74 T. THORELL, 
divides his ” Netzspinnen, Retiarie” into three families, Pachygnathide, Li- 
nyphidæ and Therididæ, of which the two latter are distinguished by the 
form of their webs, just as in BLACKWALL, refers to the Linyphide those spiders 
only, which belong to WESIRING’S Linyphia and Tapinopa, thus excluding 
both the Ærigone- and Micryphantes-species, which he makes Theridide. 
According to MENGE, the Pachygnathide do not make any web, but both 
WESTRING !) and BLACKWALL ?) speak of their webs as being irregular, and 
the latter says of Pach. Clerckii, that it is related with Zheridium "by the 
irregularity of the scanty web which it spins”: nevertheless BLACKWALL aggre- 
gates this genus to the Zinyphüde, not to the Theridüde. It having thus 
been found impracticable to assign any certain line of separation between 
Theridiide and Linyphiide either in the form of the body or the appearance 
of the web, I have (in company with WESTRING and OHLERT) not considered 
the latter as either a family or sub-family separate from the former. 
Also WALCKENAER, who had at first distinguished them under the names 
of " Rétitéles" (Theridiidee) and ” Tapiteles” (Linyphiidæ), subsequently uni- 
ted them under the denomination ÆRétitèles *). Neither needs Pachygnatha be 
separated from them, although that genus certainly deviates a little from the 
typical Theridioidæ, as is the case also with Æpisinus, which genus is by 
some (e. g. SIMON and ÖHLERT) included in the family Thomisoide. 
C. Kocm's division of his Theridides *) into 5 sub-families (” Beutel- 
spinnen”, Wandspinnen”, " Eigentliche Webspinnen”, ” Strickerspinnen” and 
"'Bodenspinnen") is altogether impracticable and full of gross errors. Epei- 
roidæ and Drassoidæ occur there mixed up with real Theridioidæ in a man- 
ner, which is utterly unaccountable. — SIMON divides his ” Théridiformes” 
into three "tribus": " Clotheiens”, ” Theridiens”, and ” Linyphiens”; the first 
of these appears to us to form two separate families, which we call Enyoidæ 
and Urocteoide, and of which we only refer the former to the Ketitelarie, 
whereas the Urocteoide may perhaps better be united with the next sub- 
order, the Tubitelariæ; the Théridiens and Linyphiens together correspond 
very nearly with our Zheridioide and Agalenoide, which last Simon has 
united with his Linyphiens. Of Hyptiotes and Dictyna, which he aggregates 
to his Theridiens, we include the former genus in the Uloborinæ of the fa- 
mily Zpeiroide, and the latter in the Amaurobiine of the family Agalenoide. — 
MENGE 5) refers not only Dictyna (and Lethia) but also Hahnia to his The- 
rididæ; we unite this latter genus with the genuine Agalenine. 
1) Aran. Suec., p. 144. 2) Spid. of Gr. Brit., II, p. 320. 
3) Hist. Nat. d. Ins. Apt., IV, p. 527. 4) Uebers. d. Arachn.-Syst., 5, p. 15 —24. 
5) Preuss. Spinn., III, p. 244, 249, 251. 
