28 ENTOMOLOGICAL NEWS [Jan., ’20 
Gomphine A griogomphus and to that of the Corduline Cordulephya that 
he finds preserved the remains of a common primitive form of the Anisop- 
terous wing and which, in addition to the similarity of front and hind 
wings, offers him a starting-point for a phylogenetic arrangement of the 
Libelluline genera. He has chosen to put the generic table in a form 
“more difficult to use, but giving a truer presentation of the natural sys- 
tem, rather than to construct a dichotomous table for mechanical identi- 
fication,”’ as the realization of the former idea seemed to him to be more 
important than to help the beginner. It must be admitted that, in prac- 
tice, the reference of an unfamiliar form to its proper group by this table 
is not always easy. 
Very full bibliographical references for the genera and especially for 
the species are given up to 1915, so that for this subfamily the catalogues 
of Kirby and of Muttkowski are superseded by the present work. After 
each reference under a species the locality or country to which that cita- 
tion applies is given in parentheses, a very useful addition. The material 
studied for this monograph is listed under the museums or collections 
to which it belongs, so that the geographical distribution of any species 
can only be ascertained by collating and rearranging these data—a feature 
which can not be praised. Special attention has been paid to pointing 
out any differences found between specimens of the same species from 
different localities, even where such are not given subspecific rank. 
Dr. Ris has rightly perceived that a most important task called for in 
the execution of this monograph, where so many forms had already been 
described, was that of critical comparison to determine the status of those 
previously named and he has exercised this function throughout, not 
hesitating to express in the supplement views different from those put 
forth in some earlier fascicules. 
The typography is very clear. Dr. Ris’s photographs of wings and 
M. Menger’s drawings of genitalia and other details are reproduced as 
excellent half-tones in the text. The colored plates show entire insects 
in most cases. The paper is of a finish correctly designated as elegant, 
but, alas, with a weight which is serious when the fascicules are handled 
together. 
The last words of the introduction to fascicule XVI, part 2, may be 
‘freely rendered thus: ‘As I now give out this great work from my hands, 
I am very conscious—more so than at its beginning—that it is not a 
conclusion but a commencement, a foundation on which more can be 
built, more easily and more safely than before the extensive material was 
collected and sifted.’’ For that collecting and sifting we offer our thanks 
and our praise to the author, our hearty congratulations for his execution 
of the “‘legacy”’ received from the great Belgian master. Only after we 
have studied his work in detail, by comparisons with the insects of which 
it treats, can we presume to fully appreciate its value. 
Puitie P. CALVERT. 
