But there are also butterflies in which both sexes mimic a protected model. Thus many imitators of the unpalatable Acræides (Pl. II, Fig. 21) resemble the model in both sexes, and of the South American Whites which mimic the Heliconiidæ there are some which have the appearance of the Heliconiidæ even in the male sex (Pl. II, Fig. 18, 19), while others look like ordinary Whites (for instance, _Archonias potamea_). But in many of these species, which are mimetic in the female sex, we find also in the male some indications of the mimetic colouring, but in the first instance only on the under surface. Thus the females of _Perhybris pyrrha_ (Pl. II, Fig. 17) resemble in their black, yellow, and orange-red colour-pattern the immune American Danaid, _Lycorea halia_ (Pl. II, Fig. 12), but their mates are, on the upper surface, like our common Whites, though they already show on the under surface the orange-red transverse stripes of the _Lycorea_ (Pl. II, Fig. 16). In other mimetic species of Whites a similar beginning is even more faintly hinted at, and in others, again, the upper surface of the male is also provided with protective colours, and only a single white spot on the posterior, or sometimes even on the anterior wing as well, shows the original white of the Pieridæ (Fig. 18). I do not know how any one can put any other construction on these facts than that the females first assumed the protective colouring, and that the males followed later, and more slowly. Whether this is due to inheritance on the female side, and thus ensues as a mechanical necessity, in virtue of laws of inheritance still unknown to us, or whether it arose because there was a certain advantage in protection to the males--though not such a marked one--and that these, therefore, followed independently along the same path of evolution as the females, has yet to be investigated. Personally, I incline to the latter view, because there are protected mimetic species, in which the female mimics one immune model, and the male another, quite different from the female's. A case in point is that of an Indian butterfly, _Euripus haliterses_, and also _Hypolimnas scopas_, in the latter of which the male resembles the male of _Euplœa pyrgion_, and the female is like the somewhat different female of the same protected species. The Indian _Papilio paradoxus_, too, seems to show the independence of the processes of mimetic adaptation, for the male is like the blue male of the immune _Euplœa binotata_ (Pl. III, Fig. 25), while the female resembles the radially-striped female of _Euplœa midamus_ (Pl. III, Fig. 27), and this double adaptation is repeated in another of the persecuted butterflies, _Elymnias leucocyma_ (Pl. III, Fig. 26, 28).