190 



SCIENCE 



[Vol. XIX. No. 478 



maxilla. That neither of them can be mandible follows 

 from the fact that I have already demonstrated the true 

 mandible. Removing the front rings altogether and spread- 

 ing out flat the two posterior sclerites after removing the in- 

 ternal structures, we have the appearance shown in Fig. 3. 

 In this figure we see the intimate connection between the 

 beak and the maxillary structures. The two bristles are seen 

 to arise from one base, and attached to the same source is the 

 remnant of the maxillary palpus. The orgaa is much re- 

 duced, and probably not functional; but there is no doubt of 

 its nature. By the pressure applied the base of the bristles 

 is torn from the fastenings, which are distorted out of recog- 

 nition. Figs. 4 and 5 give the true appearance. These two 



bristles represent the lacinia and stipes of the maxilla, devel- 

 oped in exactly the same way in which they are seen in the 

 Diptera. In most species they are quite strongly modified 

 at the tip and there is a permanent distinction in the charac- 

 ter of the armature of the two bristles which will be of as- 

 :sistance ultimately in distinguishing the parts. 



The remaining maxillary part, the galea, I identify with 

 the beak, denying thus its character as labium and grown- 

 together labial palpi. No one has questioned the fact that 

 the beak in the Hemiptera is the homologue of the similar 

 structure in Diptera, and this I have shown is a galear devel- 

 opment. The steps in the development are clearly shown by 

 studying a series of the long-tongued Hymenoptera in con- 

 nection with the piercing Diptera including Erax and allies. 



Exactly how the change to the normal Hen:\ipterous struc- 

 ture occurred, I have not yet been able to ascertain. In this 

 view the basal segment of the beak through which it is at- 

 tached to the other maxillary parts, represents the cardo; the 

 second joint the subgalea; while the third and fourth repre- 

 sent the two joints of the galea. In the apparently three- 

 jointed beak the basal segment is so intimately connected 

 with the head that it seems to form a part of it. Dissecting 

 away all tissue from the head and leaving only the cardo 

 of the maxilla and the other internal mouth structures at- 

 tached thereto, we have the appearance from behind shown 

 in Fig. 5. Centrally there is a boat-shaped structure, on 

 either side of which there is a flat chitinous plate with two 

 leaf-like membranous processes attached. On each side of 

 this central plate, and imbedded in the tissue, is one of the 



lancets. Seen from the side, as in Fig. 4, the boat -like form 

 of the central organ is more obvious as are also the maxillary 

 base and the lancets issuing therefrom. This boat is formed 

 of two parts closely united along a suture which is parallel 

 to the line of the suture separating the labrum, the anterior 

 portion belonging in the cavity behind the labrum, the re- 

 mainder belonging to the central head cavity. That portion 

 of the process belonging in the frontal portion of the head 

 is shown in Fig. 3 superiorly. Through the centre of this 

 boat on the inside is a thin membranous plate, longitudinally 

 furrowed in its centre, and from this central furrow sending 

 up long flat filaments, the nature of which I have not recog- 

 nized. This boat shaped process I homologize with the 

 mentum in mandibulate insects, the fulcrum of the Diptera. 

 It is all that remains of the labium or second maxilla, if my 

 interpretation of the structures is correct. Exactly at what 

 point in the development the niissing structures were lost, I 

 cannot yet say ; it will require close study in groups in which 

 I have as yet no material at all. I am confident, however, 

 that the above explanation of the homology of the structures 

 will prove the true one. . John B. Smith. 



Kutgers College, N. Y. 



THE ETYMOLOGY OP THE TWO IROQUOIAN COM- 

 POUND STEMS, -SKE^'-EA-EEQ'-TE' AND -NDU- 

 TA-KEQ'-TE'. 



Students of Iroquoian terms have made attempts to analyze 

 these two interesting compound-stems, but in making these 

 analyses they overlooked the force and exact meaning of 

 the component elements of these two stems, and so the ety- 

 mologies they have put forth are erroneous. Too much 

 weight was given to so-called "accepted authority," and 

 indiseriminating compilation took the place of careful re- 

 search. 



It appears from the evidence of language that hitherto all 

 students who have attempted to analyze these two compound 

 terms have been misled by a mistranslation of the noun 

 Gaskenra, made by Father Bruyas in his work mentioned 

 below. 



The writer will here cite what has been written by him 

 upon the two stems in question as well as what has been 

 written upon them by other authors who have had access to 

 his writings. This is done for the purpose of showing to 

 what extent Bruyas's erroneous translation has been an em- 

 barrassment to all his copyists; for they invariably quote 

 his wrong definition of the noun in question, and yet make 

 remarks, the reasons for which should have led them to the 

 true etymology and signification of the elements and terms 

 in question. 



Father Bruyas^ succinctly says, "Gaskenra, la Guerre. 

 'Inde hoskenragetete. S. 2ae conj. soldat." Again, on page 

 83 of the same work, he writes, " Onnita, coton, duvet." 

 And immediately below this, " NondStageHe, la Guerre. 

 HotinnondStagetete, les soldats." 



Father Cuoq, following his predecessors in Iroquoian glot- 

 tology, writes,^ '■' Oskenra, vieux mot qui n'est plus gdere 

 usite qu'en cp. avec le v. wakkehte, porter. II devait signi- 

 fler la guerre ou plutot qq. instrument de guerre. Ros- 

 kenrakehte, au pi., rotiskenrakehte, homme de guerre, guer- 

 rier, militaire, homme portant amies." This citation may 

 be translated thus: " Oskenra [is] au old word which is not 

 much in use now except in composition with the verb ivak- 



1 " Badice^3 Verborum Irociuffiorum," Neo-Eboracl, 1863, p. 98. 



2 "Lexlqae de la Langue Iroqulae," Montreal, 1883, p. 36. 



