OENEllIC NAMKS IN THE NOCTUID.K. 79 



think, then, that, if a sure literary l)asis is a desideratr.m, my conchisions, 

 where my facts cannot be disputed, slioidd be followed. , xl 



AcoNTiA, Ochs., 181G; 4, 91. — Type: A. malvae. Originally 

 Ochsenheimer propose the genus Arontid for mulenc, apricd, aihris, 

 titduin, solan's, lurtnosa. It is thus a mixed genus, including at least two 

 generic t3q)es. Hiibner (1816-18), Veyz., 257, accepts Ochsenhcimcr's 

 term,. and restricts it solely to his own species mali:ae. This becomes, 

 through this restriction, the true type of Acontin. For the second 

 generic type included by Ochsenheimer, Hiibner proposes the genus 

 Tarache, Verz., 261, and I have adojited this term, with the type oprica, 

 correctly in 1874, for the species usually catalogued under Acontia, 

 The genus Xanthodes, Guen., is thus the true synonym of Acontia, and 

 must fall. 



EusTROTr.s Hiilm., 1816-1818; Verz., 253.— Type : E. nnca. Tlie 

 name Erastria, Tr., used for this genus, must be abandoned, because 

 Erasfria Avas previously employed by Hiilmer, Tent., for the Geometrid 

 E. amataria. The necessity of this change must then l)e a23parent to 

 every intelligent and unprejudiced person accpiainted with the subject. 

 Graeperia, Grt. — Type. G. magnifica, Neum. The generic name 

 Helioilora[e'] is pre-occupied in Hemiptera (1867), and this North 

 American genus must receive a new name accordingly. 



Oligia, Hiibn., Verz., 213. — Includes strigiUs, erratricnia, and three 

 others. This would seem to correspond with Lederer's group C. of 

 Hadena, and to have been named Minnn by Stephens. Ophiogrniuma, 

 referred to this same group, is placed by Hiibner in a different genus, 

 Collier gis. It is clear that the whole of the European and North 

 American species must be re-studied. It must be ascertained whether 

 the species we in America refer to Oligia are congeneric with strigilis or 

 errntricnla, and to what genera our species, referred by me to Hadena, 

 other than those excluded by Smith under Xylophasia (^Xi/lena), really 

 belimg. Hadena must be rejected entirely. The true type of Oligia 

 I am not able to give with certainty at the moment, nor that of 

 Luperina. These matters can only be properly arrived at with all the 

 literature and material at command. It is evident that the catalogue 

 which is written by a systematist knowing the actual objects intended 

 by the Latin terms, not a mere cataloguer of names — I had almost 

 written a " philologist " — must be the more correct and useful. I know 

 of no one who is competent to undertake the revision of the 

 Palcearctio Noctuid fauna who, at the same time, has the 

 time and material to do so. It has seemed to be the policy 

 of the British Museum to exclude specialists on the Noctuidae and 

 lower moths from employment. Nevertheless, the time is coming on 

 when a new edition of Staudingcr will be necessary. I hope that the 

 attem])t I have made here to purify the generic synonymy will Ijc con- 

 sidered. Such a state of affairs as I have shown to exist, in which a 

 genus like Hadena is quoted, author and page, where if the book were 

 looked at not a single species of our modern genus could be found in 

 the original, demands enquiry. 



CopiJtAMESTRA, Grt., 1883. — Type: C. brassieae. In 1883 I took 

 this as the type of a new genus, describing a new American s])ecies 

 with armed fore-tibiae. Hiibner's genus Baraihra is mixed, including 

 also alhicolon. This latter is u.sually referred to Mamesira, but it is 

 shown to belong to a distinct structural group of the modern genus 



