NOTES. 217 



The name JTiiica appeared first in Scopoli, Entomologia Carniolica 

 1763, where Hirtea longicornis Stratiomys strigata F.) is described. 

 For an unexplained reason, Fahricins, in the Supplement to his Ento- 

 mologia Systematica, published in 1798, took up the name Hirtea 

 (without any reference to Scopoli) and applied it to a number of 

 species, the majority of which are Bibio's. At the same time, the 

 majority of Fabricins's Bibio's are our Therevae, and Fabricius's There- 

 vac are our Phasiae, Trichopodae etc. ! 



Meigen followed Fabricius's precedence about Hirtea in his earlier 

 work: Klassification etc. (1804), and Fabricius quoted Meigen in his 

 System. Antliatorum (1805^. In his principal work, however, (1818) 

 Meigen rejected the name Hirtea, and very properly adopted Geoffrey's 

 earlier name Bibio. Later writers have followed Meigen's example, 

 except Zetterstedt, who maintains the name Hirtea, for our Bibio. 



It is very probable that Stratiomyia longicornis Scopoli (Syn. 

 strigata Fabricius), which shows several peculiarities of structure, will, 

 by and by, form a 'separate genus, and then Hirtea will be the proper 

 name for that genus. 



13. Bibio articulatus Say. According to Loew, Centur. V, 10, Nota 

 this species belongs in the vicinity of B. abbreviatus , frutcriut*, 

 nigripilus, but the descriptions, both of Say and ot Wiedemann are 

 not explicit enough for identification. 



14. About Plecia, Penthetria, Hesper'nus, etc. compare Loew, Berl. 

 Entom Z. II, p. 101. Also by the same: Berichtigung der generischen 

 Bestimmung einigei fossilen Dipteren, in the Zeitschr. f. Ges. Natunv. 

 Vol. X]fclt, p 80 (1868). 



15. About Scatopse, see Loew, Linnaea Entom. I, p. 324, a mono- 

 graph of the european species. Also another paper, by the same, in 

 the Zeitschr. f. d. Ges. Naturw., Vol. XXXV. ^Ia70). 



16 The identity of Arthria Kirby with Aspistes and of Artliria 

 (ninlis with Aspistes borealis seems to me very probable, some dis- 

 crepancies between the descriptions notwithstanding. 



17. Blepharoceridae. Compare Loew's Monographic Essay. La 

 famiglia dei Blefaroceridi, in the Bollut. della Societa Entom. Italiana, 

 Vol. I, p. 85 (1869) - - The same author's : Revision der Blepharoceridae 

 (in the Schles. Zeitschr. f. Entomol. Neue Folge, Heft VI, Breslau 

 1877) is in the main a reproduction of the Italian paper, but being of 

 later date contains several additions. 



In the Monographs etc. IV, p. 3, I suggested the possibility of a 

 relationship between the Blepharoceridae and the Ptychopterina. But 

 since I know the Blepharoceridae better, I am less inclined to perceive 

 that relationship In the structure of the eyes this family stands nearer 

 to Simulium and Bibio. 



18. Asthenia americana Walker, List, etc. I, p. 28, according to 

 Loew, Monographs I, p 8, is not a Blepharocerid at all, and any one, 

 who reads the description , will agree with this conclusion It seems 

 furthermore that Mr. Walker's type is not to be found in its place at 

 the British Museum; compare Mr. Haliday's note in the Bolletino della 



