OF ARTS AND SCIENCES. 



293 



The following species of butterflies, mentioned as types of genera, were un- 

 published at the time of the issue of Kirby's Catalogue : 



Thaidina, of Armandia (Blanch.), 1871. 

 tractipennis, Arteurotia(Butl.-Druce), 1872. 

 Lidderdali, Bhutanitis (Atkins. ), 1873. 

 Juventus, Callimormus (Scudd)., 1872. 

 Leonata, Druciria (Butl.), 1872. 

 Darwinia, Mimacraea (Bull.), 1872. 



Poweshiek, of Oarisma (Scudd.), 1872. 

 [oolitica, P{ilBontina(Butl.), 1873.] 

 Leda, Periplysia (Gerst.), 1871. 



Aetta, Pteronyinia(Butl.-Druce), 1872. 

 Reynesii, Satyrites (Scudd.), 1872. 

 Hermina, Scalidoneura (Butl ), 1871. 



ADDENDA. (MARCH, 1875.) 



46. ALCIDIS. This name was introduced by an accidental error. Liris is not 



a butterfly, and was not given as one by Felder. 



152. Aunoxis. Add: 1835. Vill.-Guen., Lep. Eur. 36: employs it for roboris 

 (Evippus). 1862. Kirb., Man. Eur. Butt. 87 : roboris. 



256 bis. CIIORTOBIUS.* 



1859. [Gue'n. in] Doubl , List Brit. Lep. Ed. 2: Typhon (Davus), Pamphilus. 

 Fide Kirby in litt. Falls before Coenonympha. 



302. CUPIDO. Add: 1870. Kirb., Journ. Linn. ISoc. Zool. x. 499: says, "The 

 true type appears to be Alsus;" because, he writes me in explanation, 

 " Schrank confounds Alsus and Argiades as sexes under his Puer," the 

 name Puer being presumed to have suggested Cupido ; but this seems to 

 me rather strained. 



305. CYANIKIS. Add: 1835. Vill.-Guen., Lep. Eur. 19: employ it for Cory- 

 don, Argiolus, and others. 



492. H^EMOKIDES. Mr. Kirby writes me: "Cramer figures two species as 

 Cronis, one a Castnian, the other a Pierid. Boisduval and I take this 

 to be a case of mimicry ; but Butler considers both figures to represent 

 the Castnian." 



510. HEI.IOCHROMA. 1870. Butl., Lep. Exot. 70: says, "The genus Helio- 

 chroina will, I think, have to sink into a section of Hesperocharis. I can 

 find no constant structural characters by which to separate it." 



581. ITHOMIA. With regard to the text of Hiibner's Sammlung exotischer 

 Schmetterlinge, it may be remarked that the twelve species described in 

 it are all figured in the first volume, and all referred to in the Index of 

 244 plates. And inasmuch as in every case of alteration of the specific- 

 name, the Index is followed, we may conclude the text of the Sammlung 

 to be posterior to, or most probably nearly synchronous with, the Index, 

 namely, 1822. The genus in which Dianasa is placed is spelled Eieides, 

 as in the Index, and not Eueides as in the Verzeichniss ; and further 

 proof that it is later than the Verzeichniss is found in the entire absence 

 of one of the species (and its generic name) from the latter, Helio- 

 chlaena Leucosia. 



633. LIMENITIS. Mr. Kirby writes me that the Camilla of early British authors 

 is not that of Fabricius, and cannot therefore be taken as type. But inas- 

 much as it was a strictly congeneric insect (Sibylla), the question is not 

 affected by this fact. 



755 bis. NTMPHA.* 



1838-9. Krause, Faun. Thur., wrapper parts 4, 5: proposes it to include all the 

 European Nymphales. Mr. Kirby, from whom this information is de- 

 rived, appears sometimes to write it Nympha, sometimes Nymphae. The 

 latter form would be inadmissible in a generic name, and is also given 

 earlier by Borkhausen (Eur. Schmett., Einl. xvii.) as a name for the whole 

 family. Mr. Kirby adds : " On p. 85, populi is clearly, as I think, indi- 

 cated as type." In that case the name would fall be'bre Najas. 



861. PHRISSURA. Add: 1871. Butl., Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond. 171: says the 

 insect upon which he intended to found this genus was -ZEgis (lllana), 

 which at the time lie wrongly identified as Cynis. 



