SYNONYMIC NOTES ON THE RURALID.E. 135 



(1816). Euralis should therefore be used for all the species allied to 

 hetuhc and querciis including the beautiful Eastern green species classed 

 under Zephyrus by de Niceville, Leech, and other authors. 



Thestor, Hb. — It is with real regret that I have to give up Hubner's 

 genus for hallns and its congeners. I have no doubt it was described 

 from that species. Hiibner figured it well, and he knew its life-history. 



Toiiiares, Rambur, was, however, created solely for ballua, on the 

 strength of which Scudder named protummis {petalns) as the type of 

 Thestor, evidently by elimination. Lederer uses the name Thestor 

 simply in the ordinary way in a limited faunistic paper, this, lil^ethat 

 of Stephens', is no restriction. I regret, therefore, that in consideratioa 

 of these facts I feel compelled to adopt Toviares in the place of Thestor 

 as used generally. 



Heodes, Dalman. — In raising this genus Dalman mentions only 

 virgaureae. This, therefore becomes the type. Scudder cites phlaeas as 

 the type, but he had evidently overlooked the fact that Dalman only 

 mentions virf/anreae in his generic synopsis. 



(Jhrysoplianus, Hb., had its type fixed by Scudder as hippotho'e 

 {loc. cit.). This species is absolutely congeneric with rur/aureae and 

 therefore falls before Heodes. The neuration, structure of legs, palpi, 

 antennfe and eyes of both species are quite similar. 



Chrysoptera, Zincken (1817). — Tutt cited viryanreae as the type of 

 this genus, which therefore also falls before Heodes. 



Piuwicia, Tutt, and Loweia, Tutt. — These genera were raised by 

 the author for the reception of phlaeas and dorilis, respectively, I have 

 examined carefully the species and cannot find a single character 

 whereby to differentiate them from the genus Heodes, and I have no 

 question in my mind that the names should be sunk to Heodes. 



This leaves us with the genus Heodes for all the Palaearctic coppers 

 except one (caspius) ; ChrysopJianus, Chrysoptera, Rnmicia and Loweia, 

 sinking before it. 



The case of caspius is peculiar. I had found the neuration differed 

 from Heodes, this being recounted by Tutt in his vol. ix., p. 141, and 

 we therefore agreed to class it with the Strymoninae. Subsequent 

 examination of the male armature has proved to me that it cannot be 

 retained with that group. The armature is entirely Heodine, the 

 tegumen is quite peculiar, and, with the exception of Heliophorus, there 

 is nothing like it — under these circumstances it must go back to the 

 Chrysophanidae — this name is so well known that I think it would be 

 wise to retain it for the family group. A new genus is required for it, 

 the neuration being different, and I therefore propose to call it 

 Hyrcanana. The genus differs from Heodes in that veins 8 and 9 are 

 absent, whilst in Caiman's genus only vein 9 is wanting. The type is 

 caspius. 



Cigaritis, Hypolycaena, and lolans call for no remark in this 

 paper, as I am dealing mainly with European genera. 



Lampides, Hb. — This genus requires a little unravelling. It was 

 created for a heterogenous group, among them being aelianus {zetJms) 

 and boeticiis. It was used by Butler in 1869 for both the species 



