30 
extent superficially resemble some of the forms of the allied sub-species, 
there can be no possible doubt in determination. Of the true conflua 
in Iceland, Dr. Mason writes :—“ Very abundant and variable ; this was 
first described as a species from Icelandic specimens, and differs from 
the form usually called N. festiva var. conflua in British collections from 
its smaller size; the only British specimens of this form which I have 
seen were taken by the late John Sang, at Wolsingham in Northumber¬ 
land ” ( Ent. Mo. Mag ., xxvi., p, 198); whilst we also read:—“The 
Rev. Dr. Walker exhibited a few Noctua co?flua , illustrating the varied 
forms of this species occurring in Iceland; and Dr. Mason said that 
the only British specimens of N. conflua which he had seen resembling 
the Iceland form of the species were taken at Wolsingham, Durham ” 
( Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., 1890, p. xxxvii.). I believe that these two 
references apply to the same specimens, although the county is named 
differently in each by Dr. Mason. It appears, too, that the Wolsingham 
specimens only “ resembled ” the Icelandic conflua , which is the nearest 
statement I can make of British (except Shetlandic) specimens. So 
far, I believe we have never obtained the true conflua on the mainland 
of Great Britain. Concerning the conflua from Shetland, Herr Hoffmann 
writes :—“ On the authority of Dr. Rossler, I consider conflua a var. of 
festiva. I saw eight specimens of conflua from the Shetland Isles, 
which differ as much from the conflua of Altvater from the mountains 
of Norway and Lapland, as they vary among themselves, at least in 
colour. First the Shetland form has narrower wings, and the fore 
wings have the apex more pointed, although this is not shown in the 
figs, in the Entomologist , 1884, plate 1, figs. 8, 9, 10. In colour, they 
vary from dark grey-brown to reddish-brown and to a reddish-ochreous. 
In Iceland, according to Staudinger, quite similar forms occur. Dr. 
Rossler considers conflua the mountain form of festiva ; whilst ova of 
conflua , brought by Dr. Bodemeyer from the Silesian mountains, 
produced, in Wiesbaden, only festiva in all its varieties, but no conflua. 
Part of these, which came out late in the autumn as a second brood, 
were found to come nearer to conflua than to the typical festiva of 
our flat country. Dr. Rossler has probably tried a large number, and 
formed his opinion accordingly. Dr. Staudfuss writes to me :—‘ Dr. 
Wocke has likewise reared a second brood from Altvater, which, more 
or less forms an approach to festival According to Dr. Staudfuss, festiva 
occurs only in the heart of the Riesengebirge, and he found two larvae 
at an elevation of 4,000 feet, which produced festiva not differing in the 
least from the form of the flat country. Conflua has never been taken 
in the Riesengebirge, whilst this form further east on the Schneeberg 
and Altvater at considerable elevation, seems to represent festiva. On 
the moors of the Upper Hartz, there occurs a small pale form of festiva , 
but I have never found anything approaching conflua in that locality. 
Professor Frey gives localities for festiva not only from the lower regions 
of the Swiss mountains, but also Sils-Maria in the Upper Engadine 
about 5,500 feet high, and therefore on the borders between the lower 
and upper Alps : for conflua , only the Berner Alps, Belchen, Engethal 
and Eigenthal. The last three are at a height of 3,000 feet, and 
therefore on the boundary between the lower region and mountain 
region. I only give these details for comparison, to show that conflua 
does not represent unconditionally the mountain form, as festiva occurs 
everywhere in the mountains at the same elevation as conflua ) even much 
