35 
wing being furnished with a simple costal, a 5-branched post-costal, 
a 4-branched median and a simple anal vein. Now this is the typical 
number of branches which a lepidopterous wing ought to possess, 
according to the theory of Mr. Edward Doubleday, that we are to 
suppose the existence of a discoidal vein traversing the middle of the 
discoidal cell, and that this discoidal vein, as well as the post-costal 
and median, are respectively furnished with three branches, Ac- 
cording to this theory therefore, the two branches of the post-costal 
vein which run to the tip of the fore-wing of Endromis, together with 
the first branch traversing the front of the dise of the apical portion 
of the wing, are the only real branches of the post-costal vein; the 
two following branches of the post-costal vein, as I have regarded 
them, and the first branch of the median vein, are the branches of the 
supposed discoidal vein, and the three remaining branches of the me- 
dian vein are its only true branches. I do not intend in this place 
to enter into a detail of the reasons which induce me to refuse assent 
to this theory ; I may however observe, Ist, that with regard to the 
functions of these branches, it is evident that the fourth branch of the 
median vein, where present, must form a portion of the system of cir- 
culation effected by the branches of the median vein, just as in like 
manner the three branches of the post-costal vein of Saturnia, which 
traverse the apical portion of the fore-wing, must be considered as ef- 
fectually forming a portion of the post-costal vein ; 2ndly, that it seems 
to me contrary to analogy to admit the existence of fully-developed 
branches of a vein, the base of which has no real existence ; and 3rdly, 
that instances occur (e.g. Psyche Stettinella, Cochleophasia tes- 
sellea) in which the number of branches exceeds the supposed typical 
number of nine (i. e. three post-costal, three discoidal, and three me- 
dian), those insects having ten branches, in which ease one of the 
veins must have an extra branch ; whilst in Saturnia for instance, the 
supposed discoidal vein can only have two branches,—hence I see no 
reason why cases may not be supposed in which one vein should have 
more, and another vein fewer, than the typical number of branches ; 
or, in other words, why the median vein in Endromis should not 
have four branches, whilst there are only five branches for the post- 
costal and supposed discoidal veins. 
The antenne also of Endromis, as well as its transformations, are 
quite different from those of 4glaia and Saturnia; indeed the tribe 
Endromides of Boisduyal seems to possess no single connecting cha- 
racter. 
Hiibner, in his ‘ Verzeichniss bekannter Schmetterlinge*,’ has at- 
tempted an arrangement of these insects which appears to me unna- 
tural, so far as the primary divisions are concerned, whereas his inferior 
groups (Coitus), founded almost entirely upon the form and marking 
of the wings, appear to bring together the closely allied species. His 
first tribe of the Bombycoid Nocturnal Lepidoptera is termed Sphin- 
goides, and contains five stirpes :—Ist, Dimorphe (Endromis, Chao- 
nia, Petasia, &e.); 2nd, Ptilodontes (the Prominent Moths) ; 3rd, 
* Augsburg, 1816, 8vo. 
