unrecognised European Lycaena. 



665 



size, which holds so far as I have examined them through- 

 out the range of both species independently of the actual 

 size of the specimens, so that it is impossible to accept 

 them as one species, though that tlier sites is a derivative 

 of escheri is extremely probable (a form that somehow 

 found its living could best be got by mimicking icarus ?). 



I now Sicce^ gravesi as a form of thersites. The genitalia 

 appear to prove this, though it has a very different facies 

 from the icarus of the district in which it occurs and is 

 not quite identical with any thersites I have seen. 



1. 



3. 



4. 5. 



Camera outlines of the Acdcagus and dorsal hook x 30 of — 

 1. Polyommatus kaiiis. 2. Agriades escheri (Oavarnie). 



3. Agriades thersites (Pre St. Didier). 4. Agriades thersites (Trelex). 

 5. Agriades thersites (Altai). 



Photographs of the i appendages of thersites (var. gravesi) and escheri 

 will be found in the B.M.M. 1912, pi. VII and VIII. 



Gravesi is therefore a local race of thersites. 



Having got so far the question arose, did the name 

 icarinus belong to this new species or to the variety of 

 icartis. Scriba's original note and the figure in Esper 

 to which he refers give us really no assistance in deciding 

 the point, and there seems therefore every reason to 

 leave the name icarinus to apply to the variety of icarus, 

 as it has been supposed to do for a hundred years or so. 



Thersites, Boisd., appeared to be a nomen niLdum, and 

 it seemed highly probable that it referred to icarinus, 

 accordingly, I wrote and presented this paper to the 



