of the Genus Hestia, §c. 47} 
11. Hestia Lynceus. 
Papilio Lynceus, Drury, Ins. ii. tab. vii. fig. 1 (1773). 
Hestia Lynceus, E. Doubleday, List Lep. Brit. Mus. pt. i. p. 52 
(1844) ; Doubleday and Hewitson, Gen. Diurn. Lepid. p. 95, 
n, 1 (1847); F. Moore, Cat. Lep. Mus. East Ind. Comp. 
p. 134, n. 268 (1857). 
Hestia Lyncea, Hubner, Verz. bek. Schmett. p. 15, n. 72 (1816). 
Idea Lyncea, Godart, Enc, Méth. ix. pp. 194,195, n. 2 (1819). 
Penang, Sumatra. B. M. 
Var. Papilio Idea, Stoll, Suppl. Cram. Pap. Exot. pl. xlii. fig. 1 
(1791.) 
Borneo. B. M: 
Var. Hestia Idea, Doubleday and Hewitson, Gen. Diurn. Lepid. 
pl. xiii. fig. 1 (1847). 
Malacca. Ba M. 
AsI have now completed (see Proc. Zoo]. Soc. 1866), the de- 
termination of the insects belonging to the family Danaide, I 
think it would be well to give a table of the species, exhibiting 
their relative position in the several genera, 
Many of the forms are very closely allied, and it is not impos- 
sible that, if we could know more of their transformations, we 
should be compelled to reduce the number of species to a con- 
siderable extent; I shall therefore bracket together such forms as 
may possibly be varieties or local modifications of one another. 
[The second part of the “ Novara Voyage’’ having recently arrived in 
England, I find many species, which I have described and figured in the 
“ Zoological Proceedings,” reproduced, the plates being dated as published 
in 1865. As no notice of these species appeared in the ‘‘ Zoological Record” 
for that year, and moreover as a notice of the publication of the first part in 
1865 did appear, I conclude that separate proofs of the plates were to be had 
for some time previous to their publication in the work; if I am correct in 
this supposition my species will certainly have the right of priority. This 
idea is strengthened by the notice upon the cover of the work, which states 
that the plates for the third part will be ready at the end of the year 1866. 
No coloured copies of the second part arrived until the latter end of January, 
1867; and I am infermed that the reply given in the early part of January, 
1867, by the publishers in Vienna, to an application then made for part ii., 
was to the effect that the part was not yet ready. 
I have not been able to recognize many of the closely allied species included 
in the above work, and shall therefore place them at the end of their respec- 
tive genera.— April, 1867.] 
