GENERIC NAMES OF BUTTERFLIES 177 



volume contain anything which would support the view that the spelling which he used was 

 an inadvertent Incorrect Subsequent Spelling. It is necessary therefore to conclude 

 that under the Code Eumaea Geyer should be treated as having been a new name deliberately 

 introduced by that author. Luckily, from the practical standpoint the matter is of no 

 importance, since, for the reasons explained above, the name Eumaea would not be required 

 for taxonomic purposes, being at the best no more than a junior subjective synonym of 

 Eumaens Hiibner, [1819]. 



EUMAEUS Hiibner, [1819], Verz. bekannt. Schmett. (5) : 67. Type-species by monotypy : 

 Rusticus minijas Hiibner, [1809], Samml. exot. Schmett. 1 : pi. [97]. 



EU MARGARET A Grote, 1898, Canad. Ent. 30 : 201, 202. Type-species through Section (i) of 

 Article 67 : Nymphalis coresia Godart, [1824], Ency. m6th. 9 (Ins.) (2) : 359. 



Grote introduced the name Eamargareta as a replacement for Megalura Blanchard, 1840, 

 which, following Scudder (1875, Proc. amer. Acad. Arts Sci., Boston 10 : 212) he erroneously 

 supposed was invalid under the Law of Homonymy. 



For the foregoing reason the name Eumargareta Grote is invalid, being a junior objective 

 synonym of Megalura Blanchard, 1840. 



EUMEDONIA Forster, 1938, Mitt, munch, ent. Ges. 28 : 113. Type-species by original 

 designation : Papilio eumedon Ksper, [1780], Die Schmett. 1 (Bd 2) Forts. Tagschmett. : 

 16, pi. 52, figs 2 $, 3 <$. 



There is an older nominal species, Papilio chiron Rottemburg, 1775 (Der Katurforscher 

 6 : 27), which is subjectively considered on taxonomic grounds to represent the same taxon as 

 that represented by the nominal species Papilio eumedon Esper, [1780]. In consequence, for 

 some years the specific name chiron Rottemburg was used as the oldest name for this species. 

 There is however also another nominal species bearing this name which, like the name published 

 by Rottemburg, was also published in 1775. The nominal species in question is Papilio 

 chiron Fabricius, 1775 (Syst. Ent. : 452), which (as already noted) is the type-species of the 

 nominal genus Euglyphus Billberg, 1820. Prior to 1958 there was always a doubt as to which 

 of these names should be treated as having precedence over the other. In that year however 

 the Commission promulgated its Opinion 516 (Opin. int. Comm. zool. Notn. 19 : 1-44), in 

 which it gave rulings under its Plenary Powers as to the relative precedence to be accorded 

 to various works, including Rottemburg's paper in Der Naturforscher and Fabricius's Syst. 

 Ent., published in 1775. Under that ruling the Syst. Ent. takes precedence over Rottemburg's 

 paper. Accordingly, the name Papilio chiron Rottemburg, 1775, takes precedence after the 

 name Papilio chiron Fabricius, 1775. In consequence, the name Papilio eumedon Esper 

 [1780], is definitely established as the oldest available name subjectively applicable to the 

 present species. 



EUMENIA Godart, [1834], Ency. mith. 9 (Ins.) (2) : 826. Type-species by monotypy : 

 Eumenia toxea Godart, [1824], ibid. 9 (Ins.) (2) : 826. 



The taxon represented by the nominal species Eumenia toxea Godart is currently treated 

 subjectively on taxonomic grounds as being the same as that represented by the older- 

 established nominal species Rusticus minijas Hiibner, [1809], the type-species of Eumaens 

 Hiibner, [1819], of which therefore the name Eumenia Godart, [1824], is on the basis of the 

 foregoing subjective synonymy a junior subjective synonym. 



EUMENIS Hiibner, [1819], Verz. bekannt. Schmett. (4) : 58. Type-species by selection by 

 Grote (1873, Canad. Ent. 5 : 62) : Papilio autonoe Esper, [1784], Die Schmett. 1 (Bd 2) 

 Forts. Tagschmett. : 167, pi. 86, figs 1 <J, 2, 3 $. 



EUMESIA Felder (C.) & Felder (R.), [1867], Reise Fregatte " Novara " Lep. Rhop. (3) : 504. 

 Type-species by monotypy : Eumesia semiargentea Felder (C), & Felder (R.j, [1867], ibid., 

 Lep. Rhop. (3) : 505, pi. 69, figs 17, 18. 



Evans (1955, Cat. amer. Hesp. Brit. Mus. 4 : 18, 19, 43) treated this generic name in a 

 strange and entirely incorrect manner. He accepted ( : 43) the nominal species Eumesia 

 semiargentea as representing a taxonomically distinct species. In spite of this he rejected 



