MACROGLOSS A FLAY OF ASCI AT A . 
Ill 
“The nervulation has undergone important modifications, while the pterogostic characters in their entiety are very distinctive, 
and, without any sudden change, show the position of this genus as intermediate between Sesia and Macroglossum, while considerably 
modified from either.” I doubt if any one beside the author of Lepisesia would have acuteness of vision sufficient to perceive either the 
“important modifications,” or the “very distinctive” “pterogostic characters,” and in the sense that he uses Sesia and Macroglossum they 
are but synonyms ; thus the genus Lepisesia is intermediate between Sesia and Sesia, or between Macroglossum and Macroglossum ! Su- 
perficially, the insect looks a good deal more as if it were between Macroglossa and Pterogon, ( Proserpinus , ITb.,) the body favoring the 
former, and the wings the latter. 
There is as much propriety in Grote’s separating this species from Macroglossa as there was in his making the genus Calasymbolus 
for Smerinihus Astylus, or Cressonia for Sm. Juglandis ; although Hubner had first designated the latter as Amorpha Juglandis in Samm. 
Exot. Schmett., and afterwards taken it from that fictitious genus and placed it in Polyptychus in Verz. bek. Schmett. (1816), all of 
which Mr. Grote, with his usual sagacity, has been pleased to ignore in favor of his own genus Cressonia, which, of course, is a synonym 
of Hubner’s Polyptychus, which latter, we may as well add, is but a synonym of Smerinthus, Lat. 
Svnerinthus Dyras Wlk., Meander Bdl., and others are much more aberrant in appearance than either Juglandis or Astylus-, yet 
none have had the temerity to create new genera for them, and doubtless none will unless these species should by some mischance come 
under the observation of the author of Calasymbolus, Lepisesia, etc. 
Lepisesia was first placed by Grote at the head of the N. A. Sphingidse in 1865 ; in a later effusion Arctonotus Lucidus preceded' 
it ; in his latest effort he has placed it behind Macroglossa (which he has even cut up into several genera), and wedged it in between 
Arctonotus and Proserpinus ; and in his next spasm we confidently expect to see it jerked down to Srnerinthus and placed between Astylus 
and Juglandis. Rochefocauld, I believe it was, who said that the only thing that still ought to be capable of causing us astonishment is, 
that we have the power of being still astonished at anything. 
PTEROGON CLARKIJE. Boisduval. 
Ann. Soc. Ent. Fr., 2 me ser. X, p. 318 (1852). 
Thyreus ? Clarkice, Walker, C. B. M., AMI. VIII, p. 262 (1856). 
Proserpinus Clarkice, Clemens, Jnl. Acad. Nat. Sc., Phila., AMI. IV, p. 134 (1859). Morris, Oat. Lep. N. Am., p. IS (1860) ; Syn. Lep, 
N. Am., p. 154 (1862). Grote & Robinson, Proc. Ent. Soc., Phila., Vol. V, p. 149 (1865) ; List Lep. N. Am., p. iii (1868). 
Grote, Bull. Buff. Soc. Nat. Sc., AMI. I, p. 20 (1873), Vol. II, p. 225 (1875). 
Lepisesia Victoria, Grote, 1. c., p. 147 (1874). 
(PLATE XIII, FIG. 5 $.) 
Expands 1J inches. 
Head and body above olivaceous; antennas brownish, darkest above, tips whitish yellow. 
Primaries pale olivaceous with a darker median band and discal spot after the manner of Proserpina , 
Pall.,* a sub-terminal dark line which widens to a large triangular at apex. Inferior wings bright yellow, 
with narrow black marginal band ; fringe white. 
Under surface nearly same as Proserpina in colour and ornamentation. Primaries olivaceous, darker 
parts of upper surface faintly defined. Secondaries olivaceous, with a paler broad median band or space. 
Habitat. Oregon, Northern California Mus. Am. Ent. Soc., Hy. Edwards, Strecker. 
The American representative of the European P. Proserpina, which it strikingly resembles in both colour and markings ; but it is 
smaller, and the wings are not angulated. 
Grote, when he discovered that his Lepisesia Victoria, lately described in Buffi Bull., Vol. II, p. 147, was a redescription of this 
species, made the correction in a foot-note in this wise : “From a fresh specimen received from Hy. Edwards I find that my descrip- 
tion is based on a faded specimen of this species.” How astonishingly powerful must have been the action of the light, to have not. 
only changed the colour of the insect, but also to have actually changed the generic characters of his “faded” Pterogon ( Proserpina ,) 
into those of his own genus Lepisesia. Really, Air. Grote ought to see that his types are not exposed to this malicious light ; but, after 
all, there is no evil without its accompanying good, for if the action of light in fading is powerful enough to change the genus of a 
dead insect, why may not the same agent be employed, for purposes of utility, on the higher animals. For instance : Why not 
place all the half-starved, worthless curs, which range at large through our streets, under the action of powerful Grotesque light, and 
transform them into porkers, ready-roasted ! Would not Mr. Grote thus be immortalized with but a tithe of the labor necessary to 
create synonyms and combinations to precede his name ? besides, look at the reward: For the former, millions yet unborn would 
bless his name as one of the great benefactors of their race ; for the latter he would only receive the maledictions of ungrateful Lepi- 
dopterists for the amusement he will have bequeathed them in trying to study what “Proserpinus Hub., Clarkias Boisd. Clem. 
Lepisesia Victoria, Grote,” and the like, could possibly or impossibly mean. It appears that Mr. Grote has been lately paying consider- 
able attention to Optics, for another important discovery of his, in that branch of science, is that darkness bleaches specimens of moths, 
etc., for in one of his numerous redescriptions of Catocolaef he says in allusion to the pale colour of secondaries : “The condition of 
the specimen does not allow of the suggestion that this change of colour is owing to etiolation we sincerely hope not, for if that 
be the case we tremble for all the thousands of examples that we so carefully exclude from the light. What if some evening we went 
to take an inspiring look at our treasures, and found nothing but blanched ghosts in place of our gorgeous children of the tropics 1 
no, we pray Mr. Grote may be mistaken ; we don’t want our species Darwinized into Pieridse through disease contracted by exclusion 
from light. We know that celery and cabbage are white when kept in the dark whilst living, and that fish in the mammoth cave are 
white also, probably from same cause, but were it not for Mr. Grote’s words we would doubt that deprivation of light would disease or 
whiten a dead insect. Will not Mr. Grote speedily give this important matter further attention, and see if the pallor of the hind wings 
of his Catocala was not owing to some other cause ? Dare we suggest, homoeopathically, perhaps, exposure to the light ; Similia similibus 
curantur. 
* 
*Sphinx Proserpina, Pallas, Spicilegia Zoologica 9, p. 26, T. II, 7 (1772). 
Sphinx QSnotherce, Schiffermiller & Denis, Syst. Verz., p. 43 (1776). 
fCatocala Innubens var. Flavidalis, Trans. Am. Ent. Soc., Vol. V., advance sheets of Grote’s paper, printed and issued second 
week of Nov., 1874. The work itself just issued. (Dec., 1876.) 
