Even in those two features they are different. Unlike Haidomyrmex (or Brownimesia), the mandibles in Martialis does seems to have (in my opinion) marked masticatory and basal margins: look at the concave areas in the distal half inner margins. Haidomyrmex clypeus is quite broad and the antennal sockets are not close to the anterior border of the head capsule.

Also, compare the mesosoma in profile. Martialis has a uninterrupted smooth dorsal profile, much like amblyoponines do, wherereas in Haidomyrmex the pronotum, mesonotum and propodeum each seems to form domed structures. Of course this assessment is base on what little I can gather from Dussky (1996) and Engel and Grimaldi’s (2005) publications, since I have never examine the specimen first hand (nor Martialis for that matter).

In any case, this is one of my concerns about ant morphology and phylogeny- we have many interesting ant fossils that cannot be placed into any of the extant subfamilies, yet they are important to understand the overall picture of early ant evolution. And molecular markers can’t help us here.

Speaking of the F-word, can I ask your opinion about the relationship between Haidomyrmex and Martialis?