42 



arcuate, beyond the base ; the second nearly straight before the 

 middle of the wing; the third at three-quarters from base, a little 

 bent opposite the cell, else nearly straight. Just beyond this line 

 is a faint dark line, not easily perceived, containing a distinct 

 dark scale blotch between veins 3 and 4. This and the outer two 

 ochre lines are continued across hind-wings, which also have the 

 scale blotch in the same place. Beneath the markings repeated ; 

 discal marks ; the irrorations are coarser and yellowish in part. 

 Expanse 23 mm. Ohio, Mr. G. R. Pilate. 



PAPILIO ECCLIPSIS, A DOUBTFUL OR LOST N. 

 AMERICAN BUTTERFLY. 



By Dr. Herman H. Hagen. 



I desire to draw attention to the famous Papilio Ecclipsis 

 Linn. The specimen is figured by Petiver in Gazophylaz. PL 10, fig. 

 6; the quotation by Kirby, pi. 33. f. 11, is erroneous, and refers 

 to Erebia Portlandia. Petiver, p. 16, says " It exactly resembles 

 our English Brimstone Butterfly (R. Rhamni), were it not for 

 those black spots and apparent blue moons in the lower wings. 

 This is the only one I have seen." In the Catalogus Classicus, p. 

 2, this species is put by Petiver among the European insects. 



Linne described the species, 1763 (not 1764 as stated by 

 Kirby) in Centuria Insectorum p. 23, No. 6'j. He quotes Peti- 

 vers figure as " bona " and says : Habitat in America septentri- 

 onali, De Gecr. Therefore a specimen must have existed in De 

 Geer's collection, but this is not described in his memoirs, nor 

 mentioned in Retzius' Catalogue. Linne repeats his description 

 in Syst. Nat. Ed. Xli, p. 765. Werneburg has overlooked that 

 Petiver put his species among the European insects, and does not 

 mention it. VV. F. Kirby, Synon. Catal. p. 488, quotes the species 

 in brackets, and says; "spec, fict." America. I think it should 

 be examined if the species is still in Petiver's collection which be- 

 longs to the British Museum. If it is really fictitious, perhaps the 

 specimen in De Geer's collection came from the same maker. 

 After all De Geer's collection is still preserved and in good con- 

 dition in Stockholm. I think Linnaeus must have had some data 

 to give the country as North America. It is sure that Linne has 

 described another fictitious insect — the famous ScarabcBus Tri- 

 dentatiis. But here the falsification of blue moons seems some- 

 what more difficult if not impossible. It occurs to me that 

 perhaps the P. Ecclipsis is an insect near to Colias Caesonia, now 

 not represented in cabinets, or a remarkable variety. At least 

 the above quoted collections should be searched for a more satis- 

 factory explanation. 



