284 THR ENTOMOLOGIST. 



In ' The Zoologist ' for 1872, p. 2952, Mr. Kirby states :— 



" Limenitis Camilla, L. — In 1764 Linnaeus described the sexes 

 of our English ' White Admiral,' calling the male prorsa and the 

 female Camilla. But as he had previously described another 

 species under the name " prorsa," he properly changed the 

 name of his second species into sibilla in 1767. This, therefore, 

 establishes the name of our species to be correctly Camilla, L." 



The description of sibilla, Linn., Syst. Nat. xii. No. 186, 

 p. 781 (1768), is identical with that of the first paragraph of 

 "prorsa" in the Mus. Ludov. Ulr., with the addition of 

 " Mus. Ludov. Ulr. 303, sub prorsa. Habitat in Germania, similis 

 camillse." That of Camilla, No. 187, in the same work is also 

 identical with that of the first paragraph of the description of 

 Camilla in the Mus. Ludov. Ulr., with the addition of " Mus. 

 Ludov. Ulr. 304. Habitat in Lonicera cserulea Europe." So 

 Camilla seemed to have had a more extended range than sibilla. 



The description of the ^r&t prorsa (Linn. Syst. Nat. x. No. 134, 

 p. 480 (1758) (which was the cause of his changing the name of 

 the " prorsa " of 1764 to sibilla) is — 



«< Prorsa. 



" Alls dentatis subfuscis : fascia utrinque alba : primoribus 

 interrupta. Eces, Ins. i. pag. 1 to 8, f. 6, 7. Habitat in Urtica 

 Germanise." 



A very different description from that of the prorsa of Mus. 

 Ludov. Ulr., and a different food-plant. 



Mr. Kirby also states his reasons more fully in his * Hand- 

 book of the Order Lepidoptera,' vol. i. pp. 142-6 (1894), where 

 he also gives a reference to Aurivillius, Eecens. Grit. Lep. Mus. 

 Ulr. pp. 101-2 (1882), and, as this work is perhaps not very 

 generally known, I will give the extract in full : — 



** Nymphalis Camilla (L.). 



** Dubium esse non potest quin sic haec species P. Camilla, 

 L. et eo nomine appellari debeat. Fuit enim P. Prorsa editionis 

 decimse systematis alia species, et est ergo Camilla nomen 

 vetustissimum, quod huic formsG conservari potest, qua sententia 

 etiam auctores nonnulli et ii celeberrimi jam antea fuerunt." 



It has been agreed that the prorsa and Camilla of the Mus. 

 Ludov. Ulr. and the sibilla and Camilla of Linn. Syst. Nat. xii. 

 are sexes of the same insect, but from Linnaeus's descriptions 

 alone one would be inclined to consider them separate species, 

 or else he would not have given them distinct names. There 

 does not seem to have been any uniformity, when in the case of 

 an author describing an insect under two names but separately 

 numbered in the same work, which are afterwards found to be 

 sexes of the same insect, whether the name given to the male or 



