A CRITICAL EXAMINATIOX OF DR. VEKITy's PAPER. 33 



to later authors to decide which is the " nimotypical " race, and conse- 

 quently the received varietal nomenclature should hold good, to the 

 exclusion of vuhjaris, Ver. 



Tivf/aiireae and liippotho'i'. — These two species were dealt with by 

 Mr. Bethune-Baker {lar. cit., p. 252), but the ease is so much the most 

 complicated with which we are confronted that it seems important to 

 examine it in detail. The facts are these. Linneus first gave the 

 name riiyanreac in the xth ed. of the ■S//-s. Nat., p. 484, no. 161, where 

 he referred back to the 1st ed. of the bn. Suer., [pp. 247, 248] , nos. 

 807, 808. On turning to this we find the following descriptions : 

 " 807. P. alis rotundatis fulvis ; utrinque punctis nigris." 

 " 808. P. alis rotundatis fulvis ; infra albo punctatis." 



The latter must necessarily refer to the ^ of the species we still 

 know as v/n/aun'ae, since it is the only Swedish " copper " with white 

 spots on the underside ; the former might quite well be the 9 of the 

 same, were it not for the further references given under the descrip- 

 tion in the xth ed. of the .S//.s. Xat., viz., Roesel, Iiix. Bdia^t., pi. xxxvii., 

 figs. 5, 6, pi. xlv., figs. 5, 6 ; Merian, Ihk. Kur., pi. clxiv. ; Ray, Hist. 

 Ins., p. 125, no. 20. On looking up these references we find that 

 Roesei's figures on pi. xxxvii. are an excellent upper- and underside of 

 liipi'otlioe, whilst those on pi. xlv. are an equally good upper- and 

 underside of phlaeas, to which species Ray's description also refers, 

 whilst Maria Sibylla Merian's figure is also of p/daeas, but of the ab. 

 schniidtii, unless indeed the colour has faded out, which, in view of 

 the condition of the other plates, is not very probable, though there 

 are one or two instances, notably the " tortoise-shells," in which, it 

 seems to have done so. (His further reference, with a ? to Petiver's 

 GazopJi., pi. xiv., fig, 3, in the 2nd ed. of the Fn. Siiec, p. 285, 

 no 1079, under i-tniaiireae, is unaccountable, except on the supposition 

 that he had never seen the plate in question, for it represents an 

 obvious Geometrid moth ; the description " fnlva, alis limbo nigro 

 insignatis," must have misled him.) It is, I think, obvious that 

 when Linneus wrote his 1st ed. of the Fn. Suec, and also when he 

 wrote his xth ed. of the Si/s. Xat., he was under the impression that 

 vin/aiireae, /li/ipatlioe and p/ilaeas were all one species, those with an 

 unspotted upperside being the ^ s and those with the spotted upper- 

 side the $ s of the same insect. This is certainly supported by his 

 second, fuller, description in " Sps. Xat., xth ed., where he describes 

 the ^ as "alis supra fulvis immaculatis," though he had above spoken 

 of the species as being " punctis sparsis atris." Since he also says of 

 the $ " subtus primores maculis sparsis atris margine albo-ocellatis 

 posticae cinerascentes punctis nigris obsoletis," I feel confident that 

 Mr. Bethune-Baker is taking too much for granted when he supposes 

 that this description was taken from any y of riruatneae whatever. 

 He appears also to take " margine " to refer to the edge of the »■/»//, 

 whereas it should, in my opinion, be taken to refer to that of the black 

 spots, in which case the description is an unmistakable one of many 

 5 s of Idppotho'e. The black spots on the underside of the forewings of 

 this species are ringed with white, thus forming ('//^'-spots, whereas 

 those of rir(/aitreae are not ; the obsolescence of the spots on the 

 underside of the hindwing is also very common in hippotlmf. It Avas 

 not until he wrote the 2nd ed. of the I'li. Suec. that Linneus separated 

 these three species, giving descriptions of pldaeas and hippothoe for the 



