HETEROCERA. 



171 



fact that in 1766 Linnaeus used the name Noctua for a genus of birds, is one piece 

 of evidence that he did not use that term in 1758 with a generic significance. 

 Another indication of the value placed on the divisions of Phalcena by Linnaeus 

 is to be found in the Sy sterna Naturae, ed. 12, vol. I (2), where it will be seen that 

 there are several indexes, one called " Nomina Generica," in which Phalaena 

 occurs and Noctua does not, and another called " Termini Artis," which contains 

 such terms as " Albumen," " Ala," " Antenna," and " Bombyces," " Noctuae," 

 etc. The first use of Noctua as a generic name in the Lepidoptera appears to 

 have been by Schiffermiiller and Denis (Schmett. Wien., 1775), and in the same 

 year Fabricius used it in his Sy sterna Entomologiae. The name, however, is an 

 absolute homonym, Noctua Linnaeus, 1766 (Aves), having priority. In 1895 

 A. R. Grote (List of North American Eupterotidae, Ptilodontidae, Thyatiridae, 

 Apatelidae and Agrotidae) commenced his " Preface " with the words : 



" The family name Agrotidae is proposed instead of the usual term Noc- 

 tuidae, since the generic title Noctua is preoccupied." 



I propose, therefore, to use in future the family name Agrotidae, as being 

 the most suitable name from every point of view with which to supplant the old 

 well-known Noctuidae. I do not adopt the name Phalaenidae, which has 

 been proposed for other reasons, as I cannot accept the suggestion that Linnaeus 

 so named Phalaena typica because he regarded it as typical of the genus. The 

 first writer to use typus as a name, in a sense that might be taken to mean 

 " typical," was de Montfort in 1810, in conchology, and as the word can mean 

 a " figure " or an " emblem," it is just possible that the two species of Mollusca 

 so named at that time bore marks which may have induced de Montfort to use 

 such a term. On the other hand, Latreille, who definitely uses the word " type " 

 in the sense in which we understand it, never, so far as I am aware, described 

 a species under the name typus or typicus. Cuvier used the name Paradoxus 

 typus in 1822, Temminck used Anastomus typus in 1823, and Kaup named a 

 species Rachycentrus typus in 1826. I have no time to go into the question of 

 whether in the appearance of these organisms is to be found the reason for these 

 names, but the last example I shall give puts the matter in a clearer light. 

 In 1829, A. Smith definitely named a number of species in various genera typus, 

 and from 1830 proceeded to use typicus quite as frequently. This seems to me 

 to be the first evidence of the use of the name in the sense " typical." For my 

 part, that effectively disposes of any suggestion that Phalaena typica Linnaeus 

 can be considered to come within the scope of Article 30, rule I (b) of the Inter- 



