On EUROPEAN SPIDERS. 205 
sian Fauna; but his attempts do not appear to me to have fully suc- 
ceeded, chiefly on aecount of the insufficient materials he had at his disposal. 
SIMON in 1864?) combined C. Kocm's many genera so as to form five, Rha- 
nis ©. KocH (= hene THoR: Vid. p. 37), Attus WALCK., Cyrtonota 
Siw., Heliophanus C. Koch and Salticus (LATR.), of which the last four be- 
long to the Fauna of Europe; the greatest part of Kocm's genera (and sub- 
genera) SIMON accepted as separate sub-genera or "groups"? SIMON’S 
classification of the Attoidæ here referred to, appears to me very defective, 
and ean hardly be considered as making any advance towards the solution 
of the difficult problem; the genus Cyrtonota, in which he includes Kocnu's 
Calliethera together with Philia, Plexippus, ete. especially is very unnatural. 
SIMON himself has moreover since abandoned this division and adopted another 
quite different; he now ?) divides the European Attoidze into 10 genera (of 
which two, Aenemerus and Yllenus, are new) according to characteristics 
principally derived from the form of the males palpi and mandibles. This 
division has indeed the advantage of being based upon fixed and easily 
observable differences of form, but it has also the great defect of applying 
only to one (and that the rarer) sex; it is impossible to say to which of 
SIMONS genera a female specimen belongs, as long as the male of the same 
species is unknown, unless it should happen, that the females of that genus 
are also distinguished by some common feature; but in such case that 
feature ought to have been included among the characteristics of the genus. 
I have already (p. 19, 83) stated my objections to the adoption of genera 
depending upon characteristics that apply only to one sex, or that are de- 
rived from a difference of form in the organs of copulation alone. 
What has here been said, sufficiently indicates my opinion, that a 
natural arrangement of the Attoidæ is as yet a pium desiderium. For my 
own part I have awhile hesitated between two methods of proceeding — 
either to adopt only three genera, Salticus (Pyrophorus C. KOCH), Leptor- 
chestes (Salticus C. KocH) and Attus; — or to adopt and endeavour as well 
as possible to characterize those of the genera formed by C. Kocx, which 
belong to the European Fauna. These genera are in fact pretty well known 
as regards their general appearance, aud they have also been acknowledged 
1) Hist. Nat. d. Araignées, p. 307. — Dinopis [Deinopis] Mac Leay, which 
SIMON also refers to the Attoidæ, is in our opinion the type of a separate family, 
Dinopoide. Vid. p. 43. 
2) For Attus Doumercii WALCK. he proposed Lagenicola ‚as a new sub-genus 
of Attus (loc. cit., p. 316). 
3) Monogr. d. espéces Europ. de la fam. d. Attides, p. 16. 
