27 
“ Papilio.” Of the other American forms or representative species I 
shall speak later on, as they have as yet (with one possible exception) 
received no names. 
The next name in chronological order was var. impallescens, Christ., 
described from Kurusch, Caucasus, as follows: “Minor. Alis angusti- 
oribus, anticis albidis, dense fusco-conspersis, lineis transversis 
undulatis minus expressis” (“ Lepidoptera Nova Faunae Palaearcticae,” 
Iris., vi., p. 95, 1893). It will be observed that Christoph rightly 
erected this as a var. of caesiata, not as a new species. Staudinger 
(Cat., ed. 3, p. 299) indicates that it occurs also in Labrador as a var., 
but considers it an unimportant one—“ vix nominanda.” His 
diagnosis does not give precisely the same impression as Christoph’s; 
it runs: “ alis minus dense squamatis, semidiaphanis.” I have not 
seen specimens from either locality, so will not hazard further coment. 
Of the Labrador form, Moschler writes : “ I possess four examples of 
this species from different localities in Labrador. They vary very 
little inter se, are of the ordinary size, and the colour is rather dull and 
uniform, but much more like that of the German caesiata than that 
which is exhibited by my Finmark examples, to which, however, they 
come near in respect of the slight darkening of their markings ” ( Stett. 
Ent. Zeit., xliv., p. 122). In the Vienna “ Verhanulungen ” (xxxiv., 
p. 301) he gives nearly the same description, making them agree with 
the German form in the “ greenish ” coloration of the forewings. 
The most recent addition to the varietal nomenclature is var. 
norregica, Strand (Nyt. May. Eat., xl., p. 165, 1902), erected for the 
Norwegian forms in a paper on the Lepidoptera of (chiefly) Arctic 
Norway, and which might be diagnosed as : minor (24-31 min.), alis 
anticis magis unicoloribus, griseis. Strand’s actual description of it 
gives more detailed measurements, taken from 33 specimens, and 
some comparison Avith other forms, but the whole gist of it is contained 
in the diagnosis I have suggested here; he says “they are of smaller 
size ” (than those of central Europe), “ and of a much more uniform 
grey colour. Ab. norvegica is not confined to the arctic regions, 
individuals from southern Nonvay must also be referred thereto.” 
Its author mentions this form again two years later (Nyt. Mag. Nat., 
xlii., p. 140, 1904) and records some localities from southern Norway— 
where it seems far scarcer than in the north—but adds nothing else 
to our knowledge of it. 
The only other forms which it appears to me convenient to 
designate by special names, are two rather extreme aberrations, 
namely, the most extreme dark form ( caesiata var. A of G uenee), 
which, after Staudinger, has been passing as ab. glaciata, Germ. ; and 
the form which occasionally turns up in this species, as in so many of 
its allies, Avith the central band extremely narroAV, and incomplete, or 
broken. The former I aauII call 
ab. nigricans, mihi, n. ab. — caesiata A r ar. A, Gn., Ur. et Phal., ii. p. 
272 = caesiata var. a, Stgr., Stett. Ent. Zeit., xviii.,p. 257 (“ alis anticis 
nigricantibus ”) =caesiata ab. glaciata, Stgr., Cat. (pro parte) = caesiata 
var., Barr., Lep. Brit., viii., pi. cccxlviii., fig. 1 g. This aberration has 
the wings blackish and more or less glossy, Avhereas ab. glaciata, 
Germ ,—gelata, Gn. is much less extreme, being rather of a fuscous 
grey, or at the darkest, of a “ dead ” (“ mate ”) fuliginous colour. 
That I am justfied in separating the tAvo is shoAvn not only by my own 
