LYCENID. TAJURIA. 385 
**Most nearly allied to the ‘ Zolaws’ ister of Hewitson*, from ‘India,’ but differing theres 
from in its broader wings, the apex of the forewing less acute, the outer margin convex, the blue 
coloration of the upperside deeper and richer in shade and confined to the basal and discal 
areas of the wings (all these are female characters) ; the markings of the underside much 
the same, but the discal line on the forewing considerably further from the margin, rather 
less so on the hindwing. I have described this species with some hesitation, solely owing 
to the fact that Hewitson, in describing Z, zsfer, seems to have gone out of his way to empha- 
size the fact that his species was described from a female ; judging from his figure alone, I 
should have said that it was taken from a male, and that my specimen (which is unquestionably 
a female) was the opposite sex. The matter must remain in abeyance till some one will 
examine the sex of Hewitson’s type.’’+ 
* Described from a single example in the collection of Mr. Otto Moller.” (de Nicéville, 
1. c. in Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond.) 
The figure shews both sides of the male type specimen from Sikkim, in the collection 
of Mr. Otto Moller. 
I give as a foot-note belowt a description of the genus Purlisa of Distant. It is 
monotypic, and occurs at Penang in the Malay Peninsula. Mr. Distant places the genus between 
Neomyrina, Distant, and Cheritva, Moore, both of which come into my J/yrina group, which is 
characterised by having the one or the other of its tails over half an inch in length. Judging 
from the figures of Puriisa gigantea, Distant, it appears to resemble most closely some of the 
* I have shewn before (azve, p. 344), and since the above was written, that the ‘‘ Jodaus ” ister of Hewitson 
is probably nothing but a varietal form of the female of Casnena cleobis, Godart. 
t+ Ihave no doubt now that the type of /o/aus ister isa female, as Mr. Hewitson states : the female of 
C. cleobis, in the absence of its male, would probably be taken for a male by most entomologists. 
t Genus Purlisa, Distant. Pxurlisa, Distant, Rhop. Malay., p. 249 (1885). ‘! FoREwING, subtriangular ; 
apex subacute ; costal margin arched and convex ; exter margin nearly straight, very slightly concave ; zmmer 
margin nearly straight, very slightly concavely sinuate ; costa? me»vure short, terminating on the costa before 
the end of the cell [this is unusual] ; /27s¢ sudcostal nervule emitted near the middle of the cell and terminating 
on the costa a little beyond the end of the cell [unusually short] ; secozd subcostal emitted about midway between 
the bases of the first and third ; ¢hivd subcostal emitted a little before the end ofthe cell ; third and fourth 
subcostals bifurcating at about two-thirds the length of the third ; ¢hzvd median nervule curved and emitted from 
the end of the cell ; second and first median nervules straight, and nearly twice the distance apart as second is 
from third. Hinpwina, elongately and irregularly subtriangular, costa convex, fosterzor margin oblique, addo- 
minal margin acutely cleft near the anal angle, fosterzory margin with a long Za7/ at the apex of the submedian 
nervure, and a short one at the apex of the first median nervule ; costal ner vure not quite reaching the apex of 
the wing, sudcostad nervules bifurcating a little before the end of the cell, ¢hz7d and second median nervules with 
an apparently common origin near the end of thecell. a/#z long and porrect, second joint robust, clothed with 
shert adpressed hairs, and extending more than half its length in front of the eyes, apical joint moderately slender 
and about half the length of the second. Antexn@ with a very slender and gradually-formed apical club.” 
“* Although the name of this genus has appeared before ( ‘ Aid to the Identification of Insects,’ vol. i, plate 
xlvi), it has not been previously described, and was used by Mr. Waterhouse in error. I originally described 
the typical species under the name of Jolaus (Purlisa) giganteus, the name Purlisa being a proposal of 
Mr. Moore, but in ‘Aid’ the name ‘ Jo/aus’ was discarded, and the hitherto unpublished name of ‘ Purlisa? 
alone substituted.” (Dzstant, 1, c.) 
Purlisa gigantea, Distant. Jolaus (Purlisa) giganteus, Distant, Ent. Month. Mag., vol. xvii, p. 245 
(1881) ; Purlisa gigantea, Waterhouse, Aid, vol. i, pl. xlvi (1882); id., Distant, Rhop. Malay., p. 250, n. 1, 
pl. xxi, fig. 28 (1885). Hapirar: Penang. ExpaNnse: 2°05 inches. Description: ‘* UppERSIDE, doth 
wings brilliant cerulean-blue. Hovewing, costal margin to about one-third from the base broadly hoary-grey 3 
remainder of costal margin, apical third and outer margin dark fuscous. This dark fuscous portion occupies rather 
more than one-third of the wing, commencing at the costa it is curved downwards past the end of the cell, gradually 
narrowing and terminating near the posterior angle on the inner margin. Aindwing bi-caudate, with the outer 
margin broadly dark fuscous, terminating at the anal angle with a lunulate fuscous spot, irrorated with blue scales, 
outwardly margined with white, followed by the dark line separating the cz/za, which are white. Taz/s fuscous, 
bordered with a white fringe. Aédomen and inner margin of wings hoary and pilose. UNpsrsSIDE, doth wings 
smoky-grey, crossed by a submarginal narrow dark fascia, commencing about midway between the end of the cell 
and the margin, which is sharply defined outwardly, and evanescent inwardly, waved, but entire on the forewing, 
but deeply sinuate towards the apex of the hindwing ; a pale marginal border containing some obscure lunulate 
marks on the forewing, and a double row of smoky sublunulate marks on the Aixdwing ; a black spot faintly 
margined with blue before the base of the first tail, and a larger spot of the same colour at the anal angle ; c7/za of 
the forewing concolorous, of the hindwing white.” (Dzstan¢, 1. c. in Ent. Month. Mag.) 
“This appears to be an exceedingly rare species. I possess but one specimen, and the only other example 
which I have seen is a much mutilated and unlocalised one in the collection of Mr. F. Moore, where it has been 
for the last twenty years. During this time it has frequently excited the interest of the owner and the late 
Mr. Hewitson, but its condition prevented its proper determination.’’ (Déstant, |. c. in Rhop. Malay.) 
I have not seen this species. The sex of the specimens described is not stated, and it would be hazardous 
even to guess from the figures and descriptions what sex they may be, 
