Orneodes, Epermenia, Chrysocorys, and Pteropliorus. 131 



dorsal-plate of the head, or of the last segment of the 

 head, viz., the one to which the eyes belong. This is 

 present in no true butterfly, but is present in Skippers, 

 and carries the eye-covers with it on dehiscence ; it is to 

 be found in a few families of the true Macro-hetewcera, 

 some Geometers, the Thyatlridse, and the Lasiocamjyidx, 

 suggesting that amongst these we may find the lowest 

 families of the macros, and their line of origin from the 

 micros. Illogical and exploded as the terms macro and 

 micro may be, I still think their retention useful for the 

 present, in place of such periphrases as the more special- 

 ised and more generalised, etc., meaning by macro the 

 higher Ohtectse, and by micro the lower Incompletse, and 

 describing intermediate families as possessing such-and- 

 such macro or micro characters. In this connection I 

 should like to allude to the extent to which I regard the 

 Tineina as not being a homogeneous superfamily or 

 family. So far as it is not a mere question of names — i.e., 

 what we shall call a family, and what a sub-, and what a 

 superfjimily, what a tribe, and so forth — but a question 

 of fact, that is, of the amount of divergence between the 

 several groups, then the pupal structure shows that there 

 is a divergence between the Gracilaridai (including Litlio- 

 colletes), the Nepticnlida}, and the Argyresthidie, which is 

 much greater than that between, say, any family of 

 Noctuina and the NotodontidEe. 



That this view is not without foundation is tolerably 

 evident when we find Prof. Packard, whose authority 

 on such a matter is of the highest, not merely dividing 

 one genus of Tinem {Micropteryx) into two families, which 

 was all I had courage for, but erecting one of them 

 {Eriocephalidai) into a suborder, and the other as an 

 equivalent to all the remaining families of Lepidoptera. 



Being somewhat emboldened by this advance, and 

 adopting Prof. Packard^s conclusions on this point, and 

 reviewing the apparent relationships of the most gene- 

 ralised forms of Lepidoptera, feeling also that we have 

 not sufficiently realised the extent of our unacquaintance 

 with very many forms that are required to bridge over 

 the divergences that exist between even these earliest 

 forms, an ignorance due to our not having met with 

 them, not having learned their life-history so as to under- 

 stand their positions, or, and most frequently no doubt, 

 to their no longer existing, I would suggest that there 



