The Butteo^flies of Chile. 279 



ocellus like that of scrvilia. As in that species there 

 is no sexual patch on the fore-wing of the male. It is 

 also somewhat like Argyro^iihcnga sim'plex., Butler, but 

 larger and much more rufous above, and has the hind- 

 wings of a different shape. I can find no described species 

 to which it can be referred in any collection. I took two 

 males and one female at the Bancs de Cauquenes on 

 December 15th, flying on a bushy hillside above the 

 Baths and settling on low trees. 



16. Neommnas ? edmondsii. 



Argyro'phenga edmondsii, Butl., t. c, p. 457, PI. XXI, 

 fig- 6. 

 I know this only from the very bad specimen in the 

 British Museum which Edmonds took in March 1880 in 

 woods below the Baths of Chilian. 



17. Ncomcenas ? huviilis. 



Stygnus humilis, Felder, t. c, p. 489. 



Butler identifies as above a distinct species with the 

 same markings as ambiorix, but the ocelli much smaller 

 and fainter. It can be distinofuished, however, I think 

 from amhioriv, certainly by the absence of any chocolate 

 colour in the fore-wing below, and by the rounder and less 

 pointed fore-wings. Edmonds found it common in woods 

 near Valdivia. I only took two or three males in forest 

 at Quillen and near Lake Alumine at about 3000 feet ; 

 these agree with Edmonds' specimens, which I have 

 compared with Felder's type and find identical. 



18. Cosmosatyrvs Iciitoneui^oides. (Plate XV, figs. 3 ^, 4 $, 



6?.) 

 Cosmosatyrus Icj^toneuroides, Felder, t. c. p. 495, $. 

 Satyrus antarctica, Reed, t. c., PI. II, fig. 4. 

 Tetraphlebia gcrmainii, id., t. c., explic. de las laminas, 



lam. ii, fig. 4. 

 1 = T. ]3lumhcola, Butler, Cat. Sat., p. 95, PL II, fig. 11 



(1868). 



I first took this species in the Renaico Valley at 

 Maitenes, a farm of Mr. Bussey's, about 2500 feet 

 elevation, when it was fresh out on January 24th, and 

 common in gras.sy openings in the woods. Afterwards it 



