( 339 ) 



XII. The authorship and first pubhcatioii of the 

 " Jurinean " Genera of Hymenoptera : Being a 

 reprint of a long-lost work by Panzer, with a 

 translation into English, an Introduction, and 

 BibUographical and Critical notes. By the Rev. 

 F. D. MoRiCE, M.A., and Jno. Hartley Durrant. 



[Read December 3rd, 1913.] 



This papa- deals with a problem, which must first he solved, before 

 any attempt to fix the Generic Nomenclature of Hymenoptera according 

 to the principle of " Priority " can be accepted as final. The problem 

 is simply this — when were a number of Genera accredited by some 

 authorities to Panzer, and by others to J urine, first technically " pub- 

 lished ", and who was their real " author " ? 



We believe that a complete answer to both questions is supplied by 

 a long -forgotten Article, which is here reproduced by photographic 

 processes from the only copy of it whose existence we have been able to 

 discover. This Article was published at Erlangen in May 1801, and 

 contains inter alia a Synoptic List of the Panzer-Jurine Genera in 

 which they are compared with the Genera adopted by Fabricius in 

 Ent. Syst. Vol. 2 (1793) and its Supplementum (1798). We shall 

 refer to this Synopsis in future as the "Erlangen List," and give 

 reasons why J urine is to be considered the author of any Generic Name 

 made valid by it. 



This Article a'px>eared anonymously in two instalments in a weekly 

 'publication. But in a footnote on p. 7 of Krit. Rev. (1806) Panzer 

 acknowledges himself to have been its author, and his statement is 

 entirely borne out by internal evidence contained in the Article itself. 

 This, however does not apply to the Synoptic List above mentioned. 

 What Panzer claims in Krit. Rev., aiid what he manifestly has a 

 right to claim; is not the first publication of any Names at all (!) but 

 to have explained in this Article the method first devised by J urine 

 for classifying Hymenoptera, viz. the so-called " alary system " adopted 

 in J urine's Nouvelle Methode (a work first announced for publica- 

 tion in 1799, submitted to Panzer for insjiection at some time previous 

 to May 1801, and ultimately published at Geneva in 1807). 



The present writers were led to make the investigations which have 

 enabled them to republish these long -forgotten docximents as follows — • 



They were in correspondence as to the probable correctness or other- 

 wise of certain conclusions arrived at by Mr. Rohwer in his recent 

 publications dealing with the Genotypes of Sawjlies, and had arrived, 

 by different lines of argument, at the same result : viz. that while 

 Mr. Rohweis conclusions generally seemed to follow logically from 

 his premisses, certain of those premisses had been arrived at without 

 examination of all available evidence, and had therefore been accepted 



TRANS. ENT. SOC. LOND. 1914. — PARTS III, IV. (fEB.) Z 



