December 12, 1895] 



NATURE 



123 



collector, Sig. L. Fea. But although the Italians, 

 n the persons of Sigg. Fea and Comotto, had had the 

 first bite at the Burmese Arachnid fauna, the careful 

 sorting and examination of Mr. Oates's collection soon 

 showed that this gentleman had more than doubled the 

 number of known Burmese spiders. For whereas only 

 175 species had been previously recorded, the total number 

 now amounts to no less than 381. Mr. Oates's collection 

 thus contains 206 species that are new to Burma, and of 

 these 153 appear to be new also to science. It com- 

 prises, moreover, either the males or females of many 

 species of which only one sex had been hitherto described. 

 The secret of Mr. Oates's success as a collector of 

 spiders is to be attributed partly, of course, to his pay- 

 ing special attention to them, but largely to his ingenious 

 mode of attracting them. He tells us that — 



" The greater part of the collection was made at 

 Tharrawaddy [a station about seventy miles north of 

 Rangoon], where I had a large garden, and a portion of 

 it was specially prepared for the attraction of spiders, 

 which came to it in large numbers. I put in plants of 

 those species which my experience told me were specially 

 affected by spiders, and by this means I was able to 

 observe very many species in a small compass. By care- 

 fully watching the females for some weeks, I generally 

 contrived to secure the males in such a manner as to 

 render their identification with their respective females 

 certain. In addition to the garden, there were large 

 forests not far from my house. I collected at all seasons 

 of the year, but I found the rains, from May to October, 

 most productive. I was greatly assisted by my wife, who 

 soon overcame her natural repugnance to spiders, and 

 handled them freely." 



With such exceptional opportunities of observation at 

 his command, it is a matter for regret that Mr. Oates 

 made so few notes upon the bionomics of the species he 

 collected. For it is no exaggeration to say that if records 

 had been kept in the case of each species of its habitat, 

 and method of courtship and of the structure of its 

 cocoon and snare, the value and interest of the collec- 

 tion would have been greatly enhanced. In the case, 

 however, of Herentiia viultipuncta, an Epeiroid allied 

 to Nephila and Argiope, and widely distributed in the 

 Oriental region, Mr. Oates made the following obser- 

 vation : 



" Makes a web about three feet long on a smooth tree- 

 trunk, width one-third or one-fourth of girth of tree. All 

 the lines are vertical or horizontal, forming a perfect 

 rope-ladder. The web follows the convexity of the trunk, 

 and is everywhere about half-inch from it. Verticals 

 about one inch apart, horizontals about quarter of an 

 inch apart." 



With justice does Thorell term this : " annotatiunculam 

 magni momenti," and add " rete formaj adhuc plane 

 ignotze igitur facit, Herennia inultipuncta^\' Curiously 

 enough, however, M. Simon asserts that this same species, 

 as observed by him in Ceylon, makes a snare, as indeed 

 one would have supposed to be the case, of the ordinary 

 orbicular type. We are consequently at a loss to know 

 quite what value is to be attached to Mr. Oates's state- 

 ment. 



Turning to the spiders themselves, perhaps the only 



one amongst the new genera and species that calls for 



special mention is the remarkable new form Prolochus 



longiceps^ which although presenting many points of 



NO. 1363, VOL. 53] 



similarity to the familiar epeiroid, Meta segmen/ata, differs 

 from all the orb-spinners that have been hitherto 

 described, in having only six large eyes and the cephalic 

 region of the carapace very high and long. In this last 

 respect it somewhat resembles the spider named Arc/iaa, 

 which was described by Koch and Berendt from the 

 Oligocene amber beds of the Baltic. Thorell con- 

 sequently refers it, although provisionally, to the 

 Archaiidae (written by him Archicoida;), and classes the 

 family with the Retitelariae, although for what reason 

 does not appear. Probably the best way of disposing of 

 the difficulty would have been the establishment of a 

 new family for the reception of this anomalous spider. 



So far as the rest of the genera and species are con- 

 cerned, there appears to be nothing particularly remark- 

 able in the collection, excepting only the new genus of 

 AttideC named Ligdus, which in its flat tened form and the 

 position of its enlarged first pair of legs presents a 

 strOngish superficial resemblance to one of the False- 

 Scorpions {Pseudoscorpiones). 



Most persons who glance through this book will 

 probably be surprised and disappointed to find that the 

 400 pages of letterpress are relieved by no illustrations ; . 

 but those who are familiar with the rest of Dr. Thorell's 

 works, will know what they have to expect on this head. 

 The lack of figures, however, is made good, as far indeed 

 as is possible, by the fulness of the specific descriptions, 

 which often run to more than two pages of print. Some, 

 perhaps, may be disposed to think these descriptions are 

 unnecessarily long ; but on such a point, Dr. Thorell's 

 opinion is probably of greater value than that of any 

 other person : and it is only fair to him to mention that, 

 in addition to the description, a briefer diagnosis of each 

 species is subjoined, so that the attempt to identify a 

 species does not necessarily entail a large amount of 

 fruitless reading. We greatly regret, however, the 

 author's stern adherence to the practice of not compiling 

 synopses of his species. For there is nothing like a 

 carefully compiled synoptical table for bringing home to an 

 author and his readers the essential characteristics of the 

 species being dealt with. 



In the introduction Dr. Thorell takes the opportunity 

 of explaining his opinions upon some of the many vexed 

 questions connected with zoological nomenclature. But 

 although we find it impossible to agree with all that he 

 holds, the views of such an accomplished linguist are 

 worthy of the greatest attention, especially where 

 questions of philology are concerned ; and we earnestly 

 commend them to the notice of those who in the con- 

 struction 'and adoption of zoological names wantonly 

 violate every canon of etymology, until " it seems as if 

 neither common sense nor the dignity of science can 

 claim any rights against the whims, carelessness, or 

 ignorance of certain authors." Speaking, for instance, of 

 the adoption without alteration of ungrammatically 

 formed specific names, Dr. Thorell says ; 



" It is an essential rule in the Linnaean systeni that the 

 scientific names of plants and animals shall be in Lafin, 

 at least as to their form. Now as a great number of 

 specific names consist of the genitive of personal proper 

 names, that genitive should, when possible, be formed m 

 analogy with the genitive of Latin names or other words 

 of a similar form. The genitive, for instance, of Caligula,. 



