LYC^NID^. 
lOI 
Two dwarf $ s, from Cape Town and Graliamstown respectively, 
expand only i O and 9 lines across the fore- wings. 
Pupa. — Above bright yellowish-green ; beneath much paler, shining 
whitish -green ; semi-transparent, abdomen more opaque. On back an 
indistinct median thin fuscous line ; on this line, marking junction of 
thorax and abdomen, a conspicuous, oblong-ovate, salmon-pink, brown- 
edged spot ; on each side of abdomen a row of minute, indistinct, 
fuscous dots. About 4J lin. in length. 
The remains of a silken girth were attached on each side of the 
basal segment of the abdomen in the specimen here described, which 
was sent to me by the late Mr. Kay, on 23d October 1869, with the 
information that it had been found fastened to the upper side of the 
leaf of a Pelargonium in Cape Town. The imago (a $) emerged on the 
4th November. 
As noted by me (op. cit., p. 235), it was with considerable uncertainty 
that I referred this butterfly to the Polyommatus Emolus of Godart, and that 
I also suggested that the ^ might be the same as Lyccena Sichela, Wallen- 
gren. The late Mr. Hewitson adopted this latter suggestion in his Illustra- 
tions of Diurjial Lepidoptera ; but I have since discovered Sichela to be an 
entirely different insect, not belonging to the group Lycoinesthes. Godart 's 
Emolus, however, — described at p. 656 of Encyc. Method., tom. ix. — is very 
near to L. Liodes ; and I think that Mr. F. Moore's type of his genus 
Lyccenesthes, viz., L. Bengalensis — described in Proc. Zool. tSoc. Loud., 1865, 
p. 773 — is almost certainly the same as Godart's species, which is stated to be 
from Bengal. Bengalensis is described as expanding i\ in., and so should be 
a little larger than Liodes. Moore points out its alliance to Di2ysas lyca^no'ides 
of Felder (i860), and Hewitson (111. D. Lep., pp. 214, 219) treats the two as 
identical. Judging from Folder's figure {^^ Relse der Novara,'^ Zool., Lepid., 
ii. t. 30, f. 25) of the under side, and his description (p. 258) of the ^ , and 
Hewitson's figure {op. cit., pi. xcii. f. 39) of the 9 , I consider it very doubtful 
whether Lycoino'ides can be held synonymous with Moore's butterfly. I have 
examined the specimens of L. Liodes in the Hewitson Collection ; they are 
marked as from the Cape, and agree entirely with the Colonial examples 
above described ; and I think it very probable that the locality "Gaboon," 
assigned to the species in Hewitson's original diagnosis in 1874, and again in 
1878, was erroneous. 
Liodes belongs to the Sylvanus group of the genus ; it is considerably 
smaller than Sylvanus, and the is of a paler tint on the upper side, while 
the $ is much bluer, and has a well-marked discal fuscous fascia in the fore- 
wings, besides a much more developed one in the hind- wings. On the under 
side Liodes is distinguished by its much less distinct markings in the ^ , and 
especially by the absence in both sexes of the sub- basal transverse row of 
round spots in white rings. 
This is a common insect in and near Cape Town, frequenting gardens and 
open places in plantations. It visits many flowers, and is fond of sunning 
itself on oak-leaves. It is active and wary, and very swift in its short flights, 
reminding the collector of the species of Thecla. I have observed it on the 
wing throughout the year, except from the beginning of May to the middle 
of July. It was not uncommon near Graliamstown in January and February 
1870. I took it rarely near D' Urban, Natal, in March 1867. 
VOL. II. 
H 
