380 THE entomologist's record. 



them out to me as coming from very high ground near Larche (South 

 Daiaphine, though actually in a northern tongue of Provence). 

 Amongst the specimens placed with these are similar small apollo, that 

 have quite equal claims to be called ddiKs. They have rather short 

 antennte like delius, but have not the black rings of that species. 

 It is interesting to note the small size of these apollo, exactly 

 that of diiim, from various localities in the Alps of the Barce- 

 lonnette region which is comparatively close to Digne, where the 

 species attains a size equal to that of the Spanish specimens, though 

 with a darker and more typical apollo coloration. What is the actual 

 difference of dciiua from apollo / No one will tell me. I can find both 

 species described, but then the descriptions do not cover all the races 

 of each. Text-boolvs are usually satisfied to state that everyone knows 

 them so well that there is no need to mention the distinctions. This 

 would unquestionably be a sound position if one had only to deal with 

 such Swiss specimens as I have placed on either side of my Spanish speci- 

 mens. The best character for ddiiisis certainly the black-ringed antennae, 

 which are also ixsually proportionally shorter. The denser creamier 

 colouring is also very characteristic, yet this would make the Aragon 

 specimens delitia. The pouch of the female is, to my view, identical in 

 both species. Mr. Elwes, I think, omits to tell us whether it is so or 

 not. The ^ appendages have no structural difference that I have 

 been able to observe, beyond one in size, those of apollo being larger 

 and so apparently more solid. In the Spanish apollo this is markedly 

 so, the differences are, however, I think, less, proportionately, than may 

 be observed in Ervhia aethiojts, of which the appendages of continental 

 specimens are so much larger than those of British examples." 



Mr. J. A. Clark's complete ilhistrated account of the variation of 

 Peronea cristana, Fab., might well serve as a model on which to base 

 future accounts of the variation of more or less polymorphic species. 

 As a rule new aberrations are described without reference to those 

 that have already been dealt with, synonyms are thus hopelessly in- 

 creased, and, unless some attempt is made by those who describe varieties 

 and aberrations to work out their subject historically, endless confu- 

 sion must result. The paper has attracted considerable attention 

 among continental lepidopterists, and we may possibly hope before 

 long to get some sort of general opinion formulated, tlaat those who 

 describe new forms should first make themselves acquainted with the 

 literature of their subject. We hope Mr. Clark will treat other species 

 in the same thorough manner. 



We have received the exceedingly useful lists of the Macro-lepi- 

 doptera and Tenthredinidie of the Clyde basin district, compiled by 

 Mr. A. A. Dalglish, F.E.S., and reprinted from the British Association 

 Handbook, for 1901. We know that Mr. Dalglish has had to cut 

 down his list to meet the exigencies of space. One would have 

 supposed, at any rate, that the British Association would not have 

 reduced the scientific value of such a list, by considering the cost of 

 two or three extra pages of print. 



Mr. G. C. Bignell gives us, as his addition to the literature of his 



special subject for the year, " The IchneumonidiB of South Devon, 



pt. ii., Braconidae," a most useful little brochure, reprinted from the 



Trans. Dcron Assoc, for Adranccwent of Science, &c., 1901. 



At the meeting of theEntom. Society of London, held November20th, 



