102 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. 
remarkable peculiarity, as it is amongst them that we should 
almost exclusively expect to find that distinguishing economy, 
from the seemingly imperfect apparatus furnished in the 
short structure of their tongues. Jt is possible, however, that 
Nature has so moulded them as to fit them chiefly for 
fulfilling its objects within merely a certain range of the 
floral reign, and which restricts them to visiting flowers 
which do not require the protrusion of a long organ to rifle 
their sweet stores.”—‘ British Bees,’ p. 197. 
It will be seen, therefore, that the economy of these bees 
was unknown, or rather very imperfectly known, to those who 
have been the most assiduous in their researches into bee 
life-history. The insects themselyes—that is, their personal 
appearance—are familiar to all who have spent pleasant hours 
in the capture of wild bees. English species are very uniform 
in colour and general appearance; but those of the same 
species vary greatly in size. The species agree in having the 
head and thorax black, without any gloss, and clothed with 
a very short pilosity of a gray colour; the abdomen is gene- 
rally of a brick-red colour, and very glabrous; it is always 
more or less varied with black, particularly at the tip. None 
of the British species appear to have those yellow or whitish 
markings on the face which are so conspicuous and ornamental 
in the genus Prosopis. There are five species described as 
British by Mr. Smith, as under :— 
1. S. gibba is fond of hiding in flowers, burying itself 
among the florets of composite flowers, especially of thistles ; 
and these flowers, being in great measure autumnal, it follows 
that autumn is the proper season for collecting this species, 
which is also frequently found on sand-banks, in. company 
with the burrowing bees that commonly frequent such 
situations. Fig. 1 represents a male; fig. 2, a female (the 
-unshaded parts of the figure are red in the bee; the line 
below represents the size); fig. 3 represents a male; and 
fig. 4, a female of Sphekodes sphekoides: this was the 
Melitta sphecoides of Kirby, ‘Monographia Apum,’ vol. ii, 
p- 41; it is not now maintained as a distinct species, but is 
incorporated with S. gibba, and included under the same. 
name. 
2. S. rufescens.—There is a great confusion about the 
specific name of this species. It is certainly the Apis gibba 
