Part 5

“The neuration of the fore wing does not seem to me to accord sufficiently with that of any known genus of Oreades to admit of its being classed with them. It undoubtedly has close affinities with the characters of the genus Debis (= Lethe Hübn.) as laid down by Westwood and Hewitson, if we exclude therefrom, as we should, the _Papilio Portlandia_ of Fabricius. It is not a little interesting to notice that these authors have arranged this group in immediate proximity to the genus Cyllo (= Melanitis Fabr.), in which Dr. Boisduval placed the fossil species from Aix, named by him sepulta. Nor is it less interesting to find that in both genera all the living representatives (even including those discovered since the publication of the ‘Genera of Diurnal Lepidoptera’) are natives of the East Indies; so that the fossil butterflies of Provence have their nearest living allies in the far East.”

Although differing from Neorina (Pl. II, fig. 8) very strikingly in the form of the wing and the swollen base of the costal nervure, this genus has some striking points of agreement with that in the neuration of the fore wing. The nervure closing the cell indeed is straight in Lethites and strongly curved in Neorina, but, as there, two of the superior subcostal nervules arise before the tip of the cell, and the other two are thrown off at about equal distances between the apex of the cell and of the wing; the vein closing the cell meets the median nervure in both cases as far beyond its second divarication as that is beyond the first; the shape and proportionate length of the cell is nearly the same in the two, but the costal nervure appears to be much shorter in Lethites.

With Lethe (Pl. II, fig. 6) and Debis (Pl. II. fig. 10) the fossil genus can better be compared, as far as the form of the wing, the dilated costal vein, and the position and direction of the straight vein closing the cell are concerned; but in both these genera only a single superior subcostal nervule is emitted before the apex of the cell; the form of the cell again shows rather closer affinity between Lethites and these genera, although the difference in these respects is but slight. It is by no means distantly related to Enodia, in which two subcostal nervules are emitted before the tip of the cell, but differs from it in the much greater and more abrupt swelling of the costal vein, and in the much greater distance beyond the second divarication of the median nervure at which the vein closing the cell meets this nervure. It even exhibits no small affinity to Cercyonis, and especially to those species in which there is little dilation of the median nervure; the costal nervure is swollen in precisely the same way, and the superior nervules of the subcostal nervure are much the same; but the form of the wing is strikingly different, and the lowest subcostal interspace much wider at the base, in comparison with the width of the base of the subcosto-median interspace, in Cercyonis than in Lethites; and this seems to be a character of considerable importance. It may be noted in this connection that the markings of the fossil must have closely resembled _Cercyonis Pegala_.

Its nearest ally among living European types would seem to be _Maniola Hermione_, in which the costal and median veins are about equally swollen. The neuration of Lethites agrees with this genus in much the same way as it does with Cercyonis, the comparative width of the interspaces beyond the cell being very different in the living genera from what it is in the fossil. In the form of the wing Maniola agrees much better with Lethites than Cercyonis does, but the costa is much more arched, and the cell is much the longer in Maniola; were there no obscure spot in the lower median interspace in the male of _M. Hermione_, the markings of the fossil would agree with it almost perfectly.

LETHITES REYNESII SCUDDER.

Plate I, figs. 2, 5.

_Satyrites Reynesii_ SCUDD., Rev. et. Mag. de Zool., 1871-72, 66-72, pl. vii (1872); IB., Descr. Pap. Foss. 1-7, pl. (1872); IB., Geol. Mag. ix, 532-33, pl. xiii, figs. 2, 3 (1872); IB., Descr. Foss. Butt. 1-2, pl., figs. 2, 3 (1872); BROD., Distr. Corr. Foss. Ins. [_Satyrites Reynesii_], 8-9 (1873).

I give below the original of the first paper cited above, excepting the portion which was quoted under the genus.

In a recent examination of the rich collection of fossil insects from Aix, preserved in the Museum of the city of Marseilles, my attention was attracted by two little slabs containing the traces of a fossil butterfly. Although by no means so well preserved, nor so perfect as the remains of a butterfly from the same beds, described by Dr. Boisduval more than thirty years ago, a glance showed that it could not be referred to that species, since the costal nervure of the fore wings was greatly swollen. No such form having to my knowledge been described from these beds, Dr. Reynès, the accomplished director of the establishment, courteously placed the best specimen in my hands for closer study; and from it the following account and illustrations have been drawn. The second specimen is very imperfectly preserved, but since it exhibits in all its features an exact resemblance to similar parts in the better specimen it undoubtedly belongs to the same species.

The fossil (Pl. I, fig. 2) is a natural cast of a butterfly lying upon its side, the wings folded back to back, the legs extended as if hanging, the tongue uncurled and, with the antennæ, drooping in a direction similar to that of the legs. The right fore wing, which lies beneath, is pushed a little outward and also forward, even at its base, showing that the specimen must have been greatly macerated in very quiet water, before being covered by the deposits which have preserved its more essential features. The condition and position of all the parts also lead us to conjecture that it was swept into its final resting place by a gentle current, which left the slighter appendages lying in the direction of its final action.

It is evident that the object is a cast, for the veins of the wing which lie uppermost on the stone are impressed as we see them on the upper surface of the wings of living Oreades, while those of the wing lying beneath (veins which are plainly covered by the impressed nervures where the two come in contact) are in relief, as seen on the under surface of the same butterflies; that is, we have here the reverse of what would be the case, were we examining a living butterfly in this position.

The parts before us are: a poorly preserved body, vague indications of the terminal palpal joint, an antenna (probably a portion only), an unrolled tongue, the hinder pair of legs and portions of the other pairs, the greater part of the two front wings and fragments of the base of the hind wings. Of the latter, no border remains and only the base of a few of the nervules, which give scarcely any additional information as to the pterology of the insect. The only portion of the margin of the front wings which can be determined with certainty is the most essential part, the apex and the upper half of the outer border of the left wing, enough to show that its general contour was similar to that of the European Satyrids of the present epoch; but throughout the remainder all the nervules can be exactly traced. This being then the best preserved portion of the insect, we will consider its structure in detail, subsequently adding whatever can be gleaned from the examination of the other parts.[Q] [The account of the structural framework of the wing is given under the genus].

The basal two-thirds of the wing appears to have been more darkly clouded than the other portions, although in this fuscous area there is apparently a clearer space towards the upper, outer portion of the cell. There is also a distinct, darker, uniform and equal rounded spot in the middle of the outer two-thirds of the lowest subcostal interspace, nearly reaching the nervule on either side; in the specimen it appears to be broader than long by encroaching upon the next interspace in front, but this is evidently only apparent, the spots of the two wings (one of which I have stated to be a little in advance of the other) being blended. The object is so well preserved that one can see throughout the parallel series of minute punctures forming the points of insertion for the scales, outlines of the latter of which I have failed to discover. The wing is 28·5mm. long, the tip of the cell being distant 15mm. from the base of the wing; the costal nervure is inflated for a distance of 6·5mm., and the extreme width of this portion is 1mm.; the rows of punctures indicating the former insertion of the scales are ·12mm. apart.

Of the body itself nothing can be predicated, unless it be that the form of the abdomen and the appearance of its tip lead us to conjecture that the specimen was a female which had deposited most of her eggs, or in which they were but partially developed.

At the anterior upper extremity of the head is a dark prominence which seems to be the terminal joint of a palpus; it extends ·75mm. beyond the head and is of a nearly uniform width (·2mm.), scarcely tapering, with a rounded tip. The basal portion of an antenna, 5mm. long, is slender and apparently begins to increase slightly and very gradually in size, as in the genus Œneis Hübn. A finely impressed line, 7·25mm. long, appears to be the unrolled, though slightly curved tongue.

One of the hind femora projects 2·5mm. beyond the body; its tibia and tarsi are stretched in a single line, at an angle with it, but as the tip of what is apparently the other hind femur strikes them beyond the tip of their own femur, it is impossible to say whether they do not overlap, or are not overlaid by, the tibia and tarsi of the opposite side; their united length on the stone is 5·6mm.; but if both hind pairs are present, their probable length is 4·5mm.. There are also some remnants of the other legs, but in so fragmentary and confused a state that nothing can be determined from them, nor anything surmised of the length or structure of the front pair.

In the illustration of the fore wing given in the Revue et Magazin de Zoologie (fig. B), and copied in the Geological Magazine (fig. 3), the artist neglected to mark the position of the spot upon the wing. This is given in our Pl. I, fig. 5, which, as well as fig. 2, is taken from the originals of my former plate.

Tertiaries of Aix, Provence, France; Museum of the city of Marseilles.

NYMPHALES—NAJADES—PRÆFECTI.

EUGONIA HÜBNER.

Fore wings considerably more than half as long again as broad, the costal border scarcely bent at a little distance from the base, beyond that nearly straight to an equal distance from the tip, where it becomes more curved; outer border with the portion above the middle of the lower subcostal interspace very slightly concave, having a general direction at a very little less than a right angle with the central portion of the costal border, beyond suddenly receding at a little more than a right angle to the middle of the subcosto-median interspace, and continuing in a deep crenulate curve to just below the lower median nervure, where a prominent rounded tooth is found, and below which the border is excised, its angle rounded off; inner border very nearly straight, scarcely convex on the basal two-thirds. First superior subcostal nervule emitted a little beyond the middle of the outer two-thirds of the upper margin of the cell; the second a little more than half way from the origin of the first to the tip of the cell; the third midway between the tip of the cell and the origin of the fourth; the latter at three-fifths the distance from the tip of the cell to the apex of the wing; second inferior subcostal nervule arising scarcely one-third way down the cell; the cell considerably less than half as long as the wing, and three times as long as broad; middle of the basal curve of the last median nervule connected with the vein closing the cell.

The butterflies of this genus, which are generally above the average size, strongly resemble those of the genus Polygonia, in the form, color and design of the wings, but on the upper surface of the fore wings the costal markings are much heavier.

The above characters are wholly drawn from recent species of the genus.

EUGONIA ATAVA (CHARPENTIER) SCUDDER.

Plate I, fig. 1, 3, 7.

_Sphinx atava_ CHARP., Acta Acad. Leop.-Carol., xx, 408-9, Tab. 22, fig. 4 (1843).

_Vanessa attavina_ HEER, Insekt. Tert. Œning., ii, 177-79, Taf. 14, fig. 3 (1849); IB., Nouv. Mem. Soc. Helv., xi, 177-79, Tab. 14, fig. 3 (1850); GIEB., Deutschl. Petref., 644 (1852); IB., Faun. der Vorw., ii, 186 (1856).

_Vanessa? atovina_ KIRB., Syn. Cat. Diurn. Lep., 185 (1872).

_Nymphalis? atovina_ KIRB., Syn. Cat. Diurn. Lep., 648 (1872).

This was the second fossil butterfly known previously to the publication of Heer’s Tertiary insects. It was first described by Charpentier as a Sphinx, in the following terms:[R]

Ungemein interessant, und ich möchte sagen, ein Unicum ist der in oben bemerkter Figur abgebildete Schmetterlingsflügel. Dass es ein solcher sei, zeigt sogleich der erste Anblick, so wie sich bei näherer Ansicht herausstellt, dass es unbezweifelt der Oberflügel einer Sphinx Art sei. Er ist in seiner Form nicht gut gehalten, sondern vorn etwas eingerissen, seine Zeichnung ist aber bewundernswerth erhalten, und erinnert sehr an den fast im ganzen mittleren und nördlichen Europa vorkommenden _Sphinx Tiliæ_, doch ist er wohl specifisch von demselben verschieden. Die drei grossen dunklen Flecke, die sich von äussersten Vorderrande, fast bindenartig, über einen grossen Theil des Flügels ziehen, sind unstreitig die Reste ehemaliger Zeichnung und Färbung des lebenden Thieres.

The remainder of his remarks apply only to the rarity of fossil remains of Lepidoptera. The illustration was very poor and is reproduced on Pl. I, fig. 3. The next notice of it is by Heer, who also examined the original type, refigured [see Pl. I, figs. 1, 7] and redescribed it in the following manner, referring it to the genus Vanessa, and changing slightly the specific name:[S]

Alis anterioribus lividis, basi, fasciis maculisque nigris. Long 16⅞ Lin.

Radoboj. Ein Oberflügel, dessen Innenrand aber nicht erhalten ist.

Charpentier hat diesen Flügel einem Sphinx zugesprochen und ihn mit dem Sphinx Tiliæ L. verglichen; allein schon die ziemlich stark gebogene Randlinie (vena marginalis) spricht gegen Sphinx, bei welcher Gattung sie bis über zwei Drittel Flügellänge fast gerade verläuft und dann erst gegen die Spitze sich zubiegt; ebenso aber auch das Geäder. Bei Sphinx haben wir nämlich ein geschlossenes Mittelfeld und der Ast der vena externo-media, welcher neben der Flügelspitze ausläuft, verästelt sich nicht. In der Form des Flügels, im Geäder und Färbung stimmt unser Schmetterlingsflügel, wie mir scheint, am besten mit der Gattung Vanessa F. überein. Wir bemerken nemlich, gerade wie bei den Vanessen, zunächst eine starke vena scapularis, welche weit vorn in die v. marginalis ausläuft; eine schwächere vena externo-media, welche noch näher der Flügelspitze mit dem Rande sich verbindet; diese bildet nach Innen zunächst einen Ast[T], der flügelspitzwärts in zwei weitere Aeste sich spaltet; der äussere von diesen läuft zur Flügelspitze, der innere aber trennt sich nochmals in zwei Gabeläste, welche zum Hinterrande verlaufen und von denen jeder in einen schwachen, stumpfen Zahn des Flügelrandes ausgeht. Auf diesen Gabelast folgen weiter nach Innen zwei Längsadern, welche am Grunde sich wahrscheinlich verbinden, und in die vena externo-media eingefügt sind. Diese beiden Adern (es sind diess die fünfte und sechste Ader von Herrich Schaeffer) gehen bei [178] den Vanessen getrennt bis zur v. externo-media hinauf und divergiren gleich, wie sie aus dieser heraustreten; wahrscheinlich ist diess beim fossilen Thiere auch der Fall, jedoch sieht man nur die Einmündung des äusseren Astes in die vena externo-media, indem der innere am Grunde ganz verwischt ist, wie denn überhaupt die Adern in Folge des starken Druckes, dem der Flügel unterworfen war, äusserst schwach hervortreten und nur mit Mühe zu erkennen sind. Die vena interno-media verläuft wie bei den Vanessen, sie sendet nämlich nach dem Hinterrande zwei Aeste aus, so dass im Ganzen drei Längsadern zuletzt in parallelen Linien nach dem Rande verlaufen. Die vena analis ist nur am Grunde angedeutet, indem der Innenrand grossentheils zerstört ist. Das Mittelfeld ist offen, wenigstens ist keine Spur eines Verbindungsastes zwischen v. externo-und interno-media zu finden. In allen diesen Punkten stimmt also das fossile Thier mit den Vanessen überein. Ebenso stimmt ferner der zackige Hinterrand, indem wir, wie schon bemerkt, an der Ausmündung des äusseren Gabelastes der v. externo-media kleine Zacken bemerken, wobei freilich zu bedauern, dass von dort an der Flügel zerrissen ist, so dass die Randbildung nur an jene kleinen Stelle bestimmt werden kann. In der Färbung zeigt der Flügel viel Uebereinstimmendes mit demjenigen der Vanessa Cardui L. Wir bemerken nemlich zunächst dem Grunde eine dunklere Stelle, welche fast bis zu ⅓ Flügellänge hinausreicht; dieser dunklere Flügelgrund ist indessen wieder in der Mitte durch einige unregelmässige hellere Stellen unterbrochen. Auf diese dunkle Stelle folgt ein helles Querband von 1¾ Linien Breite, welches aber nicht bis zum Innenrande reicht, wenigstens ist an der Stelle, wo die v. interno-media den ersten Ast aussendet, wieder ein, freilich sehr undeutlich umgrenzter, dunkler Fleck; auf dieses helle Querband folgt wieder ein 3 Linien breites dunkles Querband, welches mit mittleren schwarzen Querband der V. cardui entspricht; bemerkenswerth ist, dass dieses bei der V. attavina von der Nahtseite her ebenfalls durch einen helleren Flecken getheilt wird, welcher helle Flecken nicht his zum Aussenrand hinausreicht. Auf dieses dunkle Querband folgt wieder ein helles Band von 1¼ Lin. Breite, und darauf wieder ein dunkler, 3¼ Lin. breiter Flecken, der aber sehr kurz ist, indem weiter nach Innen an jener Stelle der Flügel wieder hellgelb braun gefärbt ist; auf diesen dunklen Flecken folgt wieder ein kleiner heller Flecken; weiter flügelspitzwärts ist der Flügel dunkelbraun gefärbt, welche Farbe allmählig heller wird, so dass der Flügelrand wieder hellbraun wird; die Zackenspitzen dagegen sind schwarz.

In der Färbung des Oberflügels stimmt also der fossile Schmetterling am meisten mit Vanessa Cardui L. überein, dennoch kann er nicht als analoge Art betrachtet werden, denn fürs erste war er beträchtlich grösser [179], fürs zweite ist die Randader stärker gebogen, zeigt eine regelmässige Bogenlinie, während sie bei Vanessa Cardui in mehr gerader Linie verläuft.

The only subsequent notice of this insect, not directly copied or abbreviated from the above is by Butler, who remarks[U]; “I think it just possible, from the great resemblance which _V. Attavina_ of Heer bears to the under surface of _J.[unonia] Hedonia_, that it is the reverse of _J. Pluto_.”

I have been unable to see this fossil, or even to find out where it is preserved. Charpentier states that he received it for description from Dr. Unger through Professor Göppert of Breslau. Heer makes no mention of the quarter whence he received it. Herr Brunner von Wattenwyl searched for it in vain in the Vienna Museums.

All that can be said, therefore, must be drawn from the illustrations and remarks of Professor Heer. These seem to me to leave no doubt that the insect must be placed in Eugonia, and that it was a little larger than the European vau-album or our own j-album. A comparison of the neuration of _Eugonia j-album_ (Pl. I, fig. 4) with that of Heer’s figures of the fossil (reproduced on Pl. I, figs. 1, 7) shows that the last divarication of the subcostal nervure of the fore wing, and the points of termination of the last two superior nervules and of the subcostal nervure itself are essentially the same in both; while the position of all the markings on the fossil, allowing for its natural defects, are quite the same in position, direction and intensity, as in _E. j-album_ (Pl. I, fig. 6). The same may be said of the form of the wing, as far as it can be seen, but as this is true only of the costal margin, and the merest fragment of the outer border, it cannot be considered to have much weight in itself; still, taken in connection with all the other features, which agree almost wholly with those of Eugonia, and but partially with its near ally Vanessa, to which Heer compares it, we must refer the fossil to Eugonia, at least until a new examination of the fossil shall give us further facts as a basis for an opinion. This is the position dubiously assigned to it by Kirby, in his Synonymic Catalogue.

Tertiaries of Radoboj, Croatia.

PAPILIONIDÆ—DANAI—FUGACIA.

MYLOTHRITES SCUDDER.

Of the form of the fore wing (Pl. II, figs. 7, 17) we can say but little, from the imperfect nature of the fossil; the costal margin, however, is very regularly and rather strongly arched, and the direction of the middle portion of the outer border (probably at a right angle, or at a little less than a right angle, with the apical portion of the costal margin, and but slightly convex) leads us to presume that the apex was rather pointed, though not falciform.

The neuration of the same wing (Pl. II, fig. 7) is very similar to that of Mylothris.[V] The costal nervure terminates at about five-sevenths the distance from the base of the costal margin to its tip; the subcostal nervure emits two branches before the cell, the second probably close to the apex of the cell, the limits of which are not given in the drawing prepared for me, but which could probably be made out by a sufficiently careful examination of the original; a third superior nervule is emitted from the subcostal nervure at less than half the distance from the origin of the second to the outer border, and the emission of the inferior nervule, if it could be traced, would mark the termination of the cell; the median nervure is of course three-branched and scarcely curves upward at all to meet the subcostal.

The design of the upper surface of the fore wing (Pl. II, fig. 17) is simple, consisting only of a broad marginal pale band on a dark ground, enclosing small dark spots in the middle of the interspaces.

This fossil was placed by Heer among the Nymphales, and referred, like the preceding, to Vanessa. Heer lays stress on the non-closure of the cell, but it appears questionable whether this is not simply the result of the defective preservation of the fossil. Edwards has since referred it to Argynnis, on account of the general aspect of its markings, and Butler, on the same ground, to Junonia. But the new drawing of the fossil obtained for me through the kindness of my friend Herr Brunner von Wattenwyl, and by him carefully compared with the original, leave little doubt that it is a Pierid, and belongs in the neighborhood of such genera as Mylothris and Hebomoia. The latter genus it closely resembles in the form of the wings. Further comparisons are presented under the species.

MYLOTHRITES PLUTO (HEER) SCUDDER.

Plate II, figs. 2, 7, 17 (15?).