n 



been described, for, indeed, it has often, but not with regard 

 to its several moults. Until recent years it was thought sufficient 

 to describe, and usually in general terms, the adult caterpillar, or 

 at the most, to describe without regard to moults, as young, half- 

 grown, three-quarters grown, etc., and until Mr. Buckler bred 

 Machaon, as he relates, in 1880, with the express desire of ascer- 

 taining the number of moults the species was subject to, I, for 

 one, could get no definite information on the matter. Several 

 old authors had stated that there were four, as Chr. Schwarz, 

 1791, C. Valoren, 1859, ^-s Dr. Hagen informed me ; but later 

 ones, to whom I had access, gave no definite information about 

 it, and two well-known entomologists to whom I applied thought 

 the number was but three. Mr. Buckler's paper has the credit of 

 clearly establishing the number of moults in Machaon and for 

 the first time carefully describing them. 



" TINEID^E " OR " TINEINA." 



By Thomas, Lord Walsingham, F. Z. S., Etc. 



In a paper published in the Journal of the Cincinnati Society 

 of Natural History for April, 1882, vol. v. p. 5, Mr. V. T. Chambers 

 discusses the antennae and trophi of Lepidopterous larvae, oftering 

 the results of his observations" as suggestions to systematists of 

 the Lepidoptera " which " may aid somewhat in their classification, 

 especially in that of the Tineina." He then writes, " these do 

 not constitute a family in the sense that the Noctuidae, Geome- 

 tridae, etc., are families. The Tineina is {sic) a large group of 

 many families, some of which seem to me to be as far removed 

 from each other in a natural system as they are from any of the 

 Macro-Heterocera." 



In a foot-note at the bottom of page 5 we read : " I have 

 sometimes been asked why I used the name Tineina instead of 

 Tineidae. I trust the above remarks afford a sufficient answer. 

 Besides, ' Tineina ' is the term adopted by the editors of the ' Nat- 

 ural History of the Tineina,' the standard work upon the group.'' 



Although the precedent quoted by Mr. Chambers is rightly 

 entitled to respect, there are certain rules generally recognized 

 among naturalists of all countries by which, for the sake of uni- 

 formity, it is most desirable to be* guided. Probably the best 

 modern authority that can be quoted upon this subject is to 

 be found in the " Rules of Zoological Nomenclature by Hugh E. 

 Strickland," originally drawn up by a committee of the British 

 Association in 1842; revised, corrected, and reprinted, by their 

 authority, in 1863 and 1878. 



These " Rules " consist of a " Series of propositions for ren- 

 dering the nomenclature of Zoology uniform and permanent." 

 Turning to p. 23 and p. 17 respectively of this pamphlet we find : 



