A brief outline of the history of weevil classification is provided, with references to contributions by Schoenherr, Lacordaire, Crowson, Morimoto, Muñiz, Sanborne, Wood, Burrini et al., Calder, Thompson, Zimmerman, Kuschel, and Marvaldi. Kuschel`s (1995) and Marvaldi`s (1997) phylogenetic hypotheses are specially taken into account, and their implications for the higher classification of Curculionoidea are discussed. According to a consensus among the alternative classifications, the following families and subfamilies are recognised: Nemonychidae (Nemonychinae, Doydirhynchinae, Rhynorhyn-chinae, and Eobelinae), Anthribidae (Urodontinae, Anthribinae, and Choraginae), Belidae (Belinae, Oxycoryninae, and Aglycyderinae), Attelabidae (Rhynchitinae and Attelabinae), Brentidae (Brentinae, Cyladinae, Antliarhininae, Eurhynchinae, Apioninae, and Nanophyinae), Caridae, Brachyceridae (Brachycerinae, Microcerinae, Cryptolarynginae, and Desmidophorinae), Ithyceridae, Erirhinidae (Erirhininae, Tanysphirinae, Stenopelminae, and Raymondionyminae), Dryophthoridae (Sphenophorinae, Dryophthorinae, Orthognatinae, Sitophilinae, and Rhynchophorinae), Platypodidae (Coptonotinae, Tesserocerinae, and Platypodinae), and Curculionidae (Entiminae, Cyclominae, Brachyceropsidinae, Thecesterninae, Ulomascinae, Curculioninae, Molytinae, Cryptorhynchinae, Baridinae, Phytonominae, Lixinae, Zygopinae, Magdalininae, Cossoninae, and Scolytinae).

“Classification of weevils is like a mirage in that their wonderful variety of form and the apparent distinctness of many major groups lead one to suppose that classifying them will be fairly straightforward but, when examined closely, the distinctions disappear in a welter of exceptions and transformation series”.

                                                                Thompson (1992, p. 835)