34 T. THORELL, 
foka VINS.) to genera already received under either the same or other names. 
But if at first sight the number of genera adopted by Simon appears not 
to be unreasonably great, but rather the reverse, the fact is nevertheless 
otherwise. Instead of dividing every family or sub-family into a number 
of groups comparable with each other, viz. the genera, and merely applying 
to these a generie name, he has followed the altogether objectionable exam- 
ple set by some authors, of forming so-called sub-genera; and not content 
with dividing a large number of genera into "sous-genres' with separate 
names, he goes farther and divides these "sous-genres" into groupes”, also 
loaded with names of a similar kind, whereby the number of generie 
names used by SIMON becomes very considerable. The "sous-genres" and 
"groupes" are often very vaguely distinguished, and the characters attri- 
buted both to them and to the genera properly so called, nay even to the 
families themselves, are in general by no means trustworthy and indeed 
not unfrequently erroneous. !) 
SIMON has endeavoured to give the etymological derivation of every 
generic name; his services however in this respect are greatly depreciated 
1) This may be sufficiently shown by a couple of examples. Of the family 
Scytodiformes it is said (p. 43), that their physionomy has "quelque chose de parti- 
eulier, qui est dû à la forme globuleuse du corselet, élevé surtout en arrière” etc. But of 
the genera belonging to that family, Scytodes is the only one to which this description 
is applicable; for Omosites has the cephalothorax "déprimé" and Rachus has its 
"parties latérales et postérieures déprimées", Pholcus has it "déprimé", and Artema 
"déprimé en arrière”, according to SrwoN's own account. — According to SIMON 
(p. 256) the genus Singa differs from Æpeira "par une forme particulière et characté- 
ristique de l'abdomen; . . .. il s'éléve et s'élargit graduellement jusqu'à sa partie 
postérieure, dont la portion supérieure est un tubercule et dont la portion inférieure 
est tronquée obliquement" — a description which may very well suit for S. conica (which 
however WESTRING and MENGE, as it seems to us with good reason, do not aggre- 
gate to the genus Singa), but which is quite inapplicable to e. g. S. hamata, which 
is typical of the genus, as well as to S. Herii and others.— Epeira marmorea and 
pyramidata (scalaris), which are perfectly similar both in form and economy, and 
distinguished only by colour, are referred by Simon to different "groupes" of the 
"sub-genus" Æpeira: the former is a Neopora Sım., which group is said (p. 261) to have 
the abdomen "globuleux faiblement anguleux", and the species of which are "araignées 
vivant . . . dans les. jardins, ne construisant pas de coques", whereas the last 
belongs to the group Neoschena [Neoscona] Sim., the species of which have the 
abdomen "tout-à-fait globuleux et oviforme", and are "araignées vivant sur les bords 
des eaux, se renfermant dans des coques" etc. — The sub-genera, into which the 
genus Micryphantes is subdivided, are distinguished by characters belonging only to one 
sex, and one of them, Viderius SIM, is characterized (p. 196) by a peculiarity ("les deux 
