ON THE CETONIIDiE OF SOUTH AFRICA. 
11 
3. Mr. Kirby, in the 14th volume of the Linnean Transactions, following perhaps an opinion 
I had thrown out on the Hot at Entomologies, appears to consider Chasmodia, M‘L., to be 
close in affinity to the Cetoniidce. But the relation of Chasmodia to Lomaptera, G. P., is one 
of analogy : the two groupes being corresponding points of contiguous families. Both are pol- 
lenivorous groupes, agreeing in brilliancy of colour, and in their cleft clypeus ; but in no essen- 
tial respect are they so constructed that they can be brought close together in affinity. 
4. In some species of the Cetoniidae the tergum of the protliorax (which shall, in my obser- 
vations on this family hereafter, be generally called thorax, for convenience and in conformity to 
the vulgar notion) is apt to have the middle part produced behind into a laminar lobe, which 
covers the seutellum in a greater or less degree. In proportion as this structure occurs, 
we always find the insect to be more sluggish and inactive. Thus the insects which compose 
the American subgenus Gymnetis are incomparably more sluggish in their habits than our 
European Cetoniee. 
5. M. Dufour has given us the anatomy of the perfect insect of the well-known English 
species Cetonia aurata, Fab. ; and Professor Dehaan has favoured us with the anatomy of its 
larva. I shall in this place only observe, that the internal anatomy of the insects of this family 
is subject to greater variation than their external anatomy; and it must therefore be more 
distrusted in classification, according to the principles I have ventured to lay down in the 14th 
volume of the Linnean Transactions. 
6. In the following enumeration of the various groupes into which the Cetoniidce. have been 
broken up, I shall endeavour to be strictly just in assigning them to their proper disco- 
verers. From the respect due to the labours of my predecessors, I shall try to retain every 
name that has been published ; but 1 would have it here clearly understood, that the name of 
the author annexed to a technical word does not always signify that he invented that name, 
but rather indicates the particular value given by that person to the groupe. Thus, for 
instance, Trichinus, Fab., will indicate the groupe called Trichius by Fabricius ; and Trichius, 
M‘L. ; the value given to the Fabrician name by myself. The discoverer of a natural groupe 
may have some merit, but the mere inventor of a name has really none. On this principle, 
therefore, I have generally acted ; and more particularly when, in order to distinguish genera 
from sub-genera, I have given the former a termination always in inus. 
(Senem. 
Aberrant Groupe. 
Larva having its mandibles 
unidentate towards the 
extremity. 
1 Trichinus, Fab. 
v 2 Cryptodincs, M‘L. 
L3 Macrominus, M‘L. 
Normal Groupe. ^ GymnetinuSj K . 
Larva having its mandibles J 
pluridentate towards the 'j 
extremity. 1 5 Cetoninus, M‘L. 
f Terminal process of maxillie always furnished with a brush 
^ but not with teeth. Epimeron never prominent between 
( angles of thorax and elytra. 
(Terminal process of maxillae never furnished with a brush, 
but always dentated. Epimeron never prominent be- 
( tween angles of thorax and elytra. 
fTerminal process of maxillae generally furnished with a 
J brush and always with teeth. Epimeron always distinct 
( between angles of thorax and elytra. 
f Thorax lobate behind in the middle, and covering the 
j whole seutellum more or less with the lobe. 
f Thorax not so lobate behind, and leaving the whole scu- 
tellum always distinct. 
