456 BRITISH BUTTERFLIES. 



February 20th, 1901, at Tangier, June 26th, at Amsmiz, and August 28th- 

 September, 1901, at Tangier, etc. Blackmore recorded it at Tangier in 

 March and April, whilst Walker gives February 22nd, 1887, at Tangier 

 and July 25th, 1888, at Esmir (Azmir), midway between Ceuta and 

 Tetuan, and Mrs. Nicholl captured it in February in Algeria. 

 Norris states that it occurred throughout the whole summer of 1892, 

 up to September, in the Certosa di Pesio district, and the same facts are 

 given for Tuscany (Stefanelli), and Lucca (Verity), etc. It appears to 

 be double- brooded (probably triple-brooded in the south) in France, 

 Belgium, April-May and July- August (Lambillion) ; Denmark, May 

 and August (Aurivillius); the lowlands of Germany (Speyer); the low- 

 lands of Switzerland, April-May and July-August (Frey) ; Hungary, 

 mid- April-mid- June and July- August (Aigner-Abafi), Bulgaria, May 

 and July (Elwes); very partially double-brooded in the Baltic Provinces, 

 April-May and July (Nolcken) ; the government of Wiatka, May and occa- 

 sionally in July (Kroulikowsky), etc. We have records that it is common 

 in May throughout the Lebanon and Antilebanon, etc. (Nicholl) ; and 

 in June on the Kerasdere, near Amasia (Fountaine) ; but one suspects 

 that it is at least double-brooded throughout Asia Minor and Syria, as 

 Graves gives mid- July for Ain Zahalta. In 1886, Weir propounded 

 (Ent., xix., pp. 51, 155) a theory that this species was double-brooded in 

 England, in districts where the larva fed on ivy alone, or holly and ivy, 

 but single-brooded where holly alone was found, but he brought forward 

 no real evidence in support of this view, and his statement that, in the 

 New Forest, the insect is single-brooded in many tracts where ivy is 

 not found, was at once contradicted (op. cit., xix., pp. 122-3), in addition 

 to which Edwards notes (op. cit., xix., p. 61) that he has beaten larva3 

 out of holly as well as ivy in October at Great Malvern ; besides ivy and 

 holly are only two of many foodplants for the species (see antea pp. 447- 

 448). The species fluctuates much in Britain. There are many years when 

 specimens of either brood are hardly seen, there are others when one 

 or other, or both broods, are unusually abundant, but, apart from this, 

 there appears to be a rough unanimity in the records, that the 

 western counties have comparatively small first, and comparatively 

 large second, broods, whilst in the eastern counties the reverse is the 

 case. One suspects, however, that this varies from year to year, and 

 that statements of this kind often result from incomplete and hap- 

 hazard observations spread over an altogether insufficient period of 

 time, and that, for the same year, the abundance of the broods varies 

 greatly locally. Harwood states that, " the species is double-brooded 

 in Essex and Suffolk, but the first brood is usually much more numerous 

 than the second, in favourable seasons extending its range, and in 

 seasons with adverse climatic conditions, confined very much to head- 

 quarters." In Kent, we should report similarly, except that, in some 

 exceptional seasons, we have seen the second-brood more abundant 

 than the first, in fact Clifford does note that, in the Gravesend district, 

 the second-brood is usually far inferior to the first in numbers, although 

 we have seen the later brood quite abundant, flying over the ivied walls 

 of Rochester Castle, only some six miles from Clifford's district. 

 Sabine observes that, " in the Erith district, the species is invariably 

 double-brooded, the first brood in April-May, nine-tenths of which 

 appear to be $ s, the second in August lasting into September (and 

 once observed in early October), this later brood appearing to consist 



