31 
are rubbed.” Still, he bad from other localities what seemed to him 
to agree entirely with those from Labrador, for he records also the 
White Mountains and Mount Washington in New Hampshire, some 
localities in Colorado, and Massachusetts. His description would 
seem to fit Entephria caesiata, or, perhaps, Barrett suggests, E. jiavi- 
cinctata —for he rather emphasizes the “ golden scales.” His figure 
(pi. viii., fig. 16) could quite possibly represent the form of caesiata 
with the entire centre of the medial band pale, though it has rather 
an unfamiliar look; it does not show a discal spot on the hindwings, 
but this is mentioned in the description as “ distinct.” I cannot find 
that he says from which locality the figured specimen came. Of the 
variation in America he only says that the specimens from near 
Georgetown, Colo. (8000-9000ft. elevation), have, “ perhaps, more 
golden scales” than others, and that the Labrador examples are a 
little stunted, agree with those from Iceland as to general appearance 
and size, but are not quite so dark, and have more golden yellow 
specks. He has seen no specimens from the United States or 
Labrador with such clear markings as those received from the 
Austrian Alps. 
Butler and Grote follow with their notes on E. inventaraia 
(? n. sp.) already quoted; Grote, it will be observed, does not make 
any direct reference to Packard’s figure or description, though he 
seems to assume that the whole of the American forms are of one 
species, and that a different one from the European caesiata. After 
this, I find no American reference till 1896, when Iiulst (Tr. Amer. 
Ent. Soc. xxiii., p. 281) transfers caesiata to the genus Mesoleuca (type 
albicillata, L.), but throws no further light on its determination. In 
Dyar’s “ List” (p. 280, 1902) it still appears as “caesiata, Denis and 
Schiff.” ( i.e ., as —the European species); “ aurata, Pack.” (which I 
cannot trace) is added as a synonym, and “ inventaria, Grote ” ( inven¬ 
taraia) stands as a variety. Finally, my good friend Mr. F. H. 
Wolley Dod, in his valuable Alberta List, records ( Canad. Ent., 
xxxviii., p. 93, 1906) two forms which have been referred by 
Mr. Taylor to this species; (1) the “ Laggan form” with a “faint 
though obvious ochreous tinge,” and (2) two specimens taken near 
Calgary in 1904 and 1905, having the ground colour paler, “ with 
distinct smoky central and terminal bands.” Mr. Dod has very 
kindly sent me two of the Laggan specimens, and I feel sure that they 
represent a distinct species; the different tone, silky texture, absence 
of distinct discal dot on hindwing, shiny, unmarked undersurface, etc., 
all point to this. Indeed they are much closer to ravaria, Led., from 
the Altai and Ala Tau districts, and might almost be co-specific with 
this, or at least with two rather doubtful specimens in the British 
Museum collection, which are treated as ravaria, and which were 
collected by McArthur at “ Kokser ” and “ Rala.” Concerning his 
forms Mr. Dod wrote me (in lift., June 9th, 1906): “ caesiata certainly 
seems to me to contain more than one North American species. I 
believe I treat of two in my list ( q.v .), and strongly suspect that that 
of the Ivaslo list* is a third. Mr. Taylor, by the way, admits that 
* “ The lepidoptera of the Kootenai District of British Columbia,” by Dr. 
H. G. Dyar ( Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., xxvii., pp. 779-938, 1904). Here we simply 
find recorded (p. 896) 28 specimens, dates in June and August to September, which 
“ indicate two broods,” and that “ this is a high altitude species.”—L.B.P. 
