316 THE entomologist's record. 



afterwards restricted tlie use of this name to the Luttertlies. Tlie 

 great Professor soon recognised the necessity of dividing these into 

 gi'oups, but made several attempts before he reached his final con- 

 clusions. In the second edition of the Systevia Naiune (1740) he placed 

 first, and by themselves, those butterflies which have only four legs 

 (Nymphalids), the rest he distributed among four groups according to 

 the character of the wings. In the Fauna Suecica (1746) he only made 

 two groups, the first composed of those which had foiu" serviceable legs, 

 the other of those with six. Two years later, in the sixth edition of 

 the Systema, he divided each of these groups into two according as 

 their wings were angled or rounded. In all these earlier attempts the 

 Nymphalids are placed first, but when we come to the tenth edition 

 (1758) in which his final conclusions are embodied they have given 

 jilace to the Papilionids. In this last-mentioned work Linnauis divided 

 the genus Papilio into five groups, which correspond, to a large extent, 

 with those which in later times have received the designation of 

 families, basing his classification upon superficial characters furnished 

 by the imago. First came Eqiutes, consisting entirely of the Swallow- 

 tails and their allies, and sub-divided into Troes and Achivi ; next 

 followed Heliconii in which the only British species are crata'gi and the 

 doubtfully indigenous apollo ; then Danai, sub-divided into Candidi 

 containing the Whites and Yellows, and Festivi, the only indigenous 

 species in which is hyperanthus ; next came Nymphnles, sub-divided 

 into Gemmati containing the remaining Satyrs as Avell as io, cardui and 

 iris, and Plialcrati containing the rest of the Nymphs ; the last gTouj) 

 was called Fleheii and was sub-divided into Eurales, constituted of 

 Lyceenids, and Urhicolce of Skippers. It is interesting to note thus 

 early the separation of cratcegi from the other Whites, and of liyperan- 

 this from the Satyrs. 



Already however, in his English Moths and Butterflies published in 

 1749, Benj. Wilkes had propounded a classification of Lepidoptera, based 

 upon the larva?. He placed the butterflies last and divided tliem as 

 follows: — A. Smooth Caterpillars Avithout protuberances (iiinchaon, 

 rhamni) ; B. Caterpillars having little hair — 1. Producing round- 

 winged butterflies (Whites), 2. Producing scalloped-winged butterflies 

 (Satyrs), 3. Producing butterflies with lai-ge heads and bodies (Skipper); 

 C. Caterpillars armed with spikes, whose jDupa hangs by the tail (Vanessas 

 and Fritillaries) ; D. Caterpillars shaped like wood-lice (Hair-streaks). 

 At the end, under the heading " Caterpillars producing butterflies whose 

 generation is unknown," which I suppose means that he had not found 

 the larvae, are placed the Blue Argus and the Purple Highflier. In 

 1762, Geoffroi, of Paris, adopted the two groups of the Fauna Suecica, 

 but sub-divided the former into three, as follows : — A. Species with a 

 spiny larva and angulated wings (Vanessas) ; B. Species with a spiny 

 larva and rounded wings (Fritillaries) ; C. Species with a smooth larva 

 and with the front wings of the imago short but not tippet-like 

 (Satyrs). 



Moses Harris was the first to give generic value and generic names 

 to the gi-oups into which he divided the British s^iecies. His scheme 

 of classification was set forth in An Essay preceding a SappAement to the 

 Aurelian, which is undated, but Avhich, from internal evidence, seems 

 to have been published about 1775 ; the work, however, never seems to 

 have become widely known. Taking the neuration of the wings as his 



