34:(j Un Rhopalocera from Brazil. 



vel ? " appear over " 18. 6. 29," and are encircled by a line 

 which also includes this date. It is somewhat strange that 

 he makes no reference, on either specimen or list, to the 

 similar pattern of 1441 — the other female of this species 

 captured by Burchell. 

 20. 6. 29. (J = 1437. Para. 



Westwood's list and label on 1440 record one other speci- 

 men of this date. It seems probable that he here accidentally 

 includes the date on 1348, a specimen of //. erato amazona 

 omitted from his list of this latter species. 

 Bz.+ 26. 6. 29. $ = 1438. " Paid, near my house (Pombo 



roqinha)." 

 26. 6. 29. 2 S = 1439, 1440. " Para*, near my house (Pombo 

 rccinha)." 



A Westwood's label on 1439 reads " T hales (Eueides)" 

 and one on 1440, " Oapt. 18. 6. 29; 20. 6. 29 (2 ind 8 .) ; 

 26. 6. 29 (3 ind 8 .); 1. 7. 29; 4. 7. 29." Westwood's list 

 agrees with this labtl. 4. 7. 29 is not found on any existing 

 Burchell specimen of this species. 



1. 7. 29. $ = 1441. Paid. " Walk to the Caza de Pao." 

 Bz.+ 8. 7. 29. S = 1442. Paul. 



This date is omitted from Westwood's list and from his 

 label on 1440, but is given for IJel. erato amazona, although 

 borne by no existing Burchell specimen of that species. It is 

 possible that there lias here been an accidental transposition 

 of specimens by Westwood himself, or of labels at some later 

 date. Another interpretation would be that "4. 7. 29" of 

 his list and label is an erroneous rendering of " 8. 7. 29." In 

 either case the locality is Paid. 



Westwood evidently at first mistook this species for a true 

 Ileliconius, and placed it, not in the list of " Acrcea &c," but 

 in that of" Hehconidai" next to the three species to which 

 it bears a strong superficial resemblance, viz. H. burneyi, 

 H. erato amazona, and //. melpomene tlielxiope. Further- 

 more, he entered " 7. 6. 29 " among the dates of the Eueidts, 

 but indicated by means of a line that it really belonged to 

 " tlielxiope." These facts increase the probability that an 

 accidental transference of the date of 1442 to the list of erato 

 amazona has taken place. 



Westwood's list agrees, except for the discrepancies above 

 alluded to. Opposite to the list of dates he wrote, "Eueides 

 T hales. Alis post 8 , rufo-radiatis. ftubtus al. post, maculis 

 marg. albis." 



