224 Dr.T, A. Chapman’s 
c.  . epistygne (Fig. 25). This species has 
the processes of the sickle rather short and thick; the 
clasp resembles that of tyndarus in having very few and 
very large styles. There is often a trace of styles along 
the body, which does not, I think, occur in the tyndarus 
group. The lobe is represented by one large style, which 
may have one or more small styles on its sloping sides. 
‘There may or may not be a style, if so, a large one, 
between the lobe and head; the head terminates in from 
two to four very large porrected styles. Both sickle and 
styles are large and massive. 
Group V. This is marked by having the neck much 
elongated, agreeing in this with the next group, and 
varying therefore from the manto form in precisely the 
contrary direction to group II and especially group III. 
The line of descent (or ascent), or, to avoid theory as to 
which is the central form, the connecting link, is in some 
such form as gorge in group IV. In the present group 
the neck is not only long but free from styles, whilst 
there is usually no difficulty in placing the lobe, though 
it may be reduced and free from styles. In group VI the 
neck has styles, and the lobe is difticult to locate. I place 
in this group a. neoridas, margarita, zapatert ; b. pronoe 
scipro, lefebvrer ; c. nerine, goante, stygne, eme ; d. lappona. 
a. 1. H. neoridas (Fig. 26). At the threshold 
of this group we meet a difficulty nearly as great as and 
of a similar kind to that in group I, viz., the distinction, if 
any, between the appendages of H. nearidas and E. pronoe. 
There is certainly no difficulty in separating the flies, 
although there is a close resemblance between the patterns 
of the underside of the hindwings. 
The clasps and sickles seem to be identical. There is 
this difference in the styles of a considerable proportion of 
specimens, that neoridas has the lobe represented by one 
prominent, large, rather porrected style, with some rather 
inconsiderable styles, basal to it and at an interval. Pronoe 
rather has this first large style broken down into a little 
group, and the basal series are rather larger and of similar 
size and importance to the other group. But the varia- 
tions certainly overlap. I may easily be wrong, but I 
think this is one of the instances where the identity (or 
nearly so) of the appendages does not justify our denying 
the distinctness of the species. 
