EVOLUTION OF OUR KNOWLEDGE OF THE ICHNEUIIONIDAE. 17 



monographs upon the (iattiDKicn — Ichneumon (18G8), Camimjilcx 

 (id.), and Flcctisciis (1871) ; l:>ut it is in the erection of genera that the 

 Professor was especially prolific, and he issued a conspectus of the 

 entire group in this manner, which was not, however, adopted for a 

 very great many years''', hut has recently come to the front as heing, if 

 more difficult to follow, at least of much greater scientific worth than 

 was that of Gravenhorst. 



Space forhids more than bare mention of present-day workers — 

 Brischke, Boie, Kriechbaumer and Schmiedeknecht in Germany, Tschek 

 in Austria, Berthoumieu and Ferris in France, Tosquinet in Belgium, 

 the late Van Vollenhoven in Holland, Motschulsky and Woldstedt in 

 Kussia, Ashmead and Cresson in the United States, Provancher in 

 Canada, and a host of others are at length bringing the study to 

 something resembling the comparative perfection achieved in the other 

 orders of insects. 



This perfection, or rather, perhaps, a knowledge of such perfection 

 as exists, has recently — within the last year or two — been brought 

 clearly before us by the great systematist, the late Professor Thomson, 

 in his Opiiscula Entomolo(iica (18G9-97), the most noteworthy points of 

 which (so far as it concerns us) are his divisions of Graven hoist's 

 second family, which, with the exception of Taschenberg's revision of 

 the actual types in I860, had remained nearly in its primitive condition 

 and his farther subdivision of the cumbersome genus Iclmeiunon, of 

 which Holmgren had described 123 species from Sweden alone in his 

 first volume, Avhile 143 are recorded from Britain. Thomson was a 

 prolific author, as is evidenced in his very original rcsioii/' of various 

 genera {('.</., Mi'topiun, MesocJtoriiK, IcJineuwun, Sec), in the J\'ut. Knt. 

 Zeitschrift, and Ann. Soc. Ent. France. 



But what have we done in Britain? Viewing our work impartially, 

 it has been, to say the least, spasmodic. Curtis, Stephens and Haliday 

 (1823-40), working entirely on the Gravenhorstian system, described a 

 few new species and many old ones in Illnstrations Brit. Kntomohxjii, 

 and the Ann. Nat. History. After a lapse of about sixteen years, 

 Desvignes published a catalogue of those species he had arranged (after 

 Gravenhorst) in the British Museum, and in 1862, descriptions of a 

 dozen species of /)rt.s.s»x {Tri/jihonidat'), not found in Gravenhorst's work, 

 five of which had already been recognised by Holmgren. Another 

 eight years and Marshall gave us his Catalofiucs, containing but bare 

 names of the British species; twoyears later appearedhis ISl'ISi/noni/mic 

 Cataloi/ue, laying firm the foundation upon Avhich to place such kinds 

 as were then known to occur with us. Therewith assisted, Bridgman 

 and Fitch commenced in 1880, in the Entmnoloijiiit, to present a series 

 of analytical tables of our species with meagre details, which, never- 

 theless, were of the greatest assistance to isolated students, but they 

 were unfortunately unable to complete the series which abruptly 

 terminates in the middle of Gravenhorst's third family. Contem- 

 poraneously with the above, Bridgman published, from time to time in 

 the Trans. Ent. Soc. London, descriptions of a few new species and 



* So little, indeed, was it known that Bridgman described the genus Phrudu^ 

 as new (cf. Trans. Ent. Soc. London, 188G, p. iHJl), upon the suggestion of Professor 

 Thomson, who was evidently unaware of Forster's erection {Verh. pr, BJieinl., 1808, 

 p. 196). 



