( 504 ) 

 P. 414. To the bibliograi>hy of P. epaminonclas Oberth. add :— 

 I'ttpilio laeslnjgonuiii , NiciJville, Lej>. Iml. I. frontispiece, f. 1. la (1882). 



P. 436. Add :- 



(n) : P, eurypylus rubroplaga subsp. nov. [J]. 



Pajulio telephuM, Weymer(;Kc Felder, 1865), SUM. E. Zeit. p. 273 (1885) (Nia-s I.). 



Dififers from P. eurypyhcs axion Feki. and the other forms of euri/pyl us \.. in 

 the red markings on the underside of the liindwings being as large as, or even larger 

 than, the white submarginal spots. 



Hab. N'ias Island (4 (?). 



P. 463. My remark about Mr. Ribbe's article in Iris VIII. is partly erroneous; 

 Ribbe's P. polyduemon is not = pliestm. I had received from .Air. Ribbe a pupa of 

 P. phesttts Gu&T. under the name of polydwmon, and this misled me to siiy that 

 Ribbe confounded polypemon and phestus. Ribbe's P. polydnemmi from Mioko 

 is not this form, but P. polydoriis novobi-ltannicus Rothsch. ; liis polypemon is 

 = polydaenion Math. 



Xote.~On page 178 I spoke about sea.sonal dimorphism among Papilios. I have 

 to add that in Northern India the spring brood of P. eurypylm, aarpedon, hathydes, 

 and ayamemnoa is diiferent from the summer broods ; the median band of the wings 

 is broader in the spring brood, the specimens are generally of inferior size, and the 

 submarginal spots (in eurypylus) are larger. Moore's Papilio ackeron is the spring 

 brood of P. eiirypylns aximi Feld. We came to this conclusion when comparing 

 recently acquired, well-dated, material. — K. J. 



NOTE ON COPAXA MULTIFENESTRATA (H.-.S.). 



By the HON. WALTER ROTHSCHILD. 



lyTR. p. C. T. SNELLEN, in a list of Lepidoj-tera Heterocera from Sumatra 

 -LVJ_ ^ (/j.jg xiii p 123^ 1895), again puts forward the long-exploded assertion 

 that C. nudtifenestrata (H.-S.) is a synonym of Cricula trifenestrata Helf. If 

 Mr. Snellen had only taken the trouble to read what Druce says in the BMogiu 

 Gentrali-Americana, Heterocera, pp. 173, 174 (1886), he could never have been 

 guilty of such an error as asserting that the American Copaxa vudti/eneslrata 

 (H.-S.) was identical with the Indo-i\Ialayan Cricida trifenestrata Helf. In this 

 Mr. Snellen is following exactly the one author (Walker) he so much abuses 

 {I.e. p. 122). 



