MADEIEA AND THE CAXAET ISLANDS. 179 



c? ofirinacna (wholly blue-pulverulent) the same sex of chryso- 

 stigma (and also of harhara) may be separated by the presence of 

 a small yellow marJciny at the iase of the jjosterior icing margining 



he memhranule. 



I have entered at length into this subject on account of the 

 difficult points involved. The summing-up is as follows:— (1) 

 Libellula trinacria (and therefore L. Sahina, &c.) is not a true 

 ie^i^7ieOT«>, but is more allied to Orfhetrim ; (2) L. chrysostigma is 

 not identical with trinacria, but is very closely allied to harhara 

 (? distinct therefrom*, cf. Hagen, Ent. Month. Mag. ii. p. 27), 

 and is probably not to be generically separated from Orthetrum. 



?? Platetkum DEPEEssuif, L. (Libelliila depressa, L. ?, Bory 

 de St. Yincent, Essai, p. 369.) 



I regard this avowedly doubtful identification as erroneous ; 

 but in a synopsis such as this the citation should not be lost 

 sight of. 



Teithemis aeteetosa, Burmeister. {Lihellula distincta, Eamb. 

 — L. ruhella, Brulle, Hist. Canar. ii. pt. 2, p. 82.) 



Canaries {Wehh et Berthelot); Montanas de Nordeste, Tene- 

 riffe, 26th December {Eaton, 1 c? and 2 $ , all very adult). 



A widely distributed African species. Hagen referred ruhella 

 of Brulle to Fonscolomhii, Selys, but certainly in error. The de- 

 tailed description given by Brulle suits arteriosa admirably ; and 

 the identification therewitli is confirmed by the much damaged 6 

 type in the Paris Museum. A question of priority might be raised 

 as regards the names arteriosa and ruhella. The former was 

 published in 1839 ; the volume of Zoology in Webb and Ber- 

 thelot's work bears the dates 1836-44. Although this work was 

 published in Paris, it is certain that E,ambur was not aware of its 

 existence (or, at any rate, of the portion treating on Neuroptera) 

 when his own volume in the ' Suites a Buffou ' appeared in 1842; 

 and Burmeister's description had been published at least three 



* The types of chrysostigma (" c? $ in coji. capt.") are in the possession of 

 Dr. Hagen ; and wliile this paper -was being printed I received information 

 from hira to the effect that he considers them certainly identical with harhara 

 (the former name having priority). He calls my attention to a supplementary 

 note in the ' Eevue des Odonates,' p. 398, as to an example of harhara from the 

 south of Spain, said to exist in the Museum of the Jardin dcs Plantes at Paris, 

 so that the species may therefore be considered European. I am not aware of 

 any recent confirmation of this. 



