( 660 ) 



intergradaHoiis turn nji rather frequently. The Iiido-Malayan sjiecimens am 

 generally dark-tailed, those from the Papuan Subregion as a rule yellow-tailed, but 

 the subspecies from Lifu, Loyalty Islands, is again dark-tailed. 



A more than usual amount of nomenclatorial muddle attaches to this species. 

 Biiisduval named in manuscript as cori/thns a small species dealt with in the 

 present Revision as pi/rrltostida. Walker adojited Boisduval's name, but applied 

 it to a motley of at least three widely different species, treating as " var. /3 " 

 what Boisduval had named corythns in the Museum's collection. This was in 18.')6. 

 Moore, in 1857, in the Catalog iic of the Lep. of the East India <'ompamj,\).2G'l, 

 ajiplied the name of con/thns to individuals from Java, Caiiara, Darjceling, and 

 Ladakli, probably a mi.xture of species, and added a manuscript name of Horstield's, 

 M. arcuatum. In 187.5 Boisduval published his notes made about thirty years 

 before at the British Museum, regardless of which species Walker had actually 

 described, taking it for granted that Walker had in every case applied the 

 manuscrijit name to that species for which it was originally intended by Boisduval. 

 In this work corijthm is the insect described shortly afterwards by Butler as 

 pi/rrhosticta, agreeing with Walker's " var. /S." of conjthm. In the Revision of 

 the Sjihitigidac in 1877 Butler says that the labels to gilia and cori/tlias were 

 transposed in the cabinet ; but as he gives under (jilia only the locality Silhet 

 (Stainsforth), which Walker mentioned under corijthus var. /8 and not under gilia, 

 Butler was evidently wrong in the supposition of the labels having become changed, 

 i.e. the alteration of the labelling carried out by Bntlor was erroneous. Further, 

 the specimens first enumerated by Walker under conjthns were described by Butler 

 iu IS75 as proxima, coming from Canara and Ceylon, to which localities he added 

 in 1877 iSilhet, having, however, described in 1870 as luteata another Silhet 

 individual of the same species. Thus Butler restricted cori/tlias to the two Java 

 iudividuals "f. /'." under Walker's description. In Hampson, 1892, the name of 

 cor>/flcus appears as a synonym of a sjiecies totally difl'erent again from all the 

 forms covered by Walker's name conjthas. This is not all — the Java insect to 

 ■which Butler restricted the name of cori/tlui.-i in 1875, was shortly before wrongly 

 identified and described by Boisduval as Walker's iliiwrgenf:, and then renamed 

 ■promethetis, Boisduval always adding his beloved manuscriirt names to the names 

 already published by others. 



Now to which insect must AValker's name of roryfhits be restricted ? Certainly 

 not to his " var. /3," as the variety cannot be typical. Then there remain two 

 si)ecies. The second was named promctlieus by Boisduval, and the first proxima 

 by Butler shortly after. Walker's description agrees with both species and others 

 besides except in one point, namely in the remark that the luteous band of the 

 hindwiug is occasionally interrupted. This character only fits the species of which 

 various subsjiecies have subsei|uently been described as pgleiie, Ixteata, fulci- 

 caiulata, etc., etc., and not the species called by Boisduval prometheus and treated by 

 Butler as corythus. Besides, Ceylon and Canara are the first localities mentioned 

 by Walker, which alone would settle the (juestion for ns in this sense that cori/thas 

 of Walker (IsoO, Ceylon, Cauara) and Butler's pntxiiD/i (lt>75, Caiuu-a, Ceylon) 

 are identical. 



«. M. cori/thus platijxanthuiii subsp. nov. (PI. IV. f. 1, i). 



i % . .Similar to .1/. cori/tliii.-t luteata, but the yellow band of the hindwiug 

 broader, the Idack bordei' nurmwer at anal angle ; the basal area below shaded with 



