05 
same year Haworth introduces it in his “ Lepidoptera Britannica ” 
(part 2, p. 827). It is the greyest, most variata-coloured form of 
obeliscata, showing the typical compact dark central band of the latter. 
Next to this variata, Haworth places a munitata which he believes to 
be that of Hiibner, and to which he cites tristrigciria, Don. This is 
certainly the ordinary reddish- or fulvous-marked form. So, too, is 
Stephens’ fidvata, to which he cites fulvata, Fb., pinetata, Bkh., 
and obeliscata, Hb., though all with queries. The fulvata of Fabri- 
cius is really munitata, Hb., the other citations were less wide of the 
mark, the last, indeed, correct. Doubleday, in his first Synonymic 
List (p. 16), substitutes simularia, following a Boisduvalian mis- 
identification of simulata, Hb. Guenee maintains the names simularia 
and fulvata as varietal, treating the entire assemblage ( variata and 
obeliscata) as a single species under the name of variata, Schiff. His 
var. E., vitiosata, belongs to true variata ab. stragulata, Hb. (Guenee 
considers the identification of Hiibner’s fig. 337 too precarious to allow 
of the acceptance of his name), his other varieties to the present 
species. Ignoring Hiibner’s “ Beitrage,” he reserves the name 
obeliscata to the rare aberration figured in the “ Sammlung,” fig. 296.* 
For the ordinary obeliscata forms he uses the erroneous name of 
falvata, Fb., citing in the synonymy pinetata, Bkh., obeliscata, Tr., 
tristrigaria, Don., and munitata, Haw. His var. C. is “ variata, Wood” 
(Wood 635?), “of a sombre testaceous with the basal and median 
areas brown-black, the latter much less constricted superiorly” 
(? posteriorly, as in the description of the type and of var. fulvata). 
This is founded on two English $ s in his collection, and represents 
the less fulvous British form. Var. D., simularia, Bdv. (nec Hb.; 
firm aria, Stph. List Brit. Mus., nec Hb., and obeliscata, H.G., given as 
synonyms), is described as of a very pale, or even whitish, ochreous 
grey, with the basal and median areas of a uniform isabelline fulvous, 
not bordered by black lines, hindwing pale, without markings. This 
is the well-known form which is sometimes confused with firmata by 
the inexperienced, and Guenee himself has come dangerously near to 
falling into that confusion, for the _ fir maria, Stph., which he cites 
here ( = the simulata of Stephen’s “illustrations” and of Wood, but 
not of Boisduval [nor, of course, of Hiibner]) is really firmata. 
If these four forms of Guenee’s deserve differentation in nomencla¬ 
ture, B. will be the type obeliscata, and new names will be required for 
the other three, for all the names given by Guenee are invalid, founded 
on misconceptions. 
Two principal aberrations are not included in the above scheme, 
being evidently unknown to Guenee. One is the ab. obliterata B.’ 
White = scotica Stgr., the well-known melanic form which is frequent 
in Scotland ( e.g., at Paisley) and occasionally in England (as at 
Oxshott), and, according to Standinger, in the mountains of Central 
Italy ; and ab. mediolucens, Rossler, in which the median area is lighter 
and more fulvous than the areas which enclose it. 
It should be added that, as with variata, our British forms of 
* Guen4e has never seen an example agreeing with this figure, nor have I; 
but Rossler notes a single example quite conformable to it. 
xxii.-xxiii. 
