6 MrmoirM uf llf Indi'in Muxruni. |\<ii,. \ II, 



In onlor to prevent Muli!<e«|uent lainftiAiitn I have nHloM-ribcd, ur have nt li>aot directed 

 utt<>ntion t«» tbo ili-tinrti\i« < Ii<iruitcr'> i»(. i«v»<rv ope«iej» timt I huvv sin-n, t'Xrr|itin(; only the 

 OritMital i>ni'> «i«*M rilHtl m nty itreviiiii" |>ii|M>r ; and I have tigur***! a hirgi* prupurtiuu 

 uf them. ThiH is nuidf ('«.-eniial by the luiMitiiifai-tory cunditiuD of inu«t uf the existing 

 dev-riptioii>. a ruinlitioii wlmh han unitcil with the inrompletene-HH of the collfition hefurc 

 mo In ntakc tht* < nnipilation of a Miti.tfnrlory >ynoiiyiiiy uf the r<|N>«'if.H very diflii ult, if not 

 imiMi-sHible. No attempt ha.x l>een made to deal with the synonymy of Hpecie^i, the 

 referem't»!« given being in all ea.ses to original (le-rriptinii-* nr • •' , • • -.vhuli I ni •■ '••:•'- 

 rclieti in making my determination^. 



The form> ib-alt with in n\y " Aci-ount of the Oriental iV->'>.ili<lai' naturally r»Hfi\f Ii-m» 

 dctniliHl treatntent than the otheni. The key> to the iletermiiiation of geneni published m 

 that work ore. however, rej>eate»l with surh alterations oj* further .study ha-n nhown to be 

 di^irable ; and, exrept in snnve of the smaller gen<'ra, keys have lM«en given t«i the identi- 

 fication of all spj'iies kniiwii t>> nie. ultliMiigh in a few i a>r"-- tlu'-e :irr jir.nttirnllv iilnitirnl 

 with thuHO already publishe*! 



The first MTioii.** attempts maiif tn iliviile the I'assalidai- up iiim> gnni.i ».m ii <•! 



Kaiip in iS6*<-()anil 1S71. respectively. In his '• Monographie dor l'as.sjdi<len,"' piiblishetl in 

 the latter vear, Ke set forth a remarkable coiKvptioii of the Animal Kiiig<b»m. whieh led him 

 to pftstulate a .serie.s ui MilMlivision-s into eo-ordinated series of fives. Believing, a.s he did, 

 that none of his five sub-families <if Passali<lae eouKI contain more tlian five groups, that no 

 group eoiilil be i'ompos««d of more than five genera, and no genus of more than live s|H?eiejt, 

 and iM'lieving that cnrrespunding species, genera and groups were to be found respe<tively in 

 all or almost all genera, groups ond sub-families, his .system of claxsifieation inevitably led 

 to a cimsiderable amount of wide separation nf closely related genera and .species. 



In 1886 Bates introduceil a number of changes into Kaup"s «lassificat ion of the American 

 species. He brought together in one .lectioii all tho.se in which the elytra are relatively short, 

 and more <»r less pn>tiiberant in the middh* of the base, and into another all the re-^t — i.e., 

 those in whieh the elytra are m<Mlerately long with broadly emarginate ba.se — sulxlividilig each 

 of these sectiims primarily according to the lengths of the antennal lamellae. I'nfortunateJy 

 for this cla-vsitication the shape of the elytra is correlate*! with the m<Mlilication of the wings 

 for stridjilation and the loss of the power of flight, changes which not only appear to have 

 t il^.-n place in some of the most highly specialized forms of several different .American groups, 

 but are also foitnil among widely separated Iiiilo-Australian genera (see below, p. 125) ; and 

 the lengths of the antennal lamellae rarely seem to have mu<h phylogenetic impt>rtancc, 

 lieing more or less variable in a numl>er of genera, perhaps in all (see also (Jravely, 1914c, 

 pp. 180 and 1S2). 



Kuwert's elalMtrate " Pa-^saliden dichotoinisrh bearbeitet " is still in-' .' in any 



seiVHe i»f phvlogenetic values, and disreganls in addition the facts of geogra] • nbution. 



Zanff and Arn>\v have done much useful work in the directicm of clearing up variou-s items 

 „f fi, -d. anil mv " Ai count of the Oriental I^assalidae " ha.s, I h«»|)e, 



help. ij.in of the forms with which it deals to t>rder ; but Kuwert's 



remains the most recent monograph of the Pas.salidae of the worhl. In my " Account of the 

 Oriental Paisalitlae " I have recorded all references known to me relating to Oriental genera 



