4 Mr. H. Eltringham's Monograiih of the 



based on an inadequate study of these structures. His 

 groups are, (1) Solcnitcs, in which tlie ventral part of the 

 termination of tlie male abdomen is occupied by a chitinous 

 plate curved round in the form of a tube, the orifice of 

 which is closed by the uncus. He gives A. igati as a 

 type of this formation. (2) Phanopeltis, which includes 

 A. ranavalona. (3) Ai^liunopcltis, in which the plate 

 is reduced to a structure of variable form. This group 

 includes lioria, zetcs, egina, and pscudegina. (4) Acraea. 

 The impossibility of these groups is evident from the 

 instability of the characters suggested. Schatz and 

 RiJber recognise five groups but admit that they are 

 but slightly separated. The characters given are for the 

 most part inconstant. Careful examination of all the 

 features which have been utilised in the past for the 

 purpose of subdividing the genus convinces me that they 

 do not in fact provide grounds for such subdivision. 

 Acraea is distinct from Flancma, as Professor Aurivillius 

 has pointed out in his " Khopalocera Aethiopica." The 

 latter genus may be known by the palpi, which are black 

 with a lateral grey line ; by the position of the first branch 

 of the fore-wing subcostal, which is given off at or beyond 

 the end of the cell ; and by the relatively much smaller dis- 

 coidal cell in the hind-wing. The pupae of Planema are 

 also distinguished by the presence of long hooked spines 

 which appear never to be present in Acraea. As to the 

 genus Farclopsis, the only reason for associating it with 

 the Acraeinac seems to be the closed condition of the hind- 

 wing cell. The one known species of the genus was 

 originally included in Acraea because it looked like a 

 member of that genus — the worst of all possible reasons. 

 Trimen separated it and founded the genus Fardopsis, 

 pointing out the very curious neuration of the fore-wing. 

 That author, however, states that the legs are as in Acraea, 

 an error very easily made, even by an acute observer, if 

 opportunities were unavailable for the microscopic study of 

 these appendages. The fore-feet are of the usual Nymph- 

 alid kind, but the middle- and hind-feet have the tarsal 

 extremities of a structure quite different from that in 

 Acraea. The claws are slender and without the character- 

 istic lobes, whilst there is a well-developed pulvillus, and 

 peculiar curved and flattened spines on each side some- 

 what resembling true paronychia. Unless the closed 

 hind-wing cell can be shown to be of special taxonomic 



