249 
of the Group Cerambycinge. 
The genus may be distinguished from Taurotagus by the 
length and obliquity of the mandibles in the male and the 
tubercle with which they are each furnished externally near 
the base. The legs, too, are more elongate and not so robust 
as in Taurotagus . Lacordaire gives as a further difference 
that the prosternal process in Taurotagus is truncate and 
vertical behind, in Ccelodon strongly arched. But in no 
species of Taurotagus that I have seen can the prosternal 
process be strictly said to be truncate behind. In some of 
the specimens of Taurotagus Irevipennis (recently described 
by me in the 6 Transactions of the Entomological Society ’) 
the prosternal process approaches this condition ; but in others 
it is merely very strongly arched, and appears somewhat 
vertical behind. The same is probably the case with Tauro- 
' tagus Klugii of Lacordaire. Specimens of Hammaticherus 
Klugii , Dup., MS., from Natal, while answering in every 
other respect to Lacordaire’s description, disagree with it in 
having the prosternal process strongly arched and not trun- 
cate behind ; and in some specimens the prosternal process 
bears a feeble median tubercle behind. The distinction there- 
fore drawn from the form of the prosternum is of little or no 
value. 
Neocekambyx, Thoms. 
Authors have not been in agreement as to the limits of this 
genus, some restricting it to one or two species, others including 
in it species that had been previously rejected and placed in 
Pachydissus ) the result being that in our present catalogues 
we have closely allied species placed some in one genus and 
some in the other, and even the same species occurring in both 
genera under different names. To avoid this confusion, 
which makes the determination of species more difficult, I 
have brought together, under the generic name of PEolesthes , 
most of those species of Neocerambyx about the position of 
which there was a doubt. 
The Gantori of Hope will be better placed in Gerambyx , 
Serv., than in Neocerambyx , where Lacordaire thought it 
should go. It has as a synonym C. scabricollis , Chevr. 
Pachydissus gigas , Thoms., — the largest and one of the most 
beautiful species of the whole group — seems to me to be best 
placed in Neocerambyx . Unfortunately the male is still 
unknown. From three female specimens (including the type) 
1 am able to supplement the characters given by Thomson. 
Eyes rather wide apart above, with the vertex between 
