ıe geographical and seasonal variations of Coenonympha pamphilus L.. 193 
; I have defined above. When, on the contrary, two groups in- 
abit different areas and are on the whole different in aspect, but 
1e, or both, produce individuals transitional and similar to those 
“the other group in all or most localities, so that evidently the 
ifferencies are only due to the direct effects of local conditions 
ı the individual development and the center of oscillation of 
ıriation is not modified permanently in an hereditary way, we 
ust speak of races. In other words, differences which keep 
aaltered, like specific ones, when the two groups are bred arti- 
sially out of their usual surroundings, are to be considered of an 
»xergic“ nature; those, which are at once abolished or modified 
“such conditions, are racial. In this respect, if my definitions 
e accepted as corresponding to facts, it will be necessary to be 
ore accurate in the use of the term „race“, which has hitherto 
sen used indiscriminately for the two phenomena. Artificial breeds 
eated by ans selection, are in the nature of „exerges“ also the 
called „races“ of mankind, which some modern anthropologists 
ve been wanting to raise to the SIeity of species, find their 
cact position in classification as „exerges“. Confusion in termino- 
ey has been further increased by the use of „subspecies“ and 
 „morphs“ or „forms“ in various senses, including those of 
jerges and races. Thus, I think I am justified in having 
ıggested to introduce a new term with a definite meaning. In 
‚her languages, such as French and Italian, it is still more necessary, 
‚cause there exists only the term of „race“ to cover the natural 
terges, like those of mankind, and the artificial breeds of domestic 
ıimals, as well as the real races. 
Returning to the question of the relationship of /pllus to pam- 
tlus, | believe I am right in stating that their distinctness is 
ither specific nor racial and that they are, instead, two exerges, 
clining, if anything, rather to the lesser, racial, degree than to 
e higher, specific one, in the gradual scale of distinction. This 
st remark I make because I have not been able to detect any 
tual feature absolutely proper to one of the two, distinguishing 
‚em in an absolute way, such as exist in more highly differen- 
ated and characteristic cases of exergism: 7/esperia malvae and mal- 
Jides, Melitaea athalia and pseudoathalia, etc. Turner, however 
ıys that Bethune-Baker from his morphological examination 
‚Influenced to suggest two distinct species. This ist just what 
1e would have expected in exerges, which should be different 
‚orphologically, but not sterile between each other. Concerning 
‚e morphology, I must let Bethune-Baker illustrate, himseltf, 
e characters he has discovered and | can only say that to the 
| R 
| 
| 
