574 Mr. H. J. Elwes ow a 



The intricacy and confusion of nomenclature among 

 the next group of Argynnides, which inhabit the Eocky 

 Mountains and Pacific States, is as great as among the 

 last, but I have in this case followed Edw^ards's identi- 

 fications of Behr's and Boisduval's species, which are 

 supported by the named specimens sent me by Mr. H. 

 Edwards, rather than the arrangement of Strecker's 

 Catalogue, which makes montivaga and egleis varieties of 

 zerene, Bdv. I cannot, however, follow Edwards in 

 separating clio and artonis from eurynome, and Geddes, 

 who took them in the Northern Eocky Mountains, agrees 

 with me in considering them as synonyms. As to opis 

 and hisclioffi, I am more doubtful, having seen but few 

 specimens ; but in these, as well as in Edwards's figures 

 I can see no specific characters, and should consider 

 them as northern varieties, differing only, as might be 

 expected, in rather smaller size and duller coloration. 

 "Whether montivaga and its var. egleis are reall}' distinct 

 from eurynome and its varieties is hard to say; they 

 seem to have the fore wings rather longer and the under 

 side less tinged with green : they may, perhaps, best be 

 treated as the west coast representative of eurynome. 

 Edwards says of egleis (Can. Ent., vol. ii., p. 54) that 

 whatever the variation in other respects (and he allows 

 it to be very variable), the spots of the second and third 

 rows on the under side of hind wing are heavily edged 

 with black on the basal side. But I have specimens of 

 montivaga, collected by Morrison in Nevada (of which 

 sixty were also examined by Edwards), and others from 

 the Sierra Nevada, California, named montivaga by 

 H. Edwards and Strecker, which have the same 

 character, and in some specimens of eurynome, taken by 

 myself in the Yellowstone Park, the same black edging 

 is more or less present. 



T have also specimens of arge, Streck., from Strecker 

 and Mr. Holland, both from Spokane Falls and Cali- 

 fornia, which are undoubtedly the same as erinna, which 

 was described in 1883 as a var. of eurynome by Edvfurds, 

 and in his Catalogue of 1884 is put down as a variety of 

 montivaga. If, therefore, he is himself so uncertain of 

 the true position of these forms, he cannot expect others 

 to follow him blindly, and though many years must 

 elapse before any certain conclusion will be come to, I 

 venture to think that the arrangement I have adopted 



