188 
TWO PRINCIPAL WORKS OF ROBINEAU-DESVOIDY 
ists will therefore not expect perfection from me, the ideal of which, the 
more one studies, appears more distant. To grasp the number of specimens 
I describe it must be understood that I had the principal collections of 
Paris at my disposal. I owe to Messrs. A. Le Peletier de Saint-Fargeau, 
Audinet-Serville, and Blondel the knowledge of a large number of Parisian 
species, some of them with details concerning their habits. Mr. Carcel has 
communicated to me the result of his excursions in the ancient provinces of 
the Dauphine and Anjou. From Mr. G. Cuvier I obtained the obliging 
permission to describe the exotic species sent to the ‘ Jardin du Roi ’ by the 
travellers of this Institution. Finally, the richest and most interesting 
collection of Myodaires which I know of, and which for many years 
M. Latreille has been pleased to increase, the collection of Mr. le comte 
Dejean, has been opened to me with the courtesy and the particular atten¬ 
tions by which this celebrated entomologist is so honorably known. On all 
sides I met with willingness to be useful to science. But, before entering 
upon my subject, I beg Messrs. Latreille and de Blainville to accept the 
public testimony of my gratitude for the zeal, the advice, and the wise 
criticism with which their well-known ability has never ceased to encourage 
my work.” 
The above-quoted passage proves that, in consequence of the 
advice which Rob.-Desvoidy had received in the Report, lie had in¬ 
troduced some changes in his manuscript. In his first chapter he 
gives a definition of the Myodaires 1 (p. 45), and explains the 
terminology he had been using for the different parts of the head, 
the antennae, the proboscis, the venation, and the squamae. lie 
says that the peculiar nomenclature of the veins and cells of the 
wings which he adopted was recommended to him by M. de Blain¬ 
ville. He attempted to harmonize his work with the works of 
Fallen and Meigen. He did not succeed in getting access to the 
work of Fallen; but he was acquainted with his classification. 
About Meigen he says (p. 18) : “ Mr. Meigen, in Germany, pub¬ 
lished a very estimable work on the European Diptera. One who 
has studied these insects with as much care as this able naturalist 
1 I do not understand why Rob.-Desvoidy describes the amphipneustic charac¬ 
ter of the larvae of the Muscidae in terms which seem rather to refer to peri- 
pneustic larvae (“ larves h stigmates respiratoire situes le long du corps”; 
Myodaires, p. 4). The same terms are reproduced in Latin on the following page 5. 
They are repeated in the “ Histoire Naturelle ” (1863), p. 66. The latter passage occurs 
in the paragrapli which is merely copied from the Myodaires, and which I con¬ 
sider as an interpolation of the Editors. (Compare below.) 
