1886.] MR. H.J. ELWES ON THE GENUS PARNASSIUS. 17 
Though the genus Parnassius has hitherto been included in the 
family of Papilionide, yet it seems to me worthy to constitute a 
separate family, comprising the genera Lurycus, which is confined to 
North Australia and New Guinea, Huryades, which is found in the 
‘Argentine States, and Liihdorfia, which is an inhabitant of the 
southern coasts of Amurland and probably North Japan. In making 
this proposal, I do so on the ground that the extraordinary appendages 
of the female abdomen, which are found in these four genera alone 
among the Rhopalocera, and which, though very different in structure, 
are apparently analogous, afford a character of at least as much, if 
not of greater, value in classification than the characters drawn from 
* legs, venation, antennee, or larval structure. 
And though my ignorance of larval characters among Lepidoptera 
generally, makes me unable to form an opinion as to their value for 
purposes of classification, yet they apparently lead to the grouping 
of very dissimilar forms. Mr. W. H. Edwards remarks on the 
subject in ‘ Papilio,’ vol. iii. p. 159 :—*I do not think, judging from 
the egg and young larva as I know them, and by the mature larva 
and pupa as figured in books, that Parnassius has any right among 
the Papilionidze. Under a system in which the preparatory stages 
were considered—and in the future we shall have to come to that—it 
would stand a long way from the Papilionide. The egg of smin- 
theus is like Lycena; of baldur like Chrysophanus ; the young larva 
is like some Nymphalidze (and perhaps Erycinidze), the mature larva 
more like a Heterocerous moth (in all but the tentacles), and the 
chrysalis like a Hesperian, or also perhaps some moths.”’ 
In 1870 the late Edward Newman published in the ‘ Entomo- 
logist ’ a system of classification for Butterflies, in which he places 
Parnassius in the second division of the Rhopalocera, which he 
called Celantes, forming with Doritis the Group A, Bombyciformes. 
The division is defined as follows :—‘“‘ Celantes, or those in which 
the larve, prior to changing to pupz, envelope themselves in a 
silken follicle or cocoon more or less compact; the pupz are 
generally without angles, like those of the genus Chelonia among the 
Sessiliventres.” The Bombyciformes are those in which the head 
of the larva “is smaller than the second segment, and the body is 
altogether that of the Bombyces. 'The Capitati, which form the 
second section of this division, are the Hesperidze, in which the head 
of the larva is larger than the second segment. 
Now, without expressing any opinion on the propriety of such a 
classification, it is clear that any arrangement which depends on 
larval characters must in the case of very many genera be con- 
jectural. Newman criticizes the classification of Kirby’s catalogue 
very unfavourably, saying that his subfamily Papilionine is entirely 
opposed to his own idea of natural arrangement. The genera 
Kirby included are Mesapia, Calinaga, Hypermnestra, Ismene, 
Doritis, Parnassius, Eurycus, Euryades, Sericinus, Thais, Teinopalpus, 
Papilio, and Leptocircus. 
Staudinger includes Parnassius with Papilio, Thais, Ismene, and 
Doritis, in his family Papilionide, which comes at the head of the 
Proc. Zoou. Soc.— 1886, No. II. 2 
