LONDON:

HENRY G. BOHN, 4, YORK STREET, COVENT GARDEN.

MDCCCXXXVII.

PREFACE

TO THE PRESENT EDITION.

The acknowledged value of the figures contained in Drury's "Illustrations,"[[1]] the extreme rarity of many of the insects figured therein, which continue up to the present day to be unique, and the scarcity of the work itself, which appears almost unknown to Continental Entomologists, having induced the proprietor of the plates to republish the work, I have consented to undertake the charge of bringing it forth in a form more adapted to the present greatly advanced state of Entomology. How far I have succeeded must be left for the candid Entomologist to decide. It is fit however that, by way of bespeaking indulgence for the numerous errors into which I fear that I have, notwithstanding all my care, fallen, I should mention the obstacles which have operated against my giving the work that perfect style which I could have wished it to possess. Of these the chief difficulty has arisen from the non-possession of the specimens which served for the original illustrations, without which it may be readily conceived that it has been impossible to ascertain with precision many of the more minute characters, of which the present state of the science requires the investigation; thus in many cases I have been obliged to remain in ignorance of the particular structure of the antennæ, trophi and legs, and the disposition of the veins of the wings, in many of the smaller species of Lepidoptera, so that the precise genera may not in some instances be correctly stated; and to many I have been compelled to attach marks of interrogation for the like reason. Another and equally strong obstacle has been produced from the little attention paid to exotic Lepidoptera by modern Entomologists. More than two-thirds of these Illustrations are illustrative of that beautiful order of insects; and yet, with the exception of some of the showy butterflies and moths, scarcely a reference is to be found even in the works of Fabricius, the personal friend of Drury, whose Entomologia Systematica, published in 1793 and 1794, contains the last general summary of the species of this order; Gmelin also, whose Systema Naturæ it has been the fashion to decry, but which, as a laborious compilation from the works of preceding and chiefly Continental authors, is of great service,[[2]] was only acquainted with these illustrations through the early works of Fabricius.[[3]] It is true that M. M. Boisduval and Guérin have respectively published various new exotic Lepidoptera, especially of the Nocturnal group, in the Voyages of the Coquille and Astrolabe; but we still want a general revision, not only of the species but of the genera of this order. It was to have been hoped that, as regarded the Javanese species, this would have been effected by Dr. Horsfield, whose work upon the Lepidoptera of Java, as far as published, leaves nothing to be desired of the structural details of the species illustrated therein. M. Boisduval also, in his Histoire Naturelle des Lépidoptères, has treated the subject in a masterly manner, availing himself both of the preparatory states and veining of the wings; but we greatly miss those beautiful details which render the works of Horsfield and Curtis invaluable. It is in this comparative ignorance, both of the structural and metamorphotic details of exotic Lepidoptera, that we may attribute the want of a sound and philosophical distribution of the order in question; and which at the same time prevents us from determining the situation of many remarkable and anomalous groups. Of these the genera Castnia, Urania, &c. and the whole tribe of the Zygænidæ may especially be mentioned; and it is with the view of inciting enquiry into this part of the subject, that I have introduced many of the latter species into the genus Callimorpha amongst the Nocturnal moths.

Another obstacle has been produced by the little attention paid by the Entomologists of the last century to the geographical situation of their insects; as an instance of this, it will be sufficient to mention that Linnæus and Fabricius made use of the term "In Indiis" generally, to indicate that an insect was an inhabitant either of the West or East Indies. Drury indeed appears to have paid more than the ordinary degree of attention to this part of the subject, as appears from the Catalogue of his Insects, which I obtained at the sale of Mr. Donovan's collections, to whom, as appears by a note, they were presented by Mr. Drury. Thus under Lucanus interruptus, (Genus Passalus, Fabricius,) we find the following entries:—

7.3.Interruptus,Muskito Shore,Capt. Keay,also at Maryland, New York, Carolina, where they are very large.
8.3.Interruptus,Sierra Leone,Mr. Smeathman,
9.3.Interruptus,Maryland,Mr. Milward, 1756, Lin. Syst. p. 560, f. 4.
10.4.Interrupt. var.Rio Janeiro,Mr. Bonifas, 1775, that on the right hand from Mr. Laing, at Tobago.
12.Interrupt. var.Bought at Seymour's sale.

Here it is quite evident that Drury had carefully noted down the localities of all the specimens of this insect which he possessed, and which are now described as distinct species; and this extract will I think be quite sufficient to shew, that from the careful manner in which these Catalogues were kept by Mr. Drury, we are entitled to regard them, when there happens to be a difference between the works of Drury and Fabricius, Linnæus, &c. as at least of equal authority with the writings of these authors. I regret that these Catalogues did not come into my hands until after the first and second volumes of this edition were printed off. I have incorporated the notes in the third volume; and have given, as an Appendix, extracts from these Catalogues, where there happens to be any variation or doubt as to the locality of any of the species figured in the first two volumes.

I have almost invariably adopted the very proper principle of referring to that name, either generic or specific, which has the priority in point of date. In the first edition, the first volume appeared without specific names, which were at that time a novelty but recently introduced by Linnæus. In the second volume, however, an appendix was given, containing specific names both of the first and second volumes, and a similar appendix was given at the end of the third volume; but no specific names appeared in the body of the work. To many of the names contained in the appendices Fabricius referred, many he entirely omitted, and for many he substituted others. These last I have of course rejected; and have in many instances given the dates when the names were first imposed by the different authors—a plan which would be very serviceable if generally adopted. I have, likewise, made a point in many cases of restoring the specific proper names, where, in consequence of a change in the sex of the generic name, a corresponding change had been made in such specific name. This alteration had been carried to a great extent in the Encyclopédie Méthodique; and many male and female proper names had been completely altered, in order to suit them to the sex of the new genera in which they were placed. This was, however, an error on the wrong side; because it is admitted as an established principle, that if it should be thought necessary to subdivide a genus, the names of the subdivisions should be of the sex of the original generic name.