Jan. 2x, 1875] 



NATURE 



225 



(Sundevall) as the name of the whole order, in lieu of 

 Araneidea — Aran^ides. With regard to this change, it 

 has the opinion and authority of Dr. Thorell in its 

 favour ; and something may be said for it on its own 

 merits ; but still, similar terminations (such as in the 

 present instance the ordinal termination -eidca, in the 

 class Arachnida), when adopted for the designation of 

 parallel groups in nature, are of considerable use in 

 fixing the necessary framework of classification in the 

 mind. The grouping, however, of the different fami- 

 lies in M. Simon's four sub-orders will, we may anti- 

 cipate, hardly find much favour among araneologists. 

 The " Aranea; veiK " form an e-Kceedingly heterogeneous 

 group, including as it does spiders so widely separated 

 as the Thomisides and Pholcides ! The " Gnaphosa?," 

 also, consisting only of the IJysderides and Scytodides, 

 comprise two very distinct groups, with little in common 

 except the number of the eyes, and the mode of adapta- 

 tion of the palpal organs to the digital jomts of the male 

 palpi ; characters found also among the " Araneie vera;," 

 as well as among the " Theraphosx." 



With respect to the distinguishing characters given of 

 the sub-orders " Arane;c verx " and " Aranea; oculatiu ' 

 (Yeux diunics 2C[iA. Ycux nocturnes) — the former coloured 

 and convex, the latter vitreous and flattened — some de- 

 tailed proof of these differences producing the results 

 asserted would seem to be necessary. Differences, 

 indeed, there are between the eyes of various spiders : 

 some are undoubtedly flattened, some misshapen, and, as 

 in the genus CEcobius, apparently more or less aborted ; 

 some also are of a pearly-white lustre, some dark, 

 and others brilliantly coloured ; but that the eyes of 

 spiders may be distinguished as nocturnal or diurnal by 

 the presence or absence of colour, is an idea at least 

 opposed to the views of an eminent insect anatomist, 

 M. F. MiiUer, who, as lor.g ago as 1826, " Zur Vergleich- 

 enden Physiologie des Gesichtssinnes," wrote against 

 M. Marcel de Serres in regard to a similar point among 

 insects. Apart, however, from this point, it would seem 

 scarcely necessary to attempt the very difBcult task of 

 dividing into sub-orders a group so homogeneous as the 

 order Araneidea. 



The linear arrangement of the families adopted by 

 M. Simon is very natural, and the interpolated names of 

 his Sub-orders appear to be of little assistance as mere 

 divisional marks, while their scientific tenability seems 

 also, as hinted above, very questionable. M. Simon, 

 while attributing confusion of mind to Dr. Thorell (Note 

 I to p. 10) in regard to his notions respecting Orders and 

 Families, appears to have himself fallen into some confu- 

 sion in regard to the difference between Orders and Sub- 

 orders ; in the note above quoted these two kinds of 

 groups are spoken of as though of equal significance in 

 classification, and as being similarly characterised. An 

 Order, however (characterised by complications of struc- 

 ture common to all the families of which it is composed), 

 limits a group within a CLASS ; while the Sub-order 

 limits a group within the Order ; a group distinguisbtd 

 differentially from the Order by some special complications 

 of structure peculiar to itself Each of M. Simon's four 

 Sub-orders should, consistently with his definition of 

 those groups, be based " Sur un caractdre anatomique 

 profond, independant de la forme, mais indiquant une 



superiority ou une inftSrioritd dans les limitds de la 

 classe." When we turn, however, to the characters given 

 (in the M^moire before quoted), we find some considerable 

 details given under each of the Sub-orders ; but the special 

 anatomical character indicating the superiority or infe- 

 riority of each is not apparent. If the difference between 

 1 'cux diurncs and nocturnes be the character intended, 

 no mention is made of it in respect to the Theraphosa;, 

 while the Aranece verce possess eyes of both kinds, " the 

 two central eyes of the first row are diurnal, the other six 

 nocturnal." And even supposing these characters to be 

 good and constant, it is not easy to see what superiority 

 or inferiority is indicated by them. All recent investiga- 

 tion tends to lessen the value of characters taken merely 

 from the eyes of spiders, for higher divisional purposes. 

 Supposing they are so, all we could say is, that they 

 are modified and adapted to the habits of the different 

 spiders, and are thus, at most, valuable for specific deter- 

 minations. 



Passing on to the body of the work, we find good terse 

 descriptions of 131 species of spiders distributed among the 

 six families — Epeirida;, Uloborida;, Dictynidx, Enyoida;, 

 and Pholcida; ; the genera comprised in these being twenty- 

 three in number. The genus Epeira absorbs thirty-nine 

 out of the seventy-four species contained in the whole 

 family EpJiiRlD.E, the remainder being distributed as 

 fullows : — Peliosonia, 2 ; Argiope, 1 ; Cyrlophora, i ; 

 Cyclosa, 5 ; Larinia, 2 ; Singa, 8 ; Cercidia, i ; Zitla, 6 ; 

 iMeta, 3 ; Tctragnatlia, 5. In the family ULOBORlD.f; 

 are four species distributed between two genera : Uloborus, 

 3 ; Hyptiotes, I. The family DlCTVNlD^E contains thiity- 

 six species, distributed among four genera : Dictyna, 14 ; 

 Lethia, 5 ; Titauceca, 7 ; Amaurobius, 10. The family 

 ENVOlD-t; comprises three genera and eleven species : 

 Celo (gen. nov.), i ; Selamia, i ; Euyo, 9 ; while the last of 

 the families contained in the present volume, Pholcid.e, 

 has three genera and five species : Holocnemus, i ; 

 Pholcus, 2 ; Spei mophora, 2. 



The above families are characterised at considerable 

 length, and the diagnoses of genera are terse and good. 

 An analytical table, with cross] references of the chief 

 characters of all the families intended to be included in 

 the work, is given at page 14 ; similar tables are also 

 given of the genera and species ; of some of the genera, 

 separate tables of the males and females are given. 



Of the twenty-three genera contained in this first 

 volume, two — Larinia and Ceto, in the family Enyoida; — 

 are characterised as new. The species described as new 

 are sixteen in number : six in the family Epciridse, 

 genera Larinia, Epeira, and Tetras^natlia ; eight of 

 DictynidK, in the genera Dietyna, Lethia, Titanaea, and 

 Amaurobius ; and two of Enyoidx, in the genus Euyo. 

 The semi-tropical character of the present portion of the 

 spiders of France may be noted in the genera Pe/tosoina, 

 Argiope, CyrtopJiora, Ceto, Selamia, Enyo, Holocnemus, 

 and Spermoplwra. 



The plates illustrating' thisVolume— three in number — 

 are engraved on copper, and reflect great credit on both 

 the artist (M. Simon himself) and the engraver. The 

 figures, not too small, are yet remarkably clear, and 

 all the minute points of form, structure, and pat- 

 tern, are exceedingly well defined. One only regrets 

 that the number of species illustrated should be, perhaps 



