NOVITATES ZOOLOQICAE XXII. 1915. 81 



dealing with only two species, though he records thirteen described forms. 

 Fruhstorfer himself makes five species in all. He is nearly correct as to biilis and 

 acuta, but his account of the other species is such a remarkable jumble that it 

 seems useless to discuss it. 



Though he appears to have a keen scent for local races and varieties, which 

 one sometimes fears is merely a prejudice that every locality has a local race which 

 wants naming, the arrangement of the forms of Curetis he recognises under the five 

 species he accejits leaves everything to be desired. 



In Moore's (Swinhoe) Lepidoptera Indica, vol. viii. p. 239, thetis and phaedru» 

 are placed as one species, though they are not (the males at any rate) very difficult 

 to distinguish apart from the examination of the appendages. The others are 

 difficult or impossible without such examination : e.g. gloriosa and saronis are 

 treated as distinct, and stigmata, dentata, angtdata and malayica are also regarded 

 as distinct species. 



The species as decided by the structure of the male appendages fall distinctly 

 into two sections, which correspond with de Nicfiville's First group A and 

 Second group B. There is one species, insularis, that is in some degree 

 intermediate. 



A. The thetis section. 



All the species in this section agree in having a harpe apparently soft and 

 clothed with hairs. The aedeagns, besides the eversible vesica, with its rows of 

 cornnti, possesses an apparently separate piece, articulated and movable, close to 

 the extremity. Its movements are, however, restricted, and it is not eversible. 

 For convenience I call it the " shuttle " piece. They generally have beneath a 

 lunnlated postdiscal line, never apparently pointing to the apex, nor have they 

 the dark margin of the forewing encroaching on the inner margin. 



1. thetis. This form ranges from the plains of India to the Solomon 



Islands (and farther ?), and has many forms ; opinions may easily 

 vary as to which forms, if any, are " good " species. 



a. barsine. 



b. egena. 



c. rihhei. 



d. solita. 



e. menestratus. 



f. fergussoni. 



g. bougaincillei and a good many others named or nameable. 

 h. lucifuga (?). 



2. 2)haedrus ( ? = aesopus Fabr.). 



a. arcuata. 



3. celebensis. 



a. eos(J). 



4. saronis. 



a. gloriosa. 



b. nicobarica. 



5. nesoplnla. 

 6 



