38 T. THORELL, 
To point out and correct the numerous erroneous or contradictory 
statements we have met with in SIMON's work, excepting where they con- 
cern the synonymies of the European spider-fauna, would be foreign to the 
problem we are endeavouring to solve. It would moreover be an unneces- 
sary and thankless task, for these errors are generally of such a character 
that they are readily seen by any one tolerably versed in arachnology. — 
SIMON appears to have no idea, that a name, once imposed, ought to be 
respected, and not arbitrarily changed for another. He rechristens La- 
TREILLE'S Cteniza (= Nemesia SAV. et AUD.) Mygalodonta, merely because he 
imagines himself to have discovered, that the former apellation "est restée 
inconnue” The name Aulonia C. KocH he rejects without assigning any 
reason at all, and gives to that genus the new name Lycosina. It is there- ' 
fore evident that many changes must be made in his nomenclature: the 
name Actinopus PERTY has right of priority before Sphodros WALCK., 3) 
which is adopted by SIMON, Palpimanus Dur. before (Platyscelum Say. et 
AUD., and) Chersis WALCK., SIM., etc. Several corrections connected with 
this we shall have occasion to make in the following pages. 
XX. 
VIEW OF THE GENERA OF EUROPEAN SPIDERS. 
It is customary to begin the series of spiders with the Zpeiroide or 
the Orbitelarie. and in the following pages I have conformed to this custom, 
because it appears to me that the properties that distinguish the whole 
Order of Spiders, are most strikingly seen in that family, and the Epeiroi- 
dæ may therefore be considered as including the very type itself of the Order. 
(Ariadna Sav. et Aup. [Aran.] 1825—7; — Cerceis MILNE-Eow. [Crust.] 1840; 
— Galene DE Haan [Crust.] 1835; — Latona Scum. [Moll.] 1817; — Pasithea La- 
MOUROUX [Polypi] 1812; — Triclaria Waen. [Aves] 1838]. — The name Cyphagogus 
has been given to a genus among the Curculiones [Coleopt.] long before 1862, accord- 
ing to GERSTÄCKER (Bericht üb. die wissensch. Leistungen im Gebiete d. Entomolo- 
gie wühr. d. Jahres 1862, p. 560)). 
1) Sphodros was, it is true, already in 1833 mentioned by WALCKENAER in his 
Mém. s. une nouv. classif. d. Aranéides, but all that is there communicated about 
that genus, is, that it has "les yeux écartés” like Missulena ( Eriodon), and that 
it is "intermédiare entre les Missulénes et les Mygales", which assuredly cannot be 
considered as a characterization of the genus. — (Sphodrus CrarRw. [Coleopt.] 1806). 
