TO IXDJAX CAKCIXOLOaY. 411 



Genus Diogenes, Dana. 



Great confusion exists as to the nomenclature of the commonest and longest known 



members of this genus. I have therefore drawn up in tabular form below, a synopsis of 



the species described by last-centuiy wi-itei-s, arranged according to order of publication, 



and showing the probable interpretation of eacli, or the name which the; species now bears. 



Linuseus, 1 7G7 Cancer Diogenes Probably several species included uuder 



Syst. Nat. torn. i. pars 2. this name. 



Fabricius, 1775 Pu<jurus DicMjenes Description copied from Linnicus. 



Syst. Eiit. 



Fabricius, 1787 PagiirKs Dio(jeiies Species uurecoguizable, perhaps a 



Mantissa Insect, torn. i. Pagiwus*. 



Parjurus mUcs D. miles ( Herbst) . 



Fabricius had evidently seen the 

 then unpublished figure of Herbst, 

 for he refers the species to Cancer 

 miles, Herbst. 



Herbst, 1791 1 Cancer Diogenes D.Diogenes (Herbst). 



Naturgcs. Krabbcn u. Krebse, 

 Bd, ii. Heft 1. 



Cancer miles D. wi/e* (Herbst). 



Fabricius, 1 793 Pagurus Diogenes Species unrecognizable. 



Ent. Syst. torn. ii. 



Pagurus mites D. miles { Herbst) . 



(Both the above are copied from the 

 ' Mantissa Inscctorura.') 



Fabricius, 1798 Pagurus Diogenes Species iinrecognizable. 



Suppl. Ent. Syst. 



Pagurus miles Probably D. Diogenes (Herbst). 



Pagurus custos Probably D. cusfos (Fa))r.) , ;\Iiluc-Edw. 



Pagurus diaphanus D. miles (Herbst). 



The first writer to definitely characterize any of the species is Herbst, and on Taf xxii. 

 of his work he gives clear and unmistakable figures of two of the commoner forms, which 

 I shall redescribe in the following pages as Diogenes Diogenes % (Herbst) and I>. miles 

 (Herbst). The sliort diagnoses of Eabricius, published four years earlier in the 'Mantissa 

 Insectorvim,' were probably intended to characterize the same species, and in the case of 

 the second, viz. Pagnrus miles, Fabricius makes reference to the then unpublished figure 

 of Herbst. Tn the ' Supplementuin l<]iitomologiLe Systematicaj,' published seven years after 

 Herbst's description of the two above-named sjjecies, confusion is apparent — lierbst's Cancer 



* Dc Haaii referred this species to P. csjiei-sus, Berthold. 



t Herbst's work appeared in parts published between 17S2 and 1304 ; the date given is that of the part in which 

 the two species of Diogenes are described. 



X Identical generic and specific names are perhaps objectionable, but the other alternative, of changing a long- 

 established specific name because it has at some later period been adopted for the genus, appears to me still more objec- 

 tionable. The latter plan was adopted by Dana in the Paguridaj, and his species Clibana,-i)is vnh/nris and Aniculus 

 typiats should, in my opinion, stand as Glihaaarim cihaaarius (Herbst) and Aniculus aniculus (Fahr.). 



