NA 
present themselves to his notice differ widely among themselves in 
respect of completeness. In some instances the superficial likeness 
between two Insects is marvellously close, extending to the most 
minute particulars. This may happen even when the affinity 
between the two is remote. BATES was so much impressed with 
the excellence of the resemblance in some cases, that he speaks of 
« a minute and palpably intentional likeness which is perfectly 
staggering ». This phrase, especially the use of the word « inten- 
tional », is no doubt open to criticism ; but most students, for 
example, of the neotropical lepidopterous fauna will admit its 
virtual accuracy. In other cases the resemblance, though sufficiently 
arresting, is less exact. In a further series of instances a resem- 
blance, while certainly present, may be of so remote a kind that 
opinions may legitimately differ as to whether it possesses any 
bionomic significance at all. Between the two extremes every 
degree of transition is found to exist. I show on the screen speci- 
mens of /Zeliconius aranea (underside), MH. leuce, H. alithea 
(underside) and /7. galanthus (underside), together with Perrhy- 
bris lorena 9 (underside), Pieris noctipennis Q and Pieris locusta G 
(underside). Here we see examples of resemblance between 
Heliconius and Pierine as to the significance of which I am quite 
prepared to find that different views might be taken, though I am 
myself for various reasons inclined to the opinion that the likeness 
is what BATES would have called « intentional ». Some, again, 
may be disposed to doubt whether the Danaine here exhibited 
(Metinda formosa) bears more than an accidental resemblance to 
this Papilio (P. rex). The individuals before us are, however, both 
males, and their respective females, though easily recognisable as 
each belonging to its own male, show a mutual resemblance which 
is really close. I may mention that both sexes of each species, with 
other most interesting forms, have been well figured in «Trans. Ent. 
Soc. Lond., 1906 », pl. XI, and by Mr. ELTRINGHAM in his fine 
work on African mimicry just published. 
In many cases there exists a resemblance, not to any other Insect 
in particular, but to a group or assemblage in general. In all these 
instances, it is perhaps superfluous to mention, there is no necess- 
ary dependence on affinity. But that, as before suggested, the 
influence of affinity cannot be entirely ignored, we see from 
such an example as that of the African Acr@as, many species of 
which are superficially so much like one another that it requires 
a skilled observer to distinguish between them. The same 
may be said of many of the Eastern Zupleas. Contrast this 
