100 THE ENTOMOLOGIST’S RECORD. 
found, as he observed in the H’ntom. Zeitschr., Stutt., vol. xxi., p. 29-35 
(1907), that the first entomologists who took up the Linnean 
nomenclature applied the two names without discovering whether the 
two descriptions really referred to the two Kuropean species generally 
so named. But the truth is that the description of camilla applies well 
to the insect generally known under the name szbilla, and found also 
in Britain, whereas the description of sibilla is actually very sibylline 
and cannot be applied to any insect we know of, having perhaps been 
drawn from some abnormal specimen of camilla itself; anyhow the 
name camilla has the right of priority on the one hand, and thereby 
refers to the British species on the other, so that there exists no doubt 
concerning it, and it should be adopted; the name rivularis, Scopoli, 
should designate the other species from the South of Europe. 
L. camilla from Britain does not differ, to my knowledge, from the 
Continental one; if anything, it is larger and has wider white bands 
on the wings. There exists no specimen labelled either camilla or 
sibilla in the Linnean collection at Burlington House. 
Polygonia c-album, L. (gen. vern. forma carbonaria, mihi.).— 
The Linnean specimen of this species belongs to the form with the 
markings on the underside very dark, nearly black. In Italy this form 
invariably appears and entirely represents the species in late autumn, 
then hybernates and appears again on the wing in the early 
spring ; the other brood flies in June and always has the underside 
either light brown or rich chestnut colour; the black markings of the 
upperside are, moreover, more limited in extent in the latter brood, 
and culminate in the very conspicuous hutchinsonii, Robson, in which 
they are excessively reduced, the ground colour being of a lighter fulvous 
and the wings much more obtusely angulated ;\ this form never under 
any circumstances makes its appearance in the autumn and spring 
brood. I have insisted on this point as, curiously enough, there have 
been divergences in the assertions of observers on the subject 
[Entomologist, vol. xxix., page 358]. tt would be well to make sure 
by new observations whether the black and the brown forms do occur 
together in both broods in the British Islands. Mr. Bethune-Baker’s 
experience is that they are often bred from the same batch of ova, but 
artificial breeding in unnatural conditions may have results different 
from those which occur in nature; at high altitudes in the Maritime 
Alps I have found the different forms mixed together, but in Tuscany 
they are always restricted to one generation. Tutt’s name pallidior 
may be used for specimens of the summer brood not so extreme 
in markings as hutchinsonii, and variegata, Tutt, for those with a 
particularly bright, marbled underside. 
I wish to draw attention to the mistake commonly made by 
entomologists when talking of the summer brood of this and allied 
genera as ‘‘ second brood ”’; this expression is correct concerning the 
vast majority of butterflies, but in this particular case the summer 
brood is in reality the first of the year, the second emerging in the 
autumn, and no imagines actually emerging from the chrysalids in the 
spring, when only hybernated specimens are on the wing. 
A very distinct form of the hybernating brood, which oecurs 
commonly in England, as well as in other parts of Hurope, has the 
underside uniformly black with a shiny surface, the pattern scarcely 
