4980 Notices of New Books. 



an entomological annual, and we shall see whether space cannot be 

 spared for a few extracts in future pages of the ' Zoologist.' Other 

 chapters are not so pleasant to the mental palate : I may instance 

 the 'Ghent to Glogau and Stettin to Schauffhausen' paper. I will 

 not enter minutely into my cause of dislike, but simply say I do not 

 like it. Whether this chapter is intended as ironical, amusing or 

 instructive, whether a mere burlesque on our German brethren, or a 

 report of the state of Tinearism in Germany, 1 cannot make out : the 

 parrots, the first-rate German pudding, the tremendously hot days, 

 the pet canaries and the gnat-bites appear to me out of place, and I 

 cannot help thinking that something better might have been made 

 out of a journey through such a country and among such a people. 



I now arrive at the Reviews, and here amidst much that is good 

 there is much that is very objectionable ; objectionable, because 

 harsh, ill-timed, in bad taste, and uncalled for: let the reader judge of 

 this matter: here are some of the passages I complain of: — 



I. From review of Guenee's l Species General des Lepidopteres, 

 Noctuelites.' Observe, the truth of the allegation is admitted : the 

 italics are not in the original. 



" On two points the author has developed new crotchets ; both 

 highly absurd; — in the first place, he puts after the specific name of 

 the species, not that of the writer who gave it that name, but that of 

 the author who first described and figured the insect at all, whether he 

 gave it any name or not: thus Tryphaena pronuba, Linnaeus, becomes 

 Tryphaena pronuba, Albin. Now Albin never called the insect pro- 

 nuba at all : why then should it be called pronuba, Albin ? Linnaeus 

 was the first who named it pronuba, and therefore, according to the 

 rule universal in Zoology, except among certain demented Lepi- 

 dopterists, we say pronuba, Linnaeus. A more amusingly absurd 

 instance of the same nonsense is the Anophia Ramburii, Clerck; 

 Clerck never called it Ramburii — how forsooth could he, as Dr. Ram- 

 bur was not born till long after Clerck was dead ? Clerck figured this 

 insect as Leucomelas, but Linnaeus described another species under 

 that name, and so the Leucomelas, Clerck, must necessarily take the 

 next oldest name, Ramburii, Boisduval ; but according to the new 

 crotchet, appended to the name Ramburii must come Clerck, because 

 he first figured the insect ! Has absurdity its limits f n 



I beg to assure Mr. Stainton that his view of applying the authority 



to a name is quite as incorrect as M. Guenee's; and that under no 



theory of nomenclature can there be a Tryphaena pronuba of Linnaeus. 



II. The entire notice of Curtis's ' British Entomology :' the italics 



are not in the original. 



