186 Bulletin A?7}encan Museum of Natural History [Vol. XLIII 



This species is represented by a male and female,, the former cap- 

 tured at INIedje on May 25, the latter taken at the same place on June 

 21. 



(235) 15. Euryphene severini Aurivillius 



Euryphene severini Aurivillius, 1S97, Ofvers. Sv. Vet.-Akad. Forh., LIV, part 1, 

 p. 280, fig. 2, 9 ; 1898, Rhop. iEthiop., p. 200, Pi. in, fig. 10, d". 



Of this species there are thirteen males, all labelled as captured at 

 Medje in June, July, and August. With these males I associate five 

 females, taken at Medje in the same months, which agree almost 

 absolutely with the figure of this sex given by Aurivillius (loc. cit.), 

 save that in the specimens before me the apex of the fore wing is some- 

 what more pointed and not of precisely the shape given in the wood cut 

 supplied by Aurivillius. I can see no difference in other respects; the 

 markings are identical and, in spite of the fact that the fore wing of 

 these females is somewhat more like the female of E. sophus in showing a 

 tendency to become falcate at the tip, I am reasonably certain that my 

 reference is correct. It is to be observed that, while the fore wings are, 

 as I have said, falcate, thej' are rounded at the extreme apex and not 

 sharply acuminate as in sophus. 



(236) 16. Euryphene Isetitia Ploetz 



Euryphene Mitia Plcetz, 1880, Stett. Ent. Zeit., XLI, p. 192. Aurivillius, 1898, 

 Rhop. iEthiop., p. 200, PI. ii, fig. 2; 1912, Seitz, Gross-Schmett., XIII, p. 174, 

 PI. XLIC, d", 9 ■ 



I refer to this species two males taken at Medje on May 6, 1910. 

 While agreeing pretty thoroughly on the upper side with the figure of 

 the male given by Aurivillius, there are some minor discrepancies on the 

 under side of the wing but, without more material before me, I do not 

 feel justified in differentiating the insect from E. Icetitia, with which it 

 agrees more closely than with any other species hitherto described. 



In passing, I must call attention to the fact that Dr. Aurivillius is 

 quite in error in sinking my E. castanea (cf. Canadian Entomologist, 

 1893, XXV, p. 1) as a synonym of E. Iwtitia. It is totally distinct and, 

 had Dr. Aurivillius known it other than bj^ the verbal description I 

 published, he would not have included it under E. Icetitia. 



(237) 17. Euryphene sophus (Fabricius) 

 Papilio sophus Fabricius, 1793, Ent. 8yst., Ill, part 1. p. 46. 



Euryphene sophus Aurivillius, 1912, Seitz, Gross-Schmett., XIII, p. 174, PI. xlic. 



Two males and two females captured at Medje are referable to this 

 species. One of the males was caught on August 1, the other on Sep- 



