(ix ) 



iuleqiuitc picture ol' a clinsalis : |i<i>ilinii nf flic i;lii/,ril pDi'tions (if the eye; 

 Iciiglli ul' the tuiiguc ; cUi((M-ior I'cmiir (cxturually visiMr ui' nut j ; .-.li-uuture iA' 

 blij;matical areas ol' Uiu alwluiueii : sliaiic and armature of the cremaster. 



The nuuilier of imliviihials and sjiecies of i^iiliinijiiluc contained in the 

 Triny IMusenui is eunsideralde, there lieinj,' in tlie eolK'ctioii nearly ICijiioii s|ieei- 

 lueiis, liehinijinj,' to (ilid-odd sjiecies. Tiiough this inalc^rial is vastly larger than 

 that contained in any other collection, it was nevertheless not siillicient lo foriu 

 the basis of a ihoruu.-iii revision of the family. >Since many of the s]ieeies of 

 Sjihiiuiirliir are very ditlicult lo lli^tinguish, and therefore the descri|ilions and 

 ofteu also the figures not exact euough, it was uecessary for us to examine the 

 specimens ou which the names iirojiosed by previous authors were founded, in 

 order to find out bow many species arc known aud which arc the proper names 

 for them. 



It has lieen our good fortune to have our apfwal tor help adilres>(M| In 

 private collectors and museums respoiideil to with the greatest liberality." 

 Without this kind assistance it would have been altogether impossible to 

 diseutanglc the synonymy and to bring the species which wi're insullicienlly 

 described into their proper place in our classification. \Ve gratefully acknow- 

 ledge here the lielji received from the authorities of the Uritish Museum, of 

 the Museums at Oxford (Hope De]iartment), Dublin, Paris, IJrnxelles, Berlin, 

 Dresden, Mi'uicheu, .Stettin, ( 'ojienhagen, Stockholm, Vienna, Madrid, New York, 

 and Brisbane : and we are no less grateful for the kind assistance rendered 

 by H. Druce, L. W . Distant, W. Scliaus, Colonel 8wiuhoe, M. 0. I'iepers, 

 P. ( '. T. Snellen, G. AVeymer, G. Semper, Dr. A. Pageustecher, A, Bang-Haas 

 I coll. Staudinger), P. Doguiu, P. Mabille, Dr. W. J. Holland, and t'harles 

 (Iberthiir ; who all either sent us photographs, types, and other specimens, or 

 allowed us to "visit their collections aud to study the material coutaiued therein. — 

 Maximas colleyis gnUias .' 



An important point for the satisfactory progress of our work was a 

 comparison of the long series of types of Walker's and Boisduval's descriptions, 

 contained respectively in the magnificent collection of Mons. t'harles Oberthtir 

 aud in the British Museum. A closer study of these specimens than had 

 hitherto been atterupted was absolutely necessary. For Boisduval, when 

 visiting the British Museum in the forties of the last century, had named 

 in manuscrijit and made notes uj)on the iSphingidae of that collection, wliich 

 names were for the greater )iart adopted by Walker in ls.")('i, but often applied 

 to other species than those for which Boisduval had intended them to stand. 

 This muddle became intensified by Boisduval, who, in his monograph published 



* Only two IclteVM of iiuiuiry liiive Ijeeii left unanswered. The names of the addressees may be 

 pasited over in silence. 



