356 BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA. 



Les papillons portent de ces especes d'antennes que nous avons nominees 

 prismatiques *, c'est-a-dire, de celles qui entre leurs deux bouts, dans la plus grande 

 partie de leur etendue, ont un diametre a peu-pres 6gal, et dont la coupe est un 

 secteur de courbe, ou un triangle curviligne. Tous les papillons de cette classe 

 doivent aussi avoir des trompes. Ceux de la plupart des genres qui lui appar- 

 tiennent, ont les ailes disposees de maniefe qu'elles laissent le dessus du corps a. 

 deoouvert, qui ordinairement se termine en pointe. Leurs ailes inferieures sont petites 

 par rapport aux superieures (pi. xiii., figs. 5, 6, 9). Le cote interieur de ces dernieres 

 est plus court, et souvent considerablement plus court que le cote exterieur. Le bout 

 de celui-ci va jusqu'au derriere, et quelquefois par-dela le derriere, au ■ lieu qu' 

 apres la fin de l'autre, il reste encore quelques anneaux. Ces papillons, qui ont 

 le corps gros et pesant, dont les ailes inferieures sont courtes, et dont les superieures, 

 malgre leur longueur, n'ont pas une grande surface, font beaucoup de bruit en 

 volant ; ils font entendre un bourdonnement tres-fort : ils ne scauroient se soutenir 

 en Fair sans agiter leurs ailes avec une grande vitesse. Nous avons vu des 

 papillons bourdons dans la brae classe des diurnes (pi. xii., figs. 5, 6, M. 

 stellataium), et nous avons des bourdons-phalenes dans la premiere classe de 

 ceux-ci. 



The general characters of the superfamily are very marked, yet 

 there have been many difficulties as to the exclusion or inclusion 

 of doubtful species, mainly, however, due to ignorance of the 

 earlier stages. Reference to the earliest diagnoses [anted, pp. 343 

 et seq.) of the superfamily will show that they were all more or less 

 unsatisfactory, and, as we have already shown, included the ^geriids 

 (Sesiids), Anthrocerids, and their allies. The elimination of these 

 has already been dealt with, although it is remarkable that many 

 recent authors have insisted on placing the ^Egeriids and Anthrocerids 

 in close proximity to the Sphingids in spite of their amazing 

 difference. Even Hiibner included (Verz., pp. 115 et seq.) the 

 Anthrocerids and ^Egeriids in his Horde ii, Sphinges, but it is 

 here (see, anted, pp. 350 et seq.) that we have the first clue to a proper 

 appreciation of the natural subdivisions of the Sphingids {sens strict.), 

 considered in their world-wide variety of form and structure. It 

 is true that Hiibner's characters are superficial, but not more so 

 than those of all authors of his time, and he stands, in spite of all 

 weaknesses in his work, the first exponent of modern ideas, of the 

 collection of small groups of closely-allied species into distinct genera, 

 as apart from huge groups — often of superfamily value — that served 

 his predecessors, and still serve many of his successors, for genera. 

 The work of our British lepidopterists has been, so far as this 

 superfamily is concerned, exceedingly weak. Stephens not only 

 maintained an alliance between the Sphingids, Sesiids (Macroglossids), 

 ^Egeriids (Sesiids), and Anthrocerids (Zygaenids), which he united 

 under the name of Crepuscularia, but his knowledge of the groups 

 is well exhibited by the weakness of his generic tabulation, which 

 reads : 



I plus minusve angulata? . . . . . . . . . . Smerinthus. 



l breves . . . . . . . . Acherontia. 



integrse, acuta?. Maxilla? | / baud clavatse Sphinx. 



( elongatse ; antenna? J 



( clavatse . . Deilephila. 

 These characters are certainly no better than those of Hiibner, 

 and do not attempt to deal with the group in the same detailed 

 manner. 



* This description will give a good idea whence came the terms " prismatic 

 antenna?," etc., used by Stephens and others, They evidently originated with 

 Reaumur. 



