﻿126 
  Mr. 
  H. 
  E. 
  Andrewes 
  on 
  the 
  

  

  dans 
  I'ancien 
  genre 
  Panagaeus" 
  (Bull. 
  Mosc. 
  1861, 
  iv, 
  336) 
  

   he 
  changes 
  Fabricius' 
  fasciata 
  to 
  bifasciata, 
  but 
  the 
  other 
  

   references 
  are 
  correct, 
  and 
  we 
  have 
  Epicosmus 
  angulatus 
  

   Fab. 
  = 
  Panagaeus 
  toiTientosus 
  Vig. 
  = 
  Phnelia 
  bifasciata 
  

   Fab. 
  

  

  Later 
  on 
  in 
  his 
  " 
  Essai 
  monographique 
  sur 
  les 
  Pana- 
  

   geides 
  " 
  (Ann. 
  Soc. 
  Ent. 
  Belg. 
  xxi, 
  1878, 
  133), 
  not 
  only 
  is 
  

   the 
  species 
  allotted 
  to 
  a 
  new 
  genus, 
  but 
  the 
  name 
  of 
  

   angulatus 
  has 
  disappeared 
  and 
  we 
  have 
  only 
  Eudema 
  

   bifasciatum 
  Fab. 
  = 
  Panagaeus 
  tomentosus 
  Vig. 
  Having 
  

   thus 
  eliminated 
  the 
  correct 
  name 
  and 
  introduced 
  an 
  

   erroneous 
  one, 
  Chaudoir 
  makes 
  his 
  own 
  error 
  the 
  pretext 
  

   for 
  changing 
  Castelnau's 
  Craspedophorus 
  bifasciatus 
  into 
  

   C. 
  castelnaui 
  Chaud. 
  (Some 
  remarks 
  on 
  Chaudoir's 
  

   Monograph 
  will 
  be 
  found 
  under 
  the 
  next 
  species.) 
  

  

  The 
  species 
  is 
  common 
  in 
  South 
  India, 
  without 
  apparently 
  

   extending 
  to 
  Ceylon. 
  There 
  is 
  an 
  example 
  in 
  the 
  British 
  

   Museum 
  labelled 
  " 
  Nepal," 
  and 
  two 
  examples 
  at 
  Oxford 
  

   labelled 
  " 
  Assam 
  " 
  and 
  " 
  Siam 
  " 
  respectively, 
  but 
  these 
  

   indications 
  seem 
  to 
  me 
  doubtful. 
  

  

  6. 
  Craspedophorus 
  (Carabus) 
  reflexus. 
  Although 
  this 
  is 
  

   an 
  African 
  species, 
  it 
  was 
  described 
  as 
  coming 
  from 
  India, 
  

   and 
  references 
  to 
  it 
  in 
  entomological 
  literature 
  are 
  so 
  wide 
  

   of 
  the 
  mark 
  that 
  I 
  refer 
  to 
  it 
  here. 
  Before 
  doing 
  so 
  I 
  

   must 
  say 
  a 
  few 
  words 
  to 
  illustrate 
  Chaudoir's 
  remarkable 
  

   proceedings 
  when 
  preparing 
  his 
  " 
  Monographic 
  sur 
  les 
  

   Panageides 
  " 
  (Ann. 
  Soc. 
  Ent. 
  Belg. 
  xxi, 
  1878). 
  Panagaeus 
  

   was 
  described 
  by 
  Latreille 
  (Hist. 
  Nat. 
  Crust, 
  et 
  Ins. 
  iii, 
  

   1802, 
  91) 
  and 
  was 
  used 
  for 
  many 
  years 
  as 
  the 
  genus 
  of 
  

   most 
  of 
  the 
  then 
  known 
  species 
  of 
  the 
  group. 
  Hope 
  

   (Col. 
  Man. 
  ii, 
  1838, 
  165) 
  described 
  the 
  genus 
  Craspedophorus 
  

   for 
  Fabricius' 
  Cychrus 
  reflexus, 
  and, 
  although 
  his 
  reference 
  

   to 
  the 
  species 
  is 
  erroneous, 
  his 
  description 
  of 
  the 
  genus 
  

   shows 
  clearly 
  that 
  he 
  had 
  the 
  type 
  before 
  him, 
  and 
  more- 
  

   over 
  he 
  gives 
  (t. 
  3, 
  f. 
  1) 
  a 
  figure, 
  which, 
  except 
  for 
  the 
  

   outhne 
  of 
  the 
  thorax, 
  fairly 
  represents 
  it. 
  Two 
  years 
  

   later 
  Castelnau 
  (Hist. 
  Nat. 
  Ins. 
  i, 
  1840, 
  137) 
  indicated 
  

   rather 
  than 
  described 
  his 
  genus 
  Eudema 
  for 
  Panagaeus 
  

   regalis 
  Gory 
  (Ann. 
  Soc. 
  Ent. 
  Fr. 
  1833, 
  213) 
  from 
  Senegal 
  

   and 
  C. 
  reflexus 
  Fab., 
  which 
  he 
  makes 
  a 
  synonym 
  of 
  P. 
  

   nobilis 
  Dej. 
  (Spec. 
  Gen. 
  v, 
  1831, 
  598) 
  from 
  the 
  Cape 
  of 
  

   Good 
  Hope 
  ; 
  the 
  two 
  last-named 
  species 
  are 
  quite 
  different 
  

   and 
  probably 
  it 
  was 
  P. 
  nobilis 
  he 
  had 
  before 
  him. 
  Chaudoir 
  

   (Bull. 
  Mosc. 
  1846, 
  iv, 
  512 
  (note) 
  ) 
  described 
  his 
  genus 
  

  

  