344 Mr. Roland Trimen on 



of the liinclwings is bounded (as in Agatldnd) by the 

 costal nervure, instead of extending suflusedly beyond it 

 as in Rhodojje ; Avhile the Avide suffusion from the base of 

 the forewings is but little wider and if anything less 

 bright than in Agaihina, though very much brighter and 

 broader than in the other two species. 



With respect to the ?s, that sex of P. Phileris is not 

 known to me;* but, as regards the remaining species, 

 JI(B?nus is more like Agathina than Rhodope in either ot 

 its forms. It is best distinguished from Agathina by (1) 

 the broader red suffusion from base ; (2) the white cloud- 

 ing of the nervures on disc; (3) the broader apical fuscous 

 and larger hind-marginal spots in the forewings ; and on 

 the underside by (5) the much paler and less yellow hind- 

 wings and apex of forewings, especially white on the hind- 

 marginal edge. Both forms of Rhodope, but particularly 

 that in Avhich the forewings are white {Poppea, Cram.), 

 are specially characterized by the enlarged hind-marginal 

 spots of the upiperside, which in the forewings form broad, 

 elongated nervular rays ; but on the underside the corre- 

 sponding spots are quite as in Hcemus excepting that they 

 are slightly larger. 



In both sexes of Hamus the wings are thinner and 

 weaker in structure than in Agathina, but not so delicate 

 and semitransparent as in Rhodope and Phileris. 



Hah. — Cape Colony: King William's Town (W. S. 

 M. D'Urban, ISdl, and R. Trimen, 1878) ; 

 Kei River (J. H. Bowker, 1875). 



Trans-Kei ; Bashee River (J. H. Bowker, 



1863). 



Zambesi (In Coll. W. C. Hewitson, 1867). 



* The butterfly associated with the ^ Phileris by Boisduval, and fi.irnrcd 

 in Faviie Ent. tie Madag. etc., pi. 2, f. 5, as the J of that species aj pears 

 to belong to a different section of the iicnus Picris. 



