642 LAURA FLORENCE 
HISTORICAL REVIEW 
According to Moufetti (1634, English trans. 1658), the earliest reference 
to the hog louse is to be found in the works of Albertus, a writer of the 
twelfth century, who named the insect Pediculus urius. Moufetti retained 
this name and described the louse as somewhat larger than that infesting 
oxen and calves, and so hard that it could not be crushed between the 
fingers. Linnaeus (1758:2915) described the louse under the name Pedi- 
culus suis. Panzer (quoted by Stevenson, 1905), in 1798, followed the 
nomenclature of Linnaeus and stated that in the classification of Fabricius 
this parasite was placed “ with Pediculus asini of Redi (1671).” Leach 
(1817:65) broke up the genus Pediculus into four genera, Phthirus, 
Haematopinus, Pediculus, and Nirmus, making the hog louse the type 
of the new genus Haematopinus. This classification was not immediately 
accepted, and Nitzsch (1818:305) revived the old name of Albertus. 
He was followed in this by Burmeister (1839:58), who gave the synonymy 
and a brief deseription of the louse, and later (1847:569) gave a detailed 
description of the structure of the mouth parts. 
Systematic descriptions and figures of the species are to be found in the 
monographs of Denny (1842:34), Giebel (1874:45), and Piaget (1880: 
654), of which the last is the most detailed. More recent and popular 
descriptions are given in three bulletins of the United States Department 
of Agriculture. Two of these are the work of Osborn (1891 and 1896), 
and in them the sections on the hog louse are identical. He calls attention 
to ‘fa curious provision in the feet for strengthening the hold upon the 
hair, which does not seem to have been hitherto described.” The third 
bulletin, written by Stevenson (1905), is valuable on account of the com- 
plete synonymy and the extent of the bibliography. 
Between 1903 and 1906 a number of papers relating to the systematic 
position of the Pediculidae appeared in Europe. Most authors confined 
their investigations to the mouth parts, and for a time a bitter controversy 
was waged between Cholodkovsky of St. Petersburg and Enderlein of 
Berlin. Cholodkovsky (1903:120and 1904: 368) studied numerous sections 
of the head of the embryo of Pediculus capitis, while Enderlein (1904 and 
1905), using cleared preparations and gross dissections, studied the hog 
louse in greatest detail of all the species used. Cholodkovsky’s findings 
in regard to adult lice were confirmed by his pupil, Pawlowsky (1906:156), 
whose paper contains a discussion and criticism of the literature to date. 
