10 



SOME ACCOUNT OF THE PRINCIPAL WORKS ON ENTOMOLOGY. 



By Peter Rylands, Esq. 

 A volume, as Mr. Neville Wood justly remarks, would be necessary to 

 contain satisfactory notices of all the works which have been published on Ento- 

 mology. This, however, does not appear requisite, and probably a chapter 

 devoted to a brief retrospect of a few of the more important, will be of the desired 

 use to the student. 



For a long period after the time of Aristotle, whose labours have already 

 been sufficiently commented upon (Vol. II., p. 463), Entomology shared the 

 neglect with which other branches of Natural History were treated. Of the 

 authors who contributed to its partial revival in the sixteenth, and commence- 

 ment of the seventeenth century, Freuzius, Mouffat, Jonston, Aldrovan- 

 dus, and Goedart may be mentioned — their works are now only valuable as 

 curiosities. There was one, however, at this early period, zealously engaged in 

 prosecuting the same study, the result of whose labours remains of real worth at 

 the present day. This was the celebrated John Swammerdam, whose Biblia 

 Naturai appeared in 1728, several years after its author's death. An English 

 translation by Floyd was published in 1758, and remains a standard authority. 

 Cotemporary with Swammerdam were Rhedi, Borel, Bononio, Bonanni, and 

 Joblot, who also directed their attention to the physiology of insects, but their 

 works, although once valuable, may now be dispensed with. 



In the early part of the eighteenth century Entomology continued to excite the 

 attention of philosophers, as between the years 1700 and 1730 various works 

 devoted to it were written by Albin, Ray, Willughby, Petiver, Bradley,. 

 Valisnieri, and others. None of these, although once much esteemed, are now 

 regarded as authorities. 



We have now arrived at the commencement of an important era in the his- 

 tory of the science, caused by the publication, in 1735, of the Sy sterna Natures. 

 of Linnaeus, which is familiar to all, and therefore needs no comment here'' 

 especially as it is noticed in Mr. Wood's" paper ; to the observations of that gen- 

 tleman, I would only add my conviction that much of the difficulty experienced 

 by students, in attaining a knowledge of modern classifications, would be removed 

 if previous to commencing the study ot them, that of the great Swede was per- 

 fectly understood, — and an acquaintance with it by a little assiduity and per- 

 severance may soon be obtained. Rcesel, Edwards, Reaumur, Drury, Sul- 

 zer, Sepp, Scopoli, and De Geer, followed the example of Linnaeus, by pub- 

 lishing works on the science which he had so greatly benefitted. Many of these 

 remain at the present time standard authorities. Me moires pour servir a I'His- 



2c 



