274 Mr. K>. I. Pocock on the Pedipalpi of the Family 



Olivier (Hist. Nat. Crust. Ins. iii. p. 48). In the face of 

 these facts it seems probable that it was Olivier's intention to 

 establish the genus Phrynus for renifbrme, and that both 

 Lamarck and Latreille were acquainted with his purpose. 

 Nevertheless, since Olivier does not seem to have used the 

 name in print prior to or during 1801 , we are compelled to 

 look upon Lamarck as its parent and upon 1801 as the date 

 of its birth. Tarantula of Fabricius is consequently its elder 

 by eight years ; and the right to the inheritance of the name 

 reniformis belongs beyond dispute to the firstborn. 



This is the solution of the first difficulty. The second is 

 involved in the identity of reniformis of Linnaeus. Pallas 

 seems to have been the first to start the confusion on this 

 point, for he identified as reniformis a species belonging to a 

 group of which chiracanthus of Gervais may be regarded as 

 typical. This opinion was adopted without further question 

 by Dr. Karsch (Arch. Nat. 1879, p. 197), and subsequently 

 by Mons. Simon (Ann. Soc. Ent. France, 1892, p. 51); but, 

 as I have already pointed out (Journ. Linn. Soc. xxiv. p. 406, 

 1893), Linnseus took as the type of reniformis the figure of a 

 species from Antigua which was published by Browne in his 

 1 History of Jamaica ' ; and this figure represents a specimen 

 which is not congeneric with the chiracanthus group, but with 

 what may be termed the palmatus group. Moreover, if 

 further evidence in support of this opinion be needed, it may 

 be urged that species of the chiracanthus group are unknown 

 in the West Indies, while those of the other section are 

 exceedingly abundant *. 



It seems therefore to be perfectly clear that the name 

 Tarantula is to be applied to the Neotropical species of 

 Amblypygi, of which palmatus, Herbst, seems to be an 

 unmistakable representative. 



There is, however, one more name to be taken into con- 

 sideration. This is Admetus of Koch (' Uebersicht des 

 Arachnidensystems,' 1850, p. 81). Four species were in- 

 cluded in this genus, namely pumilio } f uscimanus } euidmargine- 

 maculatus of C. Koch, and palmatus of Herbst, occurring in 

 the order named. But the last three are admittedly refer- 

 able to the group which I have shown should be called 

 Tarantula. Pumilio, however, belongs to the chiracanthus 

 section, and at first sight it seems reasonable to suppose that 

 the species pumilio should stand as the type of Admetus, in 

 which case the latter name would embrace all the species of 



* See Supplementary Note on p. 297 on the identity of Tarantula 

 reniformis (Linn.). 



