GENERIC NAMES OF BUTTERFLIES 267 



was obtained in the Bruchkobler Wald in the " Grafschaft Hanau-Miinnzenburg ", the type- 

 locality of Papilio argyrognomon Bergstrasser. 



The foregoing discovery at once raised two important questions : (1) Now that it was 

 known that the name Papilio argyrognomon Bergstrasser applied not (as previously supposed) 

 to Species " C " but to Species " B ", should the Commission be asked to vary the Ruling 

 given in its Opinion 161, in order to secure that (in accordance with the original intention) 

 the type-species of Lycaeides Hiibner should be Species " B " ? (2) Now that it was known 

 that the specific name argyrognomon Bergstrasser applied to Species " C ", what specific 

 name was properly applicable to Species " B " ? 



As regards Question (1) above, the view was taken that, although very distinct at the 

 species-level, Species " B " and " C " should certainly be regarded as belonging taxonomically 

 to the same genus as one another. From this point of view, therefore, it was immaterial which 

 of these species should be accepted as the type-species of Lycaeides Hiibner. It was accord- 

 ingly decided that, from the taxonomic point of view, the Ruling in Opinion 161 that PapUm 

 argyrognomon Bergstrasser should be accepted as the type-species of Lycaeides Hiibner wis 

 perfectly satisfactory and that there were no need to ask the Commission to vary that Ruling. 

 At the same time however it was decided to ask the Commission to give a Ruling which would 

 secure that it was Species " C " (and not Species " B ") to which the specific name argyrog- 

 nomon Bergstrasser should be applied. For this purpose it was decided to ask the Com- 

 mission to give a Ruling that the nominal species Papilio argyrognomon was to be interpreted 

 by reference to a certain previously published figure of the male genitalia of Species " C " 

 (figure 23 on plate VIII in volume 14 of Oberthur's Etud. Lipid, comp). 



As regards Question (2), it was found impracticable to determine with certainty what was 

 the oldest available specific name which unquestionably applied to Species " B ". There 

 was however one ancient name which undoubtedly applied to Species " B " but which was 

 invalid under the Law of Homonymy. This was Papilio idas Linnaeus, 1761 {Faun. svec. 

 (ed. 2) : 284). This was invalid as a junior homonym of Papilio idas Linnaeus, 1758 (Syst. 

 Nat. (ed. 10) : 488). This latter name applied to a species which it had never been found 

 possible to interpret ; in consequence, no inconvenience of any kind would arise if the Com- 

 mission were to suppress that name, while great advantage would be secured through the 

 provision thereby for Species " B " of a specific name (idas Linnaeus, 1761) which un- 

 doubtedly applied to that species and which, when so validated, would be without question 

 the oldest available name for this taxon. This therefore is the action which it was decided 

 to ask the Commission to take. It was decided also to ask the Commission at the same time 

 to direct that the foregoing nominal species be interpreted by reference to a previously pub- 

 lished figure of the male genitalia of Species " B ", the figure selected for this purpose being 

 figure 7 on plate III of the volume of Oberthur's Etud. Lipid, comp. cited above. 



The proposals outlined above were approved by the Commission by the Ruling given in its 

 Opinion 269 published in 1954, ' n which, inter alia, the specific name argyrognomon Berg- 

 strasser, [1779], as published in the binomen Papilio argyrognomon, defined as proposed, was 

 placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology as Name No. 86. In the immediately 

 following Opinion (Opinion 270) the generic name Lycaeides Hiibner, [1819], with the above 

 species as type-species, was placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology as Name 

 No. 688. 



LYCAENA Fabricius, 1807, Mag. f. Insektenk. (Illiger) 6 : 285. Type-species by selection by 

 Curtis (1828, Brit. Entom. 5 : pi. 12) : Papilio phlaeas Linnaeus, 1761, Faun. svec. (ed. 2) : 

 285. 



The name Lycaena, which is of particular importance as the eponym of the family 

 Lycaenidae, was widely used incorrectly for the Holarctic " Blues " instead of for the 

 Holarctic " Coppers ", the usage required by Curtis's selection of Papilio phlaeas Linnaeus as 

 type-species. In the first phase following Curtis's type-selection this generic name was 

 correctly used for the " Coppers", Swainson (1833) and Westwood (1840) both reaffirming 

 the position of the above species as type-species. The first author to take the wrong path 



