76 THE EEPORT OF THE No. 36 



workers, the origin and elaboration of wax, the nature of propolis, the manner 

 of constructing the cells and combs, and the ventilation of the hives. These dis- 

 coveries are all the more wonderful when we remember that during the first period 

 of his investigation Huber employed a half -educated assistant to make the necessary 

 observations and experiments. During the middle and later periods of his life 

 his talented wife and his son Pierre acted as his assistants. The latter made 

 contributions of his own on the habits of ants and bees. 



One of the first writers to give more attention to general habits and life 

 histories than to structure was Reaumur, (1683-1757). His " Histoire des 

 Insectes " gave a great impetus to the development of the scientific method of 

 research by observation and experiment, and is one of the great entomological 

 classics. Reaumur did not possess the manual skill for dissection or drawing 

 of Lyonnet, Malpighi of Swammerdam, and he had to employ artists to draw for 

 him. He possessed, however, great patience in observation and displayed much 

 ingenuity in his experiments. Besides, his pages show a charm of language which 

 made his volumes popular and gave them a wide reading. 



Baron Chas. De Geer (1720-1728) of Sweden, was an anatomist, physiologist, 

 and systematist, and his great memoirs on the "History of Insects" (7 volumes) 

 compare very favorably with those of Reaumur. " A pupil of Linnaeus and a great 

 admirer of Reaumur, he combined the systematic regularity of the one with tlie 

 experimental skill and patient observation of the other." His works have always 

 been considered a storehouse of important facts, clear descriptions, and enlightened 

 observations. They contain " descriptions of upwards of 1,500 insects, a general 

 history of their manners and metamorphoses and carefully executed engravings 

 filling 238 plates." 



Like Reaumur, De Geer was born to wealth, and had immediate command of 

 everything that could help him in his investigations. Compared with Reaumur 

 he was more concise and precise in detailing facts and vastly more methodical. 

 On the other hand he showed less skill in making and recording his observations 

 and experiments. 



Great Insect Systematists. 



Aristotle, as I have already observed, may be considered the first systematist, 

 and his classification remained practically unchanged until the 17th century, 

 when John Ray (1628-1705) made many important advances, bridging, as it were, 

 the Medievalist and the modern systems. Ray published systematic works on 

 both plants and animals, but his chief contributions were to botany. " He was 

 the first to define the use of the word " species " and to lay emphasis on anatomical 

 characteristics as a basis of classification." In his Methodus Insectorum the 

 Arachnida, Crustacea, Myriapoda and Annelida are grouped with the Hexapoda 

 under Inseeta. 



According to Ray, all similar individuals which show constant characters from 

 generation to generation, or which breed true, form a species. 



Carl Linnaeus (1707-1778) was a compatriot of De Geer. He was essentially 

 a systematist. Sachs says: "He might almost be said to have been a classifying, 

 co-ordinating, and subordinating machine." It is hard for us to realize the immense 

 service Linnaeus did for science by the introduction of some system of order 

 among the multitude of living things. 



Locy says : " The chief services of Linnaeus to natural science consisted of 

 these three things: bringing into current use the binomial nomenclature, the 



