26 DR. W. J. HOLLAND ON THE AFRICAN [Jan. 14, 
93. H. atveus, Hiibn., var. onoporp1, Ramb. 
Syrichthus onopordi, Ramb. Faun. And. pl. viii. fig. 18 (1839). 
For fuller synonymy ef. standard works on the Lepidoptera of 
the palearctic faunal region. 
Hab. North Africa. 
94. H. (?) ormuvs, Linn. 
Papilio oileus, Linn. Syst. Nat. i. 2, p. 795, no. 269 (1767). 
Hesperia oileus, Kirby, Syn. Cat. p. 615 (1871). 
Hab. Algeria (Kirby). 
* This is a doubtful species, and it does not appear that any one 
has been able to discover exactly what Linnzus intended to 
designate by his name and description. Nominis wmbra!! 
CarcHaropvus, Hiibn. 
(Urbanus, Hiibn. ; Spilothyrus, Dup.) 
95. C. aLcEa, Esp. 
Papilio alcee, Bur. Schmett. i. 2, pl. li. fig. 3 (1780). 
For further synonymy see standard works on the Lepidoptera 
of the palearctic faunal region. 
' Hab. North Africa. 
96. C. EnMA, Trim. 
Pyrgus elma, Trim. Trans. Ent. Soe. Lond. (3) vol. i. p. 288 
(1862) ; Rhop. Afr, Austr. vol. ii. p. 291, pl. v. fig. 8 (1866) ; 
S. Afr. Butt. vol. iii. p. 293. 
Gomalia elma, Watson, P. Z. S. 1893, p. 67. 
Pyrgus elma, Karsch, Berl. Ent. Zeit. vol. xxxvili. p. 245, pl. vi. 
fig. 12. 
Hab. Southern Africa. 
I place this insect in the genus Carcharodus, Hiibn., rather than 
in the genus Gomalia, Moore, to which it bas been assigned by 
Mr. Watson, because the differences of a structural character 
which separate it from its near allies, C. alcew and C. lavatere, are,’ 
in my opinion, too slight to warrant the subdivision. In fact, I 
call in question the propriety of retaining the name Gomalia as a 
generic designation, it being founded upon differences which 
appear to me to be rather specific than generic. I am quite 
persuaded that Gomalia albofasciata, Moore, the type of his genus, 
belongs to the older genus of Hiibner, and I think Gomalia should 
be sunk as a synonym of Carcharodus. 
The figure given by Karsch is by no means characteristic. The 
checkered character of the fringes is not made to appear, and 
were not the identification made by Karsch so positive, I should 
think we were dealing with some other species, belonging, perhaps,- 
to a different genus. 
