( <i8 ) 



Genus HOLOCHILA Felder. 



62. H. ilias (Felder), Sitzber. Ak. Wissensc^. Wien, Math. JSat. CI. XL. 



p. 454 (1860). 

 Apparently not common. 



Genus HYFOC'HRYSOPS Felder. 

 r.3. H. anacletus Felder, I.e. 

 Only ihre^ females were received. They were considerably smaller than the 

 figure given iiy Felder in the Novara Eeise, and a little larger than a snite of 

 specimens coming from Amboyna, which I purchased liomc years ago from Dr. 

 Standinger, and to which I added a series obtained from Messrs. Watkins & 

 Doncaster. 



Genus PITHECOPS Horslield. 

 04. P. dionisius (Boisduval), Voy. AstroL, Le.p. p. 82 (1832). 

 Apparently quite common. The crucial test between the genus Pithecops and 

 the genns Nefljjithecops is said by Distant to be furnished by the anastomosis of the 

 first subcostal with the costal uervure. Tried by this test, dionisius comes very 

 plainly under Ilorsfield's genus. 



Genus MEGISBA Moore. 

 6.5. M. malaya (Horsfield), Cat. Lep. E.I.C. p. To (1828). 



Lycaena strongi/le Felder, Reise Nocara, Lep. j). 278. t. 34. f. 32. 33 (1865). 



Apparently common, though few of the specimens sent were in good case. 

 I think there can be no donbt of the identification made by Dr. Semper of Felder's 

 species with that described by Horsfield. I have a large series of M. malaya 

 coming from various parts of India and the Malay Peninsula. Comparing these 

 closely with the specimens before me, which agree absolutely with Felder's figure, 

 I am certain that so far as the underside of the wings is concerned there is 

 no difference whatever. The only difference discernible to me is that specimens 

 from the Asiatic mainland are all a little larger, and the white spot on the 

 disc of the primaries is relatively a little smaller, and not quite so sharply 

 defined as in the specimens from Burn and Amboyna in my collection. There 

 is therefore a slight difference in facies, so far as the upperside of the wings 

 is concerned. This is all, and not enough to warrant the specific separation of 

 the two forms. 



Genus (JYANIUIS Daliuan. 



6(1. C. cagaya (Felder), Reise Nomra, Lep. p. 278. t. 34. f 11—13 (1805). 



There are several males and one or two females, which, after much delibera- 

 tion, I am led to assign to this sjiecies, though the specimens do not agree with 

 absolute exactness with the figures given by those who have represented the 

 species. They are very close to C. puspa Horsf , but differ from that species 

 in the absence in the male sex of the dark border of the primaries, which is 

 greatly reduced, and in some cases almost altogether wanting. There is also 

 very little, if any, white npon the disc of the primaries in this sex. Cagaya 

 is evidently the more southern race of C. puspa. 



