FINIS.

R. CLAY, PRINTER, BREAD-STREET-HILL.

DIRECTIONS FOR PLACING THE DIAGRAMS.

1. The Classes of Insecta to face page 21.

2. The Sub-classes of Lepidoptera to face page 31.

3. The Natural Order of Cossi to face page 52.

Footnotes

  [1]

Sesiæ Europeæ, p. 18. Obser.

  [2]

Linn. Syst. Nat. T. I. Pars. II. p. 804.

  [3]

The system of Lamarck.

  [4]

Linnæus.

  [5]

Horæ Entomologicæ, preface, p. xxiv.

  [6]

A systematic catalogue.

  [7]

Genesis i. 27.

  [8]

Genesis ii. 3.

  [9]

Translation of Cuvier by Griffith, Vol. I. p. 64, note. Cuvier has since adopted the number four.

  [10]

Introduction to Entomology, Vol. III. p. 15, note.

  [11]

By Mr. Vigors. Linnæan Transactions.

  [12]

It will be observed that in the Mollusca, Radiata, and Acrita of MacLeay, all attempts to employ a particular number in grouping will be found futile, a circumstance obviously attributable to our ignorance; and the only conclusion to be drawn from it is this: that, as these tribes can never be rendered available for any numerical distribution, so they can never be fairly and satisfactorily adduced in refutation of such a distribution.

  [13]

That of Aristotle.

  [14]

I am fully aware that this part of the subject is far above the comprehension of man, and felt exceedingly reluctant to carry system farther than the two great groups—animals and vegetables; but alluding, as I am compelled to do so frequently, to the works of Mr. MacLeay, I was fearful lest my silence on this particular subject should be construed into consent. See Horæ Entomologicæ, p. 179.

  [15]

In Britain we labour under another difficulty in this respect, a difficulty which has proved beyond measure mortifying during the progress of the present essay,—the want of a national museum.—A private individual cannot be expected to sacrifice all his time and money in procuring, preparing, and arranging, a tolerably perfect collection; a writer on natural history is, therefore, compelled to travel round to two or three hundred private collections, and solicit leave to make his memoranda. Few men of taste can regret the purchase of the ancient works of art now open to the public at the British Museum; but the immense sums of public money granted to that institution should insure the naturalist a similar treat with the artist. A collection of vertebrate and annulose animals should be immediately formed, arranged, and named after Cuvier, Latreille, or the most approved authority of the day. Among the insecta, I have no doubt a tolerably perfect—certainly, a very useful—collection might with little trouble be made from the specimens already in the Museum.

  [16]

Horæ Entomologicæ, preface, p. xiii.

  [17]

I have invariably used the term class, to designate the orders of Linnæus, and sub-class, for the next division, of which seven are supposed to exist in every class: these sub-classes may sometimes constitute natural orders, in which case a plural termination is given; thus, Blatta constitutes in itself a sub-class Blatta, a natural order Blattæ, and a genus Blatta; but generally a sub-class will contain seven natural orders; as sub-class Scarabæus contains natural orders—Lucani, Coprides, Scarabæi, Histeres, &c.

  [18]

The only question as to the contents of insecta, is, whether the pediculi are true insects or not; the class Hemiptera is so closely related to them, that I cannot think it a great violation to place them in the outermost circle of that class; the acari may be supposed meeting them in an adjoining circle, but I have no desire to provoke controversy on this minor point.

  [19]

Annulosa Javanica, preface, p. xi.

  [20]

The learned authors of the Introduction to Entomology have inserted a sketch of the Aristotelian system in that work, a reference to which will convince the reader that it is next to impossible for the entomologist to over-rate him. See Introduction to Entomology, Vol. IV. p. 433.

  [21]

Introduction to Entomology, Vol. III. pp. 1-51.

  [22]

And, be it observed, Haustellata merely means not mandibulate; it does not propose to assert that the contents of the tribe so named need have a particular kind of haustellate mouth, or any mouth at all.

  [23]

Mr. MacLeay has written a little pamphlet on the impropriety of the dichotomous system, which I recollect reading, when published, with considerable pleasure. I forget its title.

  [24]

If the reader happen to be unacquainted with the terms which I have used in characterizing the mouth, he will find them accurately and elaborately described in Ind. to Ent. Vol. III. p. 393, et seq. The orders of Fabricius depend entirely on the formation of the mouth. See Systema Entomologiæ.

  [25]

Horæ Entomologicæ, p. 367.

  [26]

Horæ Entomologicæ, p. 518.

  [27]

See the Table.

  [28]

In Cloëon.

  [29]

Introduction to Entomology, Vol. II. p. 32.

  [30]

For a beautiful and accurate figure and dissections of this rare insect, see Curtis's Entomology, pl. 226: for a popular figure, Professor-edly of the same insect, see Insect Transformations, p. 67.

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring.

  [31]

Monographia Apum, Vol. II. p. 168.

  [32]

Particularly in the sections of Papilio.

  [33]

Linnæus.

  [34]

I mean each species labelled with a name.

  [35]

British collections.

  [36]

Latreille seems to think this to have been a deception, and that the antennæ which Godart found on the insect did not belong to it. I cannot suppose that the latter author could have been so grossly deceived.

  [37]

Volatu vespertino, Lin.

  [38]

Ochsenheimer places Oo in this genus, and I observe Mr. Stephens confines the genus to that one species. Mr. Curtis places Oo in the genus Bombycia: this confusion of genera is very puzzling, but I hope, by mentioning species, to make myself understood. Oo is not at all applicable to my purpose.

  [39]

Perhaps Noctua Lambda.

  [40]

Of Mr. Curtis's Guide. I cannot consider fasciaria, Mr. Curtis's next species, at all allied.

  [41]

Alcis. Curtis.

  [42]

Linnæus.

  [43]

I regret not having Dr. Horsfield's work to refer to; but I believe I am perfectly safe in stating from memory that these seven he considered typed in the genera, Saturnia, Lasiocampa, Cossus, Cerura, Arctia, Laria, and Limacodes: two of these he manages to unite to other two, in order to reduce the number to five, but I forget which.

  [44]

As the genera which I must mention ought necessarily to be drawn entirely from one work, in consequence of authors differing as to their contents, I have adopted those in Mr. Curtis's Guide, invariably: below is a list of the genera he has given in this section, with my own idea of their situation attached to each, and the addition of six genera, which Mr. Curtis does not consider as belonging to the sub-class Phalænæ:

  [45]

See a Papilio with the antennæ of a Lasciocampa. Drury, Vol. III. pl. v.

  [46]

It is a most singular chance that these genera should have been placed so naturally, as the cause of this proximity has never before been even hinted at.

  [47]

Another type of Hepialus is figured in Drury, Vol. II. pl. xiii. 2.

  [48]

British Entomology, pl. 328.

  [49]

As the larva so decidedly forbids the introduction of this insect among the Notodontæ, and places it among the Noctuæ, it probably in some degree approaches Geometra pennaria in the adjoining sub-class.

  [50]

See note for the genera of Lithosia.

  [51]

Ent. Useful Com. p. 249.

  [52]

Saturnia carpini is the Pavonia minor of Linnæus, who, apparently, considered it a variety of a completely different species: the retention of a name thus originating in error is not justifiable.

  [53]

Drury has some fine figures of this order, particularly Vol. I. pl. xviii. 2; Vol. II. pl. v. 1, pl. vi. 2, pl. xi. 1, 2, pl. xiii. 2; Vol. III. pl. xix. pl. xxiv. pl. xxv. pl. xxxiv.

  [54]

No individual need say with more heartfelt sincerity—"Preserve me from my friends," than Mr. MacLeay; let the naturalist read the Horæ Entomologicæ, and he will pause in admiration at the vigorous, manly display of intellect, which, frankly and eagerly seeking truth, throws a golden lustre over every page; and, I confess, my eyes were opened to the suspicion that all was not pure gold, by the awkward and abortive attempts of commentators to prove it so. Puerile schemes of applying the quinary system in detail, and sundry vapourings about affinity and analogy, have so mystified these subjects, that they already totter to their very foundations, and must speedily fall; while the existence of circles must stand for ever as a discovery of which Britain is proud.

  [55]

This question has occurred.

  [56]

It is so long since I have seen Dr. Horsfield's beautiful work, that I will not pledge myself to the doctor's making this assertion.

  [57]

Règne Animal, tom. V. p. 395.