354 Rev. F. D. Morice and J. H. Diirrant on the 



Latreille proceeds to describe the form and contents of 

 Noiwelle Methode very fully and correctly; does full 

 justice to the splendour of the illustrations, and the general 

 excellence of the work ; compares its terminology with his 

 own ; and quotes the whole List of Genera as we now find 

 them there. He does not entirely endorse Jurine's views, 

 still insisting that, when all is said, the instrumenta cibaria 

 however minute, however difficult, etc., do yet supply the 

 primary characters, but his criticism is very temperate and 

 courteous, and he makes one entirely reasonable objection 

 to Jurine's Ordo III, viz. that it is a very mixed group and 

 requires, to make it satisfactory, much further subdivision. 

 This remark is certainly not unjustified, for the Ordo in 

 question besides Bees, Fossors, Ants, and Wasps, includes 

 likewise the Ichneumonidae and Braconidae, and also 

 Chrysis, Leucospis, and many minute parasitic groups ! 



And what did Fabricius himself think of the rival who 

 was destined to overthrow him ? 



Practically he treated him rather badly. Somehow or 

 other he got knowledge of quite a number of Jurinean 

 names before 1804, in which year he published the Sy sterna 

 Piezatorum. And of these names he ignored some silently, 

 e.g. Bremus, adopting instead Latreille's later name Bonibus. 

 Others he calmly appropriated to his own use without 

 acknowledgment, e. g. Prosopis, which he cannot have 

 invented independently since he uses it in the Jurinean 

 sense. Others (the most flagrant case being that of Cryptus) 

 he also appropriates without apology, and commits the 

 unpardonable sin of deliberately creating a homonym ! 

 The older Cryptus of Jurine was a Sawfly ! The new 

 Cryptus of Fabricius was (and is still) the current name 

 for an Ichneumonid ! and this indefensible act of un- 

 detected piracy at present vitiates the whole nomenclature 

 of an immense group of modern Genera. And the rest 

 of the acts of Fabricius, and the evil that he did, and the 

 Names that he stole from Jurine, will be discussed in our 

 critical Notes. But at least he did try to make some kind 

 of reparation to his victim by paying to him, in the Preface 

 of Systema Piezatorum, a compliment, which, however 

 grudgingly expressed, shows that Fabricius did not look 

 on his rival as a mere ignorant upstart who had to be 

 brought to his senses by a good shaking, or an obscure 

 nobody whose claims to be an " author " were ridiculous, 

 and who ought to be too thankful that the great Fabricius 



