with Observations on the General Arrangement of the Articulata. 273 



The division of the Myriapoda into tribes and genera has been subject to as 

 much difference of opinion as their establishment as a distinct class, and the 

 assignment of their position in the animal kingdom. Lamarck, who arranged 

 them with the Arachnida, divided them at first into three genera, Scolopendraj 

 Scutigera and lulus, and subsequently added a fourth genus, Polly xenus. La- 

 treille in his later works removed them from true Insects, among which he had 

 originally placed them, and constituted them into an order of the Arachnida, 

 dividing them into two families, Chilognatha and Syngnatha. Dr. Leach 

 adopted these families as distinct orders. He divided the first into three 

 families, Glomeridce, lulidce and Polydesmidce ; and the second into two, 

 Scolopendridce and Geophilidce. Subsequently to this Latreille* divided the 

 class into the orders Chilognatha and Chilopoda. These were adopted by 

 Gervaisf, but were redivided by that naturalist, the former into the Onis- 

 coidece and lulidece, and the latter into Scutigeridece and Scolopendridece. 

 But before the production of Gervais' arrangement M. Brandt had begun 

 to rearrange the class ;}:, and had proposed to divide the Chilognatha into 

 sections, which were again divided into families and genera. Subsequently 

 to this, on finding that the organs of nutrition in some species were espe- 

 cially adapted for taking liquid food, he proposed to divide the class into 

 the Myriapoda manducantia and Myriapoda sugentia, and he has recently 

 republished his valuable observations on this subject §. Still more recently 

 M. Lucas II has published an arrangement of the class, and has followed the 

 views adopted by Gervais, with a slight alteration of the names of the families. 

 The arrangement proposed by Brandt is by far the most natural that has yet 

 appeared, and is of great value so far as regards the division into families and 

 genera. But I fully agree with Lucas, in his late observations^, that the 

 existence of a genus of siphonophorous Myriapods closely allied to Scolo- 

 pendra necessarily tends greatly to modify the views of Brandt in regard to 

 the division of the class in the manner proposed by him. Added to this, it 



* Cours d'Entomologie, 1831. f Loc. cit. 



X Bulletin de la Soc. Imperiale des Nat, de Moscou, torn, vi., 1833, p. 194, &c, 

 § Recueil de M^moires, &c. 



II Hist. Nat. des Crustac^s, des Arachnides et des Myriapodes, torn, iv,, 1840. 

 % Annales de la Soci6t6 Entomologique de France, deuxieme s6rie, t. i., 1843, p. 50. 



