344 Rev. F. D. Morice and J. H. Durrant on the 



there for the first time ; others are repeated from the 

 author's earlier ivorks, and of these some were not first 

 proposed by Fabricius, but by Linne. All these, however, 

 when cited by Panzer, are accredited to Fabricius ; and 

 when writing of them collectively, he calls them the 

 " Fabrician Genera " [Fabriciussche in 1801, Fabriziussche 

 (sic) in 1806 !]. Every single Generic Name adopted for a 

 Hymenopteron in Fn. Ent. Germ, up to 1799 is taken 

 straight from Ent. Syst. or its Supplement, and is used, or 

 meant to be used, exactly in the Fabrician sense. 



But, about 1799, Panzer began to fall under a new- 

 influence, tending in a measure to draw him away from 

 his former absolute dependence on Fabricius. He was 

 getting into more and more frequent and intimate corre- 

 spondence with an incomparably better Hymenopterist 

 than Fabricius; with a man, in fact, who was the first 

 real specialist on that Order ; and who already, after man}^ 

 years' study of the subject, had practically completed an 

 independent and highly original revision of the Order, 

 relying especially on a character which Fabricius had left 

 unnoticed, viz. the differences in " neuration '' of their 

 wings. 



This new friend of Panzer's lived in 1799 at Bern ; but 

 soon after he removed to Geneva, where he became a 

 Professor in its University, and there — but not till 1807 — 

 published, in its final form, the magnificent work, which 

 he had practicallv completed, and even announced for 

 pubhcation. in 1799. {Cf. Jurine, Nouvelle Methode. 1807, 

 p. 13, foot-note.) 



Jurine's Notivelle Methode, as it appeared in 1807, was 

 (1) incomparably the most beautifully illustrated work 

 dealing with Hymenoptera in existence, (2) a work intro- 

 ducing several entirely original characterisations of (^^enera. 

 many of which remain to this day as foundations on which 

 all systematists in dealing with this Order mainly build. 

 But its real importance in entomological literature depends 

 on neither of the above facts, but rather upon this — It 

 ousted altogether (not at once, but within a very few years 

 after its publication !) Fabricius and his " Systema "' 

 from the supremacy they had held so long. [Fabricius 

 died in 1808, it is said from grief at the British bombard- 

 ment of Copenhagen in 1807.] A new " Systema " had 

 appeared, which on the whole may be said to have 

 held the field ever since; though some of our best 



