193 



RECENT LITERATURE. 



British Lepidoptern. By J. W. Tutt. Vol. iv. 8vo, pp. 535. Loudon: 

 Swan Sonnenscbeiu & Co. 1904. 



The fourth volume of 'British Lepidoptera ' has just been issued, 

 and, owing to the fact that it treats on a superfamily — the Sphingides 

 — that has been studiously worked at and written upon by Messrs. 

 Rothschild and Jordan in the ' Revision of the Lepidopterous Family 

 Sphingid;e ' only just recently, it is bound to be criticized in the light 

 of a comparison. The author in the preface foresees this, and fears a 

 "poor comparison." It will be for careful readers and workers to 

 decide, and we think that percliance good results may accrue from a 

 perusal of both. It is most unfortunate that we find, even though the 

 strict rule of priority has been applied to the nomenclature (as in the 

 case of Messrs. Rothschild and Jordan's work), that it is different from 

 that work. Is this to mean that, do what we may, agreement is im- 

 possible ? The present work, put beside the latter, will reveal the 

 position we have arrived at in this matter. 



From the Natural History point of view the present volume will 

 take its place amongst the classics of entomological literature. Mr. 

 Tutt is nothing unless thorough, and the complete overhauling he has 

 given to the twelve remaining British hawk-motlis will rank as one of 

 his greatest biological achievements. It must indeed be gratifying to 

 the author, and none the less to his readers, to find that the inde- 

 pendent results of his studies of the larvae and pupa3 actually coincide 

 to ii large extent with the classification arrived at by Messrs. Roths- 

 child and Jordan in their work, which is built up essentially on imaginal 

 characters. One can compare such a case with two mathematicians 

 independently solving a difficult problem. Both get the same result. 

 It is no proof that either is right, but the probability is exceedingly 

 strong. The searching enquiry that has been made concernmg the 

 species treated in vol. iv. should be read therefore with double interest, 

 in view of this coincidence of opinions. It will be necessary for the 

 reader to note that the classification of the PaliEarctic Sphinges as 

 given in the catalogue at the end of the book is not wholly in accord- 

 ance with that given in the text. We take it that Mr. Tutt was 

 maturing his opinions as he was writing ; and, in fact, on page 2-14 

 we find a footnote that the only way out, of a difficulty was to revise 

 the terminology, although half-way through the book. The fact becomes 

 clear that the whole of the manuscript should have been sent in a single 

 instalment, and not in pieces, to the printer. It does seem a pity that 

 one may read something in the first half of the book that is greatly 

 modified in the second half. For instance, in the text the Eumor- 

 phina) are a subfamily of SphingidiD, but in the catalogue they are 

 a subfamily of Eumorphidro. Even in vol. iii. the raising of the Eu- 

 morphids to family rank was anticipated, but it has not actually come 

 till the end of vol. iv. It is not too much to assert, however, that the 

 portion of the book dealing with the Eumorphids — Eumorphinos and 

 Daphnidines — deserves the highest praise. We here have a very 



