CALIGID.E. 259 



standing this, his description of the genus and the two 

 species which he gives is better than any that had as yet 

 appeared. 



Geoffroy described and figured, in his 'Insectes de Paris,' 

 1764, a small crustacean, under the name of Binoculus 

 hamisphaericus. It bears some resemblance to a Caligus, 

 and Linnaeus, in the 'Syst. Nat.,' twelfth edition, quotes 

 it as a synonym for his Monoc. piscinus. This is repeated 

 by Fabricius, in his work already quoted, ' Entomologia 

 Systematica,' 1793, and in the Supplement to the work, 

 1798. It is not, however, a Caligus, but a different 

 genus altogether, to which Latreille has given the name 

 of Prosopistoma. Manuel, in the ' Encyclopedic method.,' 

 1792, avoids this faulty reference, but falls into the error 

 of his predecessors with regard to the Argulus. 



Cuvier mentions the Calygus in his ' Tableau ele- 

 mentaire,' 1798; and Latreille, in his 'Hist. Nat. Crust. 

 et Ins./ 1802 3 presents us with a lengthened account of 

 the genus, giving all the details made known to us pre- 

 viously by Muller and others. Risso, in his ' Hist. Nat. 

 des Crust, des Envir. de Nice,' 1816, and in his 'Hist. 

 Nat. de 1'Europe rnerid.,' 1826, mentions several species 

 belonging to the Caligidse ; Tilesius, in a paper in the 

 ' Mem. de 1'Acad. Imp. des Scien. de St. Petersbourg,' 

 1815, details at some length Muller' s two species, and 

 adds some interesting notices of a number of creatures 

 allied to this family, as connected with the luminosity of 

 the sea ; and Lamarck, in the first edition of his ' Hist. 

 Nat. des Anim. sans Verteb.,' 1818, describes shortly the 

 few species previously made known to us. Amidst this 

 host of continental authors, no British zoologist appears, 

 with the exception of Dr. Leach. In his article " Crus- 

 taceology," in the 'Edinburgh Encyclopaedia,' 1814; in 

 his article " Annulosa," in the Supplement to the ' Encyc. 

 Britann.,' 1816 ; and still later, in the article " Entomos- 

 traca," in the 'Diet, des Scien. Nat.,' 1819, he describes 

 the genus, and introduces, apparently for the first time, 

 a British species. 



