1014 TIIF. BUTTERFLIES OF NEW ENGL.US^U. 



eophanidi ; even this, however, seems hardly warranted. The larva of 

 Toinares balhis of southern Europe, which certainly must be classed with 

 the Chrysophauidi, departs in many points more strongly from tlie normal 

 form than is the case with Feniseca. The relation of the head to the first 

 thoracic seguient and the degree of retractibility of the former witiiiu the 

 latter is very much the same. The chitinous shield of the first thoracic 

 segment is the same. The form of the body is far more cylindrical, quite 

 as moniliform, and the prolegs and legs are much more fully developed 

 tiuin in Feniseca. The elevation of the segments of the body into bristly 

 bosses in Feniseca is intensified and more specialized in Tomares, and the 

 sole point wherein the latter agrees better with the normal form is the high 

 position of the spiracles of the eighth abdominal segment ; for here, in their 

 alignement with the other spiracles, Feniseca is truly anomalous, though 

 according to Guenee the same is the case withLycaena baetica. Tomares, 

 too, possesses tiie transverse slit of the dorsum of the seventh and the 

 lateral caruncles of the eighth abdominal segment, so common among Ly- 

 caeniuae, while Feniseca, likeHeodes, possesses neither. As to the cater- 

 pillar at birth there is nothing to distinguish it from other Chrysophauidi 

 except the more cylindrical form. Mr. Edwards, to judge from his com- 

 ments, does not seem to be aware that in all of them (so far as known) the 

 head is of the average body width, but one would suppose that he would be 

 familiar with the young larva of Heodes. 



I have mentioned the mature caterpillar particularly, as it is upon this 

 that Mr. Edwards specially dwells, and we know very little about the 

 range of variation in the egg and young caterpillar in Chrysophauidi. 

 In the former, however, the difference is nearly as great between Heodes and 

 Chrysophanus as between Epidemia and Feniseca, and we have no warrant 

 from its structure to exclude the egg of Feniseca from the Ciirysophanidi. 

 Easily the same may be said of the chrysalis, which differs only in gen- 

 eric features from Heodes, Tomares and the others, and indeed shows its 

 affinity witii them in every tribal characteristic, not even departing from 

 them in the fungiform character of its dermal appendages. 



EXCURSUS XXXIX.— PERIODICITY IN THE APPEARANCE 



OF BUTTERFLIES. 



Au printemps de uos jours, notre .line A peine dolose, 

 Voit ainsi I'avenir rayoniiaiitcie bonbeur, 

 Et sur un doux espoir sans crainte se repose, 

 Comme le papillon sur le sein d' une fleur. 



DiDiER. — Le Mois de Mai. 



Every year we read in the pages of our entomological journals some- 

 thing about the rarity or abundance of this or that insect. Particularly is 

 this the case vvitli those insects which are agricultural scourges, since here 

 the observation of their comparative abundance or scarcity is quickened. 



