THE GENUS HESPERIA. 163 
they are of a warm tint, sometimes almost pink, and they are without 
the “ Signe du rectangle allongé,” which Dr. Reverdin calls attention 
to as marking carlinae. These fritillum are all from southern and 
low level habitats, Spain, Italy, Digne, Clelles, Beauvezer, Fontaine- 
bleau. 
The carlinae are smaller, down to 26mm. ‘They are greyer, have 
much smaller spots, have a curved outer margin to the discal spot, 
and have on the hind wing beneath Reverdin’s “signe du rectangle 
allonyé.” Further, in the mass the two groups look very distinctly 
different. The carlinae are from more elevated and more northern 
localities, various higher regions in Switzerland, La Grave, Pré St. 
Didier, Cogne, Abries, Allos, Au Pra, Lautaret, Larche. 
Bui there are a few specimens not quite easily allocated with cer- 
tainty to one group or the other. Some of the fritillwn have the 
curved margin to the diseal spot, and some of the carlinae have the 
“elongated rectangle” hardly developed at all. The photograph of 
the underside on Plate xii. is of a specimen in which this rectangle is 
_ rather short, but this is rare, and the jritillwm never have it so marked. 
as in typical carlinae. 
Fritillum is figured, with Mr. Culot’s usual accuracy, in quite 
typical form in the Ftudes de Lépidoptérologie comparée, Fasc. Vi., pl. 
exli., figs. 1277 to 1280, and the following four figures are nearly as 
typical, the first from Saint Zacharie, the latter from Digne. The 
next four figures, 1285 to 1288, from the neigbourhood of Paris, are 
similar to those I have from Clelles, which are smaller than the 
more typical forms (1277 to 1280) and show a definite amount of the 
‘elongated rectangle,’ making in fact a definite step towards carlinae, 
and supporting the view that some further localities might give speci- 
mens quite bridging over the remaining space. As regards this, it 
may be said about the “lateral apophyses”’ of the male appendages, 
that they are not exactly alike in any two specimens of either species, 
so that the view that they are not essentially different, but only more 
or less well-developed according to the size and vigour of the indi- 
vidual insect is suggested. 
In Fasciculus iv., pl. lix., figs. 449 to 454, are again excellent 
figures of cirsti, that have some trace of the “rectangle.” These are 
all from Vernet les Bains, fig. 455, from the same locality, is very 
near to Hubner’s figure of fritillum, and like it, might very well be 
malvoides rather than cirsii. At p. 889, M. Oberthtr discusses this 
figure, says it is very like malvae, and is rather embarrasing, but de- 
cides it is fritillum Hb. With this determination I agree, regarding 
fritillum of Hubner to be really malvoides. On pl. lvi.in the same 
Fascicule (iv.), there are two figures of ballotae (Boisd.) that seem to 
be carlinae; then six figures of carlinae, which seem to be fairly 
typical of that form, followed by seven given as cirsit. Figs. 505 and 
508 rather suggest carlinae and the others suggest a certain approach 
to that form beyond what is usual in cirsii; taking the localities into 
account they, probably, however, are all correctly referred to cirsi, 
but leave the impression that the view that the two are one species is 
rather supported. 
Though it might be contended that we have here an upland and a 
lowland race of one species, I conclude that they are with hardly 
any doubt two good and definite species, though closely allied. Were 
