RniPHEUS DASYCEPHALUS. 
207 
ties presented by Drury’s figure ; but it is likely 
that different opinions will be held on the subject. 
The following are Mr. Swainson’s observations : — 
“ If the imagination was taxed to invent, or to con- 
centrate into one figure all that was splendid, 
lovely, or rare in the insect world, Nature would 
far exceed the poor invention of man by the pro- 
duction of this incomparably splendid creature ; its 
rarity also is so great, that but one specimen has 
ever been seen. It is not, however, on this account 
only that we have been induced to copy this figure, 
hut because its illustration will clear up one of the 
most intricate and perplexing questions that has 
hitherto impeded the natural arrangement of the 
Linnsean Papilwnes, and even of the whole order of 
the Lepidoptera. 
“ The error of Cramer regarding Rhipheus has 
already been rectified. It will now he demonstrated 
that not only are the two insects distinct as species , 
hut that they actually belong to different genera; 
Cramer’s being a Urania of Fabricius and Latreille, 
while Drury’s is a Papilio of the same authors. 
This is proved by the figures, and confirmed by the 
following words of Drary : — ‘ The antenna are 
black, and knobbed at their extremities,’ in other 
words, clavate ; while the palpi, as expressed in the 
figure, are so small as not to project beyond the 
head, where they lie hid among the frontal hairs ; 
this also being a typical distinction of the Latreil- 
lian Papiliones. The figures in Druiy’s work were 
all drawn and engraved by Moses Harris, well known 
