Lepidopteran isolation

Press, 11 December 1982, Page 18

Lepidopteran isolation

Butterflies of New Zealand. By Catherine Hamilton. Bateman, 1982. 48 pp. Illustrations. Beningfield’s Butterflies. Illustrated by G. Beningfield. Text by R. Goodden. Penguin, 1982. 96 pp. $13.95 (paperback).

(Reviewed by

Gordon Williams)

Australian invaders on the West Coast, Red Admirals in the Chathams, Pansy Commodores in East Africa. Has something gone terribly wrong with C.E.R.? Is the P.M. right about the communist menace? Is the Senior Service at it again? No, all these apparently inflammatory comments simply refer to butterflies, as I will explain in due course. Because of New Zealand’s long and considerable isolation from the rest of the world we can claim only 23 species of butterflies, whereas the Australians, with typical flamboyance, have a species for every day of the year, and it is rather infuriating that we cannot claim (as we can with birds) thit what we lack in numbers we make up for in peculiarity. Of our meagre lot, only 13 can be classed as real Kiwis, three mdre have reached here by devious means since European occupation and there are seven visitors, all Australian, which are blown here from time to time—only two of them frequently. Catherine Hamilton has illustrated all 23 of our species and these are competently, pleasantly, if not excitingly done. No-one who has this book should have any trouble with identification. All are usually shown in what< might be called the “insect box” position, that is, viewed from above and

with wings more or less horizontally spread. Beningfield’s illustrations of approximately the same number of species (though Britain has a total of about 75, perhaps one of the advantages of being part of the E.E.C.) show an interesting contrast. Almost none of his subjects are shown in the “insect box” position and frequently the animal appears almost incidentally amidst its botanically punctilious but delightful background, and frequently has to be almost sought out—just as would occur in life; whereas in Hamilton’s paintings, which are often impressionistic (a statement merely, not a judgment), the butterflies are always dominant. There is relatively little on butterfly ecology in her simple text though there is some useful information on wing span and a brief outline of butterfly biology' at the end. As you might expect, with a text by a professional lepidopterist, there is a great deal of biological information of all kinds in the other publication, and the paintings are accompanied by numerous pencil drawings of the insects and the plants. Incidentally, it seems as though the name “Admiral” is derived from the word “admirable” which, if true, solves a hitherto, for me, inscrutable mystery and commodores (pansy or macho) follow, by reduction I suppose, because there are admirals. However, I cannot throw any light on the origin of the word “butterfly"—it does not seem to be a spoonerism of flutterby as is commonly believed. The etymology of entomology is often a very puzzling affair.