216 LYCASNIDE. IRAOTA. 
Though these two species are apparently so distinct, I hold to the opinion that breeding will pro- 
bably prove them to be but one variable species. The same opinion is held by Mr. W. Doherty, 
who writes of Z. macenas, *‘an extremely variable species wherever I have found it,” I think it 
by no means improbable that this variability is due to seasonal causes, and that it will hereafter 
be found that Z. ¢zoéeon is the rains form and Z. mecenas the dry-season form of one species. 
Figure 192 shews both sides of a male specimen from Chumba in the Western Himalayas» 
and figure 193 shews both sides of a female example from Jalpaiguri in the Western Dooars, 
both in my collection. 
770. Traeta mecenas, Fabricius. 
Hesperia mecenas, Fabricius, Ent. Syst., vol, iii, pt. 1, p. 271, n» 45 (1793) ; id., Donovan, Ins, China, 
pl. xxxix, fig. 2) male (1798) ; Deudorix mecenas, Hewitson, Ill. Diurn, Lep., p. 25, n. 27 (1863); id., 
Butler, Cat. Fab. Lep. B. M., p. 180,n. 2 (1861) ; Zraota macenas, Moore, Lep. Cey., vol. 1, p. 102, pl. xl, 
figs. 2, male ; 2a, female ; 2b, larve and pupa (1881) ; id., Doherty, Journ. A. S. B., vol. lv, pt. 2, p. 126, n. 123 
(1886) ; Deudorix timoleon, var., Hewitson, Il], Diurn. Lep., pl. vill, fig. 21, fetale (1863). 
Hasitar : China (Fadricius and Drury) ; Hong-Kong (Butler) ; North India ( Hewitson) ; 
Ceylon (AZoore) ; Jhulaghat, eastern border of Kumaon (Doferty) ; Tanna or Nasik district» 
Egutpura, on the Thul Ghat, October ; Bombay, October (A7tkerx) ; Bhutan ; Sikkim, April, 
November and December (4/d//er) ; Mundi, Masuri, Dinapore, Bholahat, Calcutta, Orissa, 
Bangalore. 
EXPANSE: @,1'5 to 1°73 9, 1°6 to 1'9 inches. 
DESCRIPTION : “ MALEand FEMALE, UPPERSIDE, doth wings violet-black, lower discal 
areas deep metallic-blue. UNDERSIDE, doth wings dark chestnut-brown. forewing with a white 
discoidal streak, a large disco-cellular spot, some transverse discal speckled spots, and lower 
submarginal lunular spots, posterior border also white. Hindwing with a basal slender white- 
speckled curved line, some sinuous lines below the cell, an indistinct discal and a submarginal 
lunular line, and slender marginal line, the discal and anal areas also minutely white-speckled ; 
anal lobe and spot beyond black.” 
“LARVA onisciform, dorsally thickened, sloping obliquely at each end; pale green, 
with rows of small circular spots and longitudinally intervening pale pink bands. Feeds on 
Ficus religiosa. PUPA short, very broad laterally ; purple-brown, with darker dorsal bands 
and segmental spots.” (JZoore, 1. c.) 
“The variety of the plate was drawn from a belief that there was only one species ; since 
then, Iam inclined to think that there are two. First, the Z. ¢imoleon of Stoll (a wretched 
figure), the insect figured by Dr. Boisduval, and the /. vochana of Horsfield and Moore, which 
agree in having the hindwing broad at the anal angle, with two slender tails ; and secondly, 
distinct from them, the figure in Donovan’s insects of China, the Z%ecla nila of Kollar, and the 
figure of the plate, which have the hindwing much more pointed at the anal angle and with 
one broad tail. The white spots on the underside of the hindwing of Z mecenas are much 
less distinctly defined, the large white spot near the base is shorter, the double zig-zag white 
lines which cross the wing in Z. ¢émoleon (converging into one) are scarcely seen in Z, macenas, 
and the slender white line which in /. ¢¢moleon connects the basal spot and the transverse 
lines is in Z. mtecenas represented by a round spot.” (Hewitson, 1. ¢.) 
With reference to the above remarks of Hewitson’s, I consider that the ¢imoleon of Stoll 
(a female), is distinct from the insect figured under that name by Boisduval (a female), the latter 
being the vochana of Horsfield (Moore figures the male). Mr. Hewitson does not seem to have 
appreciated the fact that the broad anal angle to the hindwing with two tails (sometimes three) 
are characters usually distinctive of the female, and that one tail (sometimes two) and a narrow 
hindwing denote a male. Again, I disagree with Mr. Hewitson in considering the mecenas of 
Donovan (a male) andthe w/a of Kollar (a male) the same : they represent distinct species. 
As I identify this species, there is no difficulty in distinguishing it ; on the underside of 
the hindwing in both sexes the prominent broad silvery subcostal streak at right angles to 
the body present in Z, ¢imolcon, Stoll, is absent, though usually its outline can be distinctly 
