92 NATURAL ARRANGEMENT OP INSECTS. 



forms of the larva and pupa in this family, we may cite 

 that of the peacock butterfly (a), which agrees with the 

 general structure above described; but those of the 

 purple emperor (&) are seen to be totally different ; al- 

 though the two species, in their perfect state, obviously 

 belong to the same division. In the genus Acrea, again, 

 the larva (c) resembles that of the peacock, while the 

 perfect insects are totally dissimilar. In the American 

 genus Euplosa (cC), which we place, without doubt, in 

 this family, the caterpillar is furnished with two pair 

 of fleshy processes, one towards the head, and another 

 near the tail ; sometimes the back is furnished with 

 another pair : these processes obviously represent the 

 tufts of hair upon the clear-winged Zyganidce of Brazil, 

 and indicate a very close affinity with them. The pupa, 

 which is smooth, is suspended downwards, and clearly 

 belongs to this division.* 



(84.) The NYMPHALID^:, as a whole, have been 

 considered the typical or most perfect family of diurnal 

 butterflies. On this subject, we had long ago remarked, 

 ce If strength of body, rapidity of flight, or brilliancy 

 of colouring, were sufficient to constitute the typical 

 perfections of the diurnal Lepidoptera, the award of su- 

 periority would undoubtedly be conferred upon this 

 group, did they not show a decided inferiority to the 

 last family, in their less perfect construction. The an- 

 terior legs are destitute of claws, and are so short, as to 

 appear at first sight perfectly useless." f Now, this 

 peculiar structure of the feet, although, no doubt, admir- 

 ably adapted to some unknown habits of the insects, is 

 nevertheless, in one sense, an imperfection, when com- 



* Dr. Horsfield's illustration of his system, from placing full confidence 

 in the nomenclature of M. Latreille, is unfortunately defective. The larva 

 he has figured at pi. 3. fig. 18. of his beautiful work, taken from Stoll, as an 

 example of Beliconto, is that of an Erycina. Again, fig. 20. on the same 

 plate, copied from the same work, is not a Heliconia, but is that of Acrea 

 Thalia, an insect we have seen by thousands in Brazil ; while that at fig. 

 19. called by Latreille a Heliconia, is that of our Licinia Amphione already 

 given in this chapter. (Zoo/. III. ii. pi. 91.) The truth is, that we are 

 perfectly unacquainted with the larva of a single species of Heliconia. It 

 is entirely an American group, and altogether tropical. We have fre- 

 quently met with the chrysalis (e) t but never with the larva. 



t Phil. Mag. March, 1827. 



