320 



APPENDIX A. 



Had no type, but accept Lamarck's specification of syringaria. 



I Kirby, 2 Smith (^ super-family, but agrees with Kirby). 



, 2 - 15 - I + 2 



Result ^ ^ . 



10 



Type sambucaria, papilionaria, grossulariata or syringaria: a valid 



genus = Geometra. 



[ Aurivillius. 



^ , 1-2 — s + 2 



Result ^-^- . 



10 



No replies received from Scudder and Staudinger. Durrani. 



REPLIES. 



96. Hampson (Sir G. F.). 12 September 1896. 



" There is no such genus as PJialaena, L., which is roughly the 

 equivalent of Heterocera and includes the whole of them except the 

 Sphingidae. It was never used, in the text, singly, but always in 

 conjunction with other generic names Phalaena-Noctua, Phalaena- 

 Pyralis, etc." 



97. Walsingham (Lord). 



"It is an indisputable fact that Papilio, Sphinx, and PJialacJia 

 are the assemblages of species to which Linnaeus applied the 

 term ' genus,' but it is also equally true that the founder of zoo- 

 logical nomenclature recognised the necessity of splitting up these 

 ' genera ' into subdivisions which more nearly approximate to our 

 modern ' genus.' Are we to quarrel about the meaning of the word 

 'genus,' or are we to endeavour to bring Linnaeus into line with 

 modern thought? Surely the latter is the wiser plan, otherwise we 

 shall merely waste our time in raising the value of the word 'genus' 

 and sinking that of ' family.' As however the term ' genus ' has 

 by modern usage assumed a position inferior to that assigned 

 to it by Linnaeus, it may well continue to exist in the grade which 

 it has assumed, but it is obvious that the Linnaean ' genus ' Papilio 

 is the equivalent of the RJwpalocenx, that the Linnaean ' genus ' 

 Sphinx is the equivalent of the SpJiingina, and that the Linnaean 

 ' genus ' PJialaena is the equivalent of the remaining Heterocera, 

 while the subdivisions of these Linnaean ' genera ' more nearly 

 approach the modern conception of a ' genus.' These Linnaean 

 ' genera ' should be altered in termination in accordance with 

 modern usage, and while attributed to Linnaeus should be used 

 in lieu of the more recent terms RJiopalocera and Heterocera, 

 and the subdivisions of the Linnaean genera should be attributed 

 to Linnaeus as ' genera ' in the modern acceptance of the term. 

 L am therefore of opinion that Tortrix should be .attributed to 



