10 
SOME ACCOUNT OF THE PRINCIPAL WORKS ON ENTOMOLOGY. 
By Peter Rylands, Esq. 
A volume, as Mr. Neville Wood justly remarks, would be necessary to 
contain satisfactory notices of all the works which have been published on Ento¬ 
mology. This, however, does not appear requisite, and probably a chapter 
devoted to a brief retrospect of a few of the more important, will be of the desired 
use to the student. 
For a long period after the time of Aristotle, whose labours have already 
been sufficiently commented upon (Yol. II., p. 463), Entomology shared the 
neglect with which other branches of Natural History were treated. Of the 
authors who contributed to its partial revival in the sixteenth, and commence¬ 
ment of the seventeenth century, Freuzius, Mouffat, Jonston, Aldrovan- 
dus, and Goedart may be mentioned—their works are now only valuable as 
curiosities. There was one, however, at this early period, zealously engaged in 
prosecuting the same study, the result of whose labours remains of real worth at 
the present day. This was the celebrated John Swammerdam, whose Biblia 
Natures appeared in 1728, several years after its author’s death. An English 
translation by Floyd was published in 1758, and remains a standard authority. 
Cotemporary with Swammerdam were Rhedi, Borel, Bononio, Bonanni, and 
Joblot, who also directed their attention to the physiology of insects, but their 
works, although once valuable, may now be dispensed with. 
In the early part of the eighteenth century Entomology continued to excite the 
attention of philosophers, as between the years 1700 and 1730 various works 
devoted to it were written by Albin, Ray, Willughby, Petiver, Bradley, 
Yalisnieri, and others. None of these, although once much esteemed, are now 
regarded as authorities. 
We have now arrived at the commencement of an important era in the his¬ 
tory of the science, caused by the publication, in 1735, of the Systerna Natures 
of Linnaeus, which is familiar to all, and therefore needs no comment here’ 
especially as it is noticed in Mr. W ood’s paper; to the observations of that gen¬ 
tleman, I would only add my conviction that much of the difficulty experienced 
by students, in attaining a knowledge of modern classifications, would be removed 
if previous to commencing the study of them, that of the great Swede was per¬ 
fectly understood,—and an acquaintance with it by a little assiduity and per¬ 
severance may soon be obtained. Rcesel, Edwards, Reaumur, Drury, Sul- 
zer, Sepp, Scopoli, and De Geer, followed the example of Linnaeus, by pub¬ 
lishing works on the science which he had so greatly benefitted. Many of these 
remain at the present time standard authorities. Memoires pour servir a V His- 
2 c 
