60 INSECT TRANSFORMATIONS. 



distrust of novel opinions, than to see a man like Redi, 

 who had declared open war against popular prejudices, 

 and successfully combated many of them, thus adopt- 

 ing a notion so improbable, or (to use a stronger term) 

 so pitiable.'* It was Redi's countryman, Malpighi, 

 who first discovered the genuine history of gall-flies; 

 but when we consider that from the bedeguar gall of 

 the rose alone no less than three different species of 

 insects may proceed, two of which (Callimone bede- 

 guaris, and Eurytoma stigma, STEPHENS) are para- 

 sites, Redi had some cause for being puzzled to ex- 

 plain the phenomena. 



Two other distinguished naturalists, Goedart and 

 Ray, found no less difficulty in accounting for the 

 progeny of ichneumons issuing from the caterpillars 

 and chrysalides of butterflies. Ray, indeed, lived to 

 ascertain the fact; but he was at one time inclined to 

 believe, with Goedart, that when, from any defect 

 or weakness, Nature could not bring a caterpillar to 

 a butterfly, in order that her aim might not be en- 

 tirely defeated, she stopped short, and formed them 

 into insects of a smaller size, and less "perfect struc- 

 ture. f M. Goedart even persuaded himself, says 

 Rc-aumur sarcastically, that he had observed the ca- 

 terpillar interesting itself for its infant progeny, by 

 weaving for them an envelope of silk. It was also 

 fancied that what was wanting in size in the parasite 

 flies, when compared with the expected butterfly j was 

 made up in their greater numbers ;J with as much 

 probability, says Reaumur, as that a cat would kitten 

 a number of mice. The simple facts which we shall 

 now state, will point out the origin of these strange 

 mistakes. 



* Reaumur, Mem. iii, p. 476. 



t Ray, Hist. Ins.,Pref. xv, and Cant. 137. 



j Goedart, quoted by R c aumur, vol. ii, p. 415. 



