43 



casual glance, appear identical, but which belong to distinct groups, especially distinguished 

 by the neuration of their wings, but when we consider the almost perfect identity, in the 

 very peculiar markings and colours, of these two supposed distinct insects, the identity in 

 the nerves of their wings ;* the slight scruple which the old collectors had in patching up 

 their insects, and the truncation of the hind wings in Drm-y"s figure, which may be exactly 

 imitated by placing a slip of paper over the tails of perfect tailed specimens of Rhipheus, 

 I think we are authorised in rejecting, without hesitation, the views of Mr. Swainson. 



That this group of insects is one of the most interesting amongst the Lepidoptera, and 

 at the same time exceedingly difficult, with respect to its natural relations, cannot be 

 denied. Modern authors, Mr. Swainson observes, have been unfortunate in their location 

 of this group, of course alluding to its being placed by Latrielle in the family Hesperiida;. 

 Mr. Swainson, however, is not less unfortunate in his introduction of it into the familv 

 Papilionidae, with which the structure of the fore legs is said peculiarly to rank it. This 

 character, nevertheless, together vidth its day-flying habits and brilliant colours, are the onlv 

 points in which an affinity can be traced between the Papilionidse and Uraniidae. But the 

 structure of the hind legs (having spurs in the middle, as well as at the tips of the tibise), 

 and of the nerves of the wings, antennge, and palpi, all exhibit a very slight degree of rela- 

 tionship with Papilio. Mr. Swainson has, indeed, endeavoured to make the affinity more 

 evident by introducing Papilio Curius, Fabr. as a subgenus (Leptocircus) in the genus 

 Leilus (or Urania), but the relationship between these is of the slightest and most unsatis- 

 factory kind. Mr. Newman has suggested another view of the affinities of this group. In 

 his sketch of the circular distribution of the Lepidoptera,t he has introduced into the But- 

 terfly circle, the genera Coronis and Urania, the last forming the connecting link Avith the 

 Geometridse, by Leach's genus Ourapteryx, or the Swallow-tail Moth. The whole struc- 

 ture of the latter insect indicates, however, most clearly that the relation is but an analooical 

 one. Had, indeed, the observations of M. Sganzin,! relative to the transformations of 

 Urania Rhipheus been confirmed, this would certainly have been its more appropriate 

 locality, its caterpillar being said by him to be a semi-looper, and its chrysalis to be 

 naked, suspended by the tail, and girt round the centre. But the elaborate memoir of 

 Mr. MacLeay,§ upon the habits and changes of Urania Fernandinse, prove most clearly 

 that the larva closely resembles that of Agarista ;|| and that the pupa, as in that genus, is 

 inclosed in a cocoon. Now this latter character exists in some species of Hesperia. In 

 these, however, the chrysalis is still attached by its tail. Mr. MacLeay does not mention 

 whether such is the case in Urania ; but since his return from Cuba he has had the kind- 

 ness to shew me the cocoon, and to inform me that the chrysalis is loose. This character, 



* Mr. Swainsoa's figure of Leilus oi'ientalis is incorrect in tliis respect. 

 t Spliinx Vespiformis, an Essay, table opposite p. 31. 



t Anomalie du Genre Urania par M. Boistluval Ann. Soc. Ent. France, 1834, p. 248. 

 § Trans. Zool. Soc. Lond. vol. i. 



II Figured by Lewin in his Lepidopt. of New Holland, and republished by Gueriu Icon. Regue. An. Ins. pi. 83. fig. 2. 



G 2 



