68 
Annals of the Transvaal Museum 
fully developed in the female but quite absent in the male. The ocular 
characters vary very considerably in the several Hexisopodid species, 
and even in the same species between male and female. The dentition 
of the chelicerae is a most unsatisfactory character from a systematic ! 
point of view. 
The differences between the families Solpugidae and Galeodidae are 
apparently of a major- type, at any rate not connected with habitudinal 
differences. The Galeodidae have the stigmata of the second and third 
abdominal segments opening beneath the posterior edge of the sternites 
and protected by a pair of transversely elongated finely toothed plates 
the Serrulae: the stalks of the tarsal claws are hairy: the tarsus of the 
palp is freely articulated with the tibia. In the Solpugidae there are no 
serrulae protecting the abdominal stigmata (the modified hairs on the 
sternites in the Daesiinae may be homologous therewith), which are 
plainly visible on the posterior margins of the sternites : the stalks of the 
tarsal claws are not hairy : the tarsus of the palp is immovably attached 
to the tibia, or is only slightly movable thereon as in Daesia. In these 
characters, the Hexisopodidae agree entirely with the Solpugidae and 
I therefore propose to unite the two into one family, Solpugidae, where 
the Hexisopodid genera have the subsidiary rank of a subfamily, the 
Hexisopodinae. 
In respect to the form of the head-plate and of the first thoracic 
tergite, the Hexisopodid genera seem to shew considerable resemblance to 
the genus Rhagodes as figured by Mr H. M. Bernard in his paper on the 
‘'Comparative Morphology of the Galeodidae” {Trans. Linn. Soc. Lon. 
2nd Ser. Zoology, vol. vi. PI. 27, figs. 6 and 7). These genera also re- 
semble Rhagodes, more or less clearly, in the dentition of the chelicerae, 
in the shortness, of the legs, in the small size of the eyes, and in the rather 
large size of the anal segment. Assuming the accuracy of Mr Bernard’s 
figure, there is another interesting point in which Rhagodes differs from 
ordinary Solpugids and tends towards Hexisopus : the claw of the fourth 
leg is represented as smaller than that of the third leg, whereas in all 
genera found in S. Africa, except Hexisopus and Chelypus, the claw of 
the fourth leg is greater than that of any of the preceding legs. I may 
add that the Rhagodinae and Hexisopodinae will probably be found to 
occupy adjoining geographical areas, the genus Rhagodes extending 
southwards as far as Masailand, and the western genus Chelypus being 
known to me from North West Rhodesia. However, in the absence of 
actual material for an exact comparison between Rhagodes and the 
Hexisopid genera, it would be unwise as yet to lay too much stress on 
these points, which may prove to be explicable as the results of conver- 
gent evolution rather than of genetic affinity. At present, indeed, it is 
impossible to assert with any degree of confidence whether or not the 
Hexisopodid genera should be regarded as derivatives of the same 
immediate stock as gave rise to the other Solpugid genera in S. Africa. 
The Hexisopodinae are probably more nearly related to the 
Karschiinae than to either of the other S. African subfamilies. 
I have observed one character in Chelypus, and less distinctly in 
