ENTOMOLOGY. 
Mistery. wornis was an of attention. He says that garments 
—Y~" of silk were admired'in his days by the fair sex, 
as it'shewed their form to’ ry — the aeey 
- of its *texture. 
From the time of Pliny till the: prentiueoh the Ro- 
man empire, the study seems not to have been totally 
disregarded ; but we are ignorant what steps were advan- 
Titus, & Ged during that’periods “Am the writers were Titus, 
ZBtius, Alexander, Oribasius, lian and Paulus Agi- 
néta, who lived’ between the fourth and seventh century. 
Between 'the'ninth ‘and twelfth’ century, some of the Ara- 
bian botanists’ distinguished themselves = entomolo- 
gists. The’ principal were Rhazes, Avicenna, Avenzoar, 
Arabian et dnd Averthoes. ““Fromthis period till the fifteenth cen- 
, viz. M s; Platerus, &e. 
Albertus Albertus’ M wrote a” 1 zoological 6, en- 
Magnus. titled, "De Anita, of which treats of insects. 
He died 1280, but his work did not appear until the year 
1519; ed at Venice, 
Agricola» Tn: a published” his'work, De Animalibus 
whicly contains a systematic arrangement of 
insects; He-redices ‘all ro ie are to three ipal classes, 
and, 3. Those 
viz. 1. Those that walk ; ntl andae 
cdelben athe of 
furnished with swimming feet; and d 
Pe 1853) Edward’ Woitort | published’ a'work, entitled, 
De Di Antmalium, in’ whiely ‘he® treats 
oninsects. The book is in folio, and appeared three 
years before the author’s death. 
- I 1555, Rondeletius of Montpellier owe ye) his ‘valu- 
able'work, « Universa s altera,” to 
the world, in which “ee magento pen’ he accom- 
with wood ‘cuts. 
Tn 1599, in folio, was published at Naples, « Ferrante 
+ Historia Noturale libri 28." 
1 a very voluminots work. wis published, etitit- 
ed, De Animale Insectis, by the «ind le compil- 
ee | ef” ‘Aldrovatidus:’ Doriovan is inclined t6 give him con- 
pein ‘credit: He has'certainly acquitted himself in 
ec gl the’ undigested observations of the 
ancients ; but from his wacre ge ignorance’ of the’ subject 
he has necessarily fallen into all ibe erery oF his 
" céssor8: ‘we must; however, allow, that"hé has’acted with 
candor, having rarely omitted” to mention’ his authori-’ 
ties. He was professor of medicine at Bologna, and 
Sealer ange ‘mite ‘oF his time in the stixcly of insects, and 
stims’ of money in’ acqetniig specimens, 
Seat enploy ing artists’ to figure”them. He’ is stiitéd’ 
to have paid two] “hundred flotins” annually to an’ artist, 
Who was occupied solely” i in’ the ‘delineation of insects. 
ve divides eds into two great” orders, 1. Terrestial ;* 
hich he’ terms Insecta farica, and Non 
fe these 1 he divides into sub-otders, from thé num- 
ber ani situation of their wings and feet! His figiires 
are” but ‘rudely expressed, which is excusablé. At 
this time a taste’ for more expensive’ “embellishments 
Wotton. 
per bat p arcely oh rom i 
were exclusively ir r ay iveets i hesedivks 
Me} In 1612, the Historia Animalinm Sae?a, by’ Wol-' 
fang’ Frenzius, dividing’ imsects~ into tlitee classes, 
1. Actia, 2. Aquatica, 3. Térrea, and ‘coritaining ‘seve- 
ral new’ observations, a ears and’ three years af- 
serwards, in ‘the year 1616, at" Roti wpaiplet of 
tury; a few obscure writers, scarcely'worthy of ree ap- > 
59 
about one hundred pages, in’ Eatin;' entitled; De Fors 
mica, by Jeremialy Wilde. ~ 
In 1622, a work but remotely relating to insedts,: in Jeremiah 
4to, appeared in Edinburgh, bearing the following \title, 
Hicroglyphica Animalium Terrestrivm, Sc. que in ‘Serip- 
turis Sacris inveniuntur et um aliorum, cum’ eorun 
interpretationibus ; which, being the first work»relatin 
to insects published in Britain, is not ese of notice 
asa curiosity. 
In 1630, a thin quarto, by Hoefnagle, was' published Hoefnag'e. 
anfder the title of Diverse Insectorum volatilium Icones 
‘ad vivum ‘depict, per D. J. Hoefnagle, typisque man- 
dale a Nicolao’ Johanni: Vischer, containing 326 figures, 
some of whicly are‘very indifferent." He has not adopt- 
ed any particular mode of arrangement, but contented 
himself with delineating them in the state’ presented by 
chance; not always following thém throughout their pro- 
gressive i. 
In 1634, Thomas Mouffet published his Jnsectorwm Mouffet, 
sive minimorum Animalium Theatrum, which appears 
to be the’second! work’ on entomology published in our” 
country. This work, a& its title indicates, is written 
in the Latin language ; it appeared in London in one 
volume folio, and contains numerous wooden cuts, rude= 
ly executed, aécompanied by long, tedious, and often ri- 
diculous and fanciful detériptions of the spécies:’ The 
first seven chapters (capita,) are occupied with heavy 
details concerning the common hive bee (Aris M 
The eighth is entitled, De Vespis. The ninth, De Cran 
brone et Tenthredine, which includes the himble bees 
(Bomar). The tenth, eleventh, and twelfth, De Muscis, 
which includes, with several dipterous (or two-winged i in- 
sects) many h opterous, as well as neuropterous in- 
sects. The thirteenth, De Culicibus. The fourteenth, 
De Papilionibus, which occupies two hundred pages, the 
margins being embellished’ with 112 wooden figures, 
executed inthe radest style, yet in most instances to- 
lerably intelligible to the skilful entomologist. The’ fifs 
teenth De Cicindela, including the glow-worm (Lampy- 
ris,) and’ several others. The’sixteenth, De 
The seventeenth, De Cicadis et Gryllis. The eighteenth, 
De Biattis. The nineteenth, De By ‘et Ceram 
bice. The twentieth, De Cant The twenty- 
first, De Scarabais, which includes many of the larger 
beetles, (Coleoptera). The twenty-second, De Scara- 
beis Minoribus. The twenty-third, De Proscarabeo et 
Scarabeo Aquatico. The twenty-fourth, De Gryllotal- 
/ The twenty-fifth, De Phryganea: The twenty- 
sixth, De Tipula. The twerity-seventh; De Forficula 
tive auvicularia: ‘The twenty-eighth, De’ Scorpio, For« 
mica, et Pediculis alatis. And, lastly, the twenty-ninth, 
De Cimicve Sylvestri. After these, we arrive at the se- 
cond book, which treats of apterous irisects, (those 
wanting wings), amongst which he’ places all sorts of 
Larvw’ (or Soha ut of other species belonging’ to 
winged insécts, and likewise many of the vermes, &c. 
We miust apologise to the reader for taking up so much 
of his time with dry statements of the heads of this 
History. 
' work; but as it was one of the first produced in’ this 
country, we trust he will ‘not consider it as entirely uz 
interesting ; and as a specimen ‘of ‘his bd and notions 
relative to insects, we miay quote the following, which 
speaks of a species of Mantis, (probably M. religiosa or 
Oratoria): ‘“ Pectus habet longum, tenue, cuculo tec~ 
tum, caput simplex ; oculos sanguineos, satis magnos, an= 
