1951] 
Carpenter — Oliarces 
35 
Melander (1932) listed the genus under the family Ith- 
onidae, otherwise known only from Australia ; and Lameere 
(1936) has placed it in the Polystoechotidae. Since the un- 
certainty of the systematic position of Oliarces has been due 
in part to our very limited knowledge of the species on which 
it was based, the discovery of the female has given us addi- 
tional information useful in comparisons. 
It is at once clear, of course, that several superfamilies 
(Tillyard, 1925) of the Neuroptera specifically the Con- 
iopterygoidea, Nemopteroidea and Myrmeleontoidea — are 
so far removed structurally from Oliarces as to be elimin- 
ated from further consideration. The superfamily Hemero- 
bioidea is not so readily disposed of, but many of the in- 
cluded families (i.e., Dilaridae and Mantispidae) can have 
only the remotest affinities with Oliarces. The Osmylidae, 
although superficially resembling Oliarces more than most 
hemerobioids, have a radically different abdominal struc- 
ture, as can be seen by comparing Killington’s figures of 
Osmylus (1936, p. 56 and 58) with those of Oliarces in the 
present paper. The Polystoechotidae, to which Lameere as- 
signed Oliarces, and which were reviewed in my 1940 re- 
vision, have wings with definite gradate veins, absent in 
Oliarces; and the terminal abdominal segments (Carpenter, 
1940, figs. 70 and 72) of both sexes bear no resemblance to 
those of Oliarces, there being no anal plates in the male and 
no indication of a psammarotrum in the female. The Heme- 
robiidae, being a much larger and diversified family than 
the Osmylidae and Polystoechotidae, exhibit a greater range 
of structural differences (Killington, 1936-37 ; Carpenter, 
1940). In all, however, there are gradate veins and a vena- 
tional pattern basically unlike that of Oliarces. The term- 
inal abdominal segments of the males of some genera are 
surprisingly suggestive of those of Oliarces, but this is not 
true of the females. 
I have passed over these hemerobioid families very briefly 
because I believe that anyone who examines the specimens 
of Oliarces or studies the figures included here will not 
seriously consider assigning the genus to any of them. The 
family Ithonidae, however, deserves much more detailed 
