RHOPALOCERA MALAYANA. 97 



seventh — which are small and somewhat indistinct — arc placed on each side of the third median ner^'ule ; 

 an indistinct suhmarginal series of spots placed between the nervules, and two occllated spots, the first 

 and smallest situate between the discoidal nervules, and the second and largest situate on the second and 

 third median nervules. Posterior wings with a large elongated and duplex ocellated spot, the smaller 

 portion of which is situate between the subcostal nervules, the larger portion extending over the discoidal 

 nervule, and a very small and indistinct ocellated spot between the second and third median nervules, 

 a broad fuscous suhmarginal line and two marginal lines of the same colour. Wings beneath pale and dull 

 ochraceous. Anterior wings with the cell crossed l)y fascire as above ; other markings generally as above ; 

 the upper ocellated spot indistinct. Posterior wings with several irregular, darker, basal fascia;, and with 

 a broad suhmarginal fascia enclosing five dark spots placed between the nervules, of which the second, 

 situate above the discoidal nervule, and the iifth, placed between the second and third median nervules, 

 are largest ; marginal and suhmarginal lines as above. Body and legs more or less concolorous with 

 wings. 



Exp. wings, S and 2 , .52 millim.* 



Hab. — Continental India: Scinde, Bomliay, Calcutta, Neilgherries (coll. Moore). — Ceylon (coll. 

 Moore). — Burma ; Moulmein (Brit. Mus.) — Tenasserim ; Meetan, Taoo, Natbthoung to Paboga (Limborg — 

 Moore). — Malay Peninsula; Province Wellesley (colls. Dist. and Saiier). — Malacca (Pinwill— Brit, ilus.— 

 Siam ; Chentaboon and Nahconchaisee (Layard—Druce).— Hainan (coll. Moore).— Formosa (coll. Moore). — 

 China ; Hong Kong (Brit. Mus.) + 



In North-Westeru India Capt. Lang reported having reared the larva of this species 

 on Barlcria prionites. I The larva, as found in Ceylon, has been described by Mr. Moore, 

 " cylindrical, smoky black, with a pale dorsal band and paler lateral lower shade ; each 

 segment with eight small l)ranched spines." § 



Genus RHINOPALPA. || 



Rlminpnlpa, Felder, Wien. Ent. Men. iv. p. 390 (1860); Neues, Lep. p. 49 (1861). 

 Eurhinia. Felder, Reise Nov. Lep. p. 405 (1866). 



Anterior wings subtriangular, costal margin very strongly arched and convex, apical angle obliquely 

 truncate and very prominent, beneath which the outer margin is deeply excavated and concave ; nmer 

 margin more or less concave. First and second subcostal nervules emitted close together near apex of cell, 



* This measuremeut is that of a limited series only, aud variation in size doubtless exists as in other spoeies of 

 the genns. 



f It has also been recorded by De I'Orza from Japan, as pointed out by Mr. Elwes (Proe. Zool. Soc. 1881, p. 8i).")|. 



I Ent. Month. Mag. i. p. 1.32. 



§ Lep. Ceyl.i. p. 41. The larva is not figured, but it is probable that Mr. Moore has relied on the information or 

 drawmgs of some local observer. 



j! Felder appears to have subsequently substituted the name Eurhinia in place of that of JRMnojmlpa, which he 

 originally proposed for the genus, and this without conmient. Scudder, in his ' Historical Sketch,' and revision of generic 

 names (Proc. Am. Acad. Arti? & Sei. vol. x. pp. 173 and '2621, decides that this course should be followed, on the suggested 

 grounds that the original name was probably a hvbrid one. This, however, seems to me a retrograde step, placing the name 

 of the thing before the thing itself, and is not warranted by the " Stricklandian Rules," which thus deal with the question : — 

 "Compound words whose component parts are taken from two different languages are gi-eat deformities in nomenclature, 

 and naturalists should be especially guarded not to introduce any more such terms into Zoology, which fm-nishes too many 

 ex.amples of them already" (Pailes Zool. Nomenel. by H. E. Strickland, 1878, p. 15). This does not warrant the alteration of 

 the name, and in these days when the whole subject is being rendered incomprehensible (except to a few specialists) by the 

 alterations, substitutions, "and divisions of the vrliole generic names, a conservative course wherever possible is to be 

 commended. As Packard well remarks, " The work of the systematic biologist often amounts to Uttle more than putting 

 Nature in a strait-jacket" (Monogr. Geom. Moths, or Phalam. Uu. States, p. 42). 



Febeuaey 28, 1883. 2 c 



