STAUDINGER AND REBEL,' S CATALOGUE. 231 



for, yet it is satisfactory to know that Dr. Rebel himself holds the 

 sounder view. The preface (p. x) also expressly tells us that the 

 retention of Thi/rididar, and all families from Hrteyni/i/nKlae, in 

 Theil I, was a concession to the special desire of Dr. Staudinger. 

 Another important difierence of arrangement between the new Catalo;/ 

 and the scheme in //-/.s is that the latter follows the ascending scale, 

 beginning with the HnorephaliiJar (now correctly called Micmptrnj- 

 liiilar), whereas the former starts with Papilioniilaf and (roughly 

 speaking) works downwards. This difiterence, too, is obviously due to 

 the wishes of Di'. Staudinger, or to the fact that the present work is 

 regarded as a new edition of the Staudinger- Wocke ( 'atabxi rather 

 than as an entirely independent publication (see preface, p. \ii). The 

 genera of each family among themselves should also surely follow the 

 same plan — to the limited extent, that is, to which it is possible — and 

 this has evidently been Dr. Rebel's ideal, as he shows in his prefatory 

 remarks concerning the SpliuKjidae, which Dr. Staudinger insisted on 

 retaining in an order almost the reverse of that desired by his 

 colleague. As "will have been gathered from the foregoing remarks, 

 the general arrangement of the new catalogue is a series of "families," 

 many of which correspond to " superfamilies " in Mr. Tutt's sense. 

 Higher groupings are disregarded, and the illusive terms "Bombyces," 

 " Tineina," kc, are swept away, never again, let us hope, to appear in 

 any work of credit. The division into " Rhopalocera " and " Hetero- 

 cera " is also abandoned. Theil I (whilom " Macrolepidoptera ") 

 consists of 89 families, in the following order : — I'ajnlionidae, 

 rien'ilac, Xi/iiiji/udidae, IJhi/thcidae, Knjc'uiidae, Lycacnidae, Hesperiidae, 

 Sjiln'iKfidai', X<it<id())iti<l(ic, lliaKnictoitoeidac, Lipnantnidae, Lcmocampidae, 

 h'.ndniiiiididac, Lciiioniidai', Satiirniidac, Brahmaeidae, Bonibjjcidae, 

 I >icjianidac, i'allidulidai', Thyrididae, Noctuidae, A;/aristidae,.('y)uato- 

 /i/ioridac, Brcphidac, (Ti'ometridae, Uraniidac, Kpiphnnidae (this is the 

 last family which Staudinger lived to revise), Xnlidac, Cymhidae, 

 Syit tniii idar, A ret i id at', Heteroyynidac, Zyuaenidac, Mcyalopyfjidae, 

 ( 'orldididar, L'syc/iidac, Scsiidac, ( 'ossidac, flfjiialidoc : of these, only 

 the Xyiiiphalidac, Xoctiiidai', (-Teoiiu'tridac, Avctiidae, and Zyijaenidae 

 are divided into subfamilies. Theil II consists of 18 families, 

 namely : — Pyralidac, Pteropluiridac, Torfricidac, (Tlypluiiteryyidae, 

 yponotiinitidac, PlutcUidac, Geleclnidac, Tinaetjcriidai', PUachistidae, 

 < i facilariidai', Lyoiictiidac, Xcjiticiilidai', Talacpor'udae, Tineidae, 

 ( 'riniiptcri/fiidac, /■'riorrauiidac, Microjitcryyidae ; ten of these are 

 divided into subfamilies. It may be noticed in passing 

 that both Staudinger and Rebel have accepted the classically 

 incorrect terminations iidae and iinae where necessitated by the 

 root structure ; the present writer had already corrected his own copy 

 of the Xiiiii('ii(l((tiin' of Ijepidoptera : Vorrespoiidenre (Hainpson's), on 

 p. 808, " Analysis of Replies," where Staudinger and, apparently, also 

 Kirby and Aurivillius are made to vote ai/aiuxt " iidae, iinae," con- 

 trary to their expressed opinions — the only shadow of evidence of 

 bias which has been noticed in Mr. Durrant's truly admirable analyses. 

 In Rebel's 1S99 article the member of families proposed reached 60, 

 as against the 57 enumerated above ; the slight discrepancy is due to 

 the sinking of P>l((stiibasidac and (hropdmridac as subfamilies of 

 (iilfcliiidae ; of Adrlidac as subfamily of iinridac ; and of Litlinsiidar 

 as subfamily of Arctiidae; while on the other side the family 



