66 [August 



Sphinx, I have explained fully the syuonymical relation it bears to 

 Macrosila, Boisd. 



Amphonyz Anteeus. 



Merian, Ins. Surin. PI. 38. (1719.) 



Sjihinx Antaeus, Drury, 111. Exot Ins. II, 43, PI. 25, fig. 1. (1773.) 

 Sphinx Jatropha, Fabr., Sp. Ins. II, 143, 18. (1781.) 

 Sj)hinx Medor, Cramer, Exot. IV, 216, PI. 394, fig. A. (1782.) 

 Sphinx Jatrophce, Fabr., Ent. Syst. Ill, 1, 362, 22. (1793.) 

 Cocytius JatrophcE, Hiibner, Verz. Schm. p. 140. (1816.) 

 Amphonyx Antceus, Poey, Cent. Lepid. (1832.) 

 Macrosila Antceus, Walk., C. B. M. Part VIII, p. 200. (1856.) 

 Sphinx JatrophcB, Burm., Sph. Braz. p. 9. (1856.) 

 Macrosila Antceus, Clem., Syn. N. Am. Sph. p. 162. (1859.) 

 Macrosila anthoeus, H-S., Corr. Blatt. p. 59. (1865.) 

 Mr. Walker, and, to judge from his remarks, also Dr. Clemens, have 

 confounded this with the following species, from which it differs by 

 its greater size, and in that the squammation of the anterior wings on 

 the upper surface is of a decided brown tinge, destitute of all greenish 

 scales whatever. The anal angle of the posterior wings is less acutely 

 produced than in A. dwponvliel. It is possible that under Sphin.r 

 Medor, Cramer, pi. o94, fig. A, the following species is intended, but 

 the inferiority of Cramer's figures prevents certainty in a matter of such 

 very closely allied species. With regard to Sphinx Hi/daspus, Cramer, 

 ( S- Hi/draapua, Clem.) Cramer says: "On en trouve une variete qui 

 n'ont point les six taches blanches sur la partie posterieure du Corps ; 

 peutetre que ces derniers sont les Males, car la Figure que nous donnons 

 ici represeute une Femelle." I incline to the belief, having both sexes 

 ef A. Antseiis and A. Duponchel before me, that Cramer's figure refers 

 to a third, closely allied species, which may be called Amphonyx Hy- 

 DASPES. I have seen but one figure of Cramer's under the name of S. 

 Medor, and in the description no mention is made of the sex. If a 

 second exists, as is to be inferred from what Dr. Clemens states, it has 

 escaped my research. The description of *S'. Medor leaves it to be un- 

 derstood, that it is the species referred to as a variety of S. Hi/duspiis in 

 the description of the latter in Vol. 1, p. 31, while the name of the first 

 species with the terminal lateral white niaculations, is changed to S. 

 Ifydaspfs* a rendering I have adopted as the more correct. 



Two specimens, S and 9 . Exp. % 5.75, 9 7.50 inches. Lengfch of 

 body I 8.00, 9 o.25 inches. 



Hnbitat.—Vviha, (Poey.) Coll. Ent. Soc. Phil. 

 Nnmher 547 Potty's MSS. C<ttalogur. 



* " Hydaspes," Humboldt, Cosmos. Vol. 2, p. 538. Bohn's Edit. 1849. 



