TRAP- DOOR SPIDERS. 281 



agreeing exactly with this description, are not the males 

 of the species above described by myself as N. ccemen- 

 taria, Latr., from numerous females found at Montpel- 

 lier, appears to me clear, not only because I assume that 

 of the true N. ccenientaria, Latr., males will be found to 

 have the point of the palpal bulb bifid, but because the 

 position of the eyes is markedly different in M. 

 Simon's Pj^renean males and the Montpellier females. 

 In the latter the eyes of the front row are separated 

 from each other by equal intervals, in the former 

 the interval between those of the central pair is very 

 perceptibly greater than that between each and the 

 lateral of the same row nearest to it. The interval 

 also between each of the fore-central eyes and the 

 hind-central on its side is proportionally much less. 



It appears therefore necessary to characterize N. 

 cameiifaria (Sim. I.e.) by some other name, for if 

 eventually it should be found that Latreillehas erred in 

 N. carminans (with the bifid point to the palpal bulb) 

 being the male of his N. ccementaria, and that the 

 Montpellier species has a male with a simple point 

 to this part, even then the present spider cannot re- 

 tain its name {camentaria), being distinct from the 

 females found at Montpellier. 



It is possible, of course, that the present species 

 may hereafter be found, perhaps abundantly, at Mont- 

 pellier ; in that case it will have to be decided which 

 of the two is most likely to be the species described 

 by Latreille. In that eventuality it seems to me 

 that the spider, above described from Montpellier, 

 would be more probably Latreille's species, for one 

 of its specific characters is a tolerably distinct and 

 bold series of, not more than, five dark angular bars 



