1372 THE BUTTERFLIES OF NEW ENGLAND. 



three or four minor groups of genera, which, so far as the Hesperidi are 

 concerned, are, I think, of value. In the same year (1878) Burmeister, 

 not willing to accept the divisions proposed on the ground that they were 

 founded upon the male sex, which was certainly only partially true, proposed 

 (Descr. phys. Rep. Arg., Lep., 245) a new division into four tribes — 

 Pyrgidae, Achlyodidae (:=Mabille's Antigonini), Thymelidae and Thamy- 

 rididae (=Mabille's Pyrrhopygini). His Pyrgidae Jind Thymelidae, how- 

 ever, are assemblages of extremely dissimilar material having no distinctive 

 bonds in common, the former by the inclusion of the species he refers to 

 Pyrgus, the latter by a medley of forms belonging to two or three of 

 Mabille's divisions.* The latest division, that of Distant, is even more 

 unfortunate, for his separation of the Malayan species into two groups, 

 Ismenaria and Erionotaria, is based entirely on the relative length and 

 breadth of the hind wings, a separation he does not claim as natural, and 

 which seems to me, therefore, purely an obstacle, obliging him to separate 

 allied and place near together dissimilar forms. 



Since the publication of my proposed division I have not been able to 

 give to this family, outside of the North American forms, the study I had 

 hoped to do before publishing this work, but from numerous examinations 

 and dissections made, from the criticisms and comments of others, and 

 from the study of the published material upon the earlier stages, I have 

 been brought to the conclusion that while it is possible that the distinctions 

 to which I have drawn attention may not pervade the whole family, there 

 is no question at all of their value as separating all the forms found in north 

 temperate regions, and the fidler distinctions we have given in this work will, 

 we think, warrant our conclusion. The characteristics of the larva, the 

 chrysalis and the imago of the Pyrrhopygini of Mabille seem to me to indicate 

 that they perhaps should form a distinct group equivalent to the Hesperidi 

 rather than to either of the groups of genera into which the latter falls ; 

 while the lack of information concerning the early stages of so many tropi- 

 cal types leaves us in great uncertainty regarding the necessity for the 

 further division of the Pamphilidi or the removal of a part of its members 

 as distinct tribes ; so far, however, as I have yet been able to obtain any 

 information concerning the early stages, I discover nothing which seems to 

 point to their further division into anything more important than groups of 

 genera, such as those into which each of the two tribes is divided in the 

 present work. 



Table of tribes of Hesperidae, based on the egg. 



Eggs vertically ribbed, tlie ribs connected by horizontal cross lines Hesperidi. 



Eggs having the surface smooth or obscurely reticulated, veith no sign of ribst... Pamphilidi. 



* For instance, Hylephila phylaeus and Pyr- however, has, as Goossens states, a vertically 



gus americanus are placed under Pyrgidae, ribbed egg, but it is not cross lined, nor is it 



Thymelicus brettus and Eudamus proteus reticulate, but simply punctate; and the same 



under Thymelidae. is true in Pamphila, only the ribs are very 



t The European Heteropterus morpheus. obscure. 



