Monograph of the gcnvs Catochrysops Boisdvval. 361 



Genitalia. Harpagines shoit, broadish, somewhat constricted at 

 about two-thirds the length, then expanding somewhat into a 

 rounded apex shortly and strongly dentate all round the curve ; an 

 abundant supply of long strong bristles; anellus with the front 

 edge rounded ; the aedoeagus is short and broad ; cingulum shortish, 

 rather narrow angled forward at a third from the base ; tegumen a 

 narrow raised ridge at the rear, with lobe-shaped cheeks of but 

 moderate size having a small supply of fine bristles; falces long 

 and strong. 



Androconia very plentiful, slightly variable in size, pomegranate- 

 shaped with longish attachment stalk ; thirteen rows of reticulations 

 fairly v/ell separated, whose sculpturing is deep and placed moder- 

 ately near together. 



The androconia of brunnens differ from those of osiris ; 

 they are far from plentiful, of an oblong shape tapering 

 off to the attachment stalk, whose stem is not long, 

 with eleven or twelve rows of reticulations fairly close 

 together, and whose deep sculpturing is also close together. 



Euchrysops brunneus, sp. n. Plates XXV, fig. 62; XXXIl, 



fig. 61. 



cj Upperside, both wings brown with a slight reddish tinge and 

 a slight bronze lustre; a large orange anal patch, in which are two 

 well-defmed black terminal spots. Underside not so pale as in 

 osiris and with the pattern darker also ; otherwise like osiris. 



$. Like osiris. 



This is a very well-marked race obtaining in the moun- 

 tains around Nairobi. I have a long series, and they are 

 all quite uniform ; it appears to be a more robust insect 

 than osiris, the average of both sexes being larger. 



Hab. Nairobi District, B.E.A. 



Types in my collection. 



At first I thought this species was merely a local race of 

 E. osiris, but the androconia are so markedly different, as 

 detailed under the previous species, that I feel compelled 

 to separate them. The genitalia are also slightly different ; 

 the shape of the harpagines is not the same, botli in the 

 curves and in the apices, whilst the aedoeagus and the 

 anellus are also slightly different. 



In closing this monograph it will be well to again draw 

 attention to the figure of the genitalia of Catochrysops 



