32 
known Rhopalocera, with copious synonymic references, which show an 
acquaintance with all the authors whom we have already passed in 
review except Haworth. It was the production of M. Go dart, who, 
two years later, commenced the publication of a work on the lepidoptera 
of France, consisting of descriptions and coloured figures. M. Godart 
dealt with the Rhopalocera, Sphinges, Bombyces, and about half the 
Noctuae, but dying in 1825 the work was completed by M. Duponchel, 
the director of the Theatre Franqais, the last volume being published 
in 1842. Two years later Duponchel published a systematic catalogue 
of European lepidoptera. Boisduval in 1829 had issued a similar list 
of Butterflies, Sphinges, Bombyces and Noctuae. He was a physician, 
and received from Newman in 1845 the designation of “ prince of 
lepidopterists.” In 1836, he produced the 1st volume of a descriptive 
work, which, however, only dealt with part of the butterflies. Eleven 
years later, finding himself unable to carry out his project unaided, he 
called to his assistance M. Guenee, a lawyer of Chateaudun, who was 
also a profound student of lepidoptera in all the stages of their exist¬ 
ence, and who had already published in 1835, in conjunction with De 
Yilliers, a work on the butterflies of Europe. Boisduval reserved to 
himself the Sphinges, Bombyces, and the remainder of the Butterflies, 
and to Guenee was assigned the task of dealing with the rest. M. 
Guenee ably discharged his task, and his 3 volumes on the Nocture have 
long taken rank as a classic. His part of the work was completed in 
1857. Boisduval never succeeded in getting any more of his share 
ready, but in 1840 he issued a revised edition of his 1829 catalogue, 
in which he adopted the uniform termination aria for all Geometry. 
and which formed the groundwork of Doubleday’s first list. The 
dominant influence on the French naturalists, especially the earlier 
ones, was that of Fabricius; preference is given to his names, and 
great value is attached to the Vienna Catalogue. By the later au¬ 
thorities, Hiibner is exalted to the place of honour, but his influence 
still causes the retention of Vienna Catalogue names. The principle, 
which seems to have guided them in dealing with nomenclature, was to 
adopt the names used by the authority whom they took as their chief 
guide, although they were frequently aware of earlier names. Godart 
is the only one who shows evidence of a profound study of synonymy, 
and he alone gives references to Hufnagel and Rottemburg in the 
Encyclopaedia list of butterflies. Guenee formulates the principles 
which guided him in the names he adopted, the general tendency of 
which was to accept priority of publication, but not as giving the right 
to disturb long established usage. He emphatically declares his ad¬ 
hesion to the Vienna Catalogue. One curious principle he adopts is to 
place after a name, as its sponsor, the author who first described or 
figured the insect, whether he really gave the name or not. A s a result 
he attributes many names to authors who lived in the pre-Linnaean times 
—an unscientific method in which he was not followed by Doubleday. 
Returning now to Germany, we find that Hiibner was succeeded by 
Ochsenheimer an actor of repute in Leipsig who in 1807 commenced 
the publication of a treatise on European lepidoptera. This consists of 
descriptions of larvae, pupae and imagines, with copious synonymic 
references, showing acquaintance with all the earlier authors; it is not 
illustrated. Ochsenheimer only lived long enough to deal with the 
Rhopalocera, Sphinges and Bombyces. After his death the completion 
