106 Psyche [Sept.-Dee. 
Mitt. Munchner ent. ges. 28:11), wrongly, and belatedly, se- 
lected by the latter author as “type” with the suggestion that 
readers look up for themselves Hlibner’s plate. They do, and 
find (Htibner, Samml. europ. Schmett. pi. 64 [1800]) that fig. 
316, to which Scudder referred when selecting the type, can be 
easily matched by German males of the “Argus” of Reverdin 
and of the “argyrognomon Bergstr.” of Tutt and, consequently, 
of Hemming (1934, Gen. names hoi. butt. 1:108), who defi- 
nitely fixed it (thus excluding the other species of Lycceides 
which he knew well) as the type of the genus, and this clinches 
the matter, whatever the two species be called. The publication 
of Beuret’s important paper (1935, Lambillonea 35:162, etc.) 
has led to attempts to transfer the name argyrognomon Berg- 
strasser (1779, Nomenclatur, 2:76-77, pi. 46, fig. 1,2) from the 
short-falx species (the genotype) to which it was applied by 
Tutt (1909) and which we shall term for the moment species 
X, to the long-falx species, ismenias Meigen, 1830 (Heyde- 
mann, 4 1931) which we shall term species Y. These attempts 
have been prompted by the fact that female specimens appar- 
ently belonging to Y (Beuret, l.c., does not give the reasons for 
his determination), casually collected in the type locality of 
argyrognomon Bergstr., proved to be closer to Bergstrasser’s 
equivocal figures than sympatric females of X. One cannot 
deny that the figures apply better to the general run of Y fe- 
males than to the general run of X females; but pending further 
investigation, or some formal decision on the part of a special 
commission, I am compelled to use in this paper the name 
argyrognomon Bergstr. for X because of the following consid- 
erations: 1. As noted and illustrated by Beuret himself (1934, 
Lambillonea 34:119) at a time when he still called X by the 
name argyrognomon , absolute similarity to Bergstrasser’s fig- 
ures is exhibited by what he (inconsequently) named argyro- 
gnomon rauraca Beuret (l.c. pi. 5, 5a, fig. 9, 10. See also 
Beuret, 1928, Soc. Ent. 43, fig. 5, 10, uncus, argyrognomon , 
“Augst”) . This, now extinct, colony was discovered on a plot of 
ground, a thousand feet long and 1/6 of this broad, near Augst 
in the Aargau, N. Switzerland, i.e., some 200 miles south from 
the type locality (Bruchkobel Forest, in the Hesse-Nassau dis- 
trict, Central Germany) of argyrognomon Bergstr.; but mor- 
4 Whose clumsy fixation I reluctantly adopt. 
