152 
Bulletin Wisconsin Natural History Society [Vol. 11, No. 4 
any revision of the group must be based entirely on the literature, 
most of the types of the old genera and species having been lost. 
Another reason is this: if all of the literature is correctly given 
there is no necessity for going back of this paper for information. 
This paper is, in effect, a reprint summary of previous literature. 
Thus at the outset we found with this family: (1) The types of 
most of the old genera lost or non-existent; (2) the descriptions 
of some of the genera and many of the species inadequate for 
recognition; (3) the original descriptions of many of the genera 
changed by later authors apparently without valid reasons; and 
(4) a total lack of system in the present arrangement of the genera 
and species and the absence of a single serious study of the family 
as a whole. As a result we have been doubtful even in regard to 
the identity of the commonest and most important members of 
the family. 
These being true, thought will show that any serious effort to 
bring order out of this chaotic condition will have to deal mostly 
with and depend upon the literature itself. And in doing this I 
have made a rigid application of the internatonal code and also 
an effort to trace every unit back to its source; and, if reasonable, 
accepting the original as a basis for constructive work. In addition 
to this rigid study of the literature of the group I have made an 
effort to get together for detailed description as many specimens 
as possible and have been aided largely in this by Dr. L. O. Howard, 
who very kindly turned over to me all of these insects in the col- 
lections of the National Bureau of Entomology and of the United 
States National Museum. By collecting myself I have also added 
largely to the morphology of the group by being able to describe 
specimens from unmounted material and while it was still fresh 
and unshriveled. 
Finally I may add that the literature of this group must be fol- 
lowed either literally or else advisedly and I hope to combine the 
two. The literature is tolerably clear; it only needs proper inter- 
pretation. 
GENERAL SYSTEMATIC HISTORY OF THE FAMILY 
Previous to the last half of the nineteenth century (1850), this 
family of chalcidoids was represented by but one or two genera 
