74 
Psyche 
[Sept.-Dee. 
the abdomen buff, legs gray; palpi gray with black hair in front; 
antennae fuscous, imperfectly annulated with whitish; club 
fuscous above, russet below. 
“Female. Exp. 1.7 inch. Both wings russet in disc, primaries 
most brightly. The margins fuscous as is also costal edge of 
primaries; on secondaries the eyelets of underside are indicated 
by small dark fuscous spots. Underside as in male. 
“From Arizona and New Mexico, collected in 1874 by H. W. 
Henshaw of the Wheeler expedition in honor of whom I name 
the species, and in 1875 by Lieut. W. C. Carpenter.” 
The description of the male is worthless for all purposes of 
determination and I have ignored it in my bibliographical sum- 
mary. A light fuscous Neonympha expanding 1.5 inch with 
no markings, red flush or androconial brand might be, for all one 
knows, an oversized gemma — although on the other hand it 
is possible to argue that the describer was merely in a hurry to 
get to the interesting underside. The “demi-line” obviously 
refers to some chance sequence of strise (and what is further 
left without comment fits at least seven species of N eonympha ) . 
Size, ground color of underside and description of lines in sec- 
ondaries underside apply perhaps better to dorothea edwardsi 
than to the species which I hold to be the true henshawi Edw. 
The words “New Mexico”, where henshawi is not yet known 
to occur, suggest that there were some specimens of edwardsi 
(not however the one taken, much later, by Snow) among the 
series Edwards was examining as he wrote. On the other hand, 
the description of the lines in primaries upperside and of the 
cinereous scaling in secondaries underside does not fit edwardsi 
(or any race of dorothea ) at all: it exactly fits henshawi. In 
fact, if this male were a hybrid between the two, with moreover 
a strain of gemma , it could not have been better described. 
Such a freak being unlikely, I am forced to dismiss this con- 
fused and composite picture altogether as not applying to any 
known insect. 
The description of the female however is that of a fairly 
recognisable henshawi (a form of which was figured as pyrac- 
mon by Godman four years later) differing from the female of 
dorothea in the two main details cited: “russet in the disc, 
primaries most brightly” and “small dark fuscous spots” which 
in dorothea are comparatively large and dim. As the tint which 
Edwards calls “russet” seems to be on the yellow, rather than 
