GENERIC NAMES OF BUTTERFLIES 187 



EURYPHAEDRA Staudinger, 1891, Iris 4 (1) : 102. Type-species by monotypy : Eury- 

 phaedra thauma Staudinger, 1891, ibid. 4 (1) : 102. 



EURYPHANIS Boisduval, 1870, Consid. Lipid. Guatemala : 58 (an Incorrect Original Spelling 

 of Eriphanis Boisduval, 1870). 



EURYPHENA Feisthamel, 1850, Ann. Soc. ent. Fr. (2) 8 : 251 (an Incorrect Subsequent 

 Spelling of Euriphene Boisduval, 1847). 



EURYPHENE Feisthamel, 1850, Ann. Soc. ent. Fr. (2) 8 : 252, 254 (an Incorrect Subsequent 

 Spelling of Euriphene Boisduval, 1847). 



EURYPHENE Westwood, [1850], in Doubleday, Gen. diurn. Lep. (2) : 285 (an Unjustified 

 Emendation of Euriphene Boisduval, 1847). 



Westwood attributed the name Euryphene to Boisduval and placed in this genus six species, 

 exclusive of five which he attributed to it doubtfully, assigning to each a mark of interrogation. 

 One of the species unhesitatingly placed by Westwood in this genus was Euriphene coerulea 

 Boisduval, the type-species of Boisduval's genus Euriphene. In citing this binomen West- 

 wood correctly spelled it with an " i " in the second syllable. It is thus abundantly clear that 

 Westwood was fully aware that Doubleday considered correctly that Boisduval was the 

 author of this name and also that that author had spelled the second syllable with an " i " 

 and not with a " y ". Thus, it is to Westwood alone that the " y " spelling in this work must 

 be attributed. Accordingly, the name Euryphene Westwood, [1850], ranks (as stated above) 

 as an Unjustified Emendation of the name Euriphene Boisduval, 1847. As this name of 

 Boisduval's is nomenclatorially available, Westwood's emendation Euryphene is objectively 

 invalid, its type-species being automatically the same species as that of Euriphene Boisduval, 

 namely Euriphene coerulea Boisduval. 



The emendation Euryphene Westwood had a most unfortunate subsequent history, being 

 erroneously treated as though it had been published by Westwood as the name for a new genus 

 of his own, quite distinct from Euriphene Boisduval. Initially, no doubt this was largely due 

 to the fact that the generic diagnosis provided by Westwood did not apply to Euriphene 

 coerulea (the type-species of Euriphene Boisduval), but did apply to Papilio cocalia Fabricius, 

 1793, another of the species placed by Westwood in what he called Euryphene Boisduval. 

 It was used in this sense, for example, by Rober ([1888], in Schatz) and by Reuter ([1898]), 

 both of whom attributed this name, as Euryphene, to Boisduval, placing in it only Papilio 

 cocalia. Between the publication of the these works by Rober and Reuter, the process of 

 misunderstanding was carried a further stage by Karsch who in 1895 established the genus 

 Diestogyna for a species (Alerica tadema Hewitson), which exhibits the same generic characters 

 as does Euriphene coerulea, the true type-species of Euriphene Boisduval, with the result that 

 for many years thereafter that species was misplaced in Karsch's genus. The last phase was 

 reached in 1898 (K. svenska VetenskAkad. Handl., Stockholm 31 (No. 5) : 191-202) when 

 Aurivillius, while retaining Westwood's invalid spelling Euryphene, broke the last link 

 between this generic name and Boisduval, expressly attributed it to Westwood, but published 

 it as " Eurytheme Westwood ". Thus, it was that the mythical genus Euryphene Westwood 

 came into existence. This extraordinary muddle only came to light when the present work was 

 in preparation. It has been remedied by the provision of the name Behearia Hemming, i960 

 (type-species : Euryphene iturina Karsch, 1894) for the species hitherto placed in the non- 

 existent genus Eurphene Westwood, [1850]. 



EURYPHURA Staudinger, 1891, Iris 4 (1) : 105. Type-species by selection by Hemming 

 (1943, Proc. R. ent. Soc. Lond. (B) 12 : 28) : Euryphene porphyrion Ward, 1871, Ent. mon. 

 Mag. 8 : 118. 



EURYPTERUS Mabille, i8jy,Petites Nouvelles ent. 2 (179) : 612) Type-species by selection by 

 Kirby ([1879], in Zool. Rec. 14 (year 1877) (Ins.) : 139) : Eurypterus gigas Mabille, 1877, ibid. 2 

 (179) : 162. 



The name Eurypterus Mabille is invalid, as it is a junior homonym of Eurypterus De Kay, 

 1826 (Ann. Lyceum nat. Hist. New York 1 (12) : 375). 



