[Berliner Entomolog. Zeitschrift Bd. XXXIX. 1894. Heft IL] 249 



Synonymica about Tipulidae 

 by 



C. B. Osten Sacken. 



I have always thought that the synonymy concerning the species 

 of Diptera has not, in many publications, been treated with the care 

 which it requires. — An entomologist who adduces a synonymy is 

 responsible for its exactness. When he borrows a synonymy from some 

 other author he must verify it, and, in case he finds it acceptable, 

 he must signify the fact of this verification to the reader, either in 

 a direct Statement, or by some conventional sign, as the addition of 

 his name, or of his Initials. It sometimes happens that the verification 

 of an alleged synonym is, for the time, impossible (for instance, when 

 it is based on the comparison by another entomologist of a rather 

 inaccessible original type); in such a case the author who adopts it 

 is, of course, not responsible, but in every case he must name his 

 authority. 



Such ure, it seems to me, the common sense rules for the treat- 

 ment of synonymy. Their strict observance not only promotes exact- 

 ness, but facilitates for future students the task of verification. 



In my Catalogue of North-American Diptera (1878) I have adopted 

 the following rules (I.e. p. XLVIII): 



„1) An interrogation before a synonymy means that it is uncertain. 



„2) An exclamation (!) after a synonymy means that I have seen 

 „the original type of the description. I have used this sign when- 

 „ever I deenied it necessary to inform the reader of that fact; but 

 „the absence of that sign docs not necessarily mean that 

 „I have not seen the type.i) 



i) There is a great difference betvveen tlie mere seeing of a type, 

 and the recognizing in it something we have seen before. Haliday 

 saw the type of Tipula annulata L. in the Linnaean collection, but 

 never having seen the species before, he wrongly recognised in the type 

 the JAmnobia nubeculosa of Meißen. 



