EREBIA EPIPHRON, KNOCH. 151 



1798, is actually Erehia epipliron, var. cai^siope. At all events 

 neither mentions de Prunner's work in this connection. The 

 references he gives, however, and the description of the butterfly, 

 as well as the locality cited, seem conclusive (p. 21) : 



" Esper pag. 329, tab. 31, suppl. 7, fig. 2, pag. 131, tab. 78, cont. 28, 

 fig. 2. Alis integeiTimis fuscis, primoribus fascia utrinque ferruginea, 

 punctis duobus nigris ; posterioribus supra maculis duobus margin- 

 alibus minutis fulvis. 



^'Bcrgst. tab. 50, fig. 78, tab. 71, fig. 5-6, tab. 102, fig. 3-4. 

 Eiigramelle, tab. 24, n. 45 a-b, le petit ncgre a bandes fauves. Fuesly, 

 pag. 31, n. 604, Syst. Bescli., pag. 110, n. 51, Borhhaus., pag. 96-244, n. 

 356, Alcyone. 



" Imago in ditione Nice en Provence noii rare mense 'hdio." 



On the other hand, Werneburg (' Beitrage zur Schmetterlings- 

 kunde,' Erfurt, 1864) had already identified as Cassiope Esper's 

 figure on tab. Ixxviii, there described as Melampiis. While it is 

 hardly less doubtful that Esper's two P. (Etlicrlvs, p. 26, F., 

 figured tom. 1, tab. cxxii, Cont. 79, figs. 3 and 4, are a male 

 Epiphron ab. neUimm, Bsdv. (with all the ocellations wanting), 

 and a female var. Cassiope respectively. Bergstriisser's figs. 

 3, 4 on his tab. 102 are also Cassiope, as well as Engramelle's 

 Papilio cassiope, tab. 24, fig. 45, " aus Steiermark." De Prunner, 

 probably, had no personal acquaintance either with Melampiis or 

 Cassiope ; for the latter is included only in the " Elenchus ad 

 cognoscenda lepidopterorum nomina " at the end of his book, this 

 being an index of all the Lepidoptera known to him at the time 

 of writing. All the same the first record of Cassiope in what are 

 now the Alpes Maritimes of France must be placed to his credit. 



In 1801, or thereabouts, Jacob Huebner figured an Erehia 

 iantlie which is criticised by the Graf von Hoft'mansegg in Illiger's 

 Magazine, vol. v, p. 181: " Alphabetischen Verzeichnisse von 

 Huebner's Papilionen Durch denselben." This, he says, is 

 Cassiope Fab., and "consequently Cassiope, Bork." meaning 

 thereby, I suppose, that Borkhausen ought to have called his 

 Alcyone cassiope, which he does not. 



" Diess ist Cassiope Fab. bei der man jedoch in der Beschreibung 

 den verdrukten text nach dem ArtKinzeichen und der Mantissa so 

 verbessern muss, das in der 4te und 5te Zeile die Worte nigra und 

 rufa gegen einander vertauscbt verden. Es ist folglicb auch Cassiope 

 Bork. 



"This is Cassiope Fab., in regard to which we must amend the 

 printed text in the description in accordance with the' Species Insect- 

 orum ' and the ' Mantissa ' so that in the lines 4 and 5 the words 

 nigra and rufa are transposed." 



But Kirby in his ' Catalogue of Diurnal Lepidoptera,' 1871, 

 identifies Herbst's P. melampiis {loc. cit. p. 186) with Cassiope. 

 Our next authority is Ferdinand Ochsenheimer (Leipzig, 1807), 



