that the ceremony gone through by the Kians was a harvest festival, at which the figure of a boy was thrown into the water, signifying the dying vegetation-spirit of the year.

See G. Türk inBreslauer Philologische Abhandlungen, vii. (1895); W. Mannhardt,Mythologische Forschungen(1884).

HYLOZOISM(Gr.ὕλη, matter,ζωή, life), in philosophy, a term applied to any system which explains all life, whether physical or mental, as ultimately derived from matter (“cosmic matter,”Weldstoff). Such a view of existence has been common throughout the history of thought, and especially among physical scientists. Thus the Ionian school of philosophy, which began with Thales, sought for the beginning of all things in various material substances, water, air, fire (seeIonian School). These substances were regarded as being in some sense alive, and taking some active part in the development of being. This primitive hylozoism reappeared in modified forms in medieval and Renaissance thought, and in modern times the doctrine of materialistic monism is its representative. Between modern materialism and hylozoism proper there is, however, the distinction that the ancients, however vaguely, conceived the elemental matter as being in some sense animate if not actually conscious and conative.

HYMEN,orHymenaeus, originally the name of the song sung at marriages among the Greeks. As usual the name gradually produced the idea of an actual person whose adventures gave rise to the custom of this song. He occurs often in association with Linus and Ialemus, who represent similar personifications, and is generally called a son of Apollo and a Muse. As the son of Dionysus and Aphrodite, he was regarded as a god of fruitfulness. In Attic legend he was a beautiful youth who, being in love with a girl, followed her in a procession to Eleusis disguised as a woman, and saved the whole band from pirates. As rewardhe obtained the girl in marriage, and his happy married life caused him ever afterwards to be invoked in marriage songs (Servius on Virgil,Aen.i. 651). According to another story, he was a youth who was killed by the fall of his house on his wedding day; hence he was invoked, to propitiate him and avert a similar fate from others (Servius,loc. cit.). He is represented in works of art as an effeminate-looking, winged youth, carrying a bridal torch and wearing a nuptial veil. The marriage song was sung, with musical accompaniment, during the procession of the bride from her parents’ house to that of the bridegroom, Hymenaeus being invoked at the end of each portion.

See R. Schmidt,De Hymenaeo el Talasio(1886), and J. A. Hild in Daremberg and Saglis’sDictionnaire des antiquités.

HYMENOPTERA(Gr.ὑμήν, a membrane, andπτερόν, a wing), a term used in zoological classification for one of the most important orders of the classHexapoda(q.v.). The order was founded by Linnaeus (Systema Naturae, 1735), and is still recognized by all naturalists in the sense proposed by him, to include the saw-flies, gall-flies, ichneumon-flies and their allies, ants, wasps and bees. The relationship of the Hymenoptera to other orders of insects is discussed in the articleHexapoda, but it may be mentioned here that in structure the highest members of the order are remarkably specialized, and that in the perfection of their instincts they stand at the head of all insects and indeed of all invertebrate animals. About 30,000 species of Hymenoptera are now known.

Characters.—In all Hymenoptera the mandibles (fig. 1, C, D) are well developed, being adapted, as in the more lowly winged insects, such as the Orthoptera, for biting. The more generalized Hymenoptera have the second maxillae but slightly modified, their inner lobes being fused to form aligula(fig. 1, B,b). In the higher families this structure becomes elongated (fig. 2,g) so as to form an elaborate sucking-organ or “tongue.” These insects are able, therefore, to bite as well as to suck, whereas most insects which have acquired the power of suction have lost that of biting. Both fore- and hind-wings are usually present, both pairs being membranous, the hind-wings small and not folded when at rest, each provided along the costa with a row of curved hooks which catch on to a fold along the dorsum of the adjacent fore-wing during flight. A large number of Hymenoptera are, however, entirely wingless—at least as regards one sex or form of the species. One of the most remarkable features is the close union of the foremost abdominal segment (fig. 3, i.) with the metathorax, of which it often seems to form a part, the apparent first abdominal segment being, in such case, really the second (fig. 3, ii.). The true first segment, which undergoes a more or less complete fusion with the thorax is known as the “median segment” orpropodeum. In female Hymenoptera the typical insectan ovipositor with its three pairs of processes is well developed, and in the higher families this organ becomes functional as a sting (fig. 5),—used for offence and defence. As regards their life history, all Hymenoptera undergo a “complete” metamorphosis. The larva is soft-skinned (eruciform), being either a caterpillar (fig. 6,b) or a legless grub (fig. 7,a), and the pupa is free (fig. 7,c),i.e.with the appendages not fixed to the body, as is the case in the pupa of most moths.Fig. 4.—Fore-Wings of Hymenoptera.1. Tenthredinidae (Hylotoma)— 1, marginal; 2, appendicular; 3, 4, 5, 6, radial or submarginal; 7, 8, 9, median or discoidal; 10, sub-costal; 11, 12, cubital or branchial; and 13, anal or lanceolate cellules;a,b,c, submarginal nervures;d, basal nervures;e,f, recurrent nervures; st, stigma;co, costa.2. Cynipidae (Cynips).3. Chalcididae (Perilampus).4. Proctotrypidae (Codrus).5. Mymaridae (Mymar).6. Braconidae (Bracon).7. Ichneumonidae (Trogus).8. Chrysididae (Cleptes).9. Formicidae (Formica).10. Vespidae (Vespa).11. Apidae (Apathus).Structure.—The head of a hymenopterous insect bears three simple eyes (ocelli) on the front and vertex in addition to the large compound eyes. The feelers are generally simple in type, rarely showing serrations or prominent appendages; but one or two basal segments are frequently differentiated to form an elongate “scape,” the remaining segments—carried at an elbowed angle to the scape—making up the “flagellum”; the segments of the flagellum often bear complex sensory organs. The general characters of the jaws have been mentioned above, and in detail there is great variation in these organs among the different families. The sucking tongue of the Hymenoptera has often been compared with the hypopharynx of other insects. According to D. Sharp, however, the hypopharynx is present in all Hymenoptera as a distinct structure at the base of the “tongue,” which must be regarded as representing the fused laciniae of the second maxillae. In the thorax the pronotum and prosternum are closely associated with the mesothorax, but the pleura of the prothorax are usually shifted far forwards, so that the fore-legs are inserted just behind the head. A pair of small plates—the tegulae—are very generally present at the bases of the fore-wings. The union of the first abdominal segment with the metathorax has beenalready mentioned. The second (so-called “first”) abdominal segment is often very constricted, forming the “waist” so characteristic of wasps and ants for example. The constriction of this segment and its very perfect articulation with the propodeum give great mobility to the abdomen, so that the ovipositor or sting can be used with the greatest possible accuracy and effect.Mention has already been made of the series of curved hooks along the costa of the hind-wing; by means of this arrangement the two wings of a side are firmly joined together during flight, which thus becomes particularly accurate. The wings in the Hymenoptera show a marked reduction in the number of nervures as compared with more primitive insects. The main median nervure, and usually also the sub-costal become united with the radial, while the branches of radial, median and cubital nervures pursuing a transverse or recurrent course across the wing, divide its area into a number of areolets or “cells,” that are of importance in classification. Among many of the smaller Hymenoptera we find that the wings are almost destitute of nervures. In the hind-wings—on account of their reduced size—the nervures are even more reduced than in the fore-wings.The legs of Hymenoptera are of the typical insectan form, and the foot is usually composed of five segments. In many families the trochanter appears to be represented by two small segments, there being thus an extra joint in the leg. It is almost certain that the distal of these two segments really belongs to the thigh, but the ordinary nomenclature will be used in the present article, as this character is of great importance in discriminating families, and the two segments in question are referred to the trochanter by most systematic writers.After C. Janet,Aiguillon de la Myrmica rubra(Paris, 1898).Fig. 5.—Ovipositor or Sting of Red Ant (Myrmica rubra) Queen. Magnified. The right sheath C (outer process of the ninth abdominal segment—9) is shown in connexion with the guide B formed by the inner processes of the 9th segment. The stylet A (process of the 8th abdominal segment—8) is turned over to show its groovea, which works along the tongue or railb.The typical insectan ovipositor, so well developed among the Hymenoptera, consists of three pairs of processes (gonapophyses) two of which belong to the ninth abdominal segment and one to the eighth. The latter are the cutting or piercing stylets (fig. 5, A) of the ovipositor, while the two outer processes of the ninth segment are modified into sheaths or feelers (fig. 5, C) and the two inner processes form a guide (fig. 5, B) on which the stylets work, tongues or rails on the “guide” fitting accurately into longitudinal grooves on the stylet. In the different families of the Hymenoptera, there are various modifications of the ovipositor, in accord with the habits of the insects and the purposes to which the organ is put. The sting of wasps, ants and bees is a modified ovipositor and is used for egg-laying by the fertile females, as well as for defence. Most male Hymenoptera have processes which form claspers or genital armature. These processes are not altogether homologous with those of the ovipositor, being formed by inner and outer lobes of a pair of structures on the ninth abdominal segment.Many points of interest are to be noted in the internal structure of the Hymenoptera. The gullet leads into a moderate-sized crop, and several pairs of salivary glands open into the mouth. The crop is followed by a proventriculus which, in the higher Hymenoptera, forms the so-called “honey stomach,” by the contraction of whose wails the solid and liquid food can be separated, passed on into the digestive stomach, or held in the crop ready for regurgitation into the mouth. Behind the digestive stomach are situated, as usual, intestine and rectum, and the number of kidney (Malpighian) tubes varies from only six to over a hundred, being usually great.In the female, each ovary consists of a large number of ovarian tubes, in which swollen chambers containing the egg-cells alternate with smaller chambers enclosing nutrient material. In connexion with the ovipositor are two poison-glands, one acid and the other alkaline in its secretion. The acid gland consists of one, two or more tubes, with a cellular coat of several layers, opening into a reservoir whence the duct leads to the exterior. The alkaline gland is an irregular tube with a single cellular layer, its duct opening alongside that of the acid reservoir. These glands are most strongly developed when the ovipositor is modified into a sting.Development.—Parthenogenesis is of normal occurrence in the life-cycle of many Hymenoptera. There are species of gall-fly in which males are unknown, the unfertilized eggs always developing into females. On the other hand, in certain saw-flies and among the higher families, the unfertilized eggs, capable of development, usually give rise to male insects (seeBee). The larvae of most saw-flies feeding on the leaves of plants are caterpillars (fig. 6,b) with numerous abdominal pro-legs, but in most families of Hymenoptera the egg is laid in such a situation that an abundant food-supply is assured without exertion on the part of the larva, which is consequently a legless grub, usually white in colour, and with soft flexible cuticle (fig. 7,a). The organs and instincts for egg-laying and food-providing are perhaps the most remarkable features in the economy of the Hymenoptera. Gall-fly grubs are provided with vegetable food through the eggs being laid by the mother insect within plant tissues. The ichneumon pierces the body of a caterpillar and lays her eggs where the grubs will find abundant animal food. A digging-wasp hunts for insect prey and buries it with the egg, while a true wasp feeds her brood with captured insects, as a bird her fledglings. Bees store honey and pollen to serve as food for their young. Thus we find throughout the order a degree of care for offspring unreached by other insects, and this family-life has, in the best known of the Hymenoptera—ants, wasps and bees—developed into an elaborate social organization.

1. Tenthredinidae (Hylotoma)— 1, marginal; 2, appendicular; 3, 4, 5, 6, radial or submarginal; 7, 8, 9, median or discoidal; 10, sub-costal; 11, 12, cubital or branchial; and 13, anal or lanceolate cellules;a,b,c, submarginal nervures;d, basal nervures;e,f, recurrent nervures; st, stigma;co, costa.

2. Cynipidae (Cynips).

3. Chalcididae (Perilampus).

4. Proctotrypidae (Codrus).

5. Mymaridae (Mymar).

6. Braconidae (Bracon).

7. Ichneumonidae (Trogus).

8. Chrysididae (Cleptes).

9. Formicidae (Formica).

10. Vespidae (Vespa).

11. Apidae (Apathus).

Structure.—The head of a hymenopterous insect bears three simple eyes (ocelli) on the front and vertex in addition to the large compound eyes. The feelers are generally simple in type, rarely showing serrations or prominent appendages; but one or two basal segments are frequently differentiated to form an elongate “scape,” the remaining segments—carried at an elbowed angle to the scape—making up the “flagellum”; the segments of the flagellum often bear complex sensory organs. The general characters of the jaws have been mentioned above, and in detail there is great variation in these organs among the different families. The sucking tongue of the Hymenoptera has often been compared with the hypopharynx of other insects. According to D. Sharp, however, the hypopharynx is present in all Hymenoptera as a distinct structure at the base of the “tongue,” which must be regarded as representing the fused laciniae of the second maxillae. In the thorax the pronotum and prosternum are closely associated with the mesothorax, but the pleura of the prothorax are usually shifted far forwards, so that the fore-legs are inserted just behind the head. A pair of small plates—the tegulae—are very generally present at the bases of the fore-wings. The union of the first abdominal segment with the metathorax has beenalready mentioned. The second (so-called “first”) abdominal segment is often very constricted, forming the “waist” so characteristic of wasps and ants for example. The constriction of this segment and its very perfect articulation with the propodeum give great mobility to the abdomen, so that the ovipositor or sting can be used with the greatest possible accuracy and effect.

Mention has already been made of the series of curved hooks along the costa of the hind-wing; by means of this arrangement the two wings of a side are firmly joined together during flight, which thus becomes particularly accurate. The wings in the Hymenoptera show a marked reduction in the number of nervures as compared with more primitive insects. The main median nervure, and usually also the sub-costal become united with the radial, while the branches of radial, median and cubital nervures pursuing a transverse or recurrent course across the wing, divide its area into a number of areolets or “cells,” that are of importance in classification. Among many of the smaller Hymenoptera we find that the wings are almost destitute of nervures. In the hind-wings—on account of their reduced size—the nervures are even more reduced than in the fore-wings.

The legs of Hymenoptera are of the typical insectan form, and the foot is usually composed of five segments. In many families the trochanter appears to be represented by two small segments, there being thus an extra joint in the leg. It is almost certain that the distal of these two segments really belongs to the thigh, but the ordinary nomenclature will be used in the present article, as this character is of great importance in discriminating families, and the two segments in question are referred to the trochanter by most systematic writers.

The typical insectan ovipositor, so well developed among the Hymenoptera, consists of three pairs of processes (gonapophyses) two of which belong to the ninth abdominal segment and one to the eighth. The latter are the cutting or piercing stylets (fig. 5, A) of the ovipositor, while the two outer processes of the ninth segment are modified into sheaths or feelers (fig. 5, C) and the two inner processes form a guide (fig. 5, B) on which the stylets work, tongues or rails on the “guide” fitting accurately into longitudinal grooves on the stylet. In the different families of the Hymenoptera, there are various modifications of the ovipositor, in accord with the habits of the insects and the purposes to which the organ is put. The sting of wasps, ants and bees is a modified ovipositor and is used for egg-laying by the fertile females, as well as for defence. Most male Hymenoptera have processes which form claspers or genital armature. These processes are not altogether homologous with those of the ovipositor, being formed by inner and outer lobes of a pair of structures on the ninth abdominal segment.

Many points of interest are to be noted in the internal structure of the Hymenoptera. The gullet leads into a moderate-sized crop, and several pairs of salivary glands open into the mouth. The crop is followed by a proventriculus which, in the higher Hymenoptera, forms the so-called “honey stomach,” by the contraction of whose wails the solid and liquid food can be separated, passed on into the digestive stomach, or held in the crop ready for regurgitation into the mouth. Behind the digestive stomach are situated, as usual, intestine and rectum, and the number of kidney (Malpighian) tubes varies from only six to over a hundred, being usually great.

In the female, each ovary consists of a large number of ovarian tubes, in which swollen chambers containing the egg-cells alternate with smaller chambers enclosing nutrient material. In connexion with the ovipositor are two poison-glands, one acid and the other alkaline in its secretion. The acid gland consists of one, two or more tubes, with a cellular coat of several layers, opening into a reservoir whence the duct leads to the exterior. The alkaline gland is an irregular tube with a single cellular layer, its duct opening alongside that of the acid reservoir. These glands are most strongly developed when the ovipositor is modified into a sting.

Development.—Parthenogenesis is of normal occurrence in the life-cycle of many Hymenoptera. There are species of gall-fly in which males are unknown, the unfertilized eggs always developing into females. On the other hand, in certain saw-flies and among the higher families, the unfertilized eggs, capable of development, usually give rise to male insects (seeBee). The larvae of most saw-flies feeding on the leaves of plants are caterpillars (fig. 6,b) with numerous abdominal pro-legs, but in most families of Hymenoptera the egg is laid in such a situation that an abundant food-supply is assured without exertion on the part of the larva, which is consequently a legless grub, usually white in colour, and with soft flexible cuticle (fig. 7,a). The organs and instincts for egg-laying and food-providing are perhaps the most remarkable features in the economy of the Hymenoptera. Gall-fly grubs are provided with vegetable food through the eggs being laid by the mother insect within plant tissues. The ichneumon pierces the body of a caterpillar and lays her eggs where the grubs will find abundant animal food. A digging-wasp hunts for insect prey and buries it with the egg, while a true wasp feeds her brood with captured insects, as a bird her fledglings. Bees store honey and pollen to serve as food for their young. Thus we find throughout the order a degree of care for offspring unreached by other insects, and this family-life has, in the best known of the Hymenoptera—ants, wasps and bees—developed into an elaborate social organization.

Social Life.—The development of a true insect society among the Hymenoptera is dependent on a differentiation among the females between individuals with well-developed ovaries (“queens”) whose special function is reproduction; and individuals with reduced or aborted ovaries (“workers”) whose duty is to build the nest, to gather food and to tend and feed the larvae. Among the wasps the workers may only differ from the queens in size, and individuals intermediate between the two forms of female may be met with. Further, the queen wasp, and also the queen humble-bee, commences unaided the work of building and founding a new nest, being afterwards helped by her daughters (the workers) when these have been developed. In the hive-bee and among ants, on the other hand, there are constant structural distinctions between queen and worker, and the function of the queen bee in a hive is confined to egg-laying, the labour of the community being entirely done by the workers. Many ants possess several different forms of worker, adapted for special duties. Details of this fascinating subject are given in the special articlesAnt,BeeandWasp(q.v.).

Habits and Distribution.—Reference has been already made to the various methods of feeding practised by Hymenoptera in the larval stage, and the care taken of or for the young throughout the order leads in many cases to the gathering of such food by the mother or nurse. Thus, wasps catch flies; worker ants make raids and carry off weak insects of many kinds; bees gather nectar from flowers and transform it into honey within their stomachs—largely for the sake of feeding the larvae in the nest. The feeding habits of the adult may agree with that of the larva, or differ, as in the ease of wasps which feed their grubs on flies, but eat principally vegetable food themselves. The nest-building habit is similarly variable. Digging wasps make simple holes in the ground; many burrowing bees form branching tunnels; other bees excavate timber or make their brood-chambers in hollow plant-stems; wasps work up with their saliva vegetable fibres bitten off tree-bark to make paper; social bees produce from glands in their own bodies the wax whence their nest-chambers are built. The inquiline habit (“cuckoo-parasitism”), when one species makes use of the labour of another by invading the nest and laying her eggs there, is of frequent occurrence among Hymenoptera; and in some cases the larva of the intruder is not content with taking the store of food provided, but attacks and devours the larva of the host.

Most Hymenoptera are of moderate or small size, the giants of the order—certain saw-flies and tropical digging-wasps—never reach the bulk attained by the largest beetles, while the wing-spread is narrow compared with that of many dragon-flies and moths. On the other hand, there are thousands of very small species, and the tiny “fairy-flies” (Mymaridae), whose larvae live as parasites in the eggs of various insects, areexcessively minute for creatures of such complex organization. Hymenoptera are probably less widely distributed than Aptera, Coleoptera or Diptera, but they are to be found in all except the most inhospitable regions of the globe. The order is, with few exceptions, terrestrial or aerial in habit. Comparatively only a few species are, for part of their lives, denizens of fresh water; these, as larvae, are parasitic on the eggs or larvae of other aquatic insects, the little hymenopteron,Polynema natans, one of the “fairy-flies”—swims through the water by strokes of her delicate wings in search of a dragon-fly’s egg in which to lay her own egg, while the rareAgriotypusdives after the case of a caddis-worm. It is of interest that the waters have been invaded by the parasitic group of the Hymenoptera, since in number of species this is by far the largest of the order. No group of terrestrial insects escapes their attacks—even larvae boring in wood are detected by ichneumon flies with excessively long ovipositors. Not a few cases are known in which a parasitic larva is itself pierced by the ovipositor of a “hyperparasite,” and even the offspring of the latter may itself fall a victim to the attack of a “tertiary parasite.”

Fossil History.—Very little is known of the history of the Hymenoptera previous to the Tertiary epoch, early in which, as we know from the evidence of many Oligocene and Miocene fossils, all the more important families had been differentiated. Fragments of wings from the Lias and Oolitic beds have been referred to ants and bees, but the true nature of these remains is doubtful.

Classification.—Linnaeus divided the Hymenoptera into two sections—the Terebrantia, whose females possess a cutting or piercing ovipositor, and the Aculeata, in which the female organ is modified into a sting. This nomenclature was adopted by P. A. Latreille and has been in general use until the present day. A closely similar division of the order results from T. Hartig’s character drawn from the trochanter—whether of two segments or undivided—the groups being termed respectively Ditrocha and Monotrocha. But the most natural division is obtained by the separation of the saw-flies as a primitive sub-order, characterized by the imperfect union of the first abdominal segment with the thorax, and by the broad base of the abdomen, so that there is no median constriction or “waist,” and by the presence of thoracic legs—usually also of abdominal pro-legs—in the larva. All the other families of Hymenoptera, including the gall-flies, ichneumons and aculeates, have the first abdominal segment closely united with the thorax, the second abdominal segment constricted so as to form a narrow stalk or “waist,” and legless larvae without a hinder outlet to the food-canal. These two sub-orders are usually known as theSessiliventraandPetioliventrarespectively, but the namesSymphytaandApocritaproposed in 1867 by C. Gerstaecker have priority, and should not be replaced.

Symphyta.This sub-order, characterized by the “sessile,” broad-based abdomen, whose first segment is imperfectly united with the thorax, and by the usually caterpillar-like larvae with legs, includes the various groups of saw-flies. Three leading families may be mentioned. TheCephidae, or stem saw-flies, have an elongate pronotum, a compressed abdomen, and a single spine on the shin of the fore-leg. The soft, white larvae have the thoracic legs very small and feed in the stems of various plants.Cephus pygmaeusis a well-known enemy of corn crops. TheSiricidae(“wood-wasps”) are large elongate insects also with one spine on each fore-shin, but with the pronotum closely joined to the mesothorax. The ovipositor is long and prominent, enabling the female insect to lay her eggs in the wood of trees, where the white larvae, whose legs are excessively short, tunnel and feed. These insects are adorned with bands of black and yellow, or with bright metallic colours, and on account of their large size and formidable ovipositors they often cause needless alarm to persons unfamiliar with their habits. TheTenthredinidae, or true saw-flies, are distinguished by two spines on each fore-shin, while the larvae are usually caterpillars, with three pairs of thoracic legs, and from six to eight pairs of abdominal pro-legs the latter not possessing the hooks found on the pro-legs of lepidopterous caterpillars. Most saw-fly larvae devour leaves, and the beautifully serrate processes of the ovipositor are well adapted for egg-laying in plant tissues. Some saw-fly larvae are protected by a slimy secretion (fig. 6,c) and a few live concealed in galls. In the form of the feelers, the wing-neuration and minor structural details there is much diversity among the saw-flies. They have been usually regarded as a single family, but W. H. Ashmead has lately differentiated eleven families of them.Apocrita.This sub-order includes the vast majority of the Hymenoptera, characterized by the narrowly constricted waist in the adult and by the legless condition of the larva. The trochanter is simple in some genera and divided in others. With regard to the minor divisions of this group, great difference of opinion has prevailed among students. In his recent classification Ashmead (1901) recognizes seventy-nine families arranged under eight “super-families.” The number of species included in this division is enormous, and the multiplication of families is, to some extent, a natural result of increasingly close study. But the distinctions between many of these rest on comparatively slight characters, and it is likely that the future discovery of new genera may abolish many among such distinctions as may now be drawn. It seems advisable, therefore, in the present article to retain the wider conception of the family that has hitherto contented most writers on the Hymenoptera. Ashmead’s “super-families” have, however, been adopted as—founded on definite structural characters—they probably indicate relationship more nearly than the older divisions founded mostly on habit. The Cynipoidea include the gall-flies and their parasitic relations. In the Chalcidoidea, Ichneumonoidea and Proctotrypoidea will be found nearly all the “parasitic Hymenoptera” of older classifications. The Formicoidea are the ants. The group of Fossores, or “digging-wasps,” is divided by Ashmead, one section forming the Sphecoidea, while the other, together with the Chrysidae and the true wasps, make up the Vespoidea. The Apoidea consists of the bees only.After Marlatt,Ent. Circ.26, U.S. Dept. Agric.Fig. 6.—a, Pear Saw-fly (Eriocampoides limacina);b, larva without, andc, with its slimy protective coat;e, cocoon;f, larva before pupation;g, pupa, magnified;d, leaves with larvae.After Howard,Ent. Tech. Bull.5 U.S. Dept. Agric.Fig. 7.—Chalcid (Dibrachys boucheanus), a hyper-parasite.a, Larva.d, Its head more highly magnified.b, Female fly.c, Pupa of male.e, Feeler.Cynipoidea.—In this division the ovipositor issues from the ventral surface of the abdomen; the pronotum reaches back to the tegulae; the trochanter has two segments; the fore-wing (fig. 4, 2) has no stigma, but one or two areolets. The feelers with twelve to fifteen segments are thread-like and straight. All the insects included in this group are small and form two families—the Cynipidae and the Figitidae. They are the “gall-flies,” many of the species laying eggs in various plant-tissues where the presence of the larva causes the formation of a pathological growth or gall, always of a definite form and characteristic of the species; the “oak-apple” and thebedeguar of the rose are familiar examples. Other flies of this group have the inquiline habit, laying their eggs in the galls of other species, while others again pierce the cuticle of maggots or aphids, in whose bodies their larvae live as parasites.Chalcidoidea.—This division resembles the Cynipoidea in the position of the ovipositor, and in the two segmented trochanters. The fore-wing also has no stigma, and the whole wing is almost destitute of nervures and areolets, while the pronotum does not reach back to the tegulae, and the feelers are elbowed (fig. 7). The vast majority of this group, including nearly 5000 known species, are usually reckoned as a single family, theChalcididae, comprising small insects, often of bright metallic colours, whose larvae are parasitic in insects of various orders. The “fig-insects,” whose presence in ripening figs is believed essential to the proper development of the fruit, belong toBlastophagaand other genera of this family. They are remarkable in having wingless males and winged females. The “polyembryonic” development of anEncyrtus, as studied by P. Marchal, is highly remarkable. The female lays her egg in the egg of a small ermine moth (Hyponomeuta) and the egg gives rise not to a single embryo but to a hundred, which develop as the host-caterpillar develops, being found at a later stage within the latter enveloped in a flexible tube.TheMymaridaeor “fairy-flies” are distinguished from theChalcididaeby their narrow fringed wings (figs. 4, 5) and by the situation of the ovipositor just in front of the tip of the abdomen. They are among the most minute of all insects and their larvae are probably all parasitic in insects’ eggs.After Riley and Howard,Insect Life, vol. i.Fig. 8.—Ichneumon Fly (Rhyssa per-suasoria) ovipositing.Ichneumonoidea.—The ten thousand known species included in this group agree with the Cynipoidea and Chalcidoidea in the position of the ovipositor and in the jointed trochanters, but are distinguished by the fore-wing possessing a distinct stigma and usually a typical series of nervures and areolets (figs. 4, 8). Many of the species are of fair size. They lay their eggs (fig. 8) in the bodies of insects and their larvae belonging to various orders. A few small families such as theEvaniidaeand theStephanidaeare included here, but the vast majority of the group fall into two large families, theIchneumonidaeand theBraconidae, the former distinguished by the presence of two median (or discoidal) cells in the fore-wing (figs. 4, 7), while the latter has only one (figs. 4, 6). Not a few of these insects, however, are entirely wingless. On account of their work in destroying plant-eating insects, the ichneumon-flies are of great economic importance.Proctotrypoidea.—This group may be distinguished from the preceding by the position of the ovipositor at the extreme apex of the abdomen, and from the groups that follow (with very few exceptions) by the jointed trochanters of the legs. The pronotum reaches back to the tegulae. ThePelecinidae—included here by Ashmead—are large insects with remarkably elongate abdomens and undivided trochanters. All the other members of the group may be regarded as forming a single family—theProctotrypidae, including an immense number of small parasitic Hymenoptera, not a few of which are wingless. Of special interest are the transformations ofPlatygaster, belonging to this family, discovered by M. Ganin, and familiarized to English readers through the writings of Sir J. Lubbock (Lord Avebury). The first larva is broad in front and tapers behind to a “tail” provided with two divergent processes, so that it resembles a small crustacean. It lives in the grub of a gall-midge and it ultimately becomes changed into the usual white and fleshy hymenopterous larva. The four succeeding sections, in which the ovipositor is modified into a sting (always exserted from the tip of the abdomen) and the trochanters are with few exceptions simple, form theAculeataof Linnaeus.Formicoidea.—The ants which form this group are readily distinguished by the differentiation of the females into winged “queens” and wingless “workers.” The pronotum extends back to the wing-bases, and the “waist” is greatly constricted and marked by one or two “nodes.” The differentiation of the females leads to a complex social life, the nesting habits of ants and the various industries that they pursue being of surpassing interest (seeAnt).Vespoidea.—This section includes a number of families characterized by the backward extension of the prothorax to the tegulae and distinguished from the ants by the absence of “nodes” at the base of the abdomen. The true wasps have the fore-wings folded lengthwise when at rest and the fore-legs of normal build—not specialized for digging. TheVespidaeor social wasps have “queens” and “workers” like the ants, but both these forms of female are winged; the claws on their fret are simple. In theEumenidaeor solitary wasps the female sex is undifferentiated, and the foot claws are toothed. (For the habits of these insects seeWasp.) TheChrysididaeor ruby wasps are small insects with a very hard cuticle exhibiting brilliant metallic colours—blue, green and crimson. Only three or four abdominal segments are visible, the hinder segments being slender and retracted to form a telescope-like tube in which the ovipositor lies. When the ovipositor is brought into use this tube is thrust out. The eggs are laid in the nests of various bees and wasps, the chrysid larva living as a “cuckoo” parasite. TheTrigonalidae, a small family whose larvae are parasitic in wasps’ nests, also probably belong here.The other families of theVespoideabelong to the series of “Fossores” or digging-wasps. In two of the families—theMutillidaeandThynnidae—the females are wingless and the larvae live as parasites in the larvae of other insects; the femaleMutillaenters bumble-bees’ nests and lays her eggs in the bee-grubs. In the other families both sexes are winged, and the instinct and industry of the females are among the most wonderful in the Hymenoptera. They make burrows wherein they place insects or spiders which they have caught and stung, laying their eggs beside the victim so that the young larvae find themselves in presence of an abundant and appropriate food-supply. Valuable observations on the habits of these insects are due to J. H. Fabre and G. W. and E. Peckham. The prey is sometimes stung in the neighbourhood of the nerve ganglia, so that it is paralysed but not killed, the grub of the fossorial wasp devouring its victim alive; but this instinct varies in perfection, and in many cases the larva flourishes equally whether its prey be killed or not. The females have a wonderful power of finding their burrows on returning from their hunting expeditions. Among the Vespoid families of fossorial wasps, thePompilidaeare the most important. They are recognizable by their slender and elongate hind-legs; many of them provision their burrows with spiders. TheSapygidaeare parasitic on bees, while theScoliidaeare large, robust and hairy insects, many of which prey upon the grubs of chafers.Sphecoidea.—In this division are included the rest of the “digging-wasps,” distinguished from theVespoideaby the short pronotum not reaching backward to the tegulae. They have usually been reckoned as forming a single, very large family—theSphegidae—but ten or twelve subdivisions of the group are regarded as distinct families by Ashmead and others. Great diversity is shown in the details of structure, habits and nature of the prey. Species ofSphex, studied by Fabre, provisioned their brood-chambers with crickets.Pelopoeushunts spiders, whileAmmophilacatches caterpillars for the benefit of her young. Fabre states that the last-named insect uses a stone for the temporary closing of her burrow, and the Peckhams have seen a femaleAmmophilatake a stone between her mandibles and use it as a hammer for pounding down the earth over her finished nest. The habits ofBembexare of especial interest. The female, instead of provisioning her burrow with a supply of food that will suffice the larva for its whole life, brings fresh flies with which she regularly feeds her young. In this instinct we have a correspondence with the habits of social wasps and bees. Yet it may be thought that the usual instinct of the “digging-wasps” to capture and store up food in an underground burrow for the benefit of offspring which they will never see is even more surprising. The habit of some genera is to catch the prey before making their tunnel, but more frequently the insect digs her nest, and then hunts for prey to put into it.Apoidea.—The bees which make up this group agree with the Sphecoidea in the short pronotum, but may be distinguished from all other Hymenoptera by the widened first tarsal segment and the plumose hairs on head and body. They are usually regarded as forming a single family—theApidae—but there is very great diversity in structural details, and Ashmead divides them into fourteen families. The “tongue,” for example, is short and obtuse or emarginate inColletesandProsopis, while in all other bees it is pointed at the tip. But inAndrenaand its allies it is comparatively short, while in the higher genera, such asApisandBombus, it is elongate and flexible, forming a most elaborate and perfect organ for taking liquid food. Bees feed on honey and pollen. Most of the genera are “solitary” in habit, the female sex being undifferentiated; but among the humble-bees and hive-bees we find, as in social wasps and ants, the occurrence of workers, and the consequent elaboration of a wonderful insect-society. (SeeBee.)Bibliography.—The literature of several special families of the Hymenoptera will be found under the articlesAnt,Bee,Ichneumon-Fly,Wasp, &c., referred to above. Among earlier students on structure may be mentioned P. A. Latreille,Familles naturelles du règne animal(Paris, 1825), who recognized the nature of the “median segment.” C. Gerstaecker (Arch. f. Naturg.xx., 1867) and F. Brauer (Sitzb. K. Akad. Wiss. Wien.lxxxv., 1883) should also be consulted on this subject. For internal anatomy, specially the digestive organs, see L. Dufour,Mém. savants étrangers, vii. (1841), andAnn. Sci. Nat. Zool.(4), i. 1854. For nervous system H. Viallanes,Ann. Sci. Nat. Zool.(7), ii. iv. 1886-1887, and F. C. Kenyon,Journ. Comp. Neurol.vi., 1896. For poison and other glands, see L. Bordas,Ann. Sci. Nat. Zool.(7) xix., 1895. For the sting and ovipositor H. Dewitz,Zeits. wiss. Zool.xxv., 1874, xxviii., 1877, and F. Zander,ib.lxvi., 1899. For male genital armature S. A. Peytoureau,Morphologie de l’armure génitale desinsectes(Bordeaux, 1895), and E. Zander, Zeits. wiss. Zool. lxvii., 1900. The systematic student of Hymenoptera is greatly helped by C. G. de Dalla Torre’sCatalogus Hymenopterorum(10 vols., Leipzig, 1893-1902). For general classifications see F. W. Konow,Entom. Nachtr.(1897), and W. H. Ashmead,Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus.xxiii., 1901; the latter paper deals also especially with the Ichneumonoidea of the globe. For habits and life histories of Hymenoptera see J. Lubbock (Lord Avebury),Ants, Bees and Wasps(9th ed., London, 1889); C. Janet,Études sur les fourmis, les guêpes et les abeilles(Paris, &c., 1893 and onwards); and G. W. and E. G. Peckham,Instincts and Habits of Solitary Wasps(Madison, Wis. U.S.A., 1898). Monographs of most of the families of British Hymenoptera have now been published. For saw-flies and gall-flies, see P. Cameron’sBritish Phytophagous Hymenoptera(4 vols., London,Roy. Soc., 1882-1893). For Ichneumonoidea, C. Morley’sIchneumons of Great Britain(Plymouth, 1903, &c.), and T. A. Marshall’s “British Braconidae,”Trans. Entom. Soc., 1885-1899. The smaller parasitic Hymenoptera have been neglected in this country since A. H. Haliday’s classical papersEntom. Mag.i.-v., (1833-1838) but Ashmead’s “North American Proctotrypidae” (Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus.xlv., 1893) is valuable for the European student. For the Fossores, wasps, ants and bees see E. Saunders,Hymenoptera Aculeata of the British Islands(London, 1896). Exhaustive references to general systematic works will be found in de Dalla Torre’sCataloguementioned above. Of special value to English students are C. T. Bingham’sFauna of British India, “Hymenoptera” (London, 1897 and onwards), and P. Cameron’s volumes on Hymenoptera in theBiologia Centrali-Americana. F. Smith’sCatalogues of Hymenoptera in the British Museum(London, 1853-1859) are well worthy of study.

Symphyta.

This sub-order, characterized by the “sessile,” broad-based abdomen, whose first segment is imperfectly united with the thorax, and by the usually caterpillar-like larvae with legs, includes the various groups of saw-flies. Three leading families may be mentioned. TheCephidae, or stem saw-flies, have an elongate pronotum, a compressed abdomen, and a single spine on the shin of the fore-leg. The soft, white larvae have the thoracic legs very small and feed in the stems of various plants.Cephus pygmaeusis a well-known enemy of corn crops. TheSiricidae(“wood-wasps”) are large elongate insects also with one spine on each fore-shin, but with the pronotum closely joined to the mesothorax. The ovipositor is long and prominent, enabling the female insect to lay her eggs in the wood of trees, where the white larvae, whose legs are excessively short, tunnel and feed. These insects are adorned with bands of black and yellow, or with bright metallic colours, and on account of their large size and formidable ovipositors they often cause needless alarm to persons unfamiliar with their habits. TheTenthredinidae, or true saw-flies, are distinguished by two spines on each fore-shin, while the larvae are usually caterpillars, with three pairs of thoracic legs, and from six to eight pairs of abdominal pro-legs the latter not possessing the hooks found on the pro-legs of lepidopterous caterpillars. Most saw-fly larvae devour leaves, and the beautifully serrate processes of the ovipositor are well adapted for egg-laying in plant tissues. Some saw-fly larvae are protected by a slimy secretion (fig. 6,c) and a few live concealed in galls. In the form of the feelers, the wing-neuration and minor structural details there is much diversity among the saw-flies. They have been usually regarded as a single family, but W. H. Ashmead has lately differentiated eleven families of them.

Apocrita.

This sub-order includes the vast majority of the Hymenoptera, characterized by the narrowly constricted waist in the adult and by the legless condition of the larva. The trochanter is simple in some genera and divided in others. With regard to the minor divisions of this group, great difference of opinion has prevailed among students. In his recent classification Ashmead (1901) recognizes seventy-nine families arranged under eight “super-families.” The number of species included in this division is enormous, and the multiplication of families is, to some extent, a natural result of increasingly close study. But the distinctions between many of these rest on comparatively slight characters, and it is likely that the future discovery of new genera may abolish many among such distinctions as may now be drawn. It seems advisable, therefore, in the present article to retain the wider conception of the family that has hitherto contented most writers on the Hymenoptera. Ashmead’s “super-families” have, however, been adopted as—founded on definite structural characters—they probably indicate relationship more nearly than the older divisions founded mostly on habit. The Cynipoidea include the gall-flies and their parasitic relations. In the Chalcidoidea, Ichneumonoidea and Proctotrypoidea will be found nearly all the “parasitic Hymenoptera” of older classifications. The Formicoidea are the ants. The group of Fossores, or “digging-wasps,” is divided by Ashmead, one section forming the Sphecoidea, while the other, together with the Chrysidae and the true wasps, make up the Vespoidea. The Apoidea consists of the bees only.

a, Larva.

d, Its head more highly magnified.

b, Female fly.

c, Pupa of male.

e, Feeler.

Cynipoidea.—In this division the ovipositor issues from the ventral surface of the abdomen; the pronotum reaches back to the tegulae; the trochanter has two segments; the fore-wing (fig. 4, 2) has no stigma, but one or two areolets. The feelers with twelve to fifteen segments are thread-like and straight. All the insects included in this group are small and form two families—the Cynipidae and the Figitidae. They are the “gall-flies,” many of the species laying eggs in various plant-tissues where the presence of the larva causes the formation of a pathological growth or gall, always of a definite form and characteristic of the species; the “oak-apple” and thebedeguar of the rose are familiar examples. Other flies of this group have the inquiline habit, laying their eggs in the galls of other species, while others again pierce the cuticle of maggots or aphids, in whose bodies their larvae live as parasites.

Chalcidoidea.—This division resembles the Cynipoidea in the position of the ovipositor, and in the two segmented trochanters. The fore-wing also has no stigma, and the whole wing is almost destitute of nervures and areolets, while the pronotum does not reach back to the tegulae, and the feelers are elbowed (fig. 7). The vast majority of this group, including nearly 5000 known species, are usually reckoned as a single family, theChalcididae, comprising small insects, often of bright metallic colours, whose larvae are parasitic in insects of various orders. The “fig-insects,” whose presence in ripening figs is believed essential to the proper development of the fruit, belong toBlastophagaand other genera of this family. They are remarkable in having wingless males and winged females. The “polyembryonic” development of anEncyrtus, as studied by P. Marchal, is highly remarkable. The female lays her egg in the egg of a small ermine moth (Hyponomeuta) and the egg gives rise not to a single embryo but to a hundred, which develop as the host-caterpillar develops, being found at a later stage within the latter enveloped in a flexible tube.

TheMymaridaeor “fairy-flies” are distinguished from theChalcididaeby their narrow fringed wings (figs. 4, 5) and by the situation of the ovipositor just in front of the tip of the abdomen. They are among the most minute of all insects and their larvae are probably all parasitic in insects’ eggs.

Ichneumonoidea.—The ten thousand known species included in this group agree with the Cynipoidea and Chalcidoidea in the position of the ovipositor and in the jointed trochanters, but are distinguished by the fore-wing possessing a distinct stigma and usually a typical series of nervures and areolets (figs. 4, 8). Many of the species are of fair size. They lay their eggs (fig. 8) in the bodies of insects and their larvae belonging to various orders. A few small families such as theEvaniidaeand theStephanidaeare included here, but the vast majority of the group fall into two large families, theIchneumonidaeand theBraconidae, the former distinguished by the presence of two median (or discoidal) cells in the fore-wing (figs. 4, 7), while the latter has only one (figs. 4, 6). Not a few of these insects, however, are entirely wingless. On account of their work in destroying plant-eating insects, the ichneumon-flies are of great economic importance.

Proctotrypoidea.—This group may be distinguished from the preceding by the position of the ovipositor at the extreme apex of the abdomen, and from the groups that follow (with very few exceptions) by the jointed trochanters of the legs. The pronotum reaches back to the tegulae. ThePelecinidae—included here by Ashmead—are large insects with remarkably elongate abdomens and undivided trochanters. All the other members of the group may be regarded as forming a single family—theProctotrypidae, including an immense number of small parasitic Hymenoptera, not a few of which are wingless. Of special interest are the transformations ofPlatygaster, belonging to this family, discovered by M. Ganin, and familiarized to English readers through the writings of Sir J. Lubbock (Lord Avebury). The first larva is broad in front and tapers behind to a “tail” provided with two divergent processes, so that it resembles a small crustacean. It lives in the grub of a gall-midge and it ultimately becomes changed into the usual white and fleshy hymenopterous larva. The four succeeding sections, in which the ovipositor is modified into a sting (always exserted from the tip of the abdomen) and the trochanters are with few exceptions simple, form theAculeataof Linnaeus.

Formicoidea.—The ants which form this group are readily distinguished by the differentiation of the females into winged “queens” and wingless “workers.” The pronotum extends back to the wing-bases, and the “waist” is greatly constricted and marked by one or two “nodes.” The differentiation of the females leads to a complex social life, the nesting habits of ants and the various industries that they pursue being of surpassing interest (seeAnt).

Vespoidea.—This section includes a number of families characterized by the backward extension of the prothorax to the tegulae and distinguished from the ants by the absence of “nodes” at the base of the abdomen. The true wasps have the fore-wings folded lengthwise when at rest and the fore-legs of normal build—not specialized for digging. TheVespidaeor social wasps have “queens” and “workers” like the ants, but both these forms of female are winged; the claws on their fret are simple. In theEumenidaeor solitary wasps the female sex is undifferentiated, and the foot claws are toothed. (For the habits of these insects seeWasp.) TheChrysididaeor ruby wasps are small insects with a very hard cuticle exhibiting brilliant metallic colours—blue, green and crimson. Only three or four abdominal segments are visible, the hinder segments being slender and retracted to form a telescope-like tube in which the ovipositor lies. When the ovipositor is brought into use this tube is thrust out. The eggs are laid in the nests of various bees and wasps, the chrysid larva living as a “cuckoo” parasite. TheTrigonalidae, a small family whose larvae are parasitic in wasps’ nests, also probably belong here.

The other families of theVespoideabelong to the series of “Fossores” or digging-wasps. In two of the families—theMutillidaeandThynnidae—the females are wingless and the larvae live as parasites in the larvae of other insects; the femaleMutillaenters bumble-bees’ nests and lays her eggs in the bee-grubs. In the other families both sexes are winged, and the instinct and industry of the females are among the most wonderful in the Hymenoptera. They make burrows wherein they place insects or spiders which they have caught and stung, laying their eggs beside the victim so that the young larvae find themselves in presence of an abundant and appropriate food-supply. Valuable observations on the habits of these insects are due to J. H. Fabre and G. W. and E. Peckham. The prey is sometimes stung in the neighbourhood of the nerve ganglia, so that it is paralysed but not killed, the grub of the fossorial wasp devouring its victim alive; but this instinct varies in perfection, and in many cases the larva flourishes equally whether its prey be killed or not. The females have a wonderful power of finding their burrows on returning from their hunting expeditions. Among the Vespoid families of fossorial wasps, thePompilidaeare the most important. They are recognizable by their slender and elongate hind-legs; many of them provision their burrows with spiders. TheSapygidaeare parasitic on bees, while theScoliidaeare large, robust and hairy insects, many of which prey upon the grubs of chafers.

Sphecoidea.—In this division are included the rest of the “digging-wasps,” distinguished from theVespoideaby the short pronotum not reaching backward to the tegulae. They have usually been reckoned as forming a single, very large family—theSphegidae—but ten or twelve subdivisions of the group are regarded as distinct families by Ashmead and others. Great diversity is shown in the details of structure, habits and nature of the prey. Species ofSphex, studied by Fabre, provisioned their brood-chambers with crickets.Pelopoeushunts spiders, whileAmmophilacatches caterpillars for the benefit of her young. Fabre states that the last-named insect uses a stone for the temporary closing of her burrow, and the Peckhams have seen a femaleAmmophilatake a stone between her mandibles and use it as a hammer for pounding down the earth over her finished nest. The habits ofBembexare of especial interest. The female, instead of provisioning her burrow with a supply of food that will suffice the larva for its whole life, brings fresh flies with which she regularly feeds her young. In this instinct we have a correspondence with the habits of social wasps and bees. Yet it may be thought that the usual instinct of the “digging-wasps” to capture and store up food in an underground burrow for the benefit of offspring which they will never see is even more surprising. The habit of some genera is to catch the prey before making their tunnel, but more frequently the insect digs her nest, and then hunts for prey to put into it.

Apoidea.—The bees which make up this group agree with the Sphecoidea in the short pronotum, but may be distinguished from all other Hymenoptera by the widened first tarsal segment and the plumose hairs on head and body. They are usually regarded as forming a single family—theApidae—but there is very great diversity in structural details, and Ashmead divides them into fourteen families. The “tongue,” for example, is short and obtuse or emarginate inColletesandProsopis, while in all other bees it is pointed at the tip. But inAndrenaand its allies it is comparatively short, while in the higher genera, such asApisandBombus, it is elongate and flexible, forming a most elaborate and perfect organ for taking liquid food. Bees feed on honey and pollen. Most of the genera are “solitary” in habit, the female sex being undifferentiated; but among the humble-bees and hive-bees we find, as in social wasps and ants, the occurrence of workers, and the consequent elaboration of a wonderful insect-society. (SeeBee.)

Bibliography.—The literature of several special families of the Hymenoptera will be found under the articlesAnt,Bee,Ichneumon-Fly,Wasp, &c., referred to above. Among earlier students on structure may be mentioned P. A. Latreille,Familles naturelles du règne animal(Paris, 1825), who recognized the nature of the “median segment.” C. Gerstaecker (Arch. f. Naturg.xx., 1867) and F. Brauer (Sitzb. K. Akad. Wiss. Wien.lxxxv., 1883) should also be consulted on this subject. For internal anatomy, specially the digestive organs, see L. Dufour,Mém. savants étrangers, vii. (1841), andAnn. Sci. Nat. Zool.(4), i. 1854. For nervous system H. Viallanes,Ann. Sci. Nat. Zool.(7), ii. iv. 1886-1887, and F. C. Kenyon,Journ. Comp. Neurol.vi., 1896. For poison and other glands, see L. Bordas,Ann. Sci. Nat. Zool.(7) xix., 1895. For the sting and ovipositor H. Dewitz,Zeits. wiss. Zool.xxv., 1874, xxviii., 1877, and F. Zander,ib.lxvi., 1899. For male genital armature S. A. Peytoureau,Morphologie de l’armure génitale desinsectes(Bordeaux, 1895), and E. Zander, Zeits. wiss. Zool. lxvii., 1900. The systematic student of Hymenoptera is greatly helped by C. G. de Dalla Torre’sCatalogus Hymenopterorum(10 vols., Leipzig, 1893-1902). For general classifications see F. W. Konow,Entom. Nachtr.(1897), and W. H. Ashmead,Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus.xxiii., 1901; the latter paper deals also especially with the Ichneumonoidea of the globe. For habits and life histories of Hymenoptera see J. Lubbock (Lord Avebury),Ants, Bees and Wasps(9th ed., London, 1889); C. Janet,Études sur les fourmis, les guêpes et les abeilles(Paris, &c., 1893 and onwards); and G. W. and E. G. Peckham,Instincts and Habits of Solitary Wasps(Madison, Wis. U.S.A., 1898). Monographs of most of the families of British Hymenoptera have now been published. For saw-flies and gall-flies, see P. Cameron’sBritish Phytophagous Hymenoptera(4 vols., London,Roy. Soc., 1882-1893). For Ichneumonoidea, C. Morley’sIchneumons of Great Britain(Plymouth, 1903, &c.), and T. A. Marshall’s “British Braconidae,”Trans. Entom. Soc., 1885-1899. The smaller parasitic Hymenoptera have been neglected in this country since A. H. Haliday’s classical papersEntom. Mag.i.-v., (1833-1838) but Ashmead’s “North American Proctotrypidae” (Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus.xlv., 1893) is valuable for the European student. For the Fossores, wasps, ants and bees see E. Saunders,Hymenoptera Aculeata of the British Islands(London, 1896). Exhaustive references to general systematic works will be found in de Dalla Torre’sCataloguementioned above. Of special value to English students are C. T. Bingham’sFauna of British India, “Hymenoptera” (London, 1897 and onwards), and P. Cameron’s volumes on Hymenoptera in theBiologia Centrali-Americana. F. Smith’sCatalogues of Hymenoptera in the British Museum(London, 1853-1859) are well worthy of study.

(G. H. C.)

HYMETTUS(Ital. Monte Matto, hence the modern name Trello Vouni), a mountain in Attica, bounding the Athenian plain on the S.E. Height, 3370 ft. It was famous in ancient times for its bees, which gathered honey of peculiar flavour from its aromatic herbs; their fame still persists. The spring mentioned by Ovid (Ars Amat.iii. 687) is probably to be recognized near the monastery of Syriani or Kaesariani on the western slope. This may be identical with that known asΚύλλον Πήρα, said to be a remedy for barrenness in women. The marble of Hymettus, which often has a bluish tinge, was used extensively for building in ancient Athens, and also, in early times, for sculpture; but the white marble of Pentelicus was preferred for both purposes.

See E. Dodwell,Classical and Topographical Tour(1819), i. 483.

HYMNS.—1.Classical Hymnody.—The word “hymn” (ὕμνος) was employed by the ancient Greeks1to signify a song or poem composed in honour of gods, heroes or famous men, or to be recited on some joyful, mournful or solemn occasion. Polymnia was the name of their lyric muse. Homer makes Alcinous entertain Odysseus with a “hymn” of the minstrel Demodocus, on the capture of Troy by the wooden horse. TheWorks and Daysof Hesiod begins with an invocation to the Muses to address hymns to Zeus, and in hisTheogoniahe speaks of them as singing or inspiring “hymns” to all the divinities, and of the bard as “their servant, hymning the glories of men of old, and of the gods of Olympus.” Pindar calls by this name odes, like his own, in praise of conquerors at the public games of Greece. The Athenian dramatists (Euripides most frequently) use the word and its cognate verbs in a similar manner; they also describe by them metrical oracles and apophthegms, martial, festal and hymeneal songs, dirges and lamentations or incantations of woe.

Hellenic hymns, according to this conception of them, have come down to us, some from a very early and others from a late period of Greek classical literature. Those which passed by the name of Homer2were already old in the time of Thucydides. They are mythological poems (several of them long), in hexameter verse—some very interesting. That to Apollo contains a traditionary history of the origin and progress of the Delphic worship; those on Hermes and on Dionysus are marked by much liveliness and poetical fancy. Hymns of a like general character, but of less interest (though these also embody some fine poetical traditions of the Greek mythology, such as the story of Teiresias, and that of the wanderings of Leto), were written in the 3rd century before Christ, by Callimachus of Cyrene. Cleanthes, the successor of Zeno, composed (also in hexameters) an “excellent and devout hymn” (as it is justly called by Cudworth, in hisIntellectual System) to Zeus, which is preserved in theEclogaeof Stobaeus, and from which Aratus borrowed the words, “For we are also His offspring,” quoted by St Paul at Athens. The so-called Orphic hymns, in hexameter verse, styledτελεταί, or hymns of initiation into the “mysteries” of the Hellenic religion, are productions of the Alexandrian school,—as to which learned men are not agreed whether they are earlier or later than the Christian era.

The Romans did not adopt the word “hymn”; nor have we many Latin poems of the classical age to which it can properly be applied. There are, however, a few—such as the simple and graceful “Dianae sumus in fide” (“Dian’s votaries are we”) of Catullus, and “Dianam tenerae dicite virgines” (“Sing to Dian, gentle maidens”) of Horace—which approach much more nearly than anything Hellenic to the form and character of modern hymnody.

2.Hebrew Hymnody.—For the origin and idea of Christian hymnody we must look, not to Gentile, but to Hebrew sources. St Augustine’s definition of a hymn, generally accepted by Christian antiquity, may be summed up in the words, “praise to God with song” (“cum cantico”); Bede understood the “canticum” as properly requiring metre; though he thought that what in its original language was a true hymn might retain that character in an unmetrical translation. Modern use has enlarged the definition; Roman Catholic writers extend it to the praises of saints; and the word now comprehends rhythmical prose as well as verse, and prayer and spiritual meditation as well as praise.

The modern distinction between psalms and hymns is arbitrary (seePsalms). The former word was used by the LXX. as a generic designation, probably because it implied an accompaniment by the psaltery (said by Eusebius to have been of very ancient use in the East) or other instruments. The cognate verb “psallere” has been constantly applied to hymns, both in the Eastern and in the Western Church; and the same compositions which they described generically as “psalms” were also called by the LXX. “odes” (i.e.songs) and “hymns.” The latter word occurs,e.g.in Ps. lxxii. 20 (“the hymns of David the son of Jesse”), in Ps. lxv. 1, and also in the Greek titles of the 6th, 54th, 55th, 67th and 76th (this numbering of the psalms being that of the English version, not of the LXX.). The 44th chapter of Ecclesiasticus, “Let us now praise famous men,” &c., is entitled in the Greekπατέρων ὕμνος, “The Fathers’ Hymn.” Bede speaks of the whole book of Psalms as called “liber hymnorum,” by the universal consent of Hebrews, Greeks and Latins.

In the New Testament we find our Lord and His apostles singing a hymn (ὑμνήσαντες ἐξῆλθον), after the institution of the Lord’s Supper; St Paul and Silas doing the same (ὕμνουν τὸν θεόν) in their prison at Philippi; St James recommending psalm-singing (ψαλλέτω), and St Paul “psalms and hymns and spiritual songs” (ψαλμοῖς καὶ ὕμνοις καὶ ῲδαῖς πνευματικαῖς) St Paul also, in the 14th chapter of the first epistle to the Corinthians, speaks of singing (ψαλῶ) and of every man’s psalm (ἕκαστος ὑμῶν ψαλμὸν ἕχει). In a context which plainly has reference to the assemblies of the Corinthian Christians for common worship. All the words thus used were applied by the LXX. to the Davidical psalms; it is therefore possible that these only may be intended, in the different places to which we have referred. But there are in St Paul’s epistles several passages (Eph. v. 14; 1 Tim. iii. 16; 1 Tim. vi. 15, 16; 2 Tim. ii. 11, 12) which have so much of the form and character of later Oriental hymnody as to have been supposed by Michaelis and others to be extracts from original hymns of the Apostolic age. Two of them are apparently introduced as quotations, though not found elsewhere in the Scriptures. A third has not only rhythm, but rhyme. The thanksgiving prayer of the assembled disciples, recorded in Acts iv., is both in substance and in manner poetical;and in the canticles, “Magnificat,” “Benedictus,” &c., which manifestly followed the form and style of Hebrew poetry, hymns or songs, proper for liturgical use, have always been recognized by the church.

3.Eastern Church Hymnody.—The hymn of our Lord, the precepts of the apostles, the angelic song at the nativity, and “Benedicite omnia opera” are referred to in a curious metrical prologue to the hymnary of the Mozarabic Breviary as precedents for the practice of the Western Church. In this respect, however, the Western Church followed the Eastern, in which hymnody prevailed from the earliest times.

Philo describes the Theraputae (q.v.) of the neighbourhood of Alexandria as composers of original hymns, which (as well as old) were sung at their great religious festivals—the people listening in silence till they came to the closingTherapeutae.strains, or refrains, at the end of a hymn or stanza (the “acroteleutia” and “ephymnia”), in which all, women as well as men, heartily joined. These songs, he says, were in various metres (for which he uses a number of technical terms); some were choral, some not; and they were divided into variously constructed strophes or stanzas. Eusebius, who thought that the Theraputae were communities of Christians, says that the Christian practice of his own day was in exact accordance with this description.

The practice, not only of singing hymns, but of singing them antiphonally, appears, from the well-known letter of Pliny to Trajan, to have been established in the Bithynian churches at the beginning of the 2nd century. TheyAntiphonal singing.were accustomed “stato die ante lucem convenire, carmenque Christo, quasi Deo, diceresecum invicem.” This agrees well, in point of time, with the tradition recorded by the historian Socrates, that Ignatius (who suffered martyrdom aboutA.D.107) was led by a vision or dream of angels singing hymns in that manner to the Holy Trinity to introduce antiphonal singing into the church of Antioch, from which it quickly spread to other churches. There seems to be an allusion to choral singing in the epistle of Ignatius himself to the Romans, where he exhorts them, “χορὸς γελῳδίαν” (“having formed themselves into a choir”), to “sing praise to the Father in Christ Jesus.” A statement of Theodoret has sometimes been supposed to refer the origin of antiphonal singing to a much later date; but this seems to relate only to the singing of Old Testament Psalms (τὴν Δαυιδικὴν μελῳδίαν), the alternate chanting of which, by a choir divided into two parts, was (according to that statement) first introduced into the church of Antioch by two monks famous in the history of their time, Flavianus and Diodorus, under the emperor Constantius II.

Other evidence of the use of hymns in the 2nd century is contained in a fragment of Caius, preserved by Eusebius, which refers to “all the psalms and odes written by faithful brethren from the beginning,” as “hymning Christ, the2nd century.Word of God, as God.” Tertullian also, in his description of the “Agapae,” or love-feasts, of his day, says that, after washing hands and bringing in lights, each man was invited to come forward and sing to God’s praise something either taken from the Scriptures or of his own composition (“ut quisque de Sacris Scripturis vel proprio ingenio potest”). George Bull, bishop of St David’s, believed one of those primitive compositions to be the hymn appended by Clement of Alexandria to hisPaedagogus; and Archbishop Ussher considered the ancient morning and evening hymns, of which the use was enjoined by theApostolical Constitutions, and which are also mentioned in the “Tract on Virginity” printed with the works of St Athanasius, and in St Basil’s treatise upon the Holy Spirit, to belong to the same family. Clement’s hymn, in a short anapaestic metre, beginningστόμιον πώλων ἀδαῶν(or, according to some editions,βασιλεῦ ἁγίων, λόγε πανδαμάτωρ—translated by the Rev. A. Chatfield, “O Thou, the King of Saints, all-conquering Word”), is rapid, spirited and well-adapted for singing. The Greek “Morning Hymn” (which, as divided into verses by Archbishop Ussher in his treatiseDe Symbolis, has a majestic rhythm, resembling a choric or dithyrambic strophe) is the original form of “Gloria in Excelsis,” still said or sung, with some variations, in all branches of the church which have not relinquished the use of liturgies. The Latin form of this hymn (of which that in the English communion office is an exact translation) is said, by Bede and other ancient writers, to have been brought into use at Rome by Pope Telesphorus, as early as the time of the emperor Hadrian. A third, the Vesper or “Lamp-lighting” hymn (“φῶς ἱλαρὸν ἁγίας δόξης”—translated by Canon Bright “Light of Gladness, Beam Divine”), holds its3rd century.place to this day in the services of the Greek rite. In the 3rd century Origen seems to have had in his mind the words of some other hymns or hymn of like character, when he says (in his treatiseAgainst Celsus): “We glorify in hymns God and His only begotten Son; as do also the Sun, the Moon, the Stars and all the host of heaven. All these, in one Divine chorus, with the just among men, glorify in hymns God who is over all, and His only begotten Son.” So highly were these compositions esteemed in the Syrian churches that the council which deposed Paul of Samosata from the see of Antioch in the time of Aurelian justified that act, in its synodical letter to the bishops of Rome and Alexandria, on this ground (among others) that he had prohibited the use of hymns of that kind, by uninspired writers, addressed to Christ.

After the conversion of Constantine, the progress of hymnody became closely connected with church controversies. There had been in Edessa, at the end of the 2nd or early in the 3rd century, a Gnostic writer of conspicuous ability, named Bardesanes, who was succeeded, as the head of his sect or school, by his son Harmonius. Both father and son wrote hymns, and set them to agreeable melodies, which acquired, and in the 4th century still retained, much local popularity. Ephraem Syrus, the first voluminous hymn-writer whose works remain to us, thinking that the same melodies might be made useful to the faith, if adapted to more orthodox words, composed to them a large number of hymns in the Syriac language, principally in tetrasyllabic, pentasyllable and heptasyllabic metres, divided into strophes of from 4 to 12, 16 and even 20 lines each. When a strophe contained five lines, the fifth was generally an “ephymnium,” detached in sense, and consisting of a prayer, invocation, doxology or the like, to be sung antiphonally, either in full chorus or by a separate part of the choir. TheSyriac Chrestomathyof August Hahn (Leipzig, 1825), and the third volume of H. A. Daniel’sThesaurus Hymnologicus(Leipzig, 1841-1856), contain specimens of these hymns. Some of them have been translated into (unmetrical) English by the Rev. Henry Burgess (Select Metrical Hymns of Ephrem Syrus, &c., 1853). A considerable number of those so translated are on subjects connected with death, resurrection, judgment, &c., and display not only Christian faith and hope, but much simplicity and tenderness of natural feeling. Theodoret speaks of the spiritual songs of Ephraem as very sweet and profitable, and as adding much, in his (Theodoret’s) time, to the brightness of the commemorations of martyrs in the Syrian Church.

The Greek hymnody contemporary with Ephraem followed, with some licence, classical models. One of its favourite metres was the Anacreontic; but it also made use of the short anapaestic, Ionic, iambic and other lyrical measures, as well as the hexameter and pentameter. Its principal authors were Methodius, bishop of Olympus, who died aboutA.D.311, Synesius, who became bishop of Ptolemais in Cyrenaica in 410, and Gregory Nazianzen, for a short time (380-381) patriarch of Constantinople. The merits of these writers have been perhaps too much depreciated by the admirers of the later Greek “Melodists.” They have found an able English translator in the Rev. Allen Chatfield (Songs and Hymns of Earliest Greek Christian Poets, London, 1876). Among the most striking of their works areμνώεο Χριστέ(“Lord Jesus, think of me”), by Synesius;σὲ τὸν ἄφθιτον μονάρχην(“O Thou, the One Supreme”) andτί σοι θέλεις γενέσθαι(“O soul of mine, repining”), by Gregory; alsoἄνωθεν παρθένοι(“The Bridegroom cometh”), by Methodius. There continued to be Greek metrical hymn-writers, in a similar style, till a much later date. Sophronius, patriarch of Jerusalemin the 7th century, wrote seven Anacreontic hymns; and St John Damascene, one of the most copious of the second school of “Melodists,” was also the author of some long compositions in trimeter iambics.

An important development of hymnody at Constantinople arose out of the Arian controversy. Early in the 4th century Athanasius had rebuked, not only the doctrine of Arius, but the light character of certain hymns by which hePeriod of Arian controversy.endeavoured to make that doctrine popular. When, towards the close of that century (398), St John Chrysostom was raised to the metropolitan see, the Arians, who were still numerous at Constantinople, had no places of worship within the walls; but they were in the habit of coming into the city at sunset on Saturdays, Sundays and the greater festivals, and congregating in the porticoes and other places of public resort, where they sung, all night through, antiphonal songs, with “acroteleutia” (closing strains, or refrains), expressive of Arian doctrine, often accompanied by taunts and insults to the orthodox. Chrysostom was apprehensive that this music might draw some of the simpler church people to the Arian side; he therefore organized, in opposition to it, under the patronage and at the cost of Eudoxia, the empress of Arcadius (then his friend), a system of nightly processional hymn-singing, with silver crosses, wax-lights and other circumstances of ceremonial pomp. Riots followed, with bloodshed on both sides, and with some personal injury to the empress’s chief eunuch, who seems to have officiated as conductor or director of the church musicians. This led to the suppression, by an imperial edict, of all public Arian singing; while in the church the practice of nocturnal hymn-singing on certain solemn occasions, thus first introduced, remained an established institution.

It is not improbable that some rudiments of the peculiar system of hymnody which now prevails throughout the Greek communion, and whose affinities are rather to the Hebrew and Syriac than to the classical forms, mayGreek system of hymnody.have existed in the church of Constantinople, even at that time. Anatolius, patriarch of Constantinople in the middle of the 5th century, was the precursor of that system; but the reputation of being its proper founder belongs to Romanos, of whom little more is known than that he wrote hymns still extant, and lived towards the end of that century. The importance of that system in the services of the Greek church may be understood from the fact that Dr J. M. Neale computed four-fifths of the whole space (about 5000 pages) contained in the different service-books of that church to be occupied by hymnody, all in a language or dialect which has ceased to be anywhere spoken.

Back to Index Next