unrecognised Ewopean Lycaena. 667 



sent them to me for examination. These are of the 

 species that has been the subject of the inquiries that I 

 report in this paper. As regards size and setting, the 

 male specimen might very well be the one from which 

 Cantener's figure is drawn, neither of these specimens has 

 any label as to locality. There are also two specimens 

 from the Bellier collection, the male labelled " thersites, 

 Boisduval," and also " Digne," the female " Autriche " and 

 " thersites $ secundum Bellier " — the latter apparently 

 in M. Oberthiir's writing. This female has the first 

 orange spot less advanced than is at all usual in thersites, 

 and apart from dissection may be open to a little doubt. 

 There is a further specimen from the Guenee collection, 

 labelled by Guenee, " 6. var. ^, hybridata, Gn., Gn. Ind.", 

 with locality " Hautes Alpes." The label also carries a 

 note by Guenee, " Cette variety tres remarquable surtout 

 par la disposition des pointes, est, en dessus, d'un bleu 

 plus sombre, presque comme sur acis. Nul doute, que si 

 j'en eusse trouv^ plusieurs et autre sexe, je ne I'eusse 

 consid^re corame espece distincte." 



I have no doubt that this specimen is one of thersites, 

 but it is remarkable in having on both wings the post- 

 discal row of spots, removed outwards so far, that most 

 of them are in contact with the marginal row, a circum- 

 stance that sometimes occurs with one or two spots, most 

 frequently that between veins 4 and 5 of the forewing. 

 The spots are also, accordingly, in a very continuous line, 

 curved, of course, but not angled, and straight in the 

 sense of all being close to the marginal series. This 

 specimen is, no doubt, a very unusual aberration. The 

 upperside has a lilac colour, much as in many icarus or 

 thersites. The specimen is set as an underside and cannot 

 have faded much, but certainly has not now the dark 

 semiargus colour noted by Guenee. 



As my knowledge of the species is mostly based on 

 material from the South of France, where also it is 

 probably more plentiful than elsewhere, it is appropriate 

 that its name should be that given by a French Naturalist, 

 but this does not detract from the merits of Herr 

 Schreiner, its German discoverer. 



Boisduval does not mention thersites in the " Index " 

 (1829), nor in the "Icones"; in the "Index" (1840) he 

 merely notes under " 89. Alexis, F., etc.," " var. ? thersites, 

 B., Gallia." 



