On Some South African Aviculariidae (Arachnida). 127 



In 1902, Purcell in Trans. S. Afr. Phil. Soc. vol. xi, pt. 4, and Ann. 

 S. Afr. Mus. vol. iii, pt. 4, describes several new species of Acanthodon, 

 also from South Africa, and in the former proposes the genus Gorgy- 

 rella for form (b) . 



In 1903, loc. cit. p. 888, Simon having received a $ Icliops unites 

 Acanthodon and Lliops as having rested previously on a sexual 

 character only ; adding further that the latter genus should be con- 

 fined to American species, and proposing Titanidiops for the African 

 species. The name Acanthodon should therefore disappear. 



In 1903, P.Z.S. p. 350, Pocock apparently accepts Acanthodon as a 

 synonym of JcZiops. 



In 1904, Trans. S. Afr. Phil. Soc., vol. xv, pt. 3, Purcell removes all 

 his species from Acanthodon, 2 of which, both $ ? , namely, A. fryi 

 and A. versicolor, he transfers to the genus Idiops ; and for the other 

 species, both $ and ? ? , he makes a new genus, Ctenolophus. Sub- 

 sequently new species are described by Purcell under Idiops, but none 

 are added by him to Ctenolophus. Hewitt, however (Rec. Albany 

 Mus. vol. ii, 1913), adds several new species to both genera. 



But previously, in Ann. Transv. Mus. vol. ii, p. 74, 1910, Hewitt 

 describes the supposed ? of A. pretoriae (Poc. 1898), although the 

 genus disappeared finally in 1903. 



In Rec. Albany Mus. vol. ii, p. 418, he refers the species to Idiops, 

 giving no reasons ; and in the same volume, p. 471, describes a new 

 species, Acanthodon microps. In Ann. Transv. Mus. vol. 5, pt. 6, p. 97, 

 footnote, having examined the type, Hewitt speaks of /. thoreHi 

 (Cambr.) as being a true Acanthodon. 



However, in Rec. Albany Mus. vol. ii, pt. 5, p. 412, he describes a 

 new species, Gtenoloplms transvaglensis ; then later (Rec. Alb. Mus. 

 vol. ii, p. 473, footnote) places it under Gorgyrella, as it possesses 

 3 pairs of sternal sigilla, the 3rd pair very small (hence it cannot be 

 a Gorgyrella at all (Text-fig. 11 B) ) ; later still he settles it as 

 Acanthodon, and considers the two latter genera inseparable (Ann. 

 Transv. Mus. vol. v, pt. 3, p 183). Hence apparently Acanthodon as 

 used by Hewitt should have the sternum as in fig. (A), i.e., with 3 

 pairs of small sternal sigilla, of which he regards (B) as a variation. 



Further, in Rec. Alb. Mus. vol. xi, p. 473, Hewitt adds a footnote that, 

 according to Hirst, Ctenolophus is a synonym of Acanthodnn ; and 

 later states, in lit., that he has examined Gruerin's type A. petiti, and 

 considers that ? Ctenoloplius is congeneric with it. But Gue'rin's 

 A. petiti is an Idiops according to Cambridge, and according to Simon 

 also it should be referred to that genus. Hence, when Hewitt says 

 that Ctenolophus and A. petiti are congeneric, it may be taken as 



9 



