Chapter II: Front Matter (2)

Much uncertainty still hangs over the habits of this spider, as the facts hitherto recorded, though perfectly authentic, are difficult to piece together into a satisfactory whole. One thing, however, is clear, and that is, that the nests and habits of the spiders of the genus _Atypus_ (of which, as Mr. Pickard-Cambridge, informs me, two if not three distinct species inhabit England) merit attentive study, and would most certainly repay it. Hastings, Portland, the coast of Dorsetshire, and the neighbourhood of London and Exeter, are the habitats hitherto cited for this spider, but I cannot doubt its existence in many sheltered localities on the south coast of England.

The most recent contribution to our knowledge of this genus is contained in a paper by M. Eugène Simon,[123] who describes three species (two of which are new), as inhabiting France, and it remains to be ascertained whether our British _Atypi_ agree in their characters with any of these.

[Footnote 123: Note sur les Espèces françaises du genre _Atypus_, Latr. in Ann. Soc. Entomologique de France, 5^e ser. tom. iii. (1873), p. 109.]

He describes (p. 113-4) the nest and mode of life of _Atypus piceus_, Sulzer (=_A. Sulzeri_, Latr.),[124] the commonest of the three species, as follows:--"They (the spiders) seek dry and somewhat sandy slopes, sometimes also woods, chiefly plantations of evergreens; their retreat is always concealed either by stones, or in moss which one must remove carefully and in large masses (_plâques_) in order to detect them."

[Footnote 124: Thus named by M. Simon.]

"This Atypus excavates an oblique hole of 15 to 20 centimetres deep, and of the size of its body; it lines it with a rather narrow silken tube of a very close texture, the upper part of which, exceeding the subterranean portion in length, lies horizontally on the surface of the ground, and ends in an open tapering point. Near its lower extremity the tube is suddenly contracted, and then dilates into the form of a fairly spacious apartment, in which the spider lives; the cocoon enclosing the eggs is suspended by a few threads at the contraction. I have frequently surprised _Atypus_ in the act of holding earth-worms in their falces, and I think that these Annelids constitute the larger part of their food; indeed, if one examines the lower portion of the silk chamber, one may remark a part where the tissue is thinner and more transparent. I have not been able to detect an opening, but it is probable that the _Atypus_ can easily part the not very compact threads, and thus obtain for itself an easy prey, and dispense with the necessity of ascending to the surface of the ground. When taken out of its tube, _Atypus_ does not even attempt to escape; it is therefore plain that it is not organized for the pursuit of an active prey; and, on the other hand, the upper extremity of the tube is ill-adapted for an ambuscade, being almost closed, and without support. This small opening would seem to be solely intended for the entrance and exit of the male (a very much smaller creature than the female) during the breeding season, which occurs in the month of October."

M. Simon says that this species of _Atypus_ is common in all the centre, east and west of France, and that he has detected it in great abundance in the neighbourhood of Troyes, in Champagne, in the month of October, when the male was inhabiting the same tube with the female.[125] I am greatly indebted to M. Simon for having given me the specimen of a silk tube taken entire from a nest found in this locality, which I have figured in Plate XIII., fig. A. It will be seen that the tube has collapsed, but one may still trace the enlargement near the base which forms the chamber, the elbow where it is bent at the surface of the ground, the moss, scales, and fibres of plants which are woven into, and serve to conceal the aërial portion, and its termination in a twisted and apparently-closed mouth.

[Footnote 125: M. Simon has discovered another species of _Atypus_ at Digne in the Basses Alpes which constructs a similar nest to that described above. This species was detected for the first time by M. Simon and described by him under the name of _Atypus bleodonticus_.]

Indeed, I believe that, in this specimen, the upper extremity of the tube is really closed, for, when I succeeded in inflating this aërial portion, the lips did not part, but remained drawn together.

It seems very extraordinary that the mouth of the tube should be thus closed, so that the female spider becomes a prisoner, self-immured, and I can only suppose that this is a temporary condition, limited perhaps to the period during which she receives the visits of the male.

At the very base of the tube I found a mass of earth, roots and vegetable fibres, and in this I hoped to have detected the _débris_ of insects or other food, such as I sometimes find at the bottom of and below the tubes of the trap-door nests in the South, but of this there was no trace.

It is difficult to me to imagine how the spider could contrive to live by the capture of worms, after the fashion suggested by M. Simon; for who does not know the speed with which, on the slightest alarm, worms draw back into their holes and escape pursuit, and the muscular power which they exert in resisting any attempts to drag them out of the earth?

M. Simon's account of the closed tube and capture of worms by this spider corresponds, however, with that given by Mr. Joshua Brown, the first discoverer of _Atypus_ in England.

This gentleman communicated his discovery to Mr. Edward Newman[126] in 1856, since which time (with the exception of M. Simon's paper quoted above) little or nothing seems to have been done to clear up the points which remain doubtful in the history of these singular creatures.

[Footnote 126: Note on _Atypus Sulzeri_ of Latreille, by Mr. Edward Newman, read before the Linnean Society; a report of this communication is given in _The Zoologist_, vol. xiv. (1856), p. 5021.]

Several nests of _Atypus_ were discovered by Mr. Joshua Brown in the neighbourhood of Hastings, when traversing a lane bounded on either side by high and steep sand-banks, partially covered with grass and bushes.

His attention was at first arrested by the sight of "something hanging down which looked like the cocoon of some moth;" but, on closer examination, the silk case proved to be empty, and was continued as a tube into the ground to a depth of 9 inches, where he came upon the spider lying at the bottom. Further research revealed the existence of a number of these nests in the same locality, but the length of the different tubes varied much; they were usually about 9 inches long, but some were much longer, often baffling his attempts to follow them; the longest which he was able to secure entire measured 11 inches. All the nests were, however, alike in having a tubular silk lining, about 3/4 of an inch in diameter, a part of which protruded from the ground for about 2 inches, and was pendent, inflated, and covered with particles of sand, assimilating it to the surrounding surface; it was closed at the upper extremity, leaving no exit to the open air.

Mr. Brown took home some of these tubes in a collapsed state with the spider at the bottom. In one case, on opening the box in which the nest was placed, he perceived a movement throughout the tube, as if it were being inflated; this however soon subsided, but the following morning he was surprised to see that the whole tube was inflated, especially at the end which had lain exposed on the bank. He failed to find any aperture by which the spider could enter or leave her nest, and his captives, though passing backwards and forwards in their tubes, never came out at either end. He never saw flies or any fragments of insects in the nests; but, on drawing out one of the tubes, he observed a worm at the lower end, partially within it, partially outside, and he perceived that the spider had evidently been eating a considerable portion of its anterior extremity.

It will readily be seen that there are some discrepancies between the different accounts which have been given of the nests of _Atypus_ found in England and France,[127] and I think it quite probable that some at least of the nests described may really differ, and be the work of distinct species belonging to this genus. Mr. Brown describes his nests as having by far the greater part of their length under ground, while in those observed by M. Simon, as shown in my figure, Plate XIII. fig. A, the exposed portion of the tube equalled or exceeded the subterranean.

[Footnote 127: A subject already alluded to in _Ants and Spiders_, at p. 78.]

An imperfect specimen at the British Museum, from some English station (exact habitat not given), appears to have the proportions described by Mr. Brown; the length of the aërial portion of the tube being less than one-fourth of that of the subterranean; the upper end of the tube is however open, but I am doubtful whether this was originally so or not, for the silk is torn at this point, and the opening may be a rent caused by rough handling.

After a comparison of the above description, it appears to me that the following are the principal points which remain to be cleared up:

1. What is the precise structure of the nests of Atypus, and are they always uniform in character at all seasons of the year?

2. What is the use of the exposed aërial portion of the tube?

3. Do the two British species make similar nests?

4. What food, besides worms, does the female live upon, and how does she obtain it?

5. Does she ever leave the nest?

6. What becomes of these spiders and their nests in the winter, and how long do they live?

7. When do the young leave the nest; and do they, like their relatives in the South, construct nests like those of their parents in miniature?

I would commend all these points to any lover of Nature who may seek the southern coasts of England during the autumn and winter months, and I think it more than likely that a careful search in the sandy banks near St. Leonards, the slopes under the fir-woods of Bournemouth, and the deep lanes in the neighbourhood of Torquay, would be rewarded with success.

If the breeding season in England only commences in October, as appears to be the case in France, it would seem most probable that the spiders survive the winter. Very possibly these spiders and their nests might be transplanted and placed for observation in a garden; and if room were granted them in a greenhouse or Wardian case, or even in a large flower-pot in a living-room, it is not unlikely that the warmer temperature might waken them up to renewed activity.

It seems clear that _Atypus_ has to fear the insidious attacks of enemies; for not only is the external portion of the tube closed or almost closed at certain seasons, but it is covered outside with such materials as may serve to make it resemble the surrounding surface of the ground. Thus Mr. Brown's nests, lying on a sandy bank, were covered with particles of sand, while my specimen from Troyes has moss and fibres of plants woven into its upper extremity.

Indeed, all the European representatives of the suborder _Territelariæ_ which I have myself met with, conceal their nests with great care and skill. There appear to be others, however, which either make no nests at all but hide under stones, or only construct a simple silk tube, open at the mouth, and without any special contrivance for its dissimulation. Further observation of the habits and dwellings of these apparently unworthy members of the trap-door group is much to be desired.

Mr. Bates,[128] in his work on the Amazons, describes _Mygale (Theraphosa) Blondii_, a large and powerful spider of that region, as burrowing into the earth and "forming a broad slanting gallery about three feet long, the sides of which he lines beautifully with silk." This spider "is nocturnal in his habits," and maybe seen "just before sunset keeping watch within the mouth of his tunnel, disappearing suddenly when he hears a heavy foot-tread near his hiding place."

[Footnote 128: Bates, H. W., _Naturalist on the Amazons_, Ed. 2. (1864).]

This nest would therefore appear to have an open tube undefended by any door; but in this case the great size of the spider and the depth of the burrow, which is more than twice as long as that of the average European nests, may help to explain this apparent want of precaution.

But, if we wish to learn with what different materials and by what varied means the same end of self-preservation can be attained, we have only to cast a glance at the sketch of a portion of a nest at fig. B, Plate XIII., p. 183, where it will be seen that the entrance to the nest, far from being concealed or obscured in any way, is rendered a most striking object, and one which appears devised for the very purpose of attracting attention. The nest to which I refer is the work of _Cyrtauchenius elongatus_, from Morocco, and consists, according to the account given me by its discoverer, M. Simon, of a deep cylindrical burrow in the soil, the silk lining of which is prolonged upwards for about three inches above the surface of the ground, and enlarged into a funnel shape, so that it becomes from two to three inches across at the orifice. This aërial portion being snow-white, at once attracts the eye even from a considerable distance, and the nests rising up amid the sparse grasses and other small plants which serve to support but not to conceal them, present the appearance of scattered white fungi.

This is therefore quite a new type among the nests constructed by trap-door spiders, new in form and probably in function also, and I would propose to distinguish it provisionally as the _funnel type_.

Now the female _Cyrtauchenius_ is, like its near relatives the _Nemesias_, a sluggish and rather helpless creature, and shows no apparent physical superiority which might countenance its dispensing with the methods of concealment which form the characteristic habit of the group.

How then does this spider manage to escape its many enemies, especially the insidious attacks of the insects of the _Sphex_ and _Ichneumon_ families, which certainly abound in Morocco?

Mr. Wallace, to whom I put the question, suggested that this species may perhaps be chiefly nocturnal in its habits, and that, if this is the case, the bright white and flower-like tube of the nest may possibly serve to attract night flying insects, which would thus become its prey.

In any case, whether we can discover them or not, some curious points of difference must exist between this spider and its allies, which secure to it a comparative immunity.

It appears to me that there are few questions which can be of greater interest to the naturalist than those which have to do with the conditions determining the existence of a given species in a given place.

Of the questions, Who are your relatives? Where do they live? and How are you able to live here? surely the last is not the least important.

And, if we wish to try to answer this question, we must do all in our power to find out how the habits and conditions of life of the creature in question, differ from those of its competitors; for we may be quite certain that it does not exist where we see it by grace and favour, but by merit; if it is neither stronger, cleverer nor more numerous than its neighbours, we may be sure that it has found some means of living which does not interfere fatally with their requirements. Hence the endless diversity of function and habits in all living creatures, which forms such a prolific and marvellous subject for our study and contemplation.

I am indebted to M. Simon for permission to publish the details given above on _Cyrtauchenius elongatus_, and also for having given me such directions as enabled me to make the sketch from which the drawing at Plate XIII., fig. B, was copied.

I must however state that this illustration is not taken from an actual specimen, but is prepared solely from his description; so that it cannot pretend to complete accuracy of detail. M. Simon assured me nevertheless that it conveyed the general appearance of this remarkable nest with sufficient fidelity, and I have been induced to reproduce it here in the hope that it may serve to make my meaning plainer, and to suggest the kind of object which one should look for, if an opportunity offered.

Another species of the same genus, _Cyrtauchenius Doleschallii_, is known to inhabit Sicily, but the nest is undescribed. M. Lucas has described two species,[129] belonging to the closely-allied genus _Cyrtocephalus_, both of which appear to construct nests somewhat similar in form to that discovered by M. Simon. Whether these nests are equally showy we cannot tell, as the account is brief and few details are given; but one, that of _Cyrtocephalus terricola_, appears to differ in having threads stretched from the opening of its funnel, which serve to ensnare insects and to give notice of these captures.

[Footnote 129: _Cyrtocephalus Walckenaëri_ and _terricola_, Lucas (H.), _Animaux articulés de l'Algérie_ (Paris, 1847-9), vol. i. p. 94-5.]

The great trap-door group therefore comprises spiders which differ widely in respect of their dwelling places. Some construct no nest at all or only an irregular web, and live under stones; others, like _Theraphosa Blondii_, make a simple cylindrical tunnel, or, like those just described, a tube having a prolonged, uncovered, funnel-shaped mouth: others again, belonging to the genus _Atypus_, form the curious and as yet imperfectly-understood nests with a silken tubular lining, part of which hangs down outside; while on the highest rung of the architectural ladder, stand the builders of the veritable trap-door nests.

It seems quite possible that, when we know more of the structures made by _Territelariæ_ generally in various parts of the world, we shall find that nests of various degrees of complexity and perfection of structure exist, bridging over the gulf between the barbarous dwellers under stones and the highly civilized inhabitants of the branched wafer and cork nests.

Indeed, thanks to recent discoveries, I am already able to do something of this kind for one small group of spiders, namely, for that of the European _Nemesias_ having nests with wafer doors.

I hope to make this plain by reference to the diagrams on Plate XIV., where the figures C, D, E, F, and G represent on a reduced scale five types of wafer nest constructed by as many distinct spiders, and where a gradation may readily be traced between the simplest type at C and the most complicated at G; but we shall speak more fully of this matter by-and-by.

In these diagrams I have placed that representing the nest of _Atypus_ on the extreme left (A);[130] next to this stands that of a nest of the cork type (B), a type which must be carefully distinguished from all the rest. It must not be supposed that the solid cork door (so called from its resemblance to a short cork closing the neck of a bottle), is nothing more than a thicker edition of the wafer door; it is not so, but, on the contrary, possesses a very characteristic structure of its own, being composed of many layers of silk, each furnished with a sloping rim of earth, while the wafer door consists of but a single layer of silk.

[Footnote 130: These types may be briefly enumerated as follows:

A, nest of _Atypus_.

B, cork nest, and B, 1, layers of silk and earth forming the door of the
cork nest.

C, single-door, unbranched wafer nest.

D, single door, branched wafer nest.

E, double-door, unbranched wafer nest, and E, 1, lower door of the same.

F, the Hyères double-door branched wafer nest, and F, 1, lower door of
the same.

G, double-door branched cavity wafer nest, as seen in the oldest and
largest specimens, and G, 1, the same in the younger specimens.
G, 2, the lower door of this nest, being of the same form in young
and old nests.
]

I have represented at B 1 the 14 layers of silk and earth which went to make a single cork door examined by me. It will be seen that the outermost of these layers is the largest, and the innermost the smallest, and I have already (_Ants and Spiders_, p. 150) shown reason for believing that the latter constituted the first door the spider ever made, and that the consecutive layers mark successive stages in the enlargement of the nest.

There is therefore a broad distinction as to construction between cork nests and wafer nests; moreover, while the former are, as far as we know at present, all of one type, and only differ in size or proportion, the latter appear under five distinct types.

Thus, every known cork nest, whether found in Europe, America, or the Antipodes, has the same solid door and simple tube; while of the wafer nests, some have branched and others simple tubes, and some again possess a lower door in addition to the upper or surface door.

In the following pages I intend to treat of the trap-door spiders and their nests in the same order in which the latter are placed in the diagram, commencing with those of the cork type B, and then dealing successively with the several wafer nests from C to G. We have already spoken of A, the nest of _Atypus piceus_, and seen that our present knowledge of this nest, of the habits of its occupant and of those of its relations, is still far from complete.

The cork type is, as my readers will perhaps remember, the great cosmopolitan type which ranges round the world, and which, curious to say, is built by many different spiders belonging to distinct genera.

The idea of planning this very perfect bit of mechanism appears to be the common inheritance of these several spiders, separated though they are by wide intervals of geographical space as well as to structural divergence.

At Mentone two distinct spiders construct nests of the cork type, one of these being a _Nemesia_ and the other a _Cteniza_. They are as unlike each other as they well can be, and it seems remarkably strange that their nest-building instinct should be so similar. The nest of the _Cteniza_ is indeed shallower than that of the _Nemesia_, and a practised eye can usually trace a difference between the slightly less angular lower surface and more semi-circular outline of the door of the former, and the more abruptly bevelled and more circular door of the latter.

These spiders and their nests have been already described and figured in _Ants and Spiders_ under the names of _Ct. fodiens_ and _Nemesia cæmentaria_. Recent discoveries have however shown that these spiders possess distinctive characters of their own, and, though closely allied to the species indicated, should be separated from them.

Last spring when pulling down an old terrace-wall (by permission) I had the good fortune to discover the very remarkable male _Cteniza_ drawn at fig. A, Pl. XX., p. 254. I found no trace of a nest or web of any kind, and the spider was merely hiding between the stones.

There appears to be scarcely any doubt that this is the male of the female Mentonese _Cteniza_ which has, up to this time, been called _Ct. fodiens_. A comparison with typical specimens of the true _Ct. fodiens_ from Corsica, has however shown that the two are certainly distinct, and Mr. Pickard-Cambridge[131] now describes the Mentonese form under the name of _Ct. Moggridgii_.[132]

[Footnote 131: Mr. Pickard-Cambridge has once more kindly undertaken the task of naming and describing my collections of trap-door spiders, and the results of his labours will be found at the end of the present work.]

[Footnote 132: I take this opportunity of thanking him for the compliment. A description of this new species will be found at p. 254, below.]

The females of the true _Cteniza fodiens_ are far larger than those of our new Mentonese species, and construct their nests in dry and exposed places, instead of in the moist and shady ivy-covered banks selected by the latter. I have found _Cteniza Moggridgii_ at San Remo and Mentone, and it will probably be also discovered at Nice, but I failed to detect it either at Cannes or Hyères.

The Corsican male at the first glance curiously resembles that found at Mentone, but differs essentially in details and especially in having the surface of the caput unbroken, whereas the caput of the latter presents a very peculiar character in an impressed line which runs across it from side to side (figs. A 1 and A 2). Both agree, however, in being strangely unlike their females.

The other builder of a nest of the cork type at Mentone was, as has been already stated, described and figured in _Ants and Spiders_ under the name of _Nemesia cæmentaria_. Now the true _N. cæmentaria_ of Latreille is found at Montpellier, the classical habitat where the first discovery of trap-door spiders in Europe was made towards the end of the last century, but its true characters have been hitherto but imperfectly known.

I have lately been able to secure several specimens at this place, and they certainly differed in their markings from the so-called _cæmentaria_ of Mentone. M. Simon had previously informed me that he considered our Mentonese spider distinct from the typical _cæmentaria_, and had kindly proposed to give my name to the Mentonese species; and now Mr. Pickard-Cambridge, on the receipt of the specimens collected by me at Montpellier, coincides with M. Simon, and adopts his nomenclature, calling the Mentonese _Nemesia N. Moggridgii_.[133]

[Footnote 133: See below, p. 273.]

I found but one nest of the cork type at Montpellier, where it was most abundant, and invariably inhabited by the same spider, so that there can be little doubt that this is the celebrated _Nemesia cæmentaria_ of Latreille, the nests of which were described by the Abbé Sauvages in 1763.

When living, the pattern on the abdomen is far more distinct and is traced on a paler ground than in _N. Moggridgii_, and the patterns on the back of the caput, as seen in specimens preserved in spirits, and the relative sizes of the lateral eyes, as well as other details enumerated by Mr. Pickard-Cambridge, afford characters by which they may be known apart; and it is probable that when the males, which are at present unknown, shall be discovered, they will be found to present other distinctive peculiarities. In the present instance we have the reverse of the case described above, in which two very distinct spiders constructed a similar nest, for here both spiders and nests are much alike.

We have yet to learn what are the special advantages which each type of nest affords; but it is plain from the fact of the same type being adopted indifferently by both nearly- and most distantly-related spiders, that the form of the nest is governed far more by the conditions which it is contrived to meet, than by the affinity or resemblance of the spiders which construct it.

I have found _N. Moggridgii_ at San Remo, Mentone, Cannes, Hyères, and Marseilles, but thus far, I only know of the true _N. cæmentaria_ at Montpellier.

The latter spider is rather bolder than the former, and I frequently saw it at Montpellier watching at the slightly raised door, with the tips of the claws projecting from the nest, and it rarely failed to resist most vigorously any attempt of mine to force the door open.

During the summer of 1873, I received two specimens of trap-door nests from California. Both of these nests were of the cork type and nearly entire, wanting only a small portion of the base of the tube; they most closely resembled one another and were probably the work of the same spider. For one of these, coming from the San Joaquin valley, between the Calaveras and the Tejon, I have to thank M. J. C. Puls, a Belgian entomologist residing at Ghent; and for the other, containing the spider which had constructed it _alive within its tube_ (!), I am indebted to Mr. G. H. Treadwell of San Francisco. The former nest is drawn at fig. A, Plate XV., and the spider[134] from the latter at fig. B of the same plate.

[Footnote 134: This spider, which proves to be a new species, is described below (p. 260) as _Cteniza Californica_.]

Mr. Treadwell had carried this spider and its nest, with the block of earth in which it lay, all the way from Visalia, a town about 350 miles south of San Francisco, where he had taken it; the nest and spider travelled safe to London enclosed in an empty cocoatina tin, 4-1/2 inches deep, and 2-3/4 across.

The nest was then entire, for these spiders appear to make singularly shallow tubes; and it might have remained so up to the present day had it not been for the rash curiosity of a chambermaid in the London hotel where Mr. Treadwell was staying, who, smitten with a great desire to learn what the heavy little box which came from the land of gold might contain, proceeded to examine the earth, when the sudden appearance of the spider frightened her so much that box and nest and all were thrown with a crash upon the floor.

Were it not for this unlucky incident I might have seen a complete specimen of this curious nest; but as it was, though the spider miraculously escaped uninjured, the bottom of the nest was pounded into dust, and only the upper portion remained intact.

Both this nest and that sent to me by M. Puls, were of the true cork type, and presented a solid door with a bevelled edge, fitting into the correspondingly bevelled lip of the tube, and shutting flush with the surface of the ground. The lining of the tube was strong and thick, but soft and silky to the touch.

The tube itself in Mr. Treadwell's specimen, when intact, cannot have measured more than 3-1/2 inches in length; and we learn from Dr. Lanzwert, who collected the other specimen, that the average length of these nests does not exceed three inches. Dr. Lanzwert, writing in one of the local papers[135] of "The Mygales or Ground Spiders," says, "the poisonous black tarantulas, so well known to naturalists, are extremely common in California, but only in places upland, or lowland which are very hot and dry. Their principal haunts are the San Joaquin valley, between the Calaveras and the Tejon. A similar species from the coast is not only smaller than the interior variety, but the colours are much deeper. They both make a curious habitation under the ground, composed of a glutinized, web-worked purse, about three inches long, and which is furnished with a tightly-fitting lid which they can open or shut at pleasure, and which is as cunning a piece of insect architecture as is to be found in nature. These ugly loathsome Californian spiders are often mentioned by thoughtless scribes as carrying no more danger than a common wasp, like the species of Italy, but it is well known that several persons, young and old, have lost their lives in this State from the bite of such tarantulas as are met with in our coast and interior country. Their enemy in the Tulare valley is an immense shining black wasp,[136] fully an inch long, which will pounce upon them, and after a short battle drag the tarantula along in the most valiant style of heroic conquest. These interior tarantulas are often seen measuring two inches in the spread."

[Footnote 135: _The Evening Bulletin_ for Oct. 25, 1866.]

[Footnote 136: This insect was probably not a true wasp, though belonging to an allied family; it may perhaps have been a _Pepsis_, certain species of which genus Mr. Bates informs me he has frequently seen near Santarem on the Amazon, hawking over the ground where the huge trap-door spiders lived, and suddenly pouncing down upon one of these creatures, often many times larger than themselves, when, after paralysing their victim with their sting, they would deliberately saw off the legs before dragging away the bodies!]

Mr. Treadwell was quite as much impressed as Dr. Lanzwert with the belief that the bite of these spiders is fatal, but it does not appear that either of these gentlemen have obtained conclusive evidence in support of this allegation.

I have occasionally been bitten by the trap-door spiders in South France, but have never experienced the slightest subsequent inconvenience, nor was there any trace of inflammation or poisoning about the punctures which they made. Mr. Blackwall[137] has made a very careful set of observations on this head, and has caused some of the largest species of British spiders to bite his finger and wrist until the blood flowed, without the slightest ill effects. He also inoculated himself at the same time with the poisonous secretion of the spider and with that of the wasp; when the latter wound became extremely painful, while the former was not perceptibly aggravated. Mr. Blackwall obtained the spiders' poison by causing a spider to seize a slip of clean glass with its mandibles, when a small quantity of a liquid showing a slightly acid reaction was deposited.

[Footnote 137: Mr. J. Blackwall, _Researches in Zoology_, ed. 2, 1873; chapter on "The Poison of the Araneidea," pp. 240-256.]

Mr. Treadwell informed me that these Californian trap-door spiders leave their nests in the daytime, and may be seen walking by the roadside, though they are always prepared to hurry back to their nests on the approach of danger.

I received the spider which I have represented at fig. B, Pl. XV., p. 198 (_Cteniza Californica_), from this gentleman alive, and still within the remaining portion of her nest, on the 6th of July, 1873. She then had the legs and cephalothorax of a brownish-black, and the abdomen of a dull, uniform, dusky chocolate brown, but with an indistinct median line near the anterior end on the upper side, intersected at right angles by a shorter line. Mr. Treadwell said, however, that when captured, this spider was much darker, and of a pitchy black colour. The hairs all over the body were short, but especially so on the abdomen, which had the appearance of cloth or felt.

This creature in many ways recalls _Cteniza fodiens_ of Corsica, and in a less degree the _Cteniza_ of Mentone and San Remo.

We find not only the same general form of body, but also the same claws furnished with only one tooth, instead of many as in _Nemesia_, and other distinctive features; and it is interesting to observe in the nest that the more semi-circular form of the door and the wider hinge also connect it rather with _Cteniza_ than with _Nemesia_.

Here, as in all spiders yet observed in cork nests, we find the habit of resisting any attempt to open the door, and many a time when I have wished to raise the lid in order to drop in flies or other food, I have been obliged to desist because the bending blade of my penknife showed that I should injure the nest if I used greater force.

No doubt the shallowness of the nest is an advantage to its occupant in one way--namely, that it enables the spider to start up at the shortest notice, and cling on to the door.

It is curious to find that, far as California is removed from the Riviera, the same habits of construction and self-defence are common to the spiders of both countries, and that the bond of kinship sets time and space at defiance.

I kept this spider all through the summer and early autumn at Richmond (Surrey), sprinkling the nest from time to time with water, and constantly supplying its inhabitant with flies, wood-lice, grasshoppers, earwigs, and other similar dainties. She did not, however, seem eager for food, and the insects provided for her, and actually placed within the nest, were often turned out again almost untouched.

When I placed living insects, such as grasshoppers, for example, within the nest over-night, she would often allow them to remain there unharmed, so that I found them ready to escape on opening the door the following morning.

I never saw her leave the nest of her own free will, and when I made her come out and set her to run in the garden, she began at once to seek for a place to hide in, hobbling along in an ungainly way and at a slow pace.

She must, however, have left the nest on more than one occasion, unseen by me, for she deposited several clusters of eggs at various times upon the under-surface of the gauze net which was fastened over the mouth of the box in which she was imprisoned.

The first of these groups of eggs was laid during the night between the 12th and 13th of July, and formed a raspberry-shaped cluster attached to the gauze.

I have represented this cluster of the natural size at fig. B, 6, and magnified at fig. B, 7, on Plate XV., only in an inverted position, for they really hung downwards from the under side of the net.

These eggs were greyish white or pale brown, and varied in shape from globose to oblong.

All were very small, the largest only measuring 1/2 line in its greatest length, but it is doubtful whether any of these eggs were fertile, and, though they appeared full and plump, many presented an irregular and fissured surface.

A fortnight later (July 27) another cluster of eggs was laid, and this time between the hours of five and eight P.M. When the lamp was brought in at the latter hour, I perceived what I took to be a drop of water hanging from the gauze cover above and rather in front of the spider's door, the very position occupied by the cluster of eggs previously described. On closer inspection this proved to be a drop of a pellucid colourless liquid, in which some thirty eggs floated. One egg was laid on the gauze at some distance from the main group, and several were also attached to the inside of the tin box.

At midnight I found that the drop had coagulated and contracted, and by the following morning the mass was quite dry and resembled the former group, only that it was not quite so convex.

Some of the eggs forming this cluster were much larger than any in the preceding one, and one measured as much as a line in length by half a line in breadth. This group is shown magnified at fig. B, 8, Plate XV., and some of the separate eggs more highly magnified at fig. B, 9.

Between this date and the end of November when the spider died, eggs were laid on seven distinct occasions--viz., on July 31, August 11, 15, 31 (when I again found the eggs floating in a drop of liquid, having been deposited on the gauze between two and half-past four o'clock in the afternoon); September 9 (23 eggs laid on the earth near the entrance to the nest); September 19 (about 30 eggs on the gauze), and November 4 (about 30 eggs on the gauze).

Thus, between July 13 and November 4, this spider laid nine clusters of eggs, all but one of which were placed on the same part of the gauze cover, above and a little in front of the door, and the total number of eggs deposited cannot have been less than 250. It is difficult to understand why she should have laid these eggs outside the nest, unless indeed she knew them to be sterile, and so treated them as refuse. I can scarcely believe that such a procedure is in accordance with the ordinary habits of these spiders; for, if the eggs and young are habitually exposed, then the perfect concealment of the nest would lose one of its most important uses. When we remember that there are minute hymenopterous insects which lay their eggs within the eggs of the spiders, we can see how important it may be that the entrance to a nest, which is at once nursery and stronghold, should be closed by a well-fitting door, and one which may exclude, not only the larger and more powerful enemies of the full-grown spiders, but also the tiny and almost imperceptible assailants of the eggs and young.

This Californian spider was always careful to eject from the nest the remains of insects with which I had supplied her, and, as she did so deliberately and by day as well as by night, I had frequent opportunities of watching her. Sometimes, if not alarmed by any sudden movement, she would remain for one or two minutes at the mouth of the nest with the door partly raised, and I was glad to seize these opportunities for making some experiments, with a view to learning whether she would prove as sensitive to sound as she did to other vibrations and to the sight of moving objects.

Placing myself so that the partly-opened door screened me from her view, I was able to approach close to the nest without causing her alarm, and to make different sounds and noises at distances varying from three to fourteen inches.

In no case, however, did she pay the slightest attention; and neither shrill and sudden whistling, deep chest and buzzing sounds, an octave of piercing notes struck upon brass bells, my best imitation of the whirring of the fern owl, or finally, the angry hum of a large humble-bee imprisoned in a paper box, and held within three inches of the door of the nest, appeared to produce any kind of effect. This surprised me, I confess, for, though I am aware that no auditory apparatus has as yet been discovered in spiders, I can scarcely believe that they stand at so great a disadvantage as creatures would seem to do which lack the power of hearing.

These experiments must not, however, be taken for more than they are worth; and the results obtained may have been due rather to apathy in the individual spider than to a want of perception in the race generally. In any case they suggest the need of further experiment and observation in this direction.

In October I carried this Californian spider out with me to Mentone, and she lived there and appeared plump and well until the end of the following month, when she suddenly died, having laid one more group of eggs in the interval. On examination, I found a dark brown spot on one side of the abdomen, and this, I think, probably indicates that her death was caused by some insect of the ichneumon family, which had laid its eggs within the spider's body, after having stabbed it at the place indicated by the discolouration.

Not very long before this melancholy event occurred, I had put the spider to some inconvenience in order to secure her portrait from life, to effect which I took her from her nest and placed her in a deep china saucer.

She exhibited the strongest dislike to exposure, and sought to hide herself even under a fold of blotting-paper which lay in the saucer with her. I also noted that she appeared quite incapable of walking up the sides of the saucer, and it would therefore seem that she was destitute of the viscid hairs which enable some spiders to traverse glazed and polished surfaces.

Seeing this anxiety on the part of the spider for concealment, it came into my mind that, perhaps, if she were placed on the surface of a pot full of garden mould she might excavate a tunnel in order to hide herself from view. This I accordingly did in the evening of November 15, and on the following morning I was delighted to find that she had commenced to dig and was still at work.

In little more than an hour's time the hollow had become about the size of half a walnut, and resembled in its nearly semi-circular outline and size the surface of the door of her own nest. I was greatly pleased to be able to watch the creature at the work of excavation, a sight which I believe no naturalist has ever had before.

The legs took no part in the digging, and the palpi were but little used, the mandibles and their fangs being the implements chiefly employed. As soon as a little earth had been loosened and gathered up, the spider walked up to the edge of her excavation and deposited there her mouthful of particles of earth, separating and working the mandibles up and down in the effort to part with the pellet, which had been carried between the fangs and the mouth-organs. Each pellet was very small, and the operation appeared to be excessively tedious and laborious. I had expected to see the spider scrape out large quantities of earth at a time, and either drag it backwards or kick it out behind her as a terrier does when working at a rabbit-burrow; but no, every little pellet removed was carried forwards, and deposited separately on the "tip."

On the two following days, the 17th and 18th November, the spider remained almost inactive, and brooded over the cavity she had made, and which still remained too shallow to conceal or even contain her. At 4 P.M. on the latter day I made a hole for her in the earth, and, after some indecision, she took possession of it. Next day, however, finding that she remained motionless in the hole which I had made, and displayed no apparent intention of either lining it with silk or furnishing it with a door, I replaced her in her own nest.

Within a few days after this date I found her dead at the bottom of her tube, and at first I was inclined to fear that the treatment to which she had lately been subjected might have caused her end. When, however, I detected the brown spot on the side of the abdomen, described above, and which so strongly recalled the marks frequently observable in caterpillars attacked by ichneumons, I came to the conclusion that she had really died from the internal injuries caused by the gnawing of these cruel parasites; and that the eggs, laid long before by one of these insects, had been hatched within her body and developed into larvæ, which, living upon her tissues, had at length destroyed some vital part. It is surprising that a creature, carrying within itself such a fatal brood, should not only live, but be capable of undergoing such adventures and misadventures as this travelled spider endured with seeming indifference; but similar facts are familiar to all those who have attended to the rearing of caterpillars, and the frequent disappointment caused by the death of apparently sound specimens which have been attacked in this way is but too well known.

It would appear that _Cteniza Californica_ is peculiarly amenable to captivity, and indeed to captivity of the strictest kind.

My specimen lived during all the time she was in my possession in a cocoatina tin, a cylindrical box 4-1/2 in. deep and 2-3/4 in. in diameter, which always stood among the books and papers on my writing-table. It is probable that those trap-door spiders which inhabit nests with short tubes, and which therefore can be transported nest and all, would be less disconcerted by imprisonment than is the case with other kinds living at the bottom of a long burrow which it is almost impossible to carry away entire. This is borne out by what has been related (_Ants and Spiders_, p. 122) of the habits of _Cteniza ionica_ in captivity, which not only endured to have its nest set upside down in a flower-pot, but actually furnished the inverted base of the tube with a door appropriate to its new position.

Canon Tristram (the well-known author and naturalist) was so kind as to send me two trap-door nests from Palestine for inspection; these were small cork nests, the doors of which resembled those of the Mentonese _Cteniza_ (_Ct. Moggridgii_), but the tubes were exceedingly short, and that of the more perfect specimen, as I gather from Canon Tristram, measured only two inches and an eighth in length when entire.

The nests of _Cteniza ionica_ are but little longer, and that of the Mentonese _Cteniza_, though never so shallow as these, are far less deep than those of _Nemesia cæmentaria_, the builder of the typical cork nest.

And now we will leave the nests of the cork type and their inhabitants, and turn to the more intricate group of nests belonging to the wafer type. Following the order indicated in the diagrams, we will begin with the simplest type of all, fig. C, and afterwards take the remaining types one after the other, advancing until we reach the most complex type, G. The nest represented diagrammatically at fig. C, in Plate XIV., is shown of the natural size in Plate XVI., with the spider (_Nemesia Simoni_, Camb.) which constructs it (fig. A 1).

It belongs to the single-door unbranched wafer type, of which one example has already been described in the West Indian nest (see _Ants and Spiders_, p. 79, fig. B in woodcut); for, though this latter has a shorter tube and a much stouter silk lining than is the case with its European representative, there does not appear to be sufficient difference to justify their separation as distinct types.

This, which is the simplest known form of trap-door nest, is quite new to Europe, and the spider inhabiting it proves also to be one hitherto undescribed; it has received from Mr. Pickard-Cambridge, the name of _Nemesia Simoni_,[138] being so called in honour of M. E. Simon, the well-known arachnologist.

[Footnote 138: Mr. Pickard-Cambridge describes _N. Simoni_ at p. 297 below. This species is remarkably well characterized, an assertion rarely to be made in the case of those _Nemesias_ of which, as in the present instance, the female only is known. The elevated, rounded, and glabrous caput at once distinguishes it, not to speak of other peculiarities. Mr. Pickard-Cambridge alludes to the presence, in the specimens forwarded to him in spirits, of two singular indentations on either side of the caput (fig. A 3, Plate XVI.). I did not observe this when these spiders were alive, but I remember that the caput of one of these spiders which had been injured in capture contracted and expanded spasmodically, presenting a painful resemblance to laboured breathing. I have not observed this in other spiders.]

During last May (1874) we spent a few days at Bordeaux on our homeward route. While there my sister was fortunate enough to discover a single nest of this type when we were out together on a spider-hunt near the little village of Lormont, which is situated on the opposite bank of the river to that on which the city stands. We subsequently found these nests in tolerable abundance in a deep shady lane near a restaurant called Mon Répos, on the same side of the river, but rather farther up.

Here the hedge banks were high, and the soil was composed of a fine even-grained loam of great depth, which permitted the spiders to carry their tubes very far down, some of them attaining a length of 15 inches.

This made it very difficult to follow them throughout their whole course and so to assure oneself of the real structure of the nests, but I succeeded in doing this in twelve instances.

In every one of these I found the tube cylindrical and unbranched throughout, and destitute of any trace of a lower door.

This deficiency alone distinguishes the present type from that to which the nest of _Nemesia Eleanora_ belongs; the latter being of the _double-door_ and the former of the _single-door, unbranched wafer type_.

But perhaps it may be asked whether it is safe to assume that because twelve examples of this nest were found to correspond in structure, and were tenanted by the same occupant, that therefore all the Bordeaux nests in which this particular spider might be found would present similar peculiarities.

I greatly hope that other naturalists will put this question to the test of actual investigation on the spot, but I do not hesitate to assert my conviction that this will prove to be the case.

The result of my experience among the nests of the other _Nemesias_, scores of which I have carefully examined in many widely separated localities, shows that a given spider is invariably associated with a fixed type of nest.