91 
oi 
Eabricius for his chief guide, and adopted his names even in preference 
to those of Linnams. His work was not completed till 1813. He has 
left his mark to a slight extent upon our nomenclature, especially in 
the Micro-lepidoptera. Greater than either of these, and a man worthy 
to take his place by the side of the great Continental authors of the 
period at whom we have been glancing, was Adrian Hardy Haworth, a 
man of property, who, though educated as a lawyer, devoted his life to the 
study of Botany, Ornithology and Entomology. Part of his life was 
passed at Cottingham, in the neighbourhood of Hull, and part at Chelsea. 
He formed a collection of lepidoptera containing 1,100 species, and 300 
varieties. Although he never travelled beyond his own country, he 
had an extensive acquaintance with Continental literature, being 
familiar with the works of all the writers we have mentioned save those 
of Hufnagel and Rottemburg. He published a work on British lepi¬ 
doptera, the first part of which appeared in 1803, and the last in 1828. 
This contains ample Latin descriptions of all the species known to him, 
with copious references to the works of previous authors. In the preface 
he laments the fact that while his countrymen have acquired an ex¬ 
tensive knowledge of botany, yet few in Europe have advanced with 
less success into the sister science of entomology. In nomenclature, he 
chiefly follows Hiibner. Noticing that Linnaeus had not applied the 
principle of a uniform terminal to the Bombyces and Noctuje, he pro¬ 
posed to rectify what he considered a mere oversight of the great Swede 
by making all the trivial names of Bombyces end in us, and of Noctile 
in ina. This alteration, which he carried out in a preliminary cata¬ 
logue, did not meet with general acceptance, as he confesses in an 
appendix, nor is this to be wondered at when it resulted in such names 
as ziczacus, psiina, gammina. 
With Haworth, what I have designated the “formative period” of 
trivial nomenclature, comes to an end. It is true that from time to 
time names are given to newly discovered or differentiated species, 
but henceforth the chief attention of authors is given (and Hiibner and 
Haworth mark a transitional period in this respect) to classification, and 
especially to the multiplication of genera and the origination of new 
generic names. It is, however, necessary briefly to glance at succeed¬ 
ing authors, in order that the genesis of our conflicting lists may be 
traced, and the reasons for their differences made apparent. This will 
best be done by dealing separately with the Erench, the German, and 
the English workers. 
No Frenchman has any conspicuous place in the ranks of the 
trivial name givers during the formative period. Fourcroy is the 
earliest author of whom I have heard as using trivial names in a 
work on The Entomology of Paris, published in 1785. In 1789, the 
year of the outbreak of the Revolution, appeared the first volume of a 
dictionary of insects, published as a part of the Encyclopedic Methodique. 
A volume appeared in each successive year till 1792, and further 
volumes in 1811,1819 (1823 ?) and 1825. The author of the first 5 vol¬ 
umes was M. Olivier, a physician. After his death the remaining volumes 
were edited by M. Latreille, who was also the author of that part of 
Cuvier’s Animal Kingdom relating to insects. M. Latreille was arrested 
as a priest during the Revolution, and it is said that he escaped trans¬ 
portation owing to his discoveiy of a new insect while in captivity at 
Bordeaux. The volume published in 1819 (1823 ?) consists of a list of 
