14 L. de Niceville — Butterflies of the subgenus Tronga. [No. 1, 



Wallengren, from China, the total number therefore remaining the same 

 as in 1883. 



Tn 1896, Mr. H. Frnhstorfer recorded E. (Tronga) kinhergi, 

 Wallengren, from the Tengger mountains, 2,000 feet. East Java. In 

 1898, Mr. Fruhstorfer described Tronga crameri tenggerensis, new sub- 

 species, from the same place. 



In 1896, Dr. B. Hagen described and figured an Uuplcea fagenstecheri 

 from I^awean Island, which lies midway between Borneo and Java. 

 The describer says it comes into Moore's genus Menama, which has in 

 the male an androconal patch of shining black scales on the upperside 

 of the hindwiijg behind tlie subcostal nervure towards the base of the 

 wing (not mentioned by Dr. Moore), this character being absent from the 

 genus Tronga. Dr. Hagen says it is allied to E. lorzse, Boisduval (a 

 MS. name only, the species should be credited to Dr. Moore, who first 

 described it). Mr. Fruhstorfer, however, makes it a local race of 

 Tronga crameri, Lucas. From the figure I should say that it is a 

 Menama rather than a Tronga, but it is impossible to be certain without 

 seeing a male specimen. 



In 1898, Dr. Hagen described Euploea {Tronga). mentaicica and 

 E. {T.) morrisi, from the Mentawej Islands, which lie to the south of 

 the centre of the island of Sumatra. 



In 1898, Mr. F. Fruhstorfer gave a list of the bultei flies of the 

 genus Tronga, and described Tronga crameri tenggerensis from the 

 Tengger mountains. East Java, 2,000 feet, and Tronga crameri, ab. 

 hiseriata, from East Java. It is not known to me if Mr. Fruhstorfer 

 considered in 1898 that his E. tenggerensis is the same species as the 

 E. hinhergi, Wallengren, he recorded in 1896 from the same spot. As 

 noted above, the latter was originally described from China. But he 

 remarks that the specimen in question appears to him to be a form of 

 the very variable female of Euploea {Isamia) rafflesi, Moore, described from 

 Java. He goes on to say that " In the British Museum E. hinhergi is 

 apparently by mistake labelled as coming from China," although 

 ifc was originally described from thence. In the same paper Mr. 

 Fruhstorfer notes that Euplosa (Tronga) hroohei, Moore, from Borneo is 

 identical with Euploea (Menama) lorzee, Moore, also from Borneo. This 

 is wholly wrong, the two species are absolutely distinct, and Dr. Moore 

 has correctly placed them in his genera Tronga and Menama respectively, 

 although he has omitted to describe the satiny shining black patch 

 of androconia on the upperside of the hindwing of the male by which 

 Menama can in that sex be at once distinguished from males of Tronga, 

 which lack this patch. Mr. Fruhstorfer further notes that it is 

 impossible to establish the genus Menama [as distinct from Tronga}, 



