Classification of the Spiders. 303 



noticing the exceptions from every character thus given, so 

 far as they are known ; adding to this exposition such re- 

 marks on the liabits &c. of the animals as may be of use in 

 their determination or are of more genera] interest. 



In a work treating of the synonyms of a certain number 



of European Spiders*, in which some definition of the genera 



adopted was necessary, and where it also seemed desirable to 



have their systematic connection indicated, I have myself 



adopted, in the main, the classification of the aforesaid authors- 



but as it had become necessary, from the progress of arach- 



nology in general, and especially from the great number of 



new genera and species discovered in later years, to resolve 



the seven great " families " or " tribus " into a number of 



smaller groups (already at that time in part called " families ") 



I readopted for those greater groups, each divided into a 



certain number of families, the old Latreillian denominations 



only with a few slight modifications (Orbitelarige, Retitelariai, 



Tubitelariaj, &c.) , and raised them to the dignity of Suborders If 



— a term instead of which I shall here use that of Tribus. 



I further endeavoured to characterize the different suborders 



or tribus as far as was necessary for the classification of the 



European genera ; as to the exotic families and genera, I also 



tried to determine to which of the tribus adopted by me tliey 



probably belonged, without, however, concealing from myself 



that " a by no means inconsiderable number of forms could 



not without great uncertainty, even if at all, be included 



under the hitherto received families and higher groups " t 



and that probably one or more new tribus would in the course 



of time be proposed §, for instance by dismemberment of the 



* Thorell, ''On European Spiders," I. (in Nova Acta Rejr. Soc. Sci. 

 Upsal. ser. 3, vol. vii. fasc_. i. et ii., 1869 and 1870) ; [II.] ' Eemarks on 

 Synonjaiis of European Spiders ' (1870-1873). 



t Some years later (see Thorell, " Description of the Aranepe collected 

 in Colorado in 1875 by A, S. Packard, jun., M.D.," in Bulletin of the 

 U.S. Geological and Geographical Survey, vol. iii. no. 2, p. 477, 1877) 

 I changed this word into the less significant term "Sections," it having 

 been justly remarked (by Gerstacker) that the differences between the 

 groups in question were not of sufficient weight to warrant for them the 

 name Suborder. The term " Tribus " used by Latreille has, however, 

 the priority, and is also preferable, in so far as it implies that the groups 

 are natural, or formed of closely allied families and genera, 



X Rem. on Syn. p. 596. 



§ In ' Die Arachniden Australiens,' p. 231, L. Koch has formed the 

 Tribus (Suborder) Ruditelarice for the genera CelcBnia or Thlaosoma and 

 Cryptothele ; I think, however, that these genera may be included under 

 the Orbitelaripe (see Rem. on Syn. p. 699). More recently Dahl has 

 formed the Tribus (Suborder) Playitehirice for Pholcus, characterized by 

 having only two air-sacs and no tubular trachete (see F. Dahl, " Analy- 

 tische Bearbeitung der Spinnen Norddeutschlands, mit einer anatomisch- 



21* 



