genus. They love sunlight, and frequent the borders of streams and the
edges of puddles, where they gather together in swarms consisting of
several species, greedily sucking up the moisture, and, when disturbed,
circling round in the air, or flying high and with great strength and
rapidity.
In the following Table I have arranged all the Malayan Papilionidæ in
what appears to me their most natural succession, and have exhibited
their distribution in twenty-one columns of localities, extending from
the Malay peninsula, on the north-west, to Woodlark Island, near New
Guinea, on the south-east. The double line divides the Indo-Malayan from
the Austro-Malayan region; and those islands which form natural
zoological groups are connected by brackets.
_Table showing the Distribution of the Malayan_ Papilionidæ.
┌───┬──┬───────────────────╥─────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ │ │ ║ INDO-MALAYAN REGION. │
├───┼──┼───────────────────╫────────┬────────┬────────┬─────╥────────────┤
│ │ │ =Ornithoptera.= ║Malacca.│Sumatra.│Borneo. │Java.║Philippines.│
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
├───┼──┼───────────────────╫────────┬────────┬────────┬─────╥────────────┤
│ │a.│_Priamus_-group. ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 1│ │Priamus, _L._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 2│ │Poseidon, _Db._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 3│ │Crœsus, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 4│ │Tithonus, _De ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │ │ Haan._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 5│ │Urvilliana, _Guér._║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │b.│_Pompeus_-group. ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 6│ │Remus, _Cr._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 7│ │Helena, _L._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 8│ │Leda, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 9│ │Pompeus, _Cr._ ║ 1│ 1│ 1│ 1║ │
│ 10│ │Nephereus, _G. R. ║ │ │ │ ║ 1│
│ │ │ G._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 11│ │Magellanus, _Feld._║ │ │ │ ║ 1│
│ 12│ │Criton, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 13│ │Plato, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 14│ │Haliphron, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 15│ │Amphrisius, _Cr._ ║ 1│ │ 1│ 1║ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │c.│_Brookeana_-group. ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 16│ │Brookeana, _Wall._ ║ │ 1│ 1│ ║ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │ │ =Papilio.= ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ A.│a.│_Nox_-group. ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 17│ │Nox, _Sw._ ║ 1│ │ │ 1║ │
│ 18│ │Noctis, _Hew._ ║ │ │ 1│ ║ │
│ 19│ │Erebus, _Wall._ ║ 1│ │ 1│ ║ │
│ 20│ │Varuna, _White_ ║ 1│ │ │ ║ │
│ 21│ │Semperi, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ ║ 1│
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │b.│_Coon_-group. ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 22│ │Neptunus, _Guér._ ║ 1│ │ 1│ ║ │
│ 23│ │Coon, _Fab._ ║ │ 1│ 1│ 1║ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │c.│_Polydorus_-group. ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 24│ │Polydorus, _L._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 25│ │Leodamas, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 26│ │Diphilus, _Esper_ ║ 1│ │ │ 1║ 1│
│ 27│ │Antiphus, _Fab._ ║ │ 1│ 1│ 1║ 1│
│ 28│ │Polyphontes, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 29│ │Annæ, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ ║ 1│
│ 30│ │Liris, _Godt._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ B.│d.│_Ulysses_-group. ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 31│ │Ulysses, _L._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 32│ │Penelope, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 33│ │Telegonus, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 34│ │Telemachus, _Mont._║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │e.│_Peranthus_-group. ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 35│ │Peranthus, _Fab._ ║ │ │ │ 1║ │
│ 36│ │Pericles, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 37│ │Philippus, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 38│ │Macedon, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 39│ │Brama, _Guér._ ║ 1│ 1│ │ ║ │
│ 40│ │Dædalus, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ ║ 1│
│ 41│ │Blumei, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 42│ │Arjuna, _Horsf._ ║ │ 1│ 1│ 1║ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │f.│_Memnon_-group. ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 43│ │Memnon, _L._ ║ │ 1│ 1│ 1║ │
│ 44│ │Androgeus, _Cr._ ║ 1│ │ │ ║ │
│ 45│ │Lampsacus, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ 1║ │
│ 46│ │Priapus, _Bd._ ║ │ 1│ 1│ 1║ │
│ 47│ │Emalthion, _Hübn._ ║ │ │ │ ║ 1│
│ 48│ │Deiphontes, _Wall._║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 49│ │Deiphobus, _L._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 50│ │Ascalaphus, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 51│ │Ænomaus, _Godt._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │g.│_Helenus_-group. ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 52│ │Severus, _Cr._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 53│ │Pertinax, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 54│ │Albinus, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 55│ │Phæstus, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 56│ │Helenus, _L._ ║ │ 1│ │ 1║ │
│ 57│ │Hecuba, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 58│ │Iswara, _White_ ║ 1│ │ 1│ ║ │
│ 59│ │Hystaspes, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ ║ 1│
│ 60│ │Araspes, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ ║ 1│
│ 61│ │Nephelus, _Bd._ ║ 1│ 1│ 1│ ║ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │h.│_Pammon_-group. ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 62│ │Pammon, _L._ ║ 1│ │ │ ║ │
│ 63│ │Theseus, _Cr._ ║ │ 1│ 1│ 1║ │
│ 64│ │Alphenor, _Cr._ ║ │ │ │ ║ 1│
│ 65│ │Nicanor, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 66│ │Hipponous, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ ║ 1│
│ 67│ │Ambrax, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 68│ │Ambracia, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 69│ │Epirus, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 70│ │Dunali, _Montr._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │i.│_Erectheus_-group. ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 71│ │Ormenus, _Guér._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 72│ │Pandion, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 73│ │Tydeus, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 74│ │Adrastus, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 75│ │Gambrisius, _Cr._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 76│ │Amphytrion, _Cr._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 77│ │Euchenor, _Guér._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 78│ │Godartii, _Montr._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │k.│_Demolion_-group. ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 79│ │Demolion, _Cr._ ║ 1│ 1│ 1│ 1║ │
│ 80│ │Gigon, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │l.│_Erithonius_-group.║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 81│ │Erithonius, _Cr._ ║ 1│ │ │ ║ 1│
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │m.│_Paradoxa_-group. ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 82│ │Paradoxa, _Zink._ ║ │ 1│ 1│ 1║ │
│ 83│ │Ænigma, _Wall._ ║ 1│ 1│ 1│ ║ │
│ 84│ │Caunus, _Westw._ ║ │ 1│ 1│ ║ │
│ 85│ │Astina, _Westw._ ║ │ │ │ 1║ │
│ 86│ │Hewitsonii, ║ │ │ 1│ ║ │
│ │ │ _Westw._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │n.│_Dissimilis_-group.║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 87│ │Echidna, _De Haan._║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 88│ │Paëphates, _Westw._║ │ │ │ ║ 1│
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │o.│_Macareus_-group. ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 89│ │Veiovis, _Hew._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 90│ │Encelades, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 91│ │Deucalion, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 92│ │Idæoides, _Hew._ ║ │ │ │ ║ 1│
│ 93│ │Delessertii, ║ 1│ │ │ ║ │
│ │ │ _Guér._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 94│ │Dehaanii, _Wall._ ║ 1│ │ 1│ 1║ │
│ 95│ │Leucothoë, _Westw._║ 1│ │ │ ║ │
│ 96│ │Macareus, _Godt._ ║ 1│ │ 1│ 1║ │
│ 97│ │Stratocles, _Feld._║ │ │ │ ║ 1│
│ 98│ │Thule, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │p.│_Antiphates_-group.║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ 99│ │Antiphates, _Cr._ ║ 1│ 1│ 1│ 1║ │
│100│ │Euphrates, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ ║ 1│
│101│ │Androcles, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│102│ │Dorcus, _De Haan._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│103│ │Rhesus, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│104│ │Aristæus, _Cr._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│105│ │Parmatus, _G. R. ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │ │ G._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │q.│_Eurypylus_-group. ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│106│ │Codrus, _Cr._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│107│ │Melanthus, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ ║ 1│
│108│ │Empedocles, _Fab._ ║ │ │ 1│ 1║ │
│109│ │Payeni, _Bd._ ║ │ │ 1│ 1║ │
│110│ │Sarpedon, _L._ ║ 1│ 1│ 1│ 1║ │
│111│ │Miletus, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│112│ │Wallacei, _Hew._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│113│ │Bathycles, _Zink._ ║ 1│ │ 1│ 1║ │
│114│ │Eurypylus, _L._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│115│ │Jason, _Esp._ ║ 1│ 1│ 1│ 1║ │
│116│ │Telephus, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│117│ │Ægistus, _L._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│118│ │Agamemnon, _L._ ║ 1│ 1│ 1│ 1║ 1│
│119│ │Rama, _Feld._ ║ 1│ 1│ │ ║ │
│ │ │(? Arycles, _Rd._) ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │ │=Leptocircus.= ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│120│ │Meges, _Zink._ ║ 1│ │ │ 1║ │
│121│ │Curtius, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│122│ │Decius, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ ║ 1│
│123│ │Curius, _Fab._ ║ │ │ │ 1║ │
│ │ Totals:— ║ │ │ │ ║ │
│ │ │Ornithoptera ║ 2│ 2│ 3│ 2║ 2│
│ │ │Papilio ║ 22│ 19│ 26│ 23║ 17│
│ │ │Leptocircus ║ 1│ │ │ 2║ 1│
├───┼──┼───────────────────╫────────┼────────┼────────┼─────╫────────────┤
│ │ │Species in each ║ 25│ 21│ 29│ 27║ 20│
│ │ │ island ║ │ │ │ ║ │
├───┼──┼───────────────────╫────────┴────────┴────────┴─────╫────────────┤
│ │ │ Total ║ 45 ║ 20│
│ │ │ ║ Sixty-one, Indo-Malayan Region. │
└───┴──┴───────────────────╨─────────────────────────────────────────────┘
┌───┬──┬───────────────────╥─────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ │ │ ║ AUSTRO-MALAYAN REGION. │
├───┼──┼───────────────────╫────────╥────────┬──────╥───────┬─────────┬──────┤
│ │ │ =Ornithoptera.= ║Celebes.║Lombock.│Timor.║Gilolo.│Batchian.│Bouru.│
│ │ │ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
├───┼──┼───────────────────╫────────╥────────┬──────╥───────┬─────────┬──────┤
│ │a.│_Priamus_-group. ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 1│ │Priamus, _L._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 2│ │Poseidon, _Db._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 3│ │Crœsus, _Feld._ ║ ║ │ ║ 1│ 1│ │
│ 4│ │Tithonus, _De ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │ │ Haan._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 5│ │Urvilliana, _Guér._║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │b.│_Pompeus_-group. ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 6│ │Remus, _Cr._ ║ 1║ │ ║ 1│ │ │
│ 7│ │Helena, _L._ ║ 1║ │ ║ │ │ 1│
│ 8│ │Leda, _Wall._ ║ 1║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 9│ │Pompeus, _Cr._ ║ ║ 1│ ║ │ │ │
│ 10│ │Nephereus, _G. R. ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │ │ G._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 11│ │Magellanus, _Feld._║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 12│ │Criton, _Feld._ ║ ║ │ ║ 1│ 1│ │
│ 13│ │Plato, _Wall._ ║ ║ │ 1║ │ │ │
│ 14│ │Haliphron, _Bd._ ║ 1║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 15│ │Amphrisius, _Cr._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │c.│_Brookeana_-group. ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 16│ │Brookeana, _Wall._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │ │ =Papilio.= ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ A.│a.│_Nox_-group. ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 17│ │Nox, _Sw._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 18│ │Noctis, _Hew._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 19│ │Erebus, _Wall._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 20│ │Varuna, _White_ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 21│ │Semperi, _Feld._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │b.│_Coon_-group. ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 22│ │Neptunus, _Guér._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 23│ │Coon, _Fab._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │c.│_Polydorus_-group. ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 24│ │Polydorus, _L._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ 1│ 1│
│ 25│ │Leodamas, _Wall._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 26│ │Diphilus, _Esper_ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 27│ │Antiphus, _Fab._ ║ ║ 1│ ║ │ │ │
│ 28│ │Polyphontes, _Bd._ ║ 1║ │ ║ 1│ 1│ │
│ 29│ │Annæ, _Feld._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 30│ │Liris, _Godt._ ║ ║ │ 1║ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ B.│d.│_Ulysses_-group. ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 31│ │Ulysses, _L._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 32│ │Penelope, _Wall._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 33│ │Telegonus, _Feld._ ║ ║ │ ║ 1│ 1│ │
│ 34│ │Telemachus, _Mont._║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │e.│_Peranthus_-group. ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 35│ │Peranthus, _Fab._ ║ ║ 1│ ║ │ │ │
│ 36│ │Pericles, _Wall._ ║ ║ │ 1║ │ │ │
│ 37│ │Philippus, _Wall._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ 1│ │
│ 38│ │Macedon, _Wall._ ║ 1║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 39│ │Brama, _Guér._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 40│ │Dædalus, _Feld._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 41│ │Blumei, _Bd._ ║ 1║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 42│ │Arjuna, _Horsf._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │f.│_Memnon_-group. ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 43│ │Memnon, _L._ ║ ║ 1│ ║ │ │ │
│ 44│ │Androgeus, _Cr._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 45│ │Lampsacus, _Bd._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 46│ │Priapus, _Bd._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 47│ │Emalthion, _Hübn._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 48│ │Deiphontes, _Wall._║ ║ │ ║ 1│ 1│ │
│ 49│ │Deiphobus, _L._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ 1│
│ 50│ │Ascalaphus, _Bd._ ║ 1║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 51│ │Ænomaus, _Godt._ ║ ║ │ 1║ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │g.│_Helenus_-group. ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 52│ │Severus, _Cr._ ║ ║ │ ║ 1│ 1│ 1│
│ 53│ │Pertinax, _Wall._ ║ 1║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 54│ │Albinus, _Wall._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 55│ │Phæstus, _Bd._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 56│ │Helenus, _L._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 57│ │Hecuba, _Wall._ ║ 1║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 58│ │Iswara, _White_ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 59│ │Hystaspes, _Feld._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 60│ │Araspes, _Feld._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 61│ │Nephelus, _Bd._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │h.│_Pammon_-group. ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 62│ │Pammon, _L._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 63│ │Theseus, _Cr._ ║ ║ 1│ 1║ │ │ │
│ 64│ │Alphenor, _Cr._ ║ 1║ │ ║ │ │ 1│
│ 65│ │Nicanor, _Wall._ ║ ║ │ ║ 1│ 1│ │
│ 66│ │Hipponous, _Feld._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 67│ │Ambrax, _Bd._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 68│ │Ambracia, _Wall._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 69│ │Epirus, _Wall._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 70│ │Dunali, _Montr._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │i.│_Erectheus_-group. ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 71│ │Ormenus, _Guér._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 72│ │Pandion, _Wall._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 73│ │Tydeus, _Feld._ ║ ║ │ ║ 1│ 1│ │
│ 74│ │Adrastus, _Wall._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 75│ │Gambrisius, _Cr._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ 1│
│ 76│ │Amphytrion, _Cr._ ║ 1║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 77│ │Euchenor, _Guér._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 78│ │Godartii, _Montr._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │k.│_Demolion_-group. ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 79│ │Demolion, _Cr._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 80│ │Gigon, _Wall._ ║ 1║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │l.│_Erithonius_-group.║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 81│ │Erithonius, _Cr._ ║ ║ │ 1║ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │m.│_Paradoxa_-group. ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 82│ │Paradoxa, _Zink._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 83│ │Ænigma, _Wall._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 84│ │Caunus, _Westw._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 85│ │Astina, _Westw._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 86│ │Hewitsonii, ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │ │ _Westw._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │n.│_Dissimilis_-group.║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 87│ │Echidna, _De Haan._║ ║ │ 1║ │ │ │
│ 88│ │Paëphates, _Westw._║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │o.│_Macareus_-group. ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 89│ │Veiovis, _Hew._ ║ 1║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 90│ │Encelades, _Bd._ ║ 1║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 91│ │Deucalion, _Bd._ ║ 1║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 92│ │Idæoides, _Hew._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 93│ │Delessertii, ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │ │ _Guér._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 94│ │Dehaanii, _Wall._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 95│ │Leucothoë, _Westw._║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 96│ │Macareus, _Godt._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 97│ │Stratocles, _Feld._║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 98│ │Thule, _Wall._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │p.│_Antiphates_-group.║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ 99│ │Antiphates, _Cr._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│100│ │Euphrates, _Feld._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│101│ │Androcles, _Bd._ ║ 1║ │ ║ │ │ │
│102│ │Dorcus, _De Haan._ ║ 1║ │ ║ │ │ │
│103│ │Rhesus, _Bd._ ║ 1║ │ ║ │ │ │
│104│ │Aristæus, _Cr._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ 1│ │
│105│ │Parmatus, _G. R. ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │ │ G._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │q.│_Eurypylus_-group. ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│106│ │Codrus, _Cr._ ║ 1║ │ ║ 1│ 1│ 1│
│107│ │Melanthus, _Feld._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│108│ │Empedocles, _Fab._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│109│ │Payeni, _Bd._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│110│ │Sarpedon, _L._ ║ ║ │ ║ 1│ 1│ 1│
│111│ │Miletus, _Wall._ ║ 1║ │ ║ │ │ │
│112│ │Wallacei, _Hew._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ 1│ │
│113│ │Bathycles, _Zink._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│114│ │Eurypylus, _L._ ║ ║ │ ║ 1│ 1│ 1│
│115│ │Jason, _Esp._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│116│ │Telephus, _Wall._ ║ 1║ │ ║ │ │ │
│117│ │Ægistus, _L._ ║ ║ │ ║ 1│ 1│ │
│118│ │Agamemnon, _L._ ║ 1║ 1│ 1║ 1│ 1│ 1│
│119│ │Rama, _Feld._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │ │(? Arycles, _Rd._) ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │ │=Leptocircus.= ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│120│ │Meges, _Zink._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│121│ │Curtius, _Wall._ ║ 1║ │ ║ │ │ │
│122│ │Decius, _Feld._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│123│ │Curius, _Fab._ ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │ Totals:— ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
│ │ │Ornithoptera ║ 4║ 1│ 1║ 3│ 2│ 1│
│ │ │Papilio ║ 19║ 5│ 7║ 11│ 15│ 9│
│ │ │Leptocircus ║ 1║ │ ║ │ │ │
├───┼──┼───────────────────╫────────╫────────┼──────╫───────┼─────────┼──────┤
│ │ │Species in each ║ 24║ 6│ 8║ 14│ 17│ 10│
│ │ │ island ║ ║ │ ║ │ │ │
├───┼──┼───────────────────╫────────╫────────┴──────╫───────┴─────────┴──────┤
│ │ │ Total ║ 24║ 12 ║ │
│ │ │ ║ ║ Seventy-two, Austro-Malayan Region. │
└───┴──┴───────────────────╨────────╨────────────────────────────────────────┘
┌───┬──┬───────────────────╥────────────────────────────┐
│ │ │ ║ AUSTRO-MALAYAN REGION. │
├───┼──┼───────────────────╫──────┬──────┬──────┬───────┤
│ │ │ =Ornithoptera.= ║Ceram.│Banda.│Goram.│ Ké │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │Island.│
├───┼──┼───────────────────╫──────┬──────┬──────┬───────┤
│ │a.│_Priamus_-group. ║ 1│ │ │ │
│ 1│ │Priamus, _L._ ║ 1│ │ │ │
│ 2│ │Poseidon, _Db._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 3│ │Crœsus, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 4│ │Tithonus, _De ║ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ Haan._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 5│ │Urvilliana, _Guér._║ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │b.│_Pompeus_-group. ║ │ │ │ │
│ 6│ │Remus, _Cr._ ║ 1│ │ │ │
│ 7│ │Helena, _L._ ║ 1│ │ │ │
│ 8│ │Leda, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 9│ │Pompeus, _Cr._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 10│ │Nephereus, _G. R. ║ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ G._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 11│ │Magellanus, _Feld._║ │ │ │ │
│ 12│ │Criton, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 13│ │Plato, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 14│ │Haliphron, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 15│ │Amphrisius, _Cr._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │c.│_Brookeana_-group. ║ │ │ │ │
│ 16│ │Brookeana, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ =Papilio.= ║ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │
│ A.│a.│_Nox_-group. ║ │ │ │ │
│ 17│ │Nox, _Sw._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 18│ │Noctis, _Hew._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 19│ │Erebus, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 20│ │Varuna, _White_ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 21│ │Semperi, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │b.│_Coon_-group. ║ │ │ │ │
│ 22│ │Neptunus, _Guér._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 23│ │Coon, _Fab._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │c.│_Polydorus_-group. ║ │ │ │ │
│ 24│ │Polydorus, _L._ ║ 1│ │ │ 1│
│ 25│ │Leodamas, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 26│ │Diphilus, _Esper_ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 27│ │Antiphus, _Fab._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 28│ │Polyphontes, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 29│ │Annæ, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 30│ │Liris, _Godt._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │
│ B.│d.│_Ulysses_-group. ║ │ │ │ │
│ 31│ │Ulysses, _L._ ║ 1│ │ │ │
│ 32│ │Penelope, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 33│ │Telegonus, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 34│ │Telemachus, _Mont._║ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │e.│_Peranthus_-group. ║ │ │ │ │
│ 35│ │Peranthus, _Fab._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 36│ │Pericles, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 37│ │Philippus, _Wall._ ║ 1│ │ │ │
│ 38│ │Macedon, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 39│ │Brama, _Guér._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 40│ │Dædalus, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 41│ │Blumei, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 42│ │Arjuna, _Horsf._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │f.│_Memnon_-group. ║ │ │ │ │
│ 43│ │Memnon, _L._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 44│ │Androgeus, _Cr._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 45│ │Lampsacus, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 46│ │Priapus, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 47│ │Emalthion, _Hübn._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 48│ │Deiphontes, _Wall._║ │ │ │ │
│ 49│ │Deiphobus, _L._ ║ 1│ │ │ │
│ 50│ │Ascalaphus, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 51│ │Ænomaus, _Godt._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │g.│_Helenus_-group. ║ │ │ │ │
│ 52│ │Severus, _Cr._ ║ 1│ │ │ │
│ 53│ │Pertinax, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 54│ │Albinus, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 55│ │Phæstus, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 56│ │Helenus, _L._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 57│ │Hecuba, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 58│ │Iswara, _White_ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 59│ │Hystaspes, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 60│ │Araspes, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 61│ │Nephelus, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │h.│_Pammon_-group. ║ │ │ │ │
│ 62│ │Pammon, _L._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 63│ │Theseus, _Cr._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 64│ │Alphenor, _Cr._ ║ 1│ │ │ │
│ 65│ │Nicanor, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 66│ │Hipponous, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 67│ │Ambrax, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 68│ │Ambracia, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 69│ │Epirus, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 70│ │Dunali, _Montr._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │i.│_Erectheus_-group. ║ │ │ │ │
│ 71│ │Ormenus, _Guér._ ║ │ │ 1│ 1│
│ 72│ │Pandion, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 73│ │Tydeus, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 74│ │Adrastus, _Wall._ ║ │ 1│ │ │
│ 75│ │Gambrisius, _Cr._ ║ 1│ │ │ │
│ 76│ │Amphytrion, _Cr._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 77│ │Euchenor, _Guér._ ║ │ │ │ 1│
│ 78│ │Godartii, _Montr._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │k.│_Demolion_-group. ║ │ │ │ │
│ 79│ │Demolion, _Cr._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 80│ │Gigon, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │l.│_Erithonius_-group.║ │ │ │ │
│ 81│ │Erithonius, _Cr._ ║ │ │ │ 1│
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │m.│_Paradoxa_-group. ║ │ │ │ │
│ 82│ │Paradoxa, _Zink._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 83│ │Ænigma, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 84│ │Caunus, _Westw._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 85│ │Astina, _Westw._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 86│ │Hewitsonii, ║ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ _Westw._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │n.│_Dissimilis_-group.║ │ │ │ │
│ 87│ │Echidna, _De Haan._║ │ │ │ │
│ 88│ │Paëphates, _Westw._║ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │o.│_Macareus_-group. ║ │ │ │ │
│ 89│ │Veiovis, _Hew._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 90│ │Encelades, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 91│ │Deucalion, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 92│ │Idæoides, _Hew._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 93│ │Delessertii, ║ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ _Guér._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 94│ │Dehaanii, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 95│ │Leucothoë, _Westw._║ │ │ │ │
│ 96│ │Macareus, _Godt._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ 97│ │Stratocles, _Feld._║ │ │ │ │
│ 98│ │Thule, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │p.│_Antiphates_-group.║ │ │ │ │
│ 99│ │Antiphates, _Cr._ ║ │ │ │ │
│100│ │Euphrates, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ │
│101│ │Androcles, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ │
│102│ │Dorcus, _De Haan._ ║ │ │ │ │
│103│ │Rhesus, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ │
│104│ │Aristæus, _Cr._ ║ 1│ │ │ │
│105│ │Parmatus, _G. R. ║ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ G._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │q.│_Eurypylus_-group. ║ │ │ │ │
│106│ │Codrus, _Cr._ ║ 1│ │ │ │
│107│ │Melanthus, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ │
│108│ │Empedocles, _Fab._ ║ │ │ │ │
│109│ │Payeni, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ │
│110│ │Sarpedon, _L._ ║ 1│ │ │ │
│111│ │Miletus, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │
│112│ │Wallacei, _Hew._ ║ │ │ │ │
│113│ │Bathycles, _Zink._ ║ │ │ │ │
│114│ │Eurypylus, _L._ ║ 1│ │ │ │
│115│ │Jason, _Esp._ ║ │ │ │ │
│116│ │Telephus, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │
│117│ │Ægistus, _L._ ║ 1│ │ │ 1│
│118│ │Agamemnon, _L._ ║ 1│ │ │ 1│
│119│ │Rama, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │ │(? Arycles, _Rd._) ║ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │ │=Leptocircus.= ║ │ │ │ │
│120│ │Meges, _Zink._ ║ │ │ │ │
│121│ │Curtius, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │
│122│ │Decius, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ │
│123│ │Curius, _Fab._ ║ │ │ │ │
│ │ Totals:— ║ │ │ │ │
│ │ │Ornithoptera ║ 3│ │ 1│ 1│
│ │ │Papilio ║ 13│ 1│ 2│ 4│
│ │ │Leptocircus ║ │ │ │ │
├───┼──┼───────────────────╫──────┼──────┼──────┼───────┤
│ │ │Species in each ║ 16│ 1│ 3│ 5│
│ │ │ island ║ │ │ │ │
├───┼──┼───────────────────╫──────┴──────┴──────┴───────┤
│ │ │ Total ║ 27 │
│ │ │ ║ Seventy-two, │
│ │ │ ║ Austro-Malayan Region. │
└───┴──┴───────────────────╨────────────────────────────┘
┌───┬──┬───────────────────╥──────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ │ │ ║ AUSTRO-MALAYAN REGION. │
├───┼──┼───────────────────╫────────┬──────┬────────┬───────┬────────┬────────┤
│ │ │ =Ornithoptera.= ║ Aru │Mysol.│Waigiou.│ New │ New │Woodlark│
│ │ │ ║Islands.│ │ │Guinea.│Ireland.│ Isl. │
├───┼──┼───────────────────╫────────┬──────┬────────┬───────┬────────┬────────┤
│ │a.│_Priamus_-group. ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 1│ │Priamus, _L._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 2│ │Poseidon, _Db._ ║ 1│ 1│ 1│ 1│ │ 1│
│ 3│ │Crœsus, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 4│ │Tithonus, _De ║ │ │ │ 1│ │ │
│ │ │ Haan._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 5│ │Urvilliana, _Guér._║ │ │ │ │ 1│ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │b.│_Pompeus_-group. ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 6│ │Remus, _Cr._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 7│ │Helena, _L._ ║ │ │ │ 1_v_│ │ │
│ 8│ │Leda, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 9│ │Pompeus, _Cr._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 10│ │Nephereus, _G. R. ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ G._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 11│ │Magellanus, _Feld._║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 12│ │Criton, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 13│ │Plato, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 14│ │Haliphron, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 15│ │Amphrisius, _Cr._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │c.│_Brookeana_-group. ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 16│ │Brookeana, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ =Papilio.= ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ A.│a.│_Nox_-group. ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 17│ │Nox, _Sw._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 18│ │Noctis, _Hew._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 19│ │Erebus, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 20│ │Varuna, _White_ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 21│ │Semperi, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │b.│_Coon_-group. ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 22│ │Neptunus, _Guér._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 23│ │Coon, _Fab._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │c.│_Polydorus_-group. ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 24│ │Polydorus, _L._ ║ 1│ │ │ │ │ │
│ 25│ │Leodamas, _Wall._ ║ │ 1│ │ 1│ │ │
│ 26│ │Diphilus, _Esper_ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 27│ │Antiphus, _Fab._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 28│ │Polyphontes, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 29│ │Annæ, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 30│ │Liris, _Godt._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ B.│d.│_Ulysses_-group. ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 31│ │Ulysses, _L._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 32│ │Penelope, _Wall._ ║ 1│ │ 1│ 1│ │ │
│ 33│ │Telegonus, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 34│ │Telemachus, _Mont._║ │ │ │ │ │ 1│
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │e.│_Peranthus_-group. ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 35│ │Peranthus, _Fab._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 36│ │Pericles, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 37│ │Philippus, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 38│ │Macedon, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 39│ │Brama, _Guér._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 40│ │Dædalus, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 41│ │Blumei, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 42│ │Arjuna, _Horsf._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │f.│_Memnon_-group. ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 43│ │Memnon, _L._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 44│ │Androgeus, _Cr._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 45│ │Lampsacus, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 46│ │Priapus, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 47│ │Emalthion, _Hübn._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 48│ │Deiphontes, _Wall._║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 49│ │Deiphobus, _L._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 50│ │Ascalaphus, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 51│ │Ænomaus, _Godt._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │g.│_Helenus_-group. ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 52│ │Severus, _Cr._ ║ 1│ │ │ │ │ │
│ 53│ │Pertinax, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 54│ │Albinus, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ 1│ │ │
│ 55│ │Phæstus, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ 1│ │ │
│ 56│ │Helenus, _L._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 57│ │Hecuba, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 58│ │Iswara, _White_ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 59│ │Hystaspes, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 60│ │Araspes, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 61│ │Nephelus, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │h.│_Pammon_-group. ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 62│ │Pammon, _L._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 63│ │Theseus, _Cr._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 64│ │Alphenor, _Cr._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 65│ │Nicanor, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 66│ │Hipponous, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 67│ │Ambrax, _Bd._ ║ │ 1│ │ 1│ │ │
│ 68│ │Ambracia, _Wall._ ║ │ │ 1│ │ │ │
│ 69│ │Epirus, _Wall._ ║ 1│ │ │ │ │ │
│ 70│ │Dunali, _Montr._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ 1│
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │i.│_Erectheus_-group. ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 71│ │Ormenus, _Guér._ ║ 1│ │ 1│ │ │ │
│ 72│ │Pandion, _Wall._ ║ │ 1│ │ 1│ │ │
│ 73│ │Tydeus, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 74│ │Adrastus, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 75│ │Gambrisius, _Cr._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 76│ │Amphytrion, _Cr._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 77│ │Euchenor, _Guér._ ║ 1│ │ 1│ 1│ │ │
│ 78│ │Godartii, _Montr._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ 1│
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │k.│_Demolion_-group. ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 79│ │Demolion, _Cr._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 80│ │Gigon, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │l.│_Erithonius_-group.║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 81│ │Erithonius, _Cr._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │m.│_Paradoxa_-group. ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 82│ │Paradoxa, _Zink._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 83│ │Ænigma, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 84│ │Caunus, _Westw._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 85│ │Astina, _Westw._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 86│ │Hewitsonii, ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ _Westw._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │n.│_Dissimilis_-group.║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 87│ │Echidna, _De Haan._║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 88│ │Paëphates, _Westw._║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │o.│_Macareus_-group. ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 89│ │Veiovis, _Hew._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 90│ │Encelades, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 91│ │Deucalion, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 92│ │Idæoides, _Hew._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 93│ │Delessertii, ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ _Guér._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 94│ │Dehaanii, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 95│ │Leucothoë, _Westw._║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 96│ │Macareus, _Godt._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 97│ │Stratocles, _Feld._║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 98│ │Thule, _Wall._ ║ │ │ 1│ 1│ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │p.│_Antiphates_-group.║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ 99│ │Antiphates, _Cr._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│100│ │Euphrates, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│101│ │Androcles, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│102│ │Dorcus, _De Haan._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│103│ │Rhesus, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│104│ │Aristæus, _Cr._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│105│ │Parmatus, _G. R. ║ 1│ │ 1│ │ │ │
│ │ │ G._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │q.│_Eurypylus_-group. ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│106│ │Codrus, _Cr._ ║ 1│ │ 1│ │ │ │
│107│ │Melanthus, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│108│ │Empedocles, _Fab._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│109│ │Payeni, _Bd._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│110│ │Sarpedon, _L._ ║ 1│ │ │ 1│ │ │
│111│ │Miletus, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│112│ │Wallacei, _Hew._ ║ 1│ │ │ │ │ │
│113│ │Bathycles, _Zink._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│114│ │Eurypylus, _L._ ║ │ │ │ 1│ │ │
│115│ │Jason, _Esp._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│116│ │Telephus, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│117│ │Ægistus, _L._ ║ 1│ │ │ │ │ │
│118│ │Agamemnon, _L._ ║ 1│ 1│ 1│ 1│ │ │
│119│ │Rama, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ │(? Arycles, _Rd._) ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ │=Leptocircus.= ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│120│ │Meges, _Zink._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│121│ │Curtius, _Wall._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│122│ │Decius, _Feld._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│123│ │Curius, _Fab._ ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ Totals:— ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ │ │Ornithoptera ║ 1│ 1│ 1│ 3│ 1│ 1│
│ │ │Papilio ║ 12│ 4│ 8│ 11│ │ 4│
│ │ │Leptocircus ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
├───┼──┼───────────────────╫────────┼──────┼────────┼───────┼────────┼────────┤
│ │ │Species in each ║ 13│ 5│ 9│ 14│ 1│ 5│
│ │ │ island ║ │ │ │ │ │ │
├───┼──┼───────────────────╫────────┴──────┴────────┴───────┴────────┴────────┤
│ │ │ Total ║ 27 │
│ │ │ ║ Seventy-two, Austro-Malayan Region. │
└───┴──┴───────────────────╨──────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
The exceeding richness of the Malayan region in these fine insects is
seen by comparing the number of species found in the different tropical
regions of the earth. From all Africa only 33 species of _Papilio_ are
known; but as several are still undescribed in collections, we may raise
their number to about 40. In all tropical Asia there are at present
described only 65 species, and I have seen in collections but two or
three which have not yet been named. In South America, south of Panama,
there are 120 species, or about the same number as I make in the Malayan
region; but the area of the two countries is very different; for while
South America (even excluding Patagonia) contains 5,000,000 square
miles, a line encircling the whole of the Malayan islands would only
include an area of 2,700,000 square miles, of which the land-area would
be about 1,000,000 square miles. This superior richness is partly real
and partly apparent. The breaking up of a district into small isolated
portions, as in an archipelago, seems highly favourable to the
segregation and perpetuation of local peculiarities in certain groups;
so that a species which on a continent might have a wide range, and
whose local forms, if any, would be so connected together that it would
be impossible to separate them, may become by isolation reduced to a
number of such clearly defined and constant forms that we are obliged to
count them as species. From this point of view, therefore, the superior
number of Malayan species may be considered as apparent only. Its true
superiority is shown, on the other hand, by the possession of three
genera and twenty groups of Papilionidæ against a single genus and eight
groups in South America, and also by the much greater average size of
the Malayan species. In most other families, however, the reverse is the
case, the South American _Nymphalidæ_, _Satyridæ_, and _Erycinidæ_ far
surpassing those of the East in number, variety, and beauty.
The following list, exhibiting the range and distribution of each group,
will enable us to study more easily their internal and external
relations.
_Range of the Groups of Malayan_ Papilionidæ.
Ornithoptera.
1. _Priamus_-group. Moluccas to Woodlark Island.
2. _Pompeus_-group. Himalayas to New Guinea (Celebes, maximum).
3. _Brookeana_-group. Sumatra and Borneo.
Papilio.
4. _Nox_-group. North India, Java, and Philippines.
5. _Coon_-group. North India to Java.
6. _Polydorus_-group. India to New Guinea and Pacific.
7. _Ulysses_-group. Celebes to New Caledonia.
8. _Peranthus_-group. India to Timor and Moluccas (India, max.).
9. _Memnon_-group. India to Timor and Moluccas (Java, max.).
10. _Helenus_-group. Africa and India to New Guinea.
11. _Pammon_-group. India to Pacific and Australia.
12. _Erechtheus_-group. Celebes to Australia.
13. _Demolion_-group. India to Celebes.
14. _Erithonius_-group. Africa, India, Australia.
15. _Paradoxa_-group. India to Java (Borneo, max.).
16. _Dissimilis_-group. India to Timor (India, max.).
17. _Macareus_-group. India to New Guinea.
18. _Antiphates_-group. Widely distributed.
19. _Eurypylus_-group. India to Australia.
Leptocircus.
20. _Leptocircus_-group. India to Celebes.
This Table shows the great affinity of the Malayan with the Indian
Papilionidæ, only three out of the nineteen groups ranging beyond, into
Africa, Europe, or America. The limitation of groups to the Indo-Malayan
or Austro-Malayan divisions of the archipelago, which is so well marked
in the higher animals (see ‘Journal of Linnean Society,’ vol. iv. 172,
and ‘Journal of the Royal Geographical Society,’ 1863, p. 230), is much
less conspicuous in insects, but is shown in some degree by the
Papilionidæ. The following groups are either almost or entirely
restricted to one portion of the Archipelago:—
_Indo-Malayan Region._
_Nox_-group.
_Coon_-group.
_Macareus_-group (nearly).
_Paradoxa_-group.
_Dissimilis_-group (nearly).
_Brookeanus_-group.
LEPTOCIRCUS (genus).
_Austro-Malayan Region._
_Priamus_-group.
_Ulysses_-group.
_Erechtheus_-group.
The remaining groups, which range over the whole archipelago, are, in
many cases, insects of very powerful flight, or they frequent open
places and the sea-beach, and are thus more likely to get blown from
island to island. The fact that three such characteristic groups as
those of _Priamus_, _Ulysses_, and _Erechtheus_ are strictly limited to
the Australian region of the archipelago, while five other groups are
with equal strictness confined to the Indian region, is a strong
corroboration of that division which has been founded almost entirely on
the distribution of Mammalia and Birds.
If the various Malayan islands have undergone recent changes of level,
and if any of them have been more closely united within the period of
existing species than they are now, we may expect to find indications of
such changes in community of species between islands now widely
separated; while those islands which have long remained isolated would
have had time to acquire peculiar forms by a slow and natural process of
modification.
An examination of the relations of the species of the adjacent islands
will thus enable us to correct opinions formed from a mere consideration
of their relative positions. For example, looking at a map of the
archipelago, it is almost impossible to avoid the idea that Java and
Sumatra have been recently united; their present proximity is so great,
and they have such an obvious resemblance in their volcanic structure.
Yet there can be little doubt that this opinion is erroneous, and that
Sumatra has had a more recent and more intimate connexion with Borneo
than it has had with Java. This is strikingly shown by the mammals of
these islands—very few of the species of Java and Sumatra being
identical, while a considerable number are common to Sumatra and Borneo.
The birds show a somewhat similar relationship; and we shall find that
the group of insects we are now treating of tells exactly the same tale.
Thus:—
Sumatra 21 sp.│20 sp. common to both islands;
Borneo 29 sp.│ „
──────────────┼──────────────────────────────
Sumatra 21 sp.│11 sp. common to both islands;
Java 27 sp.│ „
──────────────┼──────────────────────────────
Borneo 29 sp.│20 sp. common to both islands;
Java 27 sp.│ „
showing that both Sumatra and Java have a much closer relationship to
Borneo than they have each other—a most singular and interesting result
when we consider the wide separation of Borneo from them both, and its
very different structure. The evidence furnished by a single group of
insects would have had but little weight on a point of such magnitude if
standing alone; but coming as it does to confirm deductions drawn from
whole classes of the higher animals, it must be admitted to have
considerable value.
We may determine in a similar manner the relations of the different
Papuan Islands to New Guinea. Of thirteen species of Papilionidæ
obtained in the Aru Islands, five were also found in New Guinea, and
eight not. Of nine species obtained at Waigiou, five were New Guinea,
and four not. The five species found at Mysol were all New Guinea
species. Mysol, therefore, has closer relations to New Guinea than the
other islands; and this is corroborated by the distribution of the
birds, of which I will only now give one instance. The Paradise Bird
found in Mysol is the common New Guinea species, while the Aru Islands
and Waigiou have each a species peculiar to themselves.
The large island of Borneo, which contains more species of Papilionidæ
than any other in the archipelago, has nevertheless only two peculiar to
itself; and it is quite possible, and even probable, that one of these
may be found in Sumatra or Java. The last-named island has also two
species peculiar to it; Sumatra has not one, and the peninsula of
Malacca only one. The identity of species is even greater than in birds
or in most other groups of insects, and points very strongly to a recent
connexion of the whole with each other and the continent. But when we
pass to the next island (Celebes), separated from them by a strait not
wider than that which divides them from each other, we have a striking
contrast; for with a total number of species less than either Borneo or
Java, no less than eighteen are absolutely restricted to it. Further
east, the large islands of Ceram and New Guinea have only three species
peculiar to each, and Timor has five. We shall have to look, not to
single islands, but to whole groups, in order to obtain an amount of
individuality comparable with that of Celebes. For example, the
extensive group comprising the large islands of Java, Borneo, and
Sumatra, with the peninsula of Malacca, possessing altogether 45
species, has about 21, or less than half, peculiar to it; the numerous
group of the Philippines possess 21 species, of which 16 are peculiar;
the seven chief islands of the Moluccas have 27, of which 12 are
peculiar; and the whole of the Papuan Islands, with an equal number of
species, have 17 peculiar. Comparable with the most isolated of these
groups is Celebes, with its 24 species, of which the large proportion of
18 are peculiar. We see, therefore, that the opinion I have already
expressed, in the papers before quoted, of the high degree of isolation
and the remarkable distinctive features of this interesting island, is
fully borne out by the examination of this conspicuous family of
insects. A single straggling island, with a few small satellites, it is
zoologically of equal importance with extensive groups of islands many
times as large as itself; and standing in the very centre of the
archipelago, surrounded on every side with islets connecting it with the
larger groups, and which seem to afford the greatest facilities for the
migration and intercommunication of their respective productions, it yet
stands out conspicuous with a character of its own in every department
of nature, and presents peculiarities which are, I believe, without a
parallel in any similar locality on the globe.
Briefly to summarize these peculiarities, Celebes possesses three genera
of mammals (out of the very small number which inhabit it) which are of
singular and isolated forms, viz., _Cynopithecus_, a tailless Ape allied
to the Baboons; _Anoa_, a straight-horned Antelope of obscure
affinities, but quite unlike anything else in the whole archipelago or
in India; and _Babirusa_, an altogether abnormal wild Pig. With a rather
limited bird population, Celebes has an immense preponderance of species
confined to it, and has also five remarkable genera (_Meropogon_,
_Streptocitta_, _Enodes_, _Scissirostrum_, and _Megacephalon_) entirely
restricted to its narrow limits, as well as two others (_Prioniturus_
and _Basilornis_) which only range to a single island beyond it.
Mr. Smith’s elaborate tables of the distribution of Malayan Hymenoptera
(see ‘Proc. Linn. Soc.’ Zool. vol. vii.) show that, out of the large
number of 301 species collected in Celebes, 190 (or nearly two-thirds)
were absolutely restricted to it, although Borneo, on one side, and the
various islands of the Moluccas on the other, were equally well explored
by me; and no less than twelve of the genera are not found in any other
island of the archipelago. I have just shown in the present paper that,
in the Papilionidæ, it has far more species of its own than any other
island, and a greater proportion of peculiar species than many of the
large groups of islands in the archipelago—and that it gives to a large
number of the species and varieties which inhabit it, 1st, an increase
of size, and, 2nd, a peculiar modification in the form of the wings,
which stamp upon the most dissimilar insects a mark distinctive of their
common birth-place.
What, I would ask, are we to do with phenomena such as these? Are we to
rest content with that very simple, but at the same time very
unsatisfying explanation, that all these insects and other animals were
created exactly _as_ they are, and originally placed exactly _where_
they are, by the inscrutable will of their Creator, and that we have
nothing to do but to register the facts and wonder? Was this single
island selected for a fantastic display of creative power, merely to
excite a child-like and unreasoning admiration? Is all this appearance
of gradual modification by the action of natural causes—a modification
the successive steps of which we can almost trace—all delusive? Is this
harmony between the most diverse groups, all presenting analogous
phenomena, and indicating a dependence upon physical changes of which we
have independent evidence, all false testimony? If I could think so, the
study of nature would have lost for me its greatest charm. I should feel
as would the geologist, if you could convince him that his
interpretation of the earth’s past history was all a delusion—that
strata were never formed in the primeval ocean, and that the fossils he
so carefully collects and studies are no true record of a former living
world, but were all created just as they now are, and in the rocks where
he now finds them.
I must here express my own belief that none of these phenomena, however
apparently isolated pr insignificant, can ever stand alone—that not the
wing of a butterfly can change in form, or vary in colour, except in
harmony with, and as a part of, the grand march of nature. I believe,
therefore, that all the curious phenomena I have just recapitulated are
immediately dependent on the last series of changes, organic and
inorganic, in these regions; and as the phenomena presented by the
island of Celebes differ from those of all the surrounding islands, it
can, I conceive, only be because the past history of Celebes has been to
some extent unique and different from theirs. We must have much more
evidence to determine exactly in what that difference has consisted. At
present, I only see my way clear to one deduction, viz., that Celebes
represents one of the oldest parts of the archipelago, that it has been
formerly more completely isolated both from India and from Australia
than it is now, and that, amid all the mutations it has undergone, a
relic or substratum of the fauna and flora of some more ancient land has
been here preserved to us.
It is only since my return home, and since I have been able to compare
the productions of Celebes side by side with those of the surrounding
islands, that I have been fully impressed with their peculiarity, and
the great interest that attaches to them. The plants and the reptiles
are still almost unknown; and it is to be hoped that some enterprising
naturalist may soon devote himself to their study. The geology of the
country would also be well worth exploring, and its recent fossils would
be of especial interest as elucidating the changes which have led to its
present anomalous condition. This island stands, as it were, upon the
boundary-line between two worlds. On one side is that ancient Australian
fauna which preserves to the present day the facies of an early
geological epoch; on the other is the rich and varied fauna of Asia,
which seems to contain, in every class and order, the most perfect and
highly organized animals. Celebes has relations to both, yet strictly
belongs to neither; it possesses characteristics which are altogether
its own; and I am convinced that no single island upon the globe would
so well repay a careful and detailed research into its past and present
history.
In the following catalogue of the Malayan species of Papilionidæ I have
included those from Woodlark Island, collected by M. Montrouzier, as
that island comes fairly within the limits of the archipelago; while I
exclude New Caledonia as belonging more to the Australian and Pacific
fauna. I have given full particulars of the variation of the several
species, and have described all new species, forms, varieties, and
undescribed sexes. The distribution of each species is noted chiefly
from my own observations[11]. As the full synonymy and references to
almost every work on Lepidoptera are given in the British Museum List of
Papilionidæ, I have not thought it necessary to do more than to refer to
a good figure and description in well-known works; and I have quoted
Boisduval’s ‘Species Général des Lépidoptères’ throughout. In all cases,
however, where I have myself corrected the synonymy, or determined sexes
which had been before improperly located, I have given much fuller
references.
Footnote 11:
Species collected by myself have (Wall.) after the localities where I
have found them.
I have found it necessary to describe and name twenty new species, and
to separate six or seven more which have been hitherto considered as
varieties or sexes of other species. I have also described and separated
twenty-five local forms or races, and twenty polymorphous forms or
sexes, as well as several simple varieties. On the other hand, I have
reduced fourteen species, which figure in some of our latest lists, to
the rank of sexes or local or polymorphic forms of other species. For
convenience of reference, I add a list of these, with a reference to the
page where will be found the reasons for not adopting them.
Ornithoptera Pronomus, _G. R. Gray_, = O. Poseidon, _Db._ (var.), p. 36.
Ornithoptera Archideus, _G. R. Gray_, = O. Poseidon, _Db._ (var.), p. 36.
Ornithoptera Euphorion, _G. R. Gray_, = O. Poseidon, _Db._ (♀ var.), p. 36.
Ornithoptera Amphimedon, _Cr._, = O. Helena, _L._ ♀, p. 38.
Papilio Hegemon, _G. R. Gray_, = P. Polyphontes, _Bd._, p. 43.
Papilio Melanides, _De Haan_, = P. Theseus, _Fab._ (♀ form), p. 53.
Papilio Romulus, _Cr._, = P. Pammon, _L._ (♀ form), p. 52.
Papilio Rumanzovia, _Eschsch._, = P. Emalthion, _Hübn._ (♀ form), p. 48.
Papilio Polytes, _L._, = P. Pammon, _L._, ♀, p. 51.
Papilio Orophanes, _Bd._, = P. Ambrax, _Bd._, ♀, p. 54.
Papilio Elyros, _G. R. Gray_, = P. Alphenor, _Cr._ (♀ form), p. 53.
Papilio Amanga, _Bd._, = P. Ormenus, _Guér._ (♀ form), p. 55.
Papilio Onesimus, _Hewits._, = P. Ormenus, _Guér._ (♀ form), p. 55.
Papilio Drusius, _Cr._, = P. Gambrisius, _Cr._, ♀, p. 58.
As the arrangement of the species of _Papilio_ which I have adopted in
this paper is somewhat new, and I hope will be found to be more natural
than those which have been previously used, I here add lists of the
Indian and Australian species arranged in the same manner. Those already
included in my Malayan list will be indicated thus, (Mal.), and printed
in _italics_.
_List of the_ PAPILIONIDÆ _of the Indian Region_.
1. Teinopalpus imperialis, _Hope_.
2. Ornithoptera Darsius, _G. R. G._ (Ceylon).
3. —— Rhadamanthus, _Bd._
4. —— _Pompeus_, Cr. (Mal.).
5. —— _Amphrisius_, Cr. (Mal.).
_Papilio_ (Sect. A).
_Nox group._
6. Papilio _Varuna_, White (Mal.).
7. —— Aidoneus, _Db._
8. —— Philoxenus, _G. R. G._
9. —— Polyceutes, _Db._
10. —— Dasarada, _Moore_.
11. —— Ravana, _Moore_.
12. —— Minereus, _G. R. G._
13. —— Icarius, _Westw._
14. —— Bootes, _Westw._
15. —— Janaka, _Moore_.
_Coon group._
16. Papilio Doubledayi, _Wall._
_Polydorus group._
17. Papilio Jophon, _G. R. G._ (Ceylon).
18. —— _Diphilus_, Esp. (Mal.).
19. —— Alcinous, _Klug._
20. —— Mencius, _Feld._
21. —— Hector, _L._
_Papilio_ (Sect. B).
_Protenor group._
22. Papilio Protenor, _Cr._
23. Papilio Elphenor, _Db._
24. —— Rhetenor, _Westw._
25. —— Sakontala, _Hewits._
_Peranthus group._
26. Papilio Crino, _Fab._ (Ceylon).
27. —— Bianor, _Cr._
28. —— Polyctor, _Bd._
29. —— Ganesa, _Db._
30. —— Arcturus, _Westw._
31. —— Paris, _L._
32. —— Palinurus, _Fab._?
33. —— Krishna, _Moore_.
_Memnon group._
34. Papilio _Androgeus_, Cr. (Mal.).
35. —— Polymnestor, _Cr._ (Ceylon).
36. —— Demetrius, _Cr._
_Helenus group._
37. Papilio _Helenus_, L. (Mal.).
38. —— Chaon, _Westw._
39. —— Castor, _Westw._
40. —— _Nephelus_, Bd. (Mal.).
_Pammon group._
41. Papilio _Pammon_, L. (Mal.).
_Demolion group._
42. Papilio _Demolion_, Cr. (Mal.).
_Papilio_ (Sect. C).
_Erithonius group._
43. Papilio _Erithonius_, Cr. (Mal.).
_Paradoxa group._
44. Papilio Telearchus, _Hewits_.
45. —— Slateri, _Hewits_.
_Dissimilis group._
46. Papilio dissimilis, _L._
47. —— Panope, _L._
48. —— Lacedæmon, _Fab._
49. —— Pollux, _Westw._
_Papilio_ (Sect. D).
_Macareus group._
50. Papilio _Macareus_, God. (Mal.).
51. —— _Leucothoë_, Westw. (Mal.).
52. —— Megarus, _Westw._
53. —— Agestor, _G. R. G._
54. —— Epytides, _Hewits_.
55. —— Xenocles, _Db._
_Antiphates group._
56. Papilio _Antiphates_, Cr. (Mal.).
57. —— Agetes, _Westw._
58. —— Anticrates, _Db._
59. —— Orestes, _Fab._
60. —— Alebion, _G. R. G._
61. —— Glycerion, _G. R. G._
_Eurypylus group._
62. Papilio Gyas, _Westw._
63. —— Evan, _Db._
64. —— Cloanthus, _Westw._
65. —— _Sarpedon_, L. (Mal.).
66. —— Chiron, _Wall._
67. —— _Jason_, Esp. (Mal.).
68. —— _Agamemnon_, L. (Mal.).
69. —— _Rama_, Feld. (Mal.).
4. Chinese species.
61. Indian species.
4. Ceylon species.
_List of the_ PAPILIONIDÆ _of the Australian Region_.
_Ornithoptera (Priamus group)._
1. Ornithoptera _Poseidon_, Db. (Mal.).
2. —— Richmondia, _G. R. G._
_Papilio_ (Sect. A).
_Polydorus group._
3. Papilio _Leodamas_, Wall. (Mal.).
4. —— _Liris_, Godt. (Mal.).
5. —— Godartianus, _Bd._ (Pacific Islands).
_Papilio_ (Sect. B).
_Helenus group._
6. Papilio Capaneus, _Westw._
7. —— Ilioneus, _Don._
_Ulysses group._
8. Papilio Ulyssinus, _Westw._
9. —— Montrouzieri, _Bd._ (New Caledonia).
_Pammon group._
10. Papilio Canopus, _Westw._
_Erectheus group._
11. Papilio Erectheus, _Don._
12. —— Amyntor, _Bd._ (New Caledonia).
_Papilio_ (Sect. C).
_Erithonius group._
13. Papilio _Erithonius_, Cr. (Mal.).
_Anactor group._
14. Papilio Anactor, _McL._
_Papilio_ (Sect. D).
_Antiphates group._
15. Papilio Leosthenes, _Db._
16. —— _Permatus_, G. R. G. (Mal.).
_Eurypylus group._
17. Papilio _Sarpedon_, L. (Mal.).
18. —— Gelon, _Bd._ (New Caledonia).
19. —— Lycaon, _Westw._
20. —— Macleayanus, _Leach._
21. —— Scottianus, _Feld._ (Ash Islands).
22. Eurycus Cressida, _Fab._
6. Pacific Islands.
16. Australia.
_Catalogue of Malayan_ PAPILIONIDÆ.
ORNITHOPTERA (Boisd.).
[Illustration:
Fig. 1.
Anal valves of _O. Amphrisius_.
]
The characters in the _larva_ and _pupa_ which have been supposed to
distinguish this genus from PAPILIO are erroneous, or at least do not
exist in all the species. My own observations on _O. Poseidon_ show that
the _larva_ has no “external sheath” to the thoracic tentacles, and that
the suspending thread passes round the pupa, and is not “fastened on
each side to a silky tubercle.” There remain therefore only the
characters of the perfect insect, the most important of which are the
anal valves in the male. These are very large, ovate or rounded,
coriaceous, and not hairy, and are furnished with projecting points or
spines (sometimes very conspicuous) which serve to attach the male more
firmly to the female _in copulâ_. In several species I have observed,
these points or hooks were buried in the protruded anal gland of the
female, and thus effectually prevented the great weight of the insects
causing them to separate upon suddenly taking flight. The great strength
and size of these insects, the thick texture of their wings, their long
curved and stout antennæ, their peculiar form, colour, and distribution,
are the only other characters that separate them from _Papilio_. Though
these may not perhaps be technically sufficient, I think it advisable
and convenient to retain a genus so well known and long established.
_Ornithoptera_ is pre-eminently a Malayan genus, seventeen species
inhabiting the archipelago, one (_Rhadamanthus_, Bd.) India and China,
one (_Darsius_, G. R. Gray) peculiar to Ceylon, one (_Richmondia_, G. R.
Gray) North Australia. _O. Victoriæ_, G. R. Gray, from some island east
of New Guinea, should probably be included in the Malayan list; and
_Æacus_, Felder, from an unknown locality. The following are the
well-established Malayan species.
a. _Priamus_ group.
1. ORNITHOPTERA PRIAMUS, Linnæus.
♂. _Papilio Priamus_, L.; Cram. Pap. Ex. t. 23. f. A, B; Godart,
Enc. Méth. ix. p. 25. _O. Priamus_, Bd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 173.
♀. _P. Panthous_, L.; Cram. Pap. Ex. t. 123. f. A, t. 124. f. A.
This may be at once distinguished from all the allied species with which
it has been often confounded—in the _male_, by the more rounded and
deeply scalloped hind wings, with larger black spots and a broader
border, the upper wings with no green on the median nervure or its
branches, and the sooty patch extending only to the second median
nervule; in the _female_, by the very constant and peculiar light
olive-brown colour, the absence of any spots in the discoidal cell of
the upper wings, and the broad shallow scallops of the hinder margin.
_Hab._ Amboyna and Ceram, probably also Bouru (_Wall._).
2. ORNITHOPTERA POSEIDON, Doubleday.
_O. Poseidon_, Db. Ann. of Nat. Hist. xvi. p. 173; Westwood, Cat. of
Orient. Ent. pl. 11, 14.
The numerous specimens of _Ornithoptera_ which I obtained in various
parts of New Guinea and the adjacent islands show so much instability of
form, colouring, and even of neuration, no two individuals being exactly
alike, that I am obliged to include them all in one variable species, to
which I believe must also be referred _O. Pronomus_, G. R. Gray, from
Cape York, _O. Euphorion_, G. R. Gray, from North Australia, _O.
Archideus_, G. R. Gray (ex Boisd.), erroneously said to be from Celebes,
and _O. Boisduvalii_, Montrouzier, from Woodlark Island.
Var. _a_, Aru Islands (_Wall._). _O. Arruana_, Feld. Lep. Frag. p. 24.
Individuals from this locality differ in the arrangement of the
nervures; in some the third subcostal nervure of the upper wings
branches from the same point with the upper disco-cellular, in others
considerably beyond it; the points from which the subcostal nervures
branch also vary. The amount of green colour on the median nervure and
its branches varies. In some specimens there is a spot at the anal angle
of lower wings beneath, agreeing with _O. Pronomus_, G. R. Gray; but
this is generally wanting.
Var. _b_, Dorey, Salwatty, south-west coast of New Guinea (_Wall._).
These agree very closely with _O. Poseidon_, as figured by Westwood;
they differ individually in the same manner as the last, and also in the
length of the lower disco-cellular nervure on the under wings. They have
generally no golden spots beneath the wings. They vary also in the
outline of the under wings, the outer and anal angles being more acute
in some specimens than in others. Some have the under wings of a uniform
green entirely without spots, while others have a range of black spots
more or less fully developed.
Var. _c_, Waigiou (_Wall._). _Archideus_, G. R. Gray, ♀.
This agrees with the last; but the male is of a more delicate green than
any of the others, and has less of that colour on the median veins. On
the under side there are no golden spots. The whole surface has a golden
tinge, and the central portion of the lower wings is tinged with
amber-brown.
The females of all the above vary extremely, much more even than the
males, and from the same locality two specimens are rarely alike. The
discoidal cell is in some specimens more than half occupied by a whitish
patch, while in others there are only a few small spots. One of my
specimens from Salwatty almost exactly agrees with that figured by
Westwood (Cat. of Or. Ent. pl. 14) as from Cape York. One of the Waigiou
specimens is the same as _Archideus_, G. R. G., figured by Boisduval
(Voy. de l’Astrolabe, t. 4. f. 1, 2); and another, from New Guinea,
differs very little from _Euphorion_, G. R. G. (Brit. Mus. Cat. Lep. pt.
1. pl. 2. f. 3), from North Australia.
From these facts I am led to conclude that we have here a variable form
spread over an extensive area, and kept variable by the continual
intercrossing of individuals, which would otherwise segregate into
distinct and sharply defined races. The same area is inhabited by many
species of birds common to all parts of it; and just as the birds of
Ceram and Amboyna are almost all distinct species from those of New
Guinea, so do we find those islands inhabited by the _Ornithoptera
Priamus_, a well-marked and constant species, readily distinguishable in
either sex from the inconstant forms of New Guinea proper. The same
parallel holds in North Australia. Many New Guinea species of birds
extend, with very slight variation, to the country about Cape York; but
when we reach the Moreton Bay district all these have disappeared, and
we find only true Australian species. So the variable forms of _O.
Poseidon_ reach North Australia and Cape York, while in the Moreton Bay
district we find the comparatively well-marked species _O. Richmondia_.
Similar causes, whether geographical or climatal, have thus produced an
analogous distribution in these widely separated groups of animals.
3. ORNITHOPTERA CRŒSUS, Felder.
_O. Crœsus_, Feld. Wien. Ent. Monats., Dec. 1859. _O. Crœsus_, G. R.
Gray, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1859, p. 424.
_Hab._ Batchian (Moluccas) (_Wall._).
Local form, _a._—_Male_: has the orange colour of the upper surface of a
much deeper fiery-red hue; on the under surface, the black spots of the
lower wings are nearer the margin, and the yellow spots below them are
entirely absent; there is also a green line between the subcostal
nervure and the margin; on the under surface of the fore wings the green
patch in the discoidal cell extends to its base, and is reflexed in a
narrow line along its upper edge.
_Female_: differs still more from that sex in _O. Crœsus_; the white
markings on all the wings are so large as almost to fill up the spaces
between the veins, the lower part of the discoidal cell in both upper
and under wings being also occupied with a whitish patch; the range of
spots occupying the posterior margin are of a dusky yellow colour.
_Hab._ Ternate (♂), Gilolo (♀) (_Wall._).
This well-marked local form is no doubt peculiar to Gilolo and the small
adjacent islands, as the original species is to Batchian.
I was three months in the island of Batchian before I obtained a
specimen of this fine insect, which I had seen once or twice only flying
high in the air. I at length came upon it flying about a beautiful
cinchonaceous shrub with white bracts and yellow flowers (_Mussænda_,
sp.); and having cleared a path round about, I visited the place every
morning on my way to the forest, and once or twice a week had the
satisfaction of capturing a fine male specimen of _O. Crœsus_. The
females were more plentiful and more easily caught. I afterwards sent
out one of my men with a net every day to look after this insect only.
He would stay out all day long, wandering up a broad rocky torrent,
where the males flew up and down occasionally or settled on the rocks
which just appeared above the water. He generally brought me one, and
sometimes even two or three specimens; and thus, with those that I
myself captured at the flowers, I secured a fine series of this richly
coloured species.
4. ORNITHOPTERA TITHONUS, De Haan.
_O. Tithonus_, De Haan, Verh. Nat. Gesch. Ned. t. 1. f. 1.
_Hab._ S.W. Coast of New Guinea (_Leyden Museum_).
This remarkable species must be very rare, as I never saw it in any part
of the New Guinea district that I visited; nor was it seen during the
exploration, a few years ago, by a Dutch steamer which visited the part
of the coast where the only specimen known was said to have been
obtained.
5. ORNITHOPTERA URVILLIANA, Guérin.
_Papilio Urvilliana_, Guér. Voy. de la Coquille, Lép. t. 13. f. 1, 2,
♂.
_O. Urvilliana_, Boisd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 175.
_Hab._ New Ireland (_Paris Museum_).
b. _Pompeus_ group.
6. ORNITHOPTERA REMUS, Cramer.
_Papilio Remus_, Cr. Pap. Ex. t. 135. f. A, t. 136. f. A (♀), t. 386.
f. A, B (♂); Fab. Syst. Ent. iii. 1. p. 11.
_O. Remus_, Bd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 176. _Papilio Panthous_ ♂, Clerck,
Icon. t. 18 (♀).
_Hab._ Amboyna, Ceram, Gilolo, Morty Island, Sulla Island, Celebes
(_Wall._).
The specimens above quoted agree well with Cramer’s figures. The female
from the Sulla Islands differs only in having more yellow towards the
anal angle of the lower wings. The specimens figured by Cramer in pls.
10, 11, under the name of “_Hypolitus_” seem to be a remarkable variety,
in which the female has much of the character of the male. Messrs.
Doubleday and G. R. Gray have adopted _Panthous_ as the specific name of
this insect; but this name was first used by Linnæus for the female of
_Priamus_ only, in the 10th ed. of the ‘Systema Naturæ’ (1758). Clerck
(in 1759) adopted the name, but supposed he had found the male in the
female of _Remus_. Linnæus, in Mus. Lud. Ulric. (1764), and in the 12th
ed. of the ‘Systema Naturæ’ (1766), adopts this error, so far as
referring to Clerck’s two figures; but in both these works his
description refers only to the female of _P. Priamus_, indicating that
the supposed other sex (_P. Remus_) was not known to him personally. The
name of _Panthous_ must therefore altogether drop, it having been
applied to this species only through a double error—first, that of
Linnæus, in supposing his _Panthous_ to be distinct from _Priamus_, and
then that of Clerck, in thinking that a female _Remus_ was the male of
the Linnean _Panthous_.
7. ORNITHOPTERA HELENA, Linnæus.
♂. _P. Helena_, Cram. Pap. Ex. t. 140. f. A, B. _O. Helena_, Boisd.
Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 177.
♀. _P. Amphimedon_, Cram. Pap. Ex. t. 194. f. A. _O. Amphimedon_,
Boisd. Sp. Gén. p. 176.
_Hab._ Amboyna and Ceram (_Wall._).
The females from these localities are always sooty, with the spots and
markings on the hinder wings of a dull buff-colour even in the freshest
specimens.
_a._ Local form _Bouruensis_.—_Male_: exactly resembles the Amboyna
specimens, except that the yellow patch is more variable in form and
extent.
_Female_: nearly black, and with the markings on the lower wings almost
as pure and deep yellow as in the males: size a little smaller than in
the type.
_Hab._ Bouru (_Wall._).
_b._ Local form _Papuensis_.—_Female_: sooty black, the two first
branches of the subcostal nervure margined with whitish near their
origin; markings of the lower wings of the same tint of orange-yellow as
is _O. Helena_ ♂, but not so glossy.
_Male_ not known.
_Hab._ New Guinea, Salwatty (_Wall._).
_c._ Local form _Celebensis_.—_Male_: wings a little more pointed than
in _O. Helena_; yellow patch of lower wings extending nearer to the
posterior margin, and bounded towards the abdominal margin by the first
branch of the median nervure. Beneath, having the nervures between the
discoidal cell and the outer border ashy-margined.
_Female_ not known.
_Hab._ Macassar (Celebes) (_Wall._).
_Remarks._—Of these three local modifications of _O. Helena_, the first
is very distinct in the female, but not separable in the male sex. Of
the second and third, only one sex is known; and they may very probably
prove to be well-marked species when more materials are obtained.
8. ORNITHOPTERA LEDA, n. s.
_Male_: upper wings elongate, triangular, glossy black, quite uniform
and immaculate; the outer margin delicately white-marked at the
termination of the nervures. Lower wings yellow, as in the allied
species, with a black border about the same width as in _O. Pompeus_ on
the outer and abdominal margins, narrower on the inner margin; the
posterior scalloping of the yellow patch not so deep as in _O. Pompeus_,
and having a spot at the anal angle connected more or less with the
margin.
The under surface differs from that of _O. Pompeus_ by the ashy margins
of the veins of the upper wings being entirely absent, and in having
much less white on the outer edge. There are no submarginal spots except
the anal one, much red at the base of the wings, and no black spots on
the abdomen.
_Female_: this sex varies very much, some having the upper wings
immaculate, while others have the veins about the end of the discoidal
cell broadly margined with whitish. The marginal series of spots on the
lower wings vary as they do in _O. Pompeus_ and _O. Amphrisius_. The
best distinction from _O. Pompeus_ (♀) seems to be the more elongated
wings, the less crenellated margin, and the more produced outer angle of
the lower wings. The yellow patch is also of a deeper colour both on the
upper and under surfaces.
_Hab._ Celebes (Macassar and Menado) (_Wall._)
9. ORNITHOPTERA POMPEUS, Cramer.
_P. Pompeus_, Cr. Pap. Ex. t. 25. f. A (♂). _P. Minos_, Cr. Pap. Ex.
t. 195. f. A (♀). _P. Heliacon_, Fab. Ent. Syst. 3. i. p. 19, 60.
_O. Heliacon_, Boisd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 178.
_Hab._ Sumatra, Borneo, Java, Lombock (_Wall._), India (var.).
_Remark._—The form that occurs in India, in its more elongate wings and
darker colouring, approaches very closely to _O. Rhadamanthus_.
10. ORNITHOPTERA NEPHEREUS, G. R. Gray.
_P. Astenous_, Eschscholtz, Voy. Kotzebue, t. 4. f. A, B, C. (nec
Fab.).
_O. Nephereus_, G. R. G., List of Lep. B. M. Papilionidæ, p. 6.
_Hab._ Philippine Islands.
_Remark._—This is quite distinct from _O. Rhadamanthus_, Bd., with which
it has generally been identified.
11. ORNITHOPTERA MAGELLANUS, Felder.
_O. Magellanus_, Feld. Lep. Nov. Phil. p. 11.
_Hab._ North of Luzon (Philippines).
_Remark._—This fine species has a beautiful opalescent glow on the lower
wings when viewed obliquely.
12. ORNITHOPTERA CRITON, Felder.
_O. Criton_, Feld. Lep. Fragm. p. 49.
_Hab._ Batchian, Ternate, Gilolo, Morty Island (_Wall._).
13. ORNITHOPTERA PLATO, n. s.
_Male_: resembles _O. Criton_ in the form and extent of the yellow
patch, but the upper wings differ in having the outer half of a lighter
tint; on the under surface this outer half of the wing is of a light
ash-colour. Abdomen almost wholly black beneath. No red patches at the
base of the wings, or any red collar.
_Female_ unknown.
_Hab._ Timor (_Wall._).
This is a very distinct species, though at first sight resembling
several others. I obtained a single male specimen only.
14. ORNITHOPTERA HALIPHRON, Boisduval.
_O. Haliphron_, Bd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 181 (♂); Felder, Lep. Fragm. p.
37, Taf. ii. f. 2, 3 (♂, ♀).
_Hab._ Macassar (Celebes) (_Wall._).
15. ORNITHOPTERA AMPHRISIUS, Cramer.
_P. Amphrisius_, Cr. Pap. Ex. t. 219. f. A; Godardt, Enc. Méth. ix. p.
27, pt.
_O. Amphrisius_, Bd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 178.
_Hab._ Malacca, Java, Borneo (_Wall._).
This may be readily distinguished from the allied species by the upper
wings in the male being yellow-marked, and by the absence of red spots
at the base of the wings beneath in both sexes.
c. _Brookeana_ group.
16. ORNITHOPTERA BROOKEANA, Wallace.
_O. Brookeana_, Wall. Proc. Ent. Soc. 1855, p. 104; Hewitson, Ex.
Butt. Papilionidæ, i. f. 1. _Papilio Trogon_, V. Voll. Tijdschrift
voor Ent. 1860, p. 69, pl. 6.
_Hab._ Borneo (Sarawak) (_Wall._), Sumatra (_Leyden Museum_).
_Remarks._—I have been in much doubt about the position of this
remarkable species, and was for some time inclined to place it among the
Papilios. It agrees, however, far better with _Ornithoptera_ in the form
and stoutness of the wings, the long stout and curved antennæ, the red
collar and patches at the base of the wings beneath, the abdominal fold,
and the flight and general appearance. It is powerful on the wing, and
occasionally settles on the ground in damp sunny places. It inhabits the
interior of North-west Borneo and the mountains of West Sumatra. The
female is unknown. It is peculiar in the great length of the discoidal
cell of the wings and its altogether unique style of coloration, and
must be considered as the type of a distinct group of the genus
_Ornithoptera_.
PAPILIO.
This is without doubt the finest and most remarkable genus of Diurnal
Lepidoptera. About 360 species are now known, all, except ten, being
tropical or subtropical. I have given at p. 23 the characters of the
sections and groups into which I divide the Malayan species.
SECTION A.
a. _Nox_ group.
17. PAPILIO NOX, Swainson.
_P. Nox._, Sw. Zool. Ill. pl. 102; Horsf. Lep. Ins. E. I. C. pl. 1. f.
1; Boisd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 277.
_P. Neesius_, Zink. Nov. Act. Acad. Nat. Cur. xv. t. 14. f. 1.
_Hab._ Java (♂, ♀) (_Wall._), Penang (♂) (_Brit. Mus._).
18. PAPILIO NOCTIS, Hewitson. Tab. V. fig. 1 (♂)[12].
Footnote 12:
In all the Plates, the wings on one side of each figure are detached
from the body, and represent the _under surface_ of the same insect.
In one case only (Tab. VII. f. 1.) the upper surfaces of two varieties
of the same species are given.
_P. Noctis_, Hewits. Proc. Zool. Soc. 1859, p. 423, pl. 66. f. 5 (♀).
_Male_: differs from the same sex of _P. Nox_ by the broader apex of the
fore wings, and by the hind wings being more elongate, more glossy, and
especially by the entire nondentated hinder margin.
_Hab._ Borneo (Sarawak) (_Wall._), (♂, ♀ Mus. nost.)
19. PAPILIO EREBUS, Wallace.
_P. Nox_, var., De Haan, Verh. Nat. Gesch. t. 5. f. 3 (♀).
_Hab._ Malacca (_Wall._), Banjermassing, Borneo (_De Haan_).
_Remarks._—I am somewhat doubtful of the species, the female only being
known; but it differs so strikingly from the same sex of _P. Nox_ and
_P. Noctis_ (the former of which seems very constant), that I think it
better to separate it in order to draw attention to other specimens that
may exist in collections. It differs from _P. Nox_ (♀) by its narrower
and more elongate hind wings, which are black, glossed with steel-blue;
the fore wings are black, with the veins beyond the cell clearly
white-margined. The lower margin is also much less strongly dentated.
20. PAPILIO VARUNA, White.
♀. _P. Varuna_, Wh., Entomologist, 1842, p. 280; Westw. Ann. Nat.
Hist. ix. p. 37. _P. Chara_, Westw. Arc. Ent. pl. 66. f. 2.
♂. _P. Astorion_, Westw. Ann. Nat. Hist. ix. p. 37; Arc. Ent. pl. 66.
f. 1.
_Hab._ Pulo Penang, Sylhet.
21. PAPILIO SEMPERI, Felder.
_P. Semperi_, Feld. Lep. Nov. Philipp, pp. 1, 11.
_Hab._ Luzon, Philippines (♂, ♀).
N.B. The _Philoxenus_ group peculiar to India follows on after these.
b. _Coon_ group.
22. PAPILIO NEPTUNUS, Guérin.
_P. Neptunus_, Guér. Deless. Voy. dans l’Inde, p. 69, t. 19 (_P.
Saturnus_).
_Hab._ Malacca, Borneo (♂, ♀) (_Wall._).
23. PAPILIO COON, Fabricius.
_P. Coon_, Fab. Ent. Syst. iii. 1. pp. 10, 27; Don. Ins. China, pl.
24. f. 1; Lucas, Lep. Ex. t. 6. f. 2; Boisd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 201.
_Hab._ Java, Sumatra (_Wall._), Borneo (_De Haan_).
_Remarks._—The specimens from Sumatra are constantly larger than those
from Java. The Indian form, in which the markings are red instead of
yellow, with other differences, I consider a distinct species, for which
I propose the name of _P. Doubledayi_, after the late Mr. Edward
Doubleday of the British Museum[13].
Footnote 13:
PAPILIO DOUBLEDAYI, Wallace. (_P. Coon_, var., B. M. Cat.)
_Above_: upper wings as in _P. Coon_, but the base darker. Lower wings
broader than in _P. Coon_; the white spot in the cell toothed below,
and divided by one or two faint blackish lines, cut off at the middle
of the cell by the black triangular basal patch. The marginal spot
next within the tail wanting; the two anal spots, end of abdomen, and
its rings (which are yellow in _P. Coon_) red; collar behind the eyes
and palpi (which are black in _P. Coon_) also red.
_Beneath_: base of lower wings broadly black; white spots all much
broader and rounder than in _P. Coon_; sides of the thorax, end of the
abdomen, and the marginal spots in the caudal and anal region red.
The female differs in a corresponding manner from _P. Coon_ ♀. Size
about the same.
_Hab._ Moulmein, Assam.
c. _Polydorus_ group.
24. PAPILIO POLYDORUS, Linnæus.
_P. Polydorus_, L.; Clerck, Icon. t. 33. f. 3. _P. Leobates_, Reinw.
Verh. Nat. Gesch. Zool. t. 6. f. 3 (♀).
_Hab._ Ceram, Matabello Island, Bouru, Batchian (♂, ♀) (_Wall._).
Local form or variety _a_.—The white markings on the fore wings forming
a patch below the cell; red spots on the hind wings nearer to the
posterior margin and that next the anal angle larger.
_Hab._ Ké Island, Aru Island (♂, ♀) (_Wall._).
25. PAPILIO LEODAMAS, n. s. Tab. V. fig. 2 (♂).
_P. Polydorus_, in Brit. Mus. List of Papilionidæ, p. 10.
_Male._ Above, glossy black, upper wings immaculate (the veins
pale-margined in the female). Lower wings with a rounded white spot
divided into six parts by fine nervures, of which the outermost and that
in the cell are sometimes reduced to points; marginal row of red spots
obscured with black, and but faintly indicated.
Beneath, the white patch has a small red spot attached to the part next
the anal angle; and the marginal row of six red spots are clearly
marked, that at the anal angle being twice the size of the rest. Wings
short, much rounded, scarcely or not at all produced in the caudal
region.
Expanse of wings 3¾ in. to 4 in.
_Hab._ New Guinea, Mysol (♂, ♀) (_Wall._), Rockingham Bay (Australia),
(_Brit. Mus._, ♀).
26. PAPILIO DIPHILUS, Esper.
_P. Diphilus_, Esp. Ausl. Schmett. t. 40. f. 1. P. _Polydorus_, Boisd.
Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 267; and most authors.
_Hab._ Java, Malacca (_Wall._), Philippine Islands, India.
_Remarks._—The specimens from Manilla are larger, and the females
paler-coloured, than those from other localities, all of which have
slight characteristic peculiarities; but they also vary in the
individuals from each locality, so that no perfect segregation of local
forms has yet taken place.
27. PAPILIO ANTIPHUS, Fabricius.
_P. Antiphus_, Fab. Syst. Ent. iii. 1. pp. 10–28; Boisd. Sp. Gén. Lép.
p. 266.
_Hab._ Sumatra, Borneo, Lombock, Java (_Wall._), Philippine Islands.
_Remarks._—The Philippine form (_P. Kotzebuea_, Eschsch.) is rather
larger and of a more uniform glossy black than those from other
localities. _P. Theseus_, Cram., has been erroneously supposed to be the
female of this species, whereas it is the female of one of the _Pammon_
group, belonging to a different section of the genus. De Haan figures
_P. Theseus_ as _P. Antiphus_ ♀, in Verh. Nat. Gesch. t. 8. f. 2. As has
been already pointed out, _P. Theseus_ mimics this species.
28. PAPILIO POLYPHONTES, Boisduval.
_P. Polyphontes_, Bd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 268. _P. Hegemon_, G. R. G.,
List of Papilionidæ in B. Mus.
_Hab._ Celebes, Batchian, Morty Isl. (♂, ♀) (_Wall._).
_Remarks._—The markings vary from pure white to a smoky tint; but
otherwise all the specimens from the above localities agree. De Haan
gives (Verh. Nat. Gesch. t. 8. f. 4) a female of one of the _Pammon_
group as _P. Polyphontes_ ♀.
29. PAPILIO ANNÆ, Felder.
_P. Annæ_, Feld. Lep. Nov. Philipp, p. 1.
_Hab._ Mindoro (Philippines).
30. PAPILIO LIRIS, Godart.
_P. Liris_, God. Enc. Méth. iv. p. 72; Boisd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 268; De
Haan, Verh. Nat. Gesch. p. 38, t. 4. f. 3 (♀).
_Hab._ Timor (_Wall._), N.W. Australia (_Brit. Mus._).
_Remarks._—The Australian specimens are smaller. The female of _P.
Œnomaus_ mimics this species, as has been already mentioned (p. 22).
Both species were taken by myself on the same spot, and, though such
large and conspicuous insects, they could never be distinguished without
a close examination after capture. The female of this species differs
very little from the male, being rather larger, with broader wings and
less vivid coloration.
SECTION B.
d. _Ulysses_ group.
31. PAPILIO ULYSSES, Linnæus.
_P. Ulysses_, L., Cramer, Pap. Ex. t. 121. f. A, B (♀), t. 122 A (♀).
_P. Diomedes_, Boisd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 202.
_Hab._ Amboyna, Ceram (♂, ♀) (_Wall._).
_Remark._—The largest specimens of this glorious insect are found in the
island of Amboyna, where it is rather common, hovering about the forest
pathways. It sometimes visits the gardens in the town of Amboyna.
32. PAPILIO PENELOPE, n. s.
_Male_: rather smaller than _P. Ulysses_. Upper wings with six black
cottony patches, and all separate from each other; whereas in _P.
Ulysses_ there are seven, and the four lower ones are always united at
their margins. The blue colour fills the discoidal cell, and generally
extends beyond it at the extremity; the upper disco-cellular nervure not
black-bordered as in _P. Ulysses_. Lower wings with the blue colour
extending further along the abdominal margin, and not quite so far
towards the outer angle.
_Female_: has the blue colour of the same form and extent as in _P.
Ulysses_ ♀, but of the same bright tint as in the male; the marginal
lunules more deeply curved.
Expanse of wings 5 inches.
_Hab._ New Guinea, Waigiou, Aru Is. (♂, ♀) (_Wall._).
_Remark._—As all the other forms closely allied to _P. Ulysses_ have
received names (_Telemachus_, Montr., _Chaudoiri_, Feld., _Telegonus_,
Feld., and _Ulyssinus_, Westw.), I have also given one to this form
peculiar to New Guinea and the Papuan Islands, the distinctive
characters of which, though very slight, seem sufficiently constant.
33. PAPILIO TELEGONUS, Felder.
_P. Telegonus_, Feld. Lep. Fragm. p. 50.
_Hab._ Batchian, Gilolo (♂, ♀) (_Wall._).
_Remark._—A very distinct species, separated from _P. Ulysses_ by the
extent of the cottony patch on the upper wings, and by the different
form and colour of the blue markings.
34. PAPILIO TELEMACHUS, Montrouzier.
_P. Telemachus_, Mont. Ann. de la Soc. d’Agriculture de Lyon, 1856, p.
395.
_Hab._ Woodlark Isl. (S. E. of New Guinea).
_Remark._—This is a small species (exp. 4 in.), with less blue on the
lower wings.
e. _Peranthus_ group.
35. PAPILIO PERANTHUS, Fabricius.
_P. Peranthus_, Fab. Syst. Ent. iii. 1. p. 15; Don. Ins. China, pl.
26; Lucas, Lep. Ex. t. 12. f. 2; Boisd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 203.
_Hab._ Java, Lombock (_Wall._).
36. PAPILIO PERICLES, n. sp. Tab. VI. fig. 1 (♂).
Wings more elongate, and upper wings more pointed, than in _P.
Peranthus_.
_Above_: black, the basal half of a silvery blue, greenish towards the
base of the costa, and purplish on the outer margin, where on the lower
wings it shades off into separate scales. On the submedian and two lower
branches of the median nervure are elongate black cottony patches as in
_P. Ulysses_, the lower ones joined at the base, the upper one separate;
above these the outer margin is of a brown-black, with a few atoms of
yellow and blue scales towards the apex; the blue colour extends beyond
the discoidal cell of the upper wings in a line parallel with the outer
margin, on the lower wings it rounds away to the anal angle, and below
it are five submarginal lunules of blue atoms, the outer one almost
obsolete, and that next the tail largest and most deeply coloured.
Thorax and body green.
_Beneath_: as in _P. Peranthus_, but the posterior range of lunules
margined with brilliant blue and orange brown.
Expanse of wings 3½ inches.
_Hab._ Timor (♂) (_Wall._).
37. PAPILIO PHILIPPUS, Wallace. Tab. VI. fig. 3.
_P. Peranthus_, var. A, Boisd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 204.
_Above_: basal half of the wings of a rich green-blue, the rest black,
with a triangular patch at the apex of the uppers, formed of green atoms
situated between the nervures; on the lower wings six large submarginal
lunules, the lowest of which sends out some green atoms along the tail.
The black cottony spot is of a different form from that of _P.
Peranthus_, the separate patches being only joined in the middle, and
two of them extending along the nervures in a point nearly to the
discoidal cell.
_Beneath_: brilliantly marked with lunules of buff, black, and blue.
Expanse of wings 4½–5 inches.
_Hab._ Moluccas (_Wall._).
_Remarks._—My specimen from Ceram is of a greener tinge, and the colour
extends a little beyond the end of the discoidal cell; that from
Batchian is smaller, of a bluer tinge, and the colour of less extent.
The species seems to be very rare.
38. PAPILIO MACEDON, Wallace. Tab. VI. fig. 2 (♂).
_P. Peranthus_, var. B., Boisd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 204.
Boisduval’s description sufficiently shows the remarkable differences of
form, size, and colouring which this species presents, compared with
that of which he considers it a variety. The female agrees with the
male, except that the colours are a little less brilliant, and the
cottony patches of the fore wings are absent.
Expanse of wings, ♂, 5 inches; ♀, 5–6 inches.
_Hab._ Macassar, Menado (Celebes) (_Wall._).
39. PAPILIO BRAMA, Guérin.
_P. Brama_, Guér. Rev. Zool. 1840, p. 43, t. 1. f. 3, 4. _P.
Palinurus_, De Haan, Verh. Nat. Gesch. pp. 5, 29.
_Hab._ Malacca, Sumatra (_Wall._).
40. PAPILIO DÆDALUS, Felder.
_P. Dædalus_, Feld. Lep. Nov. Philipp. p. 2.
_Hab._ Luzon (Philippine Islands).
41. PAPILIO BLUMEI, Boisduval. Tab. VI. fig. 4 (♂).
_P. Blumei_, Boisd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 206.
_Hab._ Menado (Celebes) (_Wall._). “Amboyna,” _Bd._, error of
locality.
_Remark._—This very fine species comes nearest to the last, but is of
much larger size, and is conspicuous by its brilliantly coloured tails.
42. PAPILIO ARJUNA, Horsfield.
_P. Arjuna_, Horsf. Cat. Lep. E. I. Comp. pl. 1. f. 14; Boisd. Sp.
Gén. Lép. p. 209. _P. Arjuna_, var. _a._, Brit. Mus. Cat. of
Papilionidæ, p. 17.
_Hab._ Java, Borneo, Sumatra (_Wall._).
The Bornean form differs from that of Java by its larger size, and on
the under surface by the three middle lunules being formed of a violet
line only, with scarcely a trace of red beneath it, and by the
orange-red lunules both at the anal and outer angles being divided (not
margined) by a violet line. The scales sprinkled at the base of the
lower wings are white and blue, and are neither so dense nor do they
extend so far as the yellowish scales of the Java specimens. In all
these particulars the Sumatra specimens are somewhat intermediate, but
approach most to those of Borneo. This is one of the examples which show
the isolation of Java, notwithstanding its proximity to Sumatra.
f. _Memnon_ group.
(N.B. The _Protenor_ group of India is intermediate between this and the
last group.)
43. PAPILIO MEMNON, Linnæus. Tab. I. figs. 1 (♂), 2, 3, 4 (♀s).
♂, _P. Memnon_, L., Cram. Pap. Ex. t. 91. f. C (♂); Boisd. Sp. Gén.
Lép. p. 192.
♀, 1st dimorphic form, _P. Anceus_, Cr. Pap. Ex. t. 222. f. A, B.
? _P. Laomedon_, Cr. Pap. Ex. t. 50. f. A, B; De Haan, Verh. Nat.
Gesch. p. 24, t. 3. f. 2.
♀, 2nd dimorphic form, _P. Achates_, Cr. Pap. Ex. t. 243. A.
_Hab._ Java, Sumatra (_Wall._).
Local form _a_.—_Male_: border of posterior wings beneath narrow and of
an ashy-blue colour.
_Female_: near _P. Anceus_, Cr., and _P. Laomedon_, Cr., but of an
olive-ashy colour.
_Hab._ Borneo (_Wall._).
Local form _b_.—_Male_: band on under side of posterior wings ashy; the
spots large, with reddish-orange lunules between the two series, and
below the four outer ones.
_Hab._ Lombock (_Wall._).
_Remarks._—The difference between the male and the 2nd form of female is
so great, both in form and colouring, that they could not have been
imagined to be the same, had they not been bred from the same larvæ.
They have also been taken “_in copulâ_” by myself. Each form varies
considerably, both individually and locally; yet there are none
intermediate between the two. I consider them, therefore, as presenting
a fine instance of dimorphism; and I also believe that the second form
mimics _P. Coon_, for reasons which I have explained at p. 21.
44. PAPILIO ANDROGEUS, Cramer.
♂, _P. Androgeus_, Cr. Pap. Ex. t. 91. f. A, B.
♀, 1st dimorphic form, _P. Agenor_, L., Cr. Pap. Ex. t. 32. f. A, B.
♀, 2nd dimorphic form, _P. Achates_, Cr. Pap. Ex. t. 182. f. A, B; _P.
Alcanor_, Cr. Pap. Ex. t. 166, f. A.
_Hab._ Malacca (_Wall._), India.
_Remarks._—Ever since it was discovered that the insects figured by the
old authors as _P. Anceus_, _P. Agenor_, _P. Achates_, &c. were varying
females of _P. Memnon_ and _P. Androgeus_, the whole of these were very
naturally concluded to belong to one varying species. An examination of
many extensive collections, however, has convinced me that the
continental forms, on the one hand, and the insular ones, on the other,
can be readily distinguished, and really form two very well-marked
species. The red lunules at the anal region beneath characterize all
specimens from India (_Androgeus_, Cr.), while these are entirely absent
in all the insular specimens (_Memnon_, Cr.); and the same
characteristic difference can be traced in a greater or less degree
throughout all the infinitely varying female specimens. My specimen from
Malacca has a faint trace only on the upper surface of the
characteristic red mark at the base of the anterior wings; in other
respects it resembles the continental individuals. This form mimics the
Indian form of _P. Coon_ (_P. Doubledayi_, Wall.).
45. PAPILIO LAMPSACUS, Boisduval.
_P. Lampsacus_, Bd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 190; De Haan, Verh. Nat. Gesch.
p. 23, t. 2. f. 2.
_Hab._ Java (♂) (_Wall._).
46. PAPILIO PRIAPUS, Boisduval.
_P. Priapus_, Bd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 190; De Haan, Verh. Nat. Gesch. p.
23, t. 2. f. 1.
_Hab._ Java (_Boisd._), Sumatra (_Raffles_), Borneo (_De Haan_).
47. PAPILIO EMALTHION, Hübner.
♂, _Iliades Emalthion_, Hübn. Samml. Exot. ii. t. 117; _P. Emalthion_,
Boisd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 196; _P. Floridor_, Godt. Enc. Méthod. ix.
p. 809; _P. Kruscusterina_ in Eschsch. Voy. Kotzebue, t. 3. f. 5.
♀, 1st form, _P. Emalthion_, Cat. of Lep. Brit. Mus. pl. 5. f. 4.
♀, 2nd form, _P. Rumanzovia_, Eschsch. Voy. Kotz. t. 2. f. 4; _P.
Descombesi_, Boisd. Sp. Gén. p. 197; _P. Floridor_, ♀. Godt. Enc.
Méth. ii. p. 809.
_Hab._ Philippine Islands.
_Remarks._—I have no doubt whatever that we have here another case of
dimorphism, and I therefore unhesitatingly place these supposed species
under one name. The male of _P. Emalthion_ very closely resembles the
next species (_P. Deiphontes_), and the 2nd form of female (_P.
Rumanzovia_, Eschsch.) as closely resembles the female of the same
species; so that there can be no doubt that Godardt was right in
describing them as the sexes of his _P. Floridor_. The female figured in
the British Museum Catalogue is intermediate between these, but has more
of the characters of the male; and it is to be remarked that both these
forms of female have arrived in Europe accompanied by the same male. I
am therefore obliged to reduce by one the hitherto received species of
Philippine Papilios.
48. PAPILIO DEIPHONTES, n. s.
_P. Deiphobus_, var. A., Bd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 201.
♂. _Above_: exactly as in _P. Deiphobus_, but having a small tooth only
in place of the tail, and the posterior band of a clear ashy blue.
_Beneath_: with the markings as in _P. Emalthion_, except that the red
patch at the base of the upper wings is smaller.
♀. Also tailless, but resembling in markings the same sex of _P.
Deiphobus_, the pale patch on the upper wings not extending into the
discoidal cell.
Expanse of wings, ♂, 5½ inches; ♀, 5¾ inches.
_Hab._ Batchian, Gilolo, Ternate, Morty Isl. (_Wall._).
49. PAPILIO DEIPHOBUS, Linnæus.
_P. Deiphobus_, L., Cramer, Pap. Ex. t. 181. f. A, B; Donovan, Ins.
Ind. pl. 17. f. 2; Lucas, Lep. Ex. t. 11; Boisd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p.
200.
♀, _P. Alcandor_, Cr. Pap. Ex. t. 40. f. A, B.
_Hab._ Ceram, Amboyna, Bouru (_Wall._).
_Remark._—A simple variety of both this and the last species frequently
occurs, in which all the markings on the under side are ochre-yellow
instead of red.
50. PAPILIO ASCALAPHUS, Boisduval.
_P. Ascalaphus_, Bd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 200 (♂); De Haan, Verh. Nat.
Gesch. p. 26, t. 1. f. 2 (♀).
_Hab._ Menado, Macassar (Celebes), Sulla Isl. (_Wall._).
51. PAPILIO ŒNOMAUS, Godardt.
_P. Œnomaus_, Godt. Encyc. Méth. ix. p. 72; Boisd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p.
190; De Haan, Verh. Nat. Gesch. p. 24, t. 4. f. 1 (♂), 2 (♀).
_Hab._ Timor (♂, ♀) (_Wall._).
_Remark._—As has been already noticed (p. 22), the female of this
species closely resembles _P. Liris_ ♀, in company with which it was
captured.
g. _Helenus_ group.
52. PAPILIO SEVERUS, Cramer.
_P. Severus_, Cr. Pap. Ex. t. 227. f. A, B (♂), t. 278. f. A, B (♀);
Boisd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 212.
_Hab._ Bouru, Ceram, Amboyna, Gilolo, Batchian, Aru Isl. (_Wall._).
_Remarks._—This species exhibits a large amount of simple variation, in
the presence or absence of a pale patch on the uppers, in the brown
submarginal marks on the lower wings, in the form and extent of the
yellow band, and in the size of the specimens. The most extreme forms,
as well as the intermediate ones, are often found in one locality and in
company with each other, indicating that over the above range continual
intermixture probably takes place, and thus prevents any one form from
becoming specialized in a restricted area. The two following
modifications of it, however, have acquired perfect stability, each in a
large island situated on the extreme limits of the species. I therefore
consider them to be distinct, though the actual differences are but
small.
53. PAPILIO PERTINAX, n. s. Tab. V. fig. 4 (♂).
_Upper side_: anterior wings rather more elongate and pointed than in
_P. Severus_, dusky brown, with faint longitudinal rows of yellow scales
in the cell, and with rather denser scales between the nervures beyond
it; these are condensed into a narrow yellowish band parallel to the
outer margin, and rather nearer to the cell than to it. Hind wings
black, with three yellowish white subquadrate spots (the upper one
smallest) situate between the outer angle and the discoidal nervule;
beyond these and continued to the anal angle are a few very faint and
minute groups of scales.
_Under side_ as above, but the transverse band on the upper wings is
whiter, and on the lower wings are seven submarginal brownish-yellow
lunules, the middle ones least marked, and those at the outer and anal
angles having above them a very small group of minute blue scales.
The female is paler-coloured, with the markings rather more diffused,
and has on the under side an imperfect ocellus at the anal angle, a row
of faint brown lunules extending to the three white spots, and two
irregular lunules of blue atoms below those next the abdominal margin.
Expanse of wings, ♂, 4¼ inches; ♀, 5 inches.
_Hab._ Macassar (Celebes) (_Wall._).
_Remark._—This species was rather abundant near Macassar, in woody
places, and was very constant in its markings and general aspect.
54. PAPILIO ALBINUS, n. s. Tab. V. fig. 5 (♂).
Wings broader than in _P. Severus_, costa less arched, tail smaller, and
the caudal margin less produced.
_Upper side_: brown-black; anterior wings with very faint horizontal
lines of yellowish scales in the cell; apical portion of the wing more
thickly powdered between the nervures, the powdering fading away towards
the outer angle. Posterior wings with a large yellowish-white patch,
commencing close to the anterior margin, widening in the middle so as to
cross the end of the cell, and ending in a triangle with prolonged apex
at the abdominal margin; the outer edge of this spot is regularly
angulated and scalloped; two very faint brown lunules occur next the
anal angle; and the outer margin is rather broadly white-edged between
the dentations.
_Under side_: the anterior wings have distinct greyish lines of scales
between the nervures in the apical region; posterior wings not dotted
with scales as in _P. Severus_, but with two or three single rows of
scales in the cell only; the yellowish band consisting of a lunule next
the upper margin, followed by three rhomboidal spots notched below, of
which the middle one is the largest, then a roundish spot and a small
horizontal mark; a row of seven submarginal lunules, of which the three
middle ones are smallest and nearly obsolete, and that at the anal angle
much the largest and, with the whitish marginal spot below it, forming
an incomplete ocellus.
Expanse of wings 3½–3¾ inches.
_Hab._ New Guinea (♂) (_Wall._).
55. PAPILIO PHESTUS, Guérin.
_P. Phestus_, Guér. Voyage de la Coquille, t. 14. f. 2; Bd. Voy. de
l’Astrolabe, i. p. 41; Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 212.
_Hab._ New Guinea (_Paris Museum_).
56. PAPILIO HELENUS, Linnæus.
_P. Helenus_, L.; Cramer, Pap. Ex. t. 153. f. A, B; Lucas, Lep. Ex. t.
15. f. 2; Boisd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 211.
_Hab._ China (“_type_,” _Cramer’s figure_).
Local form _a_. Has more falcate wings and longer tail; the red marks at
the anal angle beneath are divided by a violet-white mark.
_Hab._ North India.
Local form _b_. Same form of wings as the last, but smaller; the third
and fourth lunules from the anal angle beneath very small or quite
absent.
_Hab._ Java, Sumatra (_Wall._).
57. PAPILIO HECUBA, n. s. Tab. V. fig. 3 (♂).
Upper wings falcate, and their outer margin much hollowed out, as in
many of the Celebes butterflies.
♂. _Upper side_: the outer half of the anterior wings of a fine cottony
texture, as in _P. Helenus_, but more marked; the red lunule at the anal
angle wanting; the rest as in _P. Helenus_.
_Under side_: the lunules and ocelli are ochre-yellow instead of deep
red, the two outer ones very small, the third almost obsolete, and the
next two absent; the anal ocellus is bordered with blue above, and
adjoining it is a blue lunule in the place of the red one in _P.
Helenus_.
♀. _Upper side_: of a browner colour; two orange-brown ocelli at the
anal angle.
_Under side_: the lunules and ocelli all larger; the two intermediate
ones entirely absent, as in the male.
Expanse of wings 5½–5¾ inches.
_Hab._ Macassar, Menado (Celebes) (_Wall._).
58. PAPILIO ISWARA, White.
_P. Iswara_, White, Entom. 1842, p. 280; Doub. and Hew. Gen. of Diurn.
Lep. pl. 2. f. 1 (♀).
_Hab._ Penang, Malacca, Singapore, Borneo (♂, ♀) (_Wall._).
59. PAPILIO HYSTASPES, Felder.
_P. Hystaspes_, Feld. Lep. Nov. Philipp. p. 12.
_Hab._ Luzon (Philippines).
This is the Philippine form of _P. Helenus_.
60. PAPILIO ARASPES, Felder.
_P. Araspes_, Feld. Ent. Fragm. p. 17.
_Hab._ Philippine Islands.
This comes near to _P. Iswara_.
61. PAPILIO NEPHELUS, Boisduval.
_P. Nephelus_, Bd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 210; De Haan, Verh. Nat. Gesch. p.
29, t. 4. f. 4, ♂.
_Hab._ Malacca, Sumatra, Borneo (♂, ♀) (_Wall._), Assam (_Brit.
Mus._).
h. _Pammon_ group.
62. PAPILIO PAMMON, Linnæus. Tab. II. figs. 1 (♂), 3, 5, 6 (♀ ♀).
♂, _P. Pammon_, L.; Cram. Pap. Ex. t. 141. f. B; Boisd. Sp. Gén. Lép.
p. 272.
♀, _P. Polytes_, L.; Cram. Pap. Ex. t. 265. f. A, B, C.
_Hab._ Malacca, Singapore (_Wall._), China, India, Ceylon.
The continental specimens of _P. Pammon_ have all considerably developed
tails in both sexes; the insular specimens on the other hand, (which I
treat as a separate species), have only a prominent tooth or very short
tail in the males. The females also differ considerably, presenting an
analogous but distinct series of forms. In the true _P. Pammon_ the
males are very constant; but the females exist under three distinct
forms, each of them presenting more or less numerous varieties, viz.:—
_1st form_ of female. Tab. II. fig. 3.
This exactly resembles the male, except in the possession of a distinct
ocellus at the anal angle on the upper surface. Rarely a variety occurs
having in addition a submarginal row of red lunules, indicating a slight
approximation towards some varieties of the second form.
_2nd form_ of female (_P. Polytes_). Tab. II. fig. 5.
This is by far the most common form of female. A variety of this rarely
occurs, which wants the red patch at the anal angle, and has the white
patch formed of a row of spots all situated a little below the discoidal
cell. This is the nearest approach to the first form.
_3rd form_ of female (_P. Romulus_, Cram. Pap. Ex. t. 43. f. A; _P.
Mutius_, Fab., Boisd. Sp. Gén. p. 270; _P. Hector_ ♀, De Haan). Tab. II.
fig. 6.
This not uncommon Indian butterfly I consider to be a third form of the
female of _P. Pammon_. I was first led to suspect this by finding that
no males of it are known (the male and female from Ceylon, noted in the
British Museum List, I have ascertained to be both females), nor have I
been able to find any after an examination of the chief collections in
England. It is also to be observed that it has been received from no
locality which is not also inhabited by _P. Pammon_; there is no other
known Indian butterfly that can possibly be the other sex of it; and
lastly, it agrees very closely with the second form of female (_P.
Polytes_) in all its details of form, texture, and neuration; and though
at first sight having a very different aspect, specimens are to be found
which by a very slight modification could be changed so as to resemble
that form. I am therefore quite satisfied in my own mind that I am right
in sinking this species into a form of _P. Pammon_. I have already
stated my opinion that it mimics _P. Hector_, with which, however, it
has no affinity. The resemblance was such as to induce De Haan to place
it as the female of that species.
63. PAPILIO THESEUS, Cramer. Tab. II. figs. 2, 4, 7 (♀ ♀).
_P. Theseus_, Cr. Pap. Ex. t. 180. f. B (♀); Boisd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p.
276.
_P. Antiphus_ ♀, De Haan, Verh. Nat. Gesch. p. 49, t. 8. f. 2; Brit.
Mus. List. Pap. p. 12.
_P. Polyphontes_ ♀, De Haan, Verh. Nat. Gesch. t. 8. f. 4.
_P. Melanides_, De Haan, Verh. Nat. Gesch. t. 8. f. 3 (♀).
Male like _P. Pammon_ ♂, but smaller, and the tail always reduced to a
projecting tooth.
_Hab._ Java, Sumatra, Borneo, Lombock, Timor (_Wall._).
Local form _a_. Much larger; more falcate wings; a broad short tail.
_Hab._ Macassar (_Wall._)
_1st form_ of female. Tab. II. fig. 2.
Like the male, but with a very slightly marked blue and red ocellus at
the anal angle. This is very rare in the islands. I found one specimen
only in Timor, which I took “_in copulâ_” with a male almost exactly
resembling it.
_2nd form_ of female (_P. Polyphontes_ ♀, De Haan). Tab. II. fig. 4.
Like the 2nd form of _P. Pammon_ ♀; but has the pale portion of the
anterior wing of a much lighter colour, and not extending so far towards
the base of the wing; the white spot on the hind wings is more rounded,
and has always a rather large portion within the cell. This form is to
some extent local, not existing, I believe, in Sumatra, where it is
replaced by the next.
_Hab._ Borneo, Java, Timor (_Wall._).
_3rd form_ of female (_P. Theseus_, Cr.; _P. Antiphus_ ♀, De Haan). Tab.
II. fig. 7.
This is well characterized by the entire absence of the white spot from
the hind wings. The red spots and lunules remain; but in some specimens
only those in the anal region are visible, and these have a very close
resemblance to _P. Antiphus_. This is also a local form, not occurring,
I believe, in company with the last.
_Hab._ Sumatra, Lombock (_Wall._).
_4th form_ of female (_P. Melanides_, De Haan, Verh. Nat. Gesch. t. 8.
f. 3).
I consider this to be an isolated modification of _P. Theseus_, Cr.,
peculiar to Borneo. It possesses all the characteristics of a female of
this species.
_Hab._ Banjarmassing (Borneo) (_Leyden Museum_).
N.B. The 2nd, 3rd, and 4th forms of ♀ are all tailed, as in the females
of _P. Pammon_.
64. PAPILIO ALPHENOR, Cramer.
_P. Alphenor_, Cr. Pap. Ex. t. 90. f. B (♀); Boisd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p.
274 (♂, ♀); _P. Ledebouria_, Eschsch. Voy. Kotz. t. 3. f. 7.
This is very closely allied to _P. Theseus_. The male is larger, has the
caudal tooth scarcely perceptible, and on the under side has white
instead of red marginal lunules. The female is tailed, much larger than
_P. Theseus_ ♀ form 2nd, from which it further differs by the white
patch on the hind wings having the red markings blended with it, and
more prominent.
_Hab._ Celebes, Bouru, Amboyna, Ceram (_Wall._), Philippine Islands.
_1st form_ of female (_P. Ledebouria_, Eschsch.).
Like the male, but with a brown tinge and an obscure anal lunule. This
has been noticed only in the Philippine Islands.
_2nd form_ of female (_P. Alphenor_, Cr.).
Distribution the same as the male.
_3rd form_ of female (_P. Elyros_, G. R. Gray, B. M. List Pap. p. 26).
The white patch on the lower wings reduced to a small spot, or quite
absent. There are many varieties of this, showing very instructively how
such isolated forms of female as occur in the two preceding species may
have been produced by simple variation followed by a “natural selection”
of the forms best adapted to special conditions.
_Hab._ Philippine Islands (_B. M._)
65. PAPILIO NICANOR, Felder, ‘Voyage of the Novara,’ pl. ... f. _c_,
_d_.
_Male._ Upper side:—like _P. Alphenor_ ♂; but the band of white spots is
broader and more regular, and there is a row of four white submarginal
lunules.
Under side as in _P. Alphenor_; but the marginal spots of the upper
wings, and the submarginal lunules of the lower wings, are larger and
more distinct.
_Female_ quite tailless, like the male. Upper side:—like _P. Alphenor_
♀; but the rufous anal spots are much smaller, not forming an ocellus at
the anal angle, and they do not join the white central patch.
Under side, differs from _P. Alphenor_ in nearly the same manner as on
the upper side.
_Hab._ Batchian, Gilolo, Morty Island (_Wall._).
_Remarks._—The absence of tails in the female, and the white submarginal
lunules in the male, distinguish this at a glance from all its allies.
It has a comparatively restricted range, and is very constant in both
sexes. The plate sent me by Dr. Felder is not numbered.
66. PAPILIO HIPPONOUS, Felder[14].
Footnote 14:
Having obtained a specimen of this insect while these sheets are
passing through the press, I find that it should have been placed next
to _P. Severus_.
_P. Hipponous_, Feld. Lep. Nov. Philipp. p. 12; _P. Dironus_, B. M.
List (no description).
_Hab._ Luzon, Mindanao (Philippines).
67. PAPILIO AMBRAX, Boisduval.
_P. Ambrax_, Bd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 218; Voy. au Pôle Sud, Lép. t. 1. f.
3, 4 (♂); De Haan, Verh. Nat. Gesch. t. 7. f. 2 (♀). _P. Orophanes_,
Boisd. Sp. Gén. p. 275 (♀).
_Hab._ Mysol, Salwatty, Dorey (_Wall._).
_Remark._—I believe that two, if not three, well-marked forms or species
have been mixed up under the name of _P. Ambrax_, as I have endeavoured
to show by the references. My specimens of the two sexes of each show a
uniformity of character in each locality.
68. PAPILIO AMBRACIA, Wallace.
_P. Ambrax_, Bd.; De Haan, Verh. Nat. Gesch. t. 7. f. 1 (♂).
_Male._ Differs from _P. Ambrax_, Bd., by the ashy-white patch at the
apex of the anterior wings.
_Female._ Has a large, roundish, white patch on the anterior wings,
extending from the discoidal cell to the hinder angle. The red lunules
on the hind wings are smaller. Same size as _P. Ambrax_.
_Hab._ Waigiou (♂, ♀) (_Wall._).
69. PAPILIO EPIRUS, n. s.
_Male._ Above:—anterior wings as in _P. Ambrax_; posterior wings more
elongate, the white band much narrower, notched behind at the nervures,
with the portions between regularly rounded; the part which crosses the
cell is cut by black nervures, and there is an oblique red mark at the
anal angle.
Beneath:—with a submarginal of seven lunules on the hinder wings, the
one above the anal angle very large; whereas the last two species have
one small lunule only beneath, at the anal angle.
_Female._ Is probably that figured in ‘Voy. au Pôle Sud,’ Lép. t. 1, f.
5, which resembles most the female of _P. Ambracia_, but differs in the
form of the white and red patches. It is said to be from “the coasts of
New Guinea”; but as the expedition touched at the Aru Islands, it is
very probable that there is an error of locality, as I have ascertained
to be very often the case in the indications furnished by these and
other ‘Voyages.’
_Hab._ Aru Islands (_Wall._).
70. PAPILIO DUNALI, Montrouzier.
_P. Dunali_, Mont. Ann. Soc. d’Agricult. de Lyon, 1856, p. 394.
_Hab._ Woodlark Island (S.E. of New Guinea).
_Remark._—This seems closely allied to the last species.
i. _Erectheus_ group.
71. PAPILIO ORMENUS, Guérin. Tab. III. figs. 2 (♂), 1, 3, 4 (♀ ♀).
_P. Ormenus_, Guér. Voy. de la Coquille, pl. 14. f. 3; Boisd. Sp. Gén.
Lép. p. 211.
_P. Erectheus_, var., Voy. au Pôle Sud, Lép. t. 1. f. 1, 2.
_P. Amanga_, Boisd. Sp. Gén. p. 216, ♀ (_P. Onesimus_, Hew. Ex. Butt.
Pap. iii. f. 8).
_Hab._ Waigiou, Aru Isl., Ké Isl., Matabello and Goram Isl. (_Wall._).
This belongs to a remarkable group of Papilios inhabiting the
Austro-Malayan region, and which are especially interesting as
exhibiting a good instance of polymorphism, the females being of two or
three distinct forms.
The male in this species is characterized by the small amount of marking
on the under surface.
_1st form_ of female. Tab. III. fig. 1.
Almost exactly intermediate between the male and the normal female,
which resembles _P. Erectheus_ ♀.
Upper side brown-black; a band of four whitish-yellow spots across the
anterior wings beyond the cell, the upper one of the same size and
position as in the male, the 2nd and 3rd elongated towards the cell, the
4th rather shorter than the 3rd, and immediately beneath it. Posterior
wings with a central patch of a pale sulphur-yellow just crossing the
end of the cell, and separated below into five truncate lobes; below
this, and next the anal margin, are two irregular blue lunules, with a
red lunule at the anal angle and a smaller one lower down beneath the
second blue lunule.
Under side as above; on the hind wings the upper half of the yellow
patch is dusky, and there is a complete submarginal series of seven red
lunules.
_Hab._ Waigiou (a single specimen) (_Wall._).
_2nd form_ of female. Tab. III. fig. 3.
Resembles very closely _P. Erectheus_ ♀; but the white patch on the hind
wings does not cover so much of the cell, and the two middle lobes are
much elongated posteriorly, and separated by wedge-shaped spaces; the
blue lunules are but slightly marked, and do not exceed two in number.
Under side:—differs from _P. Erectheus_ in the white patch never
reaching the anterior margin of the hind wings. In a specimen from
Waigiou, the four middle lunules are nearly white. This may be
considered the typical form of female, as it occurs everywhere in
company with the male.
_3rd form_ of female (_Amanga_, Bd.). Tab. III. fig. 4.
I have three specimens of this form from three of the localities in
which the male occurs. They differ slightly from each other, but agree
generally with the figure and description above quoted. An allied form
of female (of the next species) was observed closely followed by two
males of the ordinary form; they were watched for some time, the males
hovering over the females in the manner usual before pairing; and the
three were then captured at one stroke of the net. This occurred three
years after the capture of the specimen figured by Mr. Hewitson, and at
once convinced me that these puzzling specimens were an additional form
of female to a well-known male. The fact that the only females known of
an allied species (_P. Tydeus_) are intermediate between these forms
confirms this determination.
_Hab._ Aru Island, Mysol, Goram Isl. (_Wall._)
72. PAPILIO PANDION, n. s.
_Male._ Closely resembles _P. Ormenus_, but presents the following
differences:—
Upper side:—the band of spots across the fore wings is faintly marked,
or more frequently quite absent; the grey lines bordering the nervures
at the apex are more distinct; on the hind wings, the first three
indentations of the whitish patch are followed by faint powdered lunules
of the same colour.
Under side:—the apex of the fore wings is strongly marked with grey
lines between the nervures, but has generally no spots; on the hind
wings there is a curved submarginal band of lunules across the wing,
viz., at the anal angle a large irregular red lunulate spot with a blue
and a grey mark above it—2nd, a larger grey lunule with an angular blue
mark below it, and a red lunule nearer the margin—3rd, a similar grey
lunule and blue mark—4th, a larger grey lunule, and a smaller blue mark
with a faint red lunule below—5th, a grey lunule and a faint blue dash
below—6th, a blue lunule with a faint grey mark above—7th, a blue lunule
with a very faint mark above it. These vary somewhat in different
specimens, but the whole series can always be traced.
_1st form_ of female.
Scarcely distinguishable from the typical female of the last species:
the blue lunules on the under surface form a complete series, almost as
in _P. Erectheus_ ♀.
_Hab._ New Guinea, Salwatty, Mysol Island (with the male) (_Wall._).
_2nd form_ of female.
Upper surface:—fore wings as in _P. Onesimus_, Hew.; hind wings
yellowish-white, a broad black border along the anterior, and a narrow
one along the posterior margin, two yellowish lunules near the outer
angle, anal angle pale yellow, then an oblong black spot with a bluish
mark in its upper part, followed by a second (half-obliterated) black
spot.
Under surface with the same markings; but there are a series of six blue
angulated marks upon a black ground, the two intermediate ones being
smaller and less distinct. Abdomen yellow; under side black.
_Hab._ Dorey (New Guinea) (_Wall._)
_Remarks._—This specimen was taken in company with two males, as before
mentioned. An insect, described by M. Montrouzier as the female of his
_P. Godartii_ (from Woodlark Island), agrees very closely with this, and
is no doubt the female of the same species, or a closely allied one
which he puts in his list as _P. Ormenus_. The fact, therefore, that
this peculiar pale form of female _Papilio_ has been found in five
islands, from no one of which is a male insect known which can be mated
with it, except those of the _Ormenus_-form (which always occur in the
same places), may, in conjunction with the observation already given of
the companionship of the two forms, be taken to prove that this is
really a case of polymorphism. I believe also it will be found that
these extreme departures from the typical form of a species are
connected with mimetic resemblances and the safety of the individuals.
We have already seen that the extreme forms of _P. Memnon_ ♀ and _P.
Pammon_ ♀ respectively resemble other species which from their habits
and abundance seem to have some peculiar immunity from danger. In this
case also there is a resemblance to quite a different family of
butterflies, the Morphidæ. In form, coloration, and general appearance
these pale-coloured Papilios resemble species of the genus _Drusilla_;
and the same genus is also imitated by other butterflies—one of these,
_Melanitis Agondas_ ♀, having been actually confounded with _Drusilla
bioculata_ as the same species, so great is the resemblance. This fact
of species of several genera imitating the Drusillas would indicate that
they have some special immunities which make it advantageous to other
insects to be mistaken for them; and their habits confirm this opinion.
They have all a very similar style of dress, and fly very slowly, low
down in damp woods, often settling on the ground or on rotten wood; and
they are exceedingly abundant in individuals. Now these are the general
characteristics of all groups which are the subjects of imitation; and
we may therefore presume, when we see forms departing widely from the
general appearance of their close relations, and resembling closely
other groups with which they have no affinity, that what we must call
_accidental_ variations have been accumulated and rendered definite by
natural selection for the protection and benefit of those forms.
73. PAPILIO TYDEUS, Felder. Tab. IV. figs. 3 (♂), 2 (♀).
_P. Tydeus_, Feld. Lep. Fragm. p. 52 (♂).
_Female._—Upper side dusky brown; fore wings with the central portion
below the cell nearly white; hind wings with the basal two-thirds white,
with an irregular and obtusely dentated margin, and edged with
ochre-yellow; the rest black, with a submarginal row of seven broad
yellowish lunules, and above those nearest the anal angle three
irregular blue patches.
Under side nearly as above; the white space on the upper wings is more
extensive and better defined; the marginal lunules are dilated so as to
form a crenellated band, and the blue marks are increased to six or
seven in number. Head and thorax dusky; abdomen yellowish.
_Hab._ Batchian, Morty Island (_Wall._).
_Remark._—The female, which seems to be of only one form in this
species, is especially interesting as being allied to the pale-yellow
form of _P. Ormenus_ and _P. Pandion_.
74. PAPILIO ADRASTUS, n. s. Tab. IV. fig. 1 (♀).
_Male._—Upper side, like _P. Ormenus_ ♂; but has the band of the hind
wings narrower, not crossing the cell, and more pointed towards the anal
angle.
Under side with a single red anal spot, and three blue lunules beyond
it.
_Female._—Upper side brown-black; anterior wings with the apical half
browner, a whitish patch around the end of the cell, and an ovate spot
within it; posterior wings with a small central whitish patch more or
less tinged with ochreous; a submarginal row of very large deep-red
lunules, that at the anal angle forming an irregular ocellus bordered
above with pale blue, and a few blue atoms on the side of it.
Indentations of all the wings broadly margined with ochreous.
Under side:—the white patch of the anterior wings larger and well
defined, and continued by smaller and fainter patches to the outer
angle; posterior wings with the small central patch and marginal lunules
as above, with the addition of a faint row of angulated blue marks
between them.
Wings elongated posteriorly, and somewhat angulated at the termination
of the first median nervure.
Expanse of wings, ♂, 5¼ inches; ♀, 6 inches.
_Hab._ Banda Island (_Wall._).
_Remarks._—This species is near _P. Ormenus_ in the male, but approaches
_P. Gambrisius_ in the female, which differs from all others in this
group by its dark colouring and the short narrow band on the hind wings.
A male and two females were obtained in the small island of Banda.
75. PAPILIO GAMBRISIUS, Cramer.
_P. Gambrisius_, Cr. Pap. Ex. t. 157. f. A, B (♂); Boisd. Sp. Gén.
Lép. p. 213.
_P. Drusius_, Cr. Pap. Ex. t. 229. f. A, t. 230. f. A (♀); Boisd. Sp.
Gén. Lép. p. 218.
_Hab._ Amboyna, Ceram, Bouru (_Wall._).
_Remarks._—The males of this fine species are not uncommon in Ceram, and
in hot weather come down to the beach and settle on the wet sand. The
females, however, are very rare; I obtained one in the mountainous
forests of Ceram, and this is, I believe, the only fine and perfect
specimen now in Europe.
Expanse of male 5½–6½ inches, of female 7 inches.
76. PAPILIO AMPHITRION, Cramer.
_P. Amphitrion_, Cr. Pap. Ex. t. 7 f. A, B; Boisd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p.
217.
_Hab._ Celebes?
_Remarks._—The habitat of this rare species is doubtful. Cramer says,
“America;” Godart, “Amboyna;” but I believe its true locality will be
found to be Celebes. It forms a transition to the next species.
77. PAPILIO EUCHENOR, Guérin.
_P. Euchenor_, Guér. Voy. de la Coquille, t. 13. f. 3 (♂); _P. Axion_,
Boisd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 46 (♂).
_Female._—Similar to the male; but the markings are all of a dull
ochre-yellow, and the second and third spots, reckoning from the inner
margin of the upper wings, are almost entirely wanting. This sex is much
rarer than the male.
_Hab._ New Guinea, Aru Island, Ké Island (_Wall._).
78. PAPILIO GODARTII, Montrouzier.
_P. Godartii_, Montr. Ann. Soc. d’Agric. de Lyon, 1856, p. 394.
_Hab._ Woodlark Island.
_Remark._—Closely allied to the last; perhaps a variation only.
k. _Demolion_ group.
79. PAPILIO DEMOLION, Cramer.
_P. Demolion_, Cr. Pap. Ex. t. 89. f. A, B; _P. Cresphontes_, Fabr.;
Boisd. Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 220.
_Hab._ Java, Borneo, Sumatra, Singapore (_Wall._), Moulmein (_Brit.
Mus._).
80. PAPILIO GIGON, n. s. Tab. VII. fig. 6 (♀).
“_P. Gigon_,” List of Papilionidæ in Brit. Mus. p. 27 (no
description).
Much larger than _P. Demolion_; costal margin of the fore wings very
much arched from the base; tail proportionally shorter.
Upper side:—markings as in _P. Demolion_, with the following
differences. In the cell of the fore wings are four longitudinal curved
greyish-yellow lines; the yellow band begins higher on the abdominal
margin, and curves outward toward the tip, where the spots are obliquely
elongate, and the three last distinctly notched; on the hind wings the
lunulate spots are much deeper and are rather further from the margin,
and the two spots at the outer angle (often obsolete in _P. Demolion_)
are large and well marked.
Under side:—the markings resemble those of _P. Demolion_, but are
stronger; the band of silvery spots is much more sinuate, and possesses
an additional lunule above the outer angle; a patch of ochre-yellow
covers the lower margin of the cell, extending a little along the
nervures which radiate from it.
Abdomen blackish, with numerous stripes and spots of pale yellow.
Expanse of wings 4¾ to 5⅓ inches.
_Hab._ Celebes, Sulla Island (_Wall._).
_Remark._—This was regarded by Boisduval as a large variety of _P.
Demolion_ (see Sp. Gén. Lép. p. 221); but it offers remarkable
differences both in form and markings.
l. _Erithonius_ group.
81. PAPILIO ERITHONIUS, Cramer.
_P. Erithonius_, Cr. Pap. Ex. t. 232. f. A, B.
_P. Epius_, Fabr.; Don. Ins. China, pl. 29. f. 2; Boisd. Sp. Gén. Lép.
p. 238.
_Hab._ India, China (_type_).
Local form _a_ (_Malayanus_).—The two spots on the lower margin of the
cell of the hind wings wanting; anal spots redder, and the ocellus at
the outer angle darker: two spots in cell of fore wings, as in the type;
but in Flores specimens these approach so as almost to unite.
_Hab._ Singapore, Flores (_Wall._), Manilla.
Local form _b_ (_Sthenelus_, Macleay).—A single large spot in the cell
of the fore wings; one small detached spot on the margin of the cell of
the hind wings.
_Hab._ Goram Island (_Wall._), Australia.