272 THE SCHOOL OF RISAUMUR 



and greatest astronomer of that illustrious name, hi 

 kept glass hives in the garden of the observatory at 

 Paris, and these had been used by his nephew Maraldi 

 for observations on the construction of the honeycomb. 

 Eeaumur's hives and the work done with their help 

 speedily superseded all Maraldi's results. 



The account of the external features of the honey-be^ 

 in the Histoire des Insectes is an improvement eve^ i 

 upon that of Swammerdam, and the description of the 

 proboscis there given has never been mended except in 

 minor details. One mistake of his predecessor E^aumur 

 was careful to correct. Swammerdam had represented 

 the so-called tongue, which forms the tip of the pro- 

 boscis, as a tubular organ, which sucks up the honey 

 like a pump. E(^aumur showed that it is not a complete 

 tube, but rather an elongate gutter. The cavity along 

 which the honey flows lies between the tongue and the 

 ensheathing blades of the maxillae. ^^^j 



When Eeaumur comes to discuss the source from 

 which bees get their honey, he gives the credit of th^. 

 discovery of the nectaries of flowers to "M. Lin^us.^j 

 Linnaeus had recently visited Paris, and made himself 

 known to the Jussieus, from whom Eeaumur may have 

 learned something about him. The nectaries of flowers 

 are mentioned in his Linnaeus' Fundamenta Botanica 

 (1736) (pp. 10, 13), but were described long before his 

 day by Malpighi (see p. 156). 



Many particulars are added to Swammerdam's account I 

 of the pollen-collecting of the workers. The collecting ! 

 hairs are figured ; the comb on the hind leg and the  

 bread-basket are well explained. In studying the mov^BI 

 ments of the legs in a bee which was combing out the ' 

 pollen, Eeaumur found that the bee worked her legs too j 

 rapidly for the convenience of the observer; he got ! 



