490 Mr. F. Pickard-Cambridge—A Revision 
genus to the species he quotes, nor can any of the types 
selected for any of the sections be regarded as a type 
selected for the genus itself. 
C.L. Koch, in Deutsch. Ins. 119.3. 4, 1833, quotes under 
Attus two species, A. terebratus, Clerck, and A. pubescens 
(Aran. F.), and in the same place and at the same time he 
makes a new genus, Heliophanus, 119.1.2, 1833, giving 
H. cupreus, Wlk., as the sole representative. This action 
must, if we follow our principles of elimination, be regarded 
as a first breaking up of the genus and limiting it to the 
two species quoted. 
Thorell (Europ. Spid. p. 218) says, referring to the ‘ Ueber- 
sicht,’ 1837 :—“* We have accordingly restored the generic 
name Aftus to the spiders, which Koch first under that name 
detached from Walckenaer’s Attus.”’ Thorell’s principle is 
that which is followed here ; but 1837 was not the first 
occasion, for, as shown above, the first detachment took 
place by Koch in 18383. 
Koch, however, in the place quoted by Thorell (Ueber- 
sicht, 1837, p. 32), further limits Attus to pubescens, adding 
arcuatus, Clerck, which, however, cannot serve as the type, . 
since it does not occur in the first limitation of the genus. 
A. pubescens is therefore the last species left in, and 
remains as the type. 
Thorell, curiously enough, selects as the type A. terebratus, 
Clerck, a species which is not even mentioned in what he 
considered to be the jirst detachment from Attus by Koch. 
He does not, however, regard any of these as synonyms, 
for arcuatus, Clerck, terebra, Clerck, and pubescens, Fabr., 
are all (Rem. Syn. Europ. Spid.) regarded as distinct species. 
Samouelle, ‘ Entomologist’s Useful Compendium,’ 1819, 
p. 129, places Aranea scenica, Linn., under Salticus, and 
Salticus formicarius, Latr., under Aitus, p. 130. In this 
work, however, no new genus is being formed out of the 
species left under Attus, and the act cannot be regarded as 
one of valid limitation or definite citing of types. The case 
furnishes a good illustration of the advisability of requiring 
some criterion as to the real systematic intentions of an 
author, such as that furnished by the fact of the formation 
of anewgenus. We thus rid ourselves of the inconvenience 
of having to consult all kinds of trivial papers and works. 
The name Ata is used by Fabricius for Hymenoptera in 
1804, but Azius is here retained none the less for the Aranez. 
Type, Attus pubescens, Fabricius, 1775.—EKurope. 
