498 



terized. Walckenaeh did not describe it before 1837 (in his H. N. 

 d. Ins. Apt., I, p. 239). 



(Pag. 454.) Filistata bicolor. 



Filistata testacea Latr. 1810. 



Syn. : 1810. Filistata testacea Lath., Consid. gen., cet. , p. 121. 



1816. „ bicolor in Nouv. Diet. d'Hist. Nat., 2 e Ed., II, p. 



468 (sec. Walck., Faune Franc.). 



1817. „ „ id. , in Cuv., Eegne Anim., Ill, p. 83. 



1825. „ „ Walck., Faune Fran9., Arachn., p. 11, PI. VI, 



figg. 1-3. 



1836. „ „ Duf. , Observ. sur la Fil. bicolor, in Ann. de la 



Soc. Ent. de France, V, p. 527. 

 1839. Teratodes ATTATjous C. Koch, Die Arachn., V, p. 6, Tab. CXLVI, 



fig. 343. 



1845. Filistata bicolor Luc, Explor. de l'Alger., Anim. Artie, I, p. 97, 



PL I, fig. 6. 



1870. ' „ testacea Thoe.', On Eur. Spiel., p. 160. 



The genus Filistata was, as is generally known, characterized 

 by Latreille in 1810 in his "Consid. gen. sur l'ordre naturel com- 

 posant les Classes d. Crustace's, d. Arachn. et d. Ins."; one species, 

 from "les environs de Marseille", is there adduced under the name 

 of F. testacea, but without any description of the species. In the 

 Nouv. Diet. d'Hist. Nat., 2" Ed., and in the list Ed. of Ctjvier's 

 Eegne Anim., Latreille himself changed the name to F. bicolor, and 

 the species was afterwards described under that name by Walckenaer 

 in Faune Franc., Arachn.: F. testacea Latr. and F. bicolor id. are 

 there taken up as synonymous with F. bicolor Walck. Latreille 

 however seems subsequently to have come to the conclusion that Ms 

 F. bicolor or testacea and Walckenaer's F. bicolor were two distinct 

 species: he says in fact in 1831, in his Cours d'Entom., p. 512, 

 concerning the genus Filistata: "nous en conuaissons trois especes, 

 deux de l'Europe ineridionale, et la troisieme de la Guadeloupe"; but 

 that "nous connaissons" does not here mean that he had himself 

 seen three species, or even three specimens of the genus Filistata, 

 is evident from his statement on the preceding page (p. 511), where 

 he says that he cannot give the number of the mamillse in Filistata, 

 "n'ayant que deux individus desseches" of that genus. His two Euro- 

 pean species must therefore have been, the one F. testacea Latr., 

 the other F. bicolor Walck.; for no third European species was at 

 that time known. Dufour, who afterwards, in 1836 (loc. cit), gave 



