INTRODUCTION. 1^ 



Papilio Lucina of Linnaeus mentioned above. The authors point out the distinctive 

 properties of this species in a note ;* they are of opinion, that it leads to the next 

 family. Their opinion is founded on the character of the pupa; the larva had 

 escaped their research. This species has afforded the type of a new genus Nemeo- 

 Bius to J. F. Stephens, Esq., who has thus confirmed the accuracy of the observation 

 of Messrs. Denis and Schieffermiiller. 



The remaining families M. N. and O. embrace the Lepidoptera with onisciform 

 larvae ; these constituted, according to the system of Fabricius, the genera Thecla 

 and LycEena. Mr. Stephens has lately, in his Illustrations of British Entomology, 

 distributed them with more propriety into three genera, by which means, 



Fam. M. represents the genus Lyccena. 



Fam. N. represents the genus Polyommatus, and 



Fam. O. represents the genus Thecla. 

 This abstract tends to show, in my opinion, that in the true Papilionid^, at least, 

 the metamorphosis affords most clear indications, not only of genei'ic distinctions, 

 but also of a continuous natural arrangement. To illustrate the latter of these points 

 will, as has already been stated, be my object throughout the whole of the present 

 undertaking. As far as regards the former, it is evident that-.those genera, which are 

 now universally adopted, were clearly indicated as early as the year I776 ; and the 

 quotation above given proves that the authors considered their families as representa- 

 tives of genera. They appear to have been prevented from imposing appropriate 

 names, and from offering them to the public, by a deference to the authority of 

 Linnaeus, which at that time was paramount, and any interference with which was 

 prohibited in them, apparently, by a sense of propriety, and by a modest reluc- 

 tance to impede the general improvement in nomenclature, which had been just 

 accomplished by that remarkable man. Denis and Schieffermiillei', therefore, framed 

 their system for the succeeding generation ; and we shall see in the sequel how^ 

 far their discoveries and suggestions were regarded. I shall, however, in this place 

 merely advert in a general manner to the history of the nomenclature of the 

 Papilionidse. Now it is well known that most of the names of the genera above 

 enumerated ware published in lUiger's Magazin der Insectenkunde, in 1807, as a 

 fragment of a large work of Fabricius, a Systema Glossatarum, which was found 

 in an unfinished state at the time of his death : for instance, the names Melitcea, 



Argynnis, 



* die letzte art {Lucina) unterscheidet sich wie man schon aus dem, was wir hier angesetzt haben, 



bemerken wird, noch deutlicher ; vielleicht ist aber ihre Raupe mehr denen der drey folgenden Farailien 

 ahnlich : wenigstens sah ihre Pupe, die wir einst an eine niedere Wiesenpflanze angehasftet fanden, wie die 

 derselben aus. W. V. p. 179, Note. 



