a Group of Lycaenid Butterflies. 489 
nification, which their real names, if I knew them, have 
not. 
Sangra is certainly a form of lahradics, but then Idbradus 
is a name up to the present understood to signify the 
quite Southern Polynesian and Australian forms, and its 
occurrence in Java, Sumatra, and India has not been 
recognised. 
Then the name otis has been applied to a supposed 
species consisting of both sangra and indica. My real 
difficulty in regard to names is in fact that I have no idea 
what otis is. If otis = sangra, then the two Indian forms 
are lahradus and indica, but if otis = indica, then the real 
names are lahradus and otis. I don’t know that this 
difficulty can be solved without reference to the type 
specimen of otis, if it exist. 
I am, no doubt, to blame for not following this point 
up, since it is not a valid excuse that I interest myself 
more in the facts than the names; it is, however, an 
explanation. 
I shall call the species (1) lahradus, with its vars. sangra 
and dryina ; and (2) indica, the latter purely for con¬ 
venience and clearness until the real value of otis as a 
name is decided. 
If we may attach any value to Bingham’s remark that 
sangra and dccreta are slight varieties of otis, but that 
indica may be separated by the larger size of the spots, 
we must conclude that otis = lahradus and indica stands 
good as the name of the other species. The Fabrician 
description also rather favours sangra than indica, and the 
habitat China seems to exclude indica, which happens to 
be very descriptively named, hardly occurring out of 
India. 
De Niceville and Bingham recognised only one species, 
and this they agreed must be otis, of which therefore 
sangra and indica were both synonyms. Butler referred 
sangra to otis, retaining indica as a separate species. In 
making two species Butler was here unquestionably right. 
In working the matter out, I found that Moore’s sangra 
was rarer in India than indica, and was represented in his 
collection by only a few specimens; I concluded,therefore, 
that otis was the common (Indian) species indica. 
This is contrary to Butler’s conclusion, and I fancy to 
the belief of others, if those can be said to have a belief 
who recognise otis only. Mr. Butler’s distinction between 
