ARGYRODES. 405 
(Walck.) was quite different from A. epeire, Simon, from Corsica, a form also usually 
treated as identical with A. argyrodes ; but other writers made the mistake of regarding 
the North-American form as identical with A. argyrodes. 
The type of the latter is, as Walckenaer himself says, in his own collection, though he 
is doubtful as to whether it came from “ Algeria” or “ Guadaloupe,” and in his descrip- 
tion he makes no mention of the bifurcate apex of the abdomen, so characteristic of 
A. trigonus (Hentz). Wherever it came from, Walckenaer’s species is not A. trigonus 
(Hentz), and it is most probable that its real habitat was Algeria. Simon (Arachn. 
Fr. v. p. 16) has given the first really good description and figures of the species 
which he has identified as A. argyrodes, Walck., and one must accept his interpretation, 
in all probability a correct one. Thorell (Europ. Spid. p. 80) also asserts the identity 
of A. argyrodes with A. epeire, but on the strength of examples from Brazil. 
We come to the conclusion, then, that A. trigonus (Hentz) and A. argyrodes (Walck.) 
are two quite different species, and I very much doubt if the latter has ever been taken 
in America at all; at any rate, there is no evidence to justify such an assumption. 
Figures of the essential characteristics of each of them are given on the Plate for the 
sake of comparison. In A. argyrodes the central eyes of both rows are situated high 
up on the posterior lobe of the ocular area, while the lateral pairs are far remote from 
the base of the fissure. In A. trigonus, on the other hand, the central eyes are situated 
quite at the dase of the posterior lobe, and the lateral pairs lie closely adjacent. ‘The 
palpal organs are also of quite distinct character in the two species: see Emerton’s 
admirable figures, and also, for the eyes, that of Simon (Arachn. Fr. v. t. 25. fig. 3). 
I have not seen the type of A. dicornis, O. P.-Cambr., from Brazil, but the figures of 
the eyes, and of the abdomen with its bifurcate apex (P. Z. 8. 1880, t. 29. fig. 12), leave 
little room for doubt that this, too, is identical with A. trigonus (Hentz). 
Keyserling’s figures of the palpi of this genus are not sufficiently detailed to be of 
any great value, but fortunately his types and examples are before me. Our figures 
of A. argyrodes are from specimens taken in Spain and kindly furnished by M. E. Simon, 
and there are also examples of the same species in the Keyserling Collection from 
Lesina and Corsica, which I have examined in comparison. 
6. Argyrodes subdolus. (Tab. XXXVIII. figg. 11, lla, 2.) 
Argyrodes subdola, O. P.-Cambr. Biol. Centr.-Amer., Arachn. Aran. i. p. 260, t. 39. fige. 2, - 
2a-c (?)’: 
Type, @, in coll. Godman & Salvin. Total length 3-25 millim. 
Hab. GuateMALa, San Antonio (Sarg 1). 
7. Argyrodes maculosus. (Lab. XXXVIII. figg. 12,120, g; 13,184,8, 2.) 
Argyrodes maculosa, O. P.-Cambr. Biol. Centr.-Amer., Arachn. Aran. i. p. 258, t. 37. figg. 3, 
3a,b(¢)’. 
