GENERA OF AFRICAN LYCAENIDAE 277 



climate that its original fauna must have been replaced, at least partially on several 

 occasions, the species present there now having been derived mostly from recent 

 angarian immigrants. In Africa, on the other hand where the climate remained 

 more stable, there are still ancient gondwanian elements which have continued to 

 evolve there, or have come in from Indo-Australian regions via Arabia. It is this that 

 has produced the astonishing diversity both of types and of highly specialized genera. 

 Some of these archaic groups include only a small number of species that have, 

 however, an exceedingly wide distribution, they are nevertheless very distinct, and 

 it would be quite arbitrary to lump them, systematically, with a group of more 

 recent and more numerous species. Classification can only take facts into account, 

 it cannot be subservient to geometrical patterns. It cannot, for example, like an 

 army commander divide its taxa into units of fixed size, like regiments, battalions 

 and companies. 



I could have limited the scope of this work to a bare compilation and the statement 

 of facts. Instead, I have attempted to revise and bring up to date the systematics 

 of the African Lycaenidae by the use of characters accepted in the study of the 

 faunas of other regions. This first attempt on these lines cannot but be imperfect 

 and, to some extent, hypothetical. I have not glossed over my doubts, hesitations 

 and setbacks, but have called attention to them, believing it wiser so to do than to 

 attempt a dogmatic solution in spite of them. The preparation of this work has 

 occupied much of my time and has entailed much labour, I am fully satisfied if it 

 attracts fruitful criticism and provides basis for a more comprehensive and detailed 

 investigation. 



A POSTSCRIPT 



Mr. Harry K. Clench, of the Carnegie Museum, Pittsburgh, U.S.A. has been so very 

 kind as to send me a copy of the volume on the Butterflies of Liberia, (1965, Mem. 

 Am. ent. Soc. 19), to which he contributed the section on the Lycaenidae. It is most 

 unfortunate that this should have been published at a moment when it was no 

 longer possible for me to incorporate the important results of his research in the body 

 of the present work. This has obliged me to review, in the form of a supplementary 

 note, his ideas on the subject of the classification of the African Lycaenidae. And I 

 find it a little disconcerting to have to disagree, on several matters of importance, 

 with the views of a valued correspondent of long standing. 



As a starting point Clench erects the superfamily Lycaenoidea, divided into four 

 families : Liptenidae, Liphyridae, Lycaenidae and Riodinidae. I will not deal 

 with the last of these as it is outside the scope of the present work. 



If the Liphyridae are excluded from the Lycaenidae because of the segmented fore 

 tarsi of the males of the former, it would be equally logical to exclude the Thestorinae 

 from the Lycaenidae, because they too have segmented fore tarsi, a character which 

 I regard as of primary importance. 



Clench then subdivides each of the families on the basis of a variety of characters, 

 without according consistent primacy to any single character. For example, he 



