Fossil Butterflies Memoirs of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, I.

Part 1

Chapter 13,066 wordsPublic domain

MEMOIRS OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE.

SALEM, MASS. F. W. PUTNAM, PERMANENT SECRETARY, A.A.A.S. 1875.

PRINTED AT THE SALEM PRESS, SALEM, MASS.

LETTER OF GIFT.

PORTLAND, Aug. 22, 1873.

Mrs. Elizabeth Thompson of New York City, to-day elected a member, sympathizing with the purposes of our Association in the advancement of science, and seeing the new crop of young and industrious scientific investigators who are to form the future basis of this Association following in the footsteps of the veterans of science who founded it, and being aware of the financial difficulties which often beset the path of those noble men of science who labor more for truth than for profit’s sake, wishes to place at the disposal of the Permanent Secretary the sum of one thousand dollars, to be used according to the directions of the Standing Committee, for the promotion and publication of such original investigations by members of the Association as may be accepted by the said Standing Committee, to be published by means of this special donation.

[Signed]

P. H. VAN DER WEYDE.

To the Standing Committee of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

REPORT OF THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON THE THOMPSON FUND, HARTFORD MEETING, AUGUST, 1874.

The Standing Committee of the Association at the Portland Meeting appointed the undersigned a Committee with full power to accept and print such papers as they might deem of sufficient importance to be published by the donation of Mrs. Thompson.

In accordance with the duties assigned to them, the Committee have accepted the Memoir by Mr. Scudder on Fossil Butterflies as the first paper to be published by the THOMPSON FUND, and while regretting that the unavoidable delay in engraving the plates prevents their having the gratification of presenting the work at the present Meeting, they believe that the Association and its liberal patron will accept the Memoir as one in every way worthy of the honor thus bestowed.

ASA GRAY, } JAMES HALL, } THOMAS HILL, } P. H. VAN DER WEYDE, } _Committee_. J. L. LECONTE, } T. STERRY HUNT, } F. W. PUTNAM, }

FOSSIL BUTTERFLIES.

BY SAMUEL H. SCUDDER.

TO COUNT GASTON DE SAPORTA, OF AIX IN PROVENCE,

WHOSE EXTENDED MEMOIRS ON THE FLORA OF THE TERTIARIES OF SOUTHERN FRANCE FORM THE BASIS OF THE BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSIONS OF THIS ESSAY; AND WHOSE UNWONTED COURTESIES HAVE PERMITTED A CAREFUL EXAMINATION OF THE MOST IMPORTANT FOSSIL BUTTERFLIES,

THIS MEMOIR IS RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED BY THE AUTHOR.

CONTENTS.

INTRODUCTION xi

BIBLIOGRAPHY 1

DESCRIPTIONS OF GENERA AND SPECIES OF FOSSIL BUTTERFLIES

NEORINOPIS 9

1. Neorinopis sepulta 14

LETHITES 34

2. Lethites Reynesii 37

EUGONIA 40

3. Eugonia atava 41

MYLOTHRITES 44

4. Mylothrites Pluto 45

COLIATES 51

5. Coliates Proserpina 52

PONTIA 53

6. Pontia Freyeri 54

THAITES 57

7. Thaites Ruminiana 60

THANATITES 62

8. Thanatites vetula 63

PAMPHILITES 66

9. Pamphilites abdita 68

COMPARATIVE AGE OF FOSSIL BUTTERFLIES 70

PROBABLE FOOD PLANTS OF TERTIARY CATERPILLARS 71

PRESENT DISTRIBUTION OF BUTTERFLIES MOST NEARLY ALLIED TO FOSSIL SPECIES 76

GENERAL RÉSUMÉ, WITH NOTICE OF UNDETERMINED FORMS 83

FOSSIL INSECTS ERRONEOUSLY REFERRED TO BUTTERFLIES 88

EXPLANATION OF THE PLATES AND WOOD CUTS 97

INTRODUCTORY.

The happy discovery in the Museum of Marseilles of a new fossil butterfly first drew my special attention to this group of extinct insects, and determined me to make, during my residence in Europe, a careful study of the original types of all that had been previously described. By the great courtesy of Count Saporta, Professor Heer, Dr. Reynès, Mr. Oustalet, Mr. Woodward, the Rev. Mr. Brodie, Mr. Charlesworth, and the authorities of the Jermyn street Museum, I was able to study not only all the originals of the Museums of Aix, Marseilles, Zurich, Paris, London, Cambridge and Warwick, but several new types, described here for the first time. As I was unable to visit Vienna, Mr. Brunner de Wattenwyl was good enough to procure for me new drawings, made under his immediate supervision, of the species from Radoboj, described by Heer and preserved in the museums of that city. So that I have either personally inspected all the fossils described within recent times as butterflies, or have procured new and excellent original drawings of them, with the exception of Heer’s _Vanessa attavina_ (_Sphinx atava_ Charp.), which I was unable to find, and two fragments of slight value, viz.: the hind wing referred by Heer to his _Vanessa Pluto_, and the portion of a hind wing, called _Cyllonium Hewitsonianum_ by Westwood. In the hope of drawing attention to fossil butterflies, which have been hitherto so little studied, I have brought together in this connection all that has been published of this group of fossils, whether of text or illustration; presenting thus, within a small compass, a complete account of our knowledge of these insects, as a basis for future investigations.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.

1726. HUEBER. Lithographiæ Wirceburgensis specimen primum. Fol. Wirceburg. This work contains the first reference to fossil Lepidoptera which I have found. In his Synopsis Tabellarum, he gives on page 94:

“Tabulâ XV. Similium insectorum alatorum Papilionum videlicet diversas species;” but the plates are too rude to be of the slightest value or even to indicate the suborder to which the insects may belong.

1729. BROMELL. Lithographia Suecana. Acta Litteraria Sueciæ, II. In a section _de lapidibus insectiferis Seanicis et Gothicis_ (p. 525) he says:

“Praeter umbratiles etenim papilionum vel muscarum quasdam imagines, lapidi huic leviter sed distincte impressas, multa scarabæorum figuras, mole totaque facie imitantur;” these were found in “saxo fœtido” in “Westrogothia.”

In his enumeration of fossils he specifies further:

[528]. “9. Papilionum majorum ac minorum imagines et impressiones nitidæ, in lapide calcario communi inodoro, ubi etiam in alio fœtido conspicuæ, ex eisdem Westrogothiæ locis.”

[529]. “10. Insectorum ovula, an nymphæ seu aureliæ lapideæ? saxo fœtido nigricanti immersæ. Ex eadem paræcia karabylonga.”

[531]. “14. Papilionum minorum imagines et impressiones, in ejusdem generis saxo suillo fœtido. Ex eodem loco. Hæ itidem figura sua a papilionibus illis differre haud videntur, quarum superius Num. 9. meminimus.”

I find no later reference to these supposed Lepidoptera.

1742. SENDELIUS. Historia succinorum. Fol. Lipsiæ.

Devotes a chapter (_De Erucis_, pp. 169-171) to supposed remains of caterpillars and chrysalides in amber. Several forms are figured (pl. 5, figs. 25-28; pl. 6, figs. 1-4), of which it is not impossible that pl. 6, fig. 1, may represent a Papilionid larva; and pl. 6, fig. 4, the chrysalis of a Nymphalid; but the illustrations are wholly insufficient to assert anything of them with confidence.

1828. MARCEL DE SERRES. Note sur les Arachnides et les Insectes fossiles et spécialement sur ceux des terrains d’eau douce. Ann. Sc. Nat., XV, 98-108.

This is an extract only from the next citation.

1829. MARCEL DE SERRES. Géognosie des terrains tertiaires ou Tableau des principaux animaux invertébrês des terrains marins tertiaires du midi de la France. 16mo. Montpellier et Paris.

Contains a “Tableau des Arachnides et des Insectes fossiles du bassin tertiaire d’Aix (Bouches-du-Rhône),” printed in the preceding citation, in which (p. 230; p. 107 of preceding) occurs the genus “Papilio,” with the remark: “Nous citons ici, sous la foi d’autrui, un Lépidoptère diurne de la division des _Satyrus_,” doubtless referring to _Neorinopis sepulta_.

Speaking of the authors who have treated of the fossils of Œningen, he says: (p. 235) “Ces divers naturalistes y ont signalé des Scarabées, des Lucanus (p. 236) fort rapprochés du Lucanus cervus, des Papillons,” etc.

In a “Tableau général des Arachnides et des Insectes fossiles” he gives on p. 257, the following:

================================================================ Genres qui se trouvent dans les terrains anormaux. /-----------------------/\---------------------\

In the “marnes calcaires” of Aix he has referred already, as we have seen, to one; he previously speaks of _Papillons_ at Œningen (see above) and may therefore place two in the second column; he quotes Sendelius as probably figuring caterpillars in amber as follows (p. 242): “Des Lépidoptères (M. Brongniart). On a cru reconnaître des chenilles parmi les insectes du Succin figurés par Sendelius Tab. 3, fig. 28-82;”[A] and this accounts for one in his third column; and the following passage from the section on “Insectes fossiles des terrains secondaires inférieurs, ou de transitions” (p. 246) accounts for that in the fifth column: “Il se peut que ce soit également dans des formations de la même époque qu’existent les vestiges d’insectes, d’ailes de Papillons et de Scarabées signalés par Bromel.”

1835. GRAVENHORST. Bericht der entomologischen Section. Uebers. d. Arbeit u. Veränd. Schlesisch. Gesellsch. Vaterl. Caltur, 1854, 92-93.

Gives a general enumeration of the collection of fossils from amber in the museum of the Königsberg Society, specifying a few Lepidoptera.

1836. HOPE. Observations on Succinic Insects. Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., I, iii, 133-147.

In a list of insects observed in amber we find the following on p. 146:

1838. BRONN. Lethæa Geognostica, 2d ed., II. 8vo.

In a tabular list of fossil insects, with localities, he gives (p. 814):

Papilis [Papilio] (Bernstein), Satyrus (Gyps formation von Aix).

1838. DUPONCHEL. Ann. Soc. Ent. France, VII, Bull. 51-52.

Re-announces the discovery of _Neorinopis sepulta_, referring it to Nymphalis.

1839. BOISDUVAL. Ann. Soc. Ent. France, VIII, Bull. 11-12.

Gives a verbal report on the characteristics of _Neorinopis sepulta_, drawn from an inspection of a drawing sent by Fonscolombe to Audouin, refers the insect to the genus Cyllo and says that the species is allied to Europa and others.

1840. BOISDUVAL. Rapport sur une empreinte de Lépidoptère trouvée dans les marnes des environs d’Aix, en Provence, et communiquée par M. de Saporta. Ann. Soc. Ent. France, IX, 371-374. Accompanied by a plate (viii) which appeared in the second livrasion.

Describes _Neorinopis sepulta_ from the specimen, referring it to the genus Cyllo, and the neighborhood of the species Rohria, Caumas and Europa, and giving it the specific name sepulta.

1843. MARCEL DE SERRES. Notes géologiques sur la Provence. Actes Linn. Soc. Bord., XIII, 1-82; Note additionelle, 83-90; Deuxième note additionelle, 170-2. 2 planches.

In a list of the plants and animals found at Aix, the author gives on p. 41: “Lépidoptères Diurnes. Papilio de la division des Satyrus. Cette espèce conserve encore en partie ses couleurs.” On p. 172 is a _Note relative au Lépidoptère figuré_ (_Cyllo sepulta_), in which Boisduval’s opinion of its relationship is given.[B] The author’s review of the plants and animals leads him to the generalization that they are analogous to those which now live in dry and arid spots in the south of France.

1843. CHARPENTIER. Ueber einige fossile Insecten aus Radoboj in Croatien. Acta Acad. Leop. Carol., XX, 401-410.

Describes (p. 408) and figures (Tab. xxii, fig. 4) _Eugonia atava_ under the name of _Sphinx atavus_.

1845. COQUAND. Bull. Soc. Geol. France [2], II, 384-386.

Refers to and quotes a portion of Boisduval’s description of _Neorinopis sepulta_; nothing new is added.

1845. MARCEL DE SERRES. Sur les fossiles du bassin d’Aix (Bouches-du-Rhône). Ann. Sc. Nat. [3], IV, 249-256.

Uses the discovery of _Neorinopis sepulta_ as an argument in support of his theory that there is an intimate relation between the tertiary fauna and flora of Aix and the animals and plants now existing in southern France; and that the climate of the two epochs was the same. Recalling the then recent discovery of many butterflies new to the fauna of Europe, he suggests that _N. sepulta_ may yet be found alive.

1847. HOPE. Observations on the fossil insects of Aix in Provence, with descriptions and figures of three species. Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond., IV, 250-255.

Gives a list of genera published by Bronn with some additions; on p. 252, under Lepidoptera, we have “85. Satyrus B[ronn].”

1849. HEER. Die Insektenfauna der Tertiärgebilde von Œningen und von Radoboj in Croatien. 2er Theil. 4to. Leipzig. Extracted from the Neue Denkschr. allg. Schweiz. Gesellschaft für Naturw., XI (1850).

Contains (pp. 177-183, Taf. xiv, figs. 3-6) descriptions and illustrations of _Eugonia atava_ (_Vanessa attavina_), _Mylothrites Pluto_ (_Vanessa Pluto_) and _Pontia Freyeri_ (_Pierites Freyeri_).

1849. HEER. Zur Geschichte der Insekten. Verhandl. Schweiz. naturf. Gesellsch., XXXIV, 78-97.

Refers to the late epoch at which Lepidoptera appeared, and adds, pp. 87-8: “Merkwürdig ist, dass von diesen Schmetterlingen 2 Arten grosse Aehnlichkeit [88] mit ostindischen Arten haben, während eine mit unserm Distelfalter, eine andere mit unserem Grassackträger zu vergleichen ist.”

1850. HEER. Zur Geschichte der Insekten. Neues Jahrb. für Mineral., 17-33.

On the History of Insects. Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. Lond., VI, ii, 68-76. Translated by T. R[ymer] J[ones].

Essentially the same as the preceding. The quotation given above is found on p. 24 of the Jahrbuch, p. 72 of the Journal. “Schmetterlinge” is everywhere translated Butterflies instead of Lepidoptera. Aix in Provence is nearly always given as Aix-la-Chapelle.

1851. LEFEBVRE. Observations relatives à l’empreinte d’un Lépidoptère fossile (_Cyllo sepulta_) du docteur Boisduval. Ann. Soc. Ent. France [2], IX, 71-88, pl. 3, No. II.

Criticises at length the opinion of Dr. Boisduval on the systematic position and structure of _Neorinopis sepulta_, maintaining that the fore and not the hind wing was furnished with a tail, and while confessing his inability to decide upon its relationship, inclines to the opinion that the insect was more nearly allied to Vanessa. His studies were wholly taken from the plate published by Boisduval.

1851. BOISDUVAL. Quelques mots de réponse à M. Alex. Lefebvre sur ses observations relatives à la _Cyllo sepulta_. Ann. Soc. Ent. France [2], IX, Bull. 96-98.

Defends his views against the criticisms of Lefebvre.

1852. GIEBEL. Deutschland’s Petrefacten. p. 644. 8vo. Leipzig.

Catalogues the three butterflies described by Heer from Radoboj.

1854. WESTWOOD. Contributions to Fossil Entomology. Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. Lond., X, 378-96, pl. 14-18.

Represents on pl. 17, fig. 17, and pl. 18, fig. 27, two fragments of wings, which he considers as belonging to butterflies, and to which, on pp. 395-6, in the explanation of the plates, he gives the names of _Cyllonium Boisduvalianum_ and _C. Hewitsonianum_.

1854. PICTET. Traite de Palæontologie, II, pp. 392-393, pl. 40. 8vo. Paris.

Gives a brief account of the fossil butterflies then known, and reproduces excellently the figures of _Neorinopis sepulta_, and _Mylothrites Pluto_ given by Boisduval and Heer.

1856. GIEBEL. Fauna der Vorwelt, II. pp. 185-7. 8vo. Leipzig.

Gives a similar but fuller account of the butterflies described by Heer and a brief notice of others.

1856. GIEBEL. Geologische Uebersicht der vorweltlichen Insekten. Zeitschr. gesammt. Naturw., VIII, pp. 174-188.

Gives lists of Lepidoptera summarized from his previous work.

1856. HEER. Ueber die fossilen Insekten von Aix in der Provence. Vierteljahrsschr. naturf. Gesellsch. Zurich, I, 1-40.

Simply mentions in his introductory remarks the occurrence of _Neorinopis sepulta_ at Aix, and says that most of the insects from this locality present a Mediterranean aspect.

1858. HEER. Ueber die Insectfauna von Radoboj. Bericht 32e Versamml. Deutsch. Naturf., 118-121.

A cursory review of Radoboj insects, mentioning the rarity of Lepidoptera, and specifying _Eugonia atava_ (_Vanessa attarina_) and _Mylothrites Pluto_ (_Vanessa Pluto_). He remarks that the former resembles _V. cardui_ and probably fed on thistles, although these had not yet been found in a fossil condition in that locality; and that the latter was nearly allied to _Papilio Hadena_.

1859. HEYDEN. Fossile Insecten aus der Rheinischen Braunkohle. Dunk. u. Mey. Palæontogr., VIII, 1-15, Taf. 1-2.

Contains pp. 12-13, Taf. I, fig. 10, description and figure of _Thanatites vetula_ (_Vanessa vetula_).

1860. HEER. Untersuchungen über das Klima und die Vegetations Verhältnisse des Tertiärlandes. 4to. Winterthur.

Refers to some of the fossil butterflies described from Radoboj and Aix.

1861. HEER. Recherches sur le climat et la Végétation du pays tertiaires; traduction de Gaudin. 4to. Winterthur.

The same as the previous; and also (on p. 205; not in the original edition) the following reference: “un cinquième (_Thaites Ruminiana_) est très voisin du genre Thais qui appartient à la faune méditerranéene.”

1868. BUTLER. Catalogue of Diurnal Lepidoptera of the family Satyridæ in the collection of the British Museum. 8vo. London.

Gives an appendix (pp. 189-190) on fossil species, in which he discusses the zoological position of _Neorinopis sepulta_ (_Cyllo sepulta_).

1869. BUTLER. Catalogue of Diurnal Lepidoptera described by Fabricius in the collection of the British Museum. 8vo. London.

Discusses briefly (p. 109) the relationship of “_Vanessa Pluto_” to _Argynnis Diana_ and _Junonia Hedonia_.

1872. SCUDDER. Description d’un nouveau papillon fossile (_Satyrites Reynesii_) trouvé à Aix en Provence. Rev. et Mag. de Zool., 62-71, pl. 7. Also separate, pp. 7.

Description of a New Fossil Butterfly (_Satyrites Reynesii_) found at Aix in Provence. This is a translation of a portion of my paper. Geol. Mag., IX, 532-533, pl. 13, figs. 2-3. The same, separate, pp. 2.

Describes and figures _Lethites Reynesii_.

1872. SAPORTA. Études sur la végétation du Sud Est de la France à l’époque tertiaire. Suppl. I. Révision de la flore des gypses d’Aix. 1er fascicule, Généralités. Ann. Sc. Nat. [5], Bot. XV, 277-351.

Discusses (p. 342) the probable food of the caterpillars of _Neorinopis sepulta_ and _Thaites Ruminiana_.

1873. BUTLER. On Fossil Butterflies. Lepidoptera Exotica, part xv, pp. 126-8, pl. 48.

On a Fossil Butterfly belonging to the family Nymphalidæ from the Stonesfield slate near Oxford; with notices of two other foreign forms from France and Croatia. Geol. Mag., X, No. ciii, 2-4, pl. 1.

Describes the genus Palæontina and species oolitica (a supposed fossil butterfly), refers _Cyllo sepulta_ Boisd. to a new genus, Neorinopis, and _Vanessa Pluto_ Heer, doubtfully, to Junonia, adding remarks upon the relationships of each.

1873. ANON. The oldest Fossil Butterfly in the World. The [London] Graphic. Feb. 22.

A popular account of the preceding paper, accompanied by a woodcut of _Palæontina oolitica_.

1873. BRODIE. The Distribution and Correlation of Fossil Insects, etc. 8vo. pamph. Warwick.

Gives a brief notice (pp. 8-9) of the various fossils referred to butterflies, especially of _Palæontina oolitica_ and _Lethites Reynesii_, and publishes an opinion expressed to him by me that the former was Homopterous.

1874. SCUDDER. Proc. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist., XVI, 112.

Doubts the lepidopterous character of Butler’s Palæontina, and refers it, probably, to the Cicadinæ.

1874. BUTLER. Notes on the impression of _Palæontina oolitica_ in the Jermyn Street Museum. Geol. Mag. [2], I, 446-449, pl. 19.

Defends the lepidopterous character of Palæontina and gives new illustrations of the same.

1874. SMITH. Discovery of Remains of Plants and Insects. Nature, XI, 88.

Enumerates fossils found at Gurnet Bay, and specifies among them “butterflies.”

Sehn wir daher durch das Fenster, In das alte Schattenreich, Sehen wir da statt Gespenster, Wesen, die den jetz’gen gleich; Sehen nicht des Pluto Schrecken, Sphinxe und Harpyen Brut, Nicht Chimären Flammen lecken, In der Hölle Feuer Glut,

Nein! in diesen stillen Räumen Wo man sich den Orcus denkt, Sehn wir tausend Wesen träumen, Tief in ew’gen Schlaf versenkt. Haben einst die Welt genossen, Unterm blauen Himmelszelt, Jetzt sind sie in Fels verschlossen, In der schwarzen Unterwelt.

OSWALD HEER.

DESCRIPTIVE.

NYMPHALES—PRÆTORES—OREADES.

Genus NEORINOPIS BUTLER.

_Neorinopis_ Butler, Lepid. Exot., i, 127 (1873);—Ib., Geol. Mag. x, 3.