138 Bulletin American Museum of Natural History [Vol. XLIII 



linge des Afrikanischen Faunengebietes,' p. 91), but they differ from M . 

 haumanni in not having the transverse bands on the under side of the 

 fore and hind wings strongly produced on vein 4. This band has its 

 outer margin more or less irregular, and its course recalls that of the 

 band on the under side of M. sandace Hewitson, with which the speci- 

 mens otherwise have nothing to do, as is shown by the sexual brands 

 and the entire absence of ocelli on the upper side of the primaries. 



The specimens are not, for the most part, ver}'- well preserved, some 

 of them being rather badly rubbed, making the determination of the 

 exact pattern of the markings a little difficult to determine, but I do 

 not feel like hazarding their description as a new species, though eventu- 

 ally they may turn out to be undescribed. 



The specunens were taken at Meclje, one in April, the others at 

 dates ranging from July to September. 



(91) 19. Mycalesis milyas Hewitson (?) 



Mycalesis milyas Hewitson, 1864, Exot. Butt., Ill, Mycalesis, PI. vi, fig. 34. 

 AuRiviLLius, 1911, Seitz, Gross-Schmett., XIII, p. 92, PI. xxviig'. 



I refer with great doubt a rubbed male and a rather poorly preserved 

 female to this species. The male was taken at Medje in September 

 1910, the female in July. 



The description and figure of M. milyas given by Hewitson 

 {loc. cit.) leave much to be desired. The figure given by Aurivillius on 

 Plate xxvii of 'Die Gross-Schmetterlinge des Afrikanischen Faunen- 

 gebietes' more nearly represents the under side of the specimens under 

 consideration, but his description does not agree either with the figure 

 he gives or the specimens before me. I have in my possession a male 

 taken at Efulen by A. C. Good, and there are in the Carnegie Museum 

 some specimens taken by A. C. Good at Lolodorf, which are identical 

 with the insect taken at Medje. I have assigned all of them to M. 

 milyas with a double interrogation mark, as they do not perfectly agree 

 either with the descriptions or figures hitherto given by authors, al- 

 though they come nearer to that species than to any other. 



(92) 20. Mycalesis pavonis Butler 



Mycalesis pavonis Butler, 1876, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., (4) XVIII, p. 481- 

 Aurivillius, 1911, Seitz, Gross-Schmett., XIII, p. 92. 



There are seven males and three females of this well-marked species > 

 all taken at Faradje in November and December. 



