REVIEWS, 
85 
Ptiolina. —The fourth joint of the antennae, described as “ short,” is 
really long and setaceous. 
Spania. —Here, again, the account of the structure of the antennae is 
very vague; and this is the more unsatisfactory, since the figures given to 
illustrate it are also inaccurate. 
In the synoptic table of the genera of Bombylidce , Theretja is divided 
from the other genera by the character “ wings short.” This phrase, 
so liable to misconstruction, would have been better replaced by the cha¬ 
racter derived from the greater number of posterior areolets in the wing of 
Thereua, Equally unsatisfactory is the distinction of Lomatxa and An¬ 
thrax by the greater distance between the antennae in the former genus. 
This difference may hold good of the British species, but it tends to give a 
totally false impression of the relation between the genera; the only trust¬ 
worthy criterion, and which should have been employed accordingly, is 
the elongated first cubital areolet of Lomatia, 
Thereua.— The proboscis is characterized as “ occultathe utmost 
that can be properly said of it is “ retracta,” and not that even in all the 
species. The vast difference in the form of the epistoma and in the vena¬ 
tion, which separates the genus from the rest of the family with which it is 
here associated, is passed over in silence. This should have been expressly 
noticed, while “ oculi nudi” and “ ocelli tres,” affording no distinctive cha¬ 
racter, might have been dispensed with. 
Anthrax. —The genus is taken in the extent given it by Meigen in his 
third volume, and in the supplementary work of Wiedemann. It would 
have been more judicious to have followed the generally received division 
into two genera, Anthrax and Exoprosopa. It is no objection to this that 
the small number of species found in Great Britain does not require such a 
subdivision. The writer of a Fauna should regard his subject from the 
common point of view of the General System, and not modify this accord¬ 
ing to the particular circumstances of his limited material. The account of 
the predominant colours in this genus is calculated to perplex rather than 
inform. 
Lomatia. —The character from the wing which we have specified ought 
to be added. 
Bombylius. —By an oversight, in the Latin text, the eyes of the female 
are qualified as “ contigui,” instead of disjuncti. 
Phthiria. —The first posterior areolet is always open in this genus ; a 
character the more, worthy of notice, as it serves readily to distinguish the 
genus from Bombylius , of which none of the British species have that 
