_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.