Mr. E. Doubleday on some new Diurnal Lepidoptei'a. 305 



its original German, but now that it has been translated and widely 

 circulated by the Ray Society, it becomes almost imperative on 

 me to do so, and to put our English naturalists on their guard 

 against this and numerous — I am sorry to say very numerous — 

 similar errors, in this and other reports in the same volume. I am 

 the more surprised at the error in the case of these species, as I 

 believe the information relative to them was given to Erichson by 

 an English entomologist who well knew their distinction. 



Erichson states that P. Ganesa is synonymous with P. Arc- 

 turns J P. Polyeudes with P. Bootes^ and P. Xenocles with P. Pol- 

 lux. Had he ever read the descriptions, he could not have fallen 

 into this error. 



P. Ganesa is in both sexes destitute of the splendid blue patch 

 on the posterior wings so conspicuous in P. Ardurus, and is far 

 more nearly allied to P. Paris than to that species, but differs 

 from it in many points besides the downy nervures of the anterior 

 wings in the males. 



P. Polyeudes is much nearer to P. Philoxenus than to P. 

 Bootes, and may possibly be only a variety of the former, though 

 I think its characters are too clearly marked for this to be the 

 case. Of the four species in this singular group, P. Polyeudes 

 has the posterior wings by far the narrowest, P. Bootes by far the 

 widest. P. Bootes has a large red patch at the base of the wings 

 below, P. Polyeudes has not ; P. Bootes has the white spots on 

 the disc of the posterior wings of a totally different form, and in 

 a different position to P. Polyeudes. 



P. Xenocles being almost a white insect, P. Pollux almost en- 

 tirely brown ; P. Pollux extending in extent of wing little less 

 than double the expanse of P. Xenocles, cannot very easily be con- 

 founded. The species nearest to P. Xenocles is P. Macareus ; but 

 this is a darker insect, the dark markings extending over a wider 

 space, the light colour not being nearly so white ; it also wants 

 the orange spot at the anal angle of the posterior wings. 



I am convinced that Erichson cannot hate seen the descriptions 

 of these species, and has been misled by erroneous information 

 from England. Other mistakes in his report I shall hereafter 

 point out. 



P. Elephcnor. P. alis anticis elongatis, supra nigris, viridi irroratis, 

 nervulis tribus pubescentibus, subtus pallidis nigro lineatis, posticis 

 ovatis elongatis, angustatis, dentatis, nigris viridi irroratis, antice 

 cserulescenti nitentibus, lunula anali rufa, subtus nigro- caeruleis, 

 lunulis marginalibus rufis, cseruleo irroratis ( (J). Exp. alar. 5 uiic. 

 31in.vell32millim. 



Hub. Sylhet. 



Anterior wings elongate, triangular, the outer margin about 

 two-thirds the length of the anterior, the inner bearing the same 

 Ann, ^ Mag, N, Hist. Vol. xwi, Z 



