GENERIC NAMES OF BUTTERFLIES 345 



Moore published the replacement name Parhestina. It would have been open to him therefore 

 to select as the type-species of Parhestina either of the two nominal species cited by Snellen 

 as belonging to the genus Diagora, and the designation of one of these as the type-species of 

 Parhestina would have constituted also a valid selection of that species as the type-species 

 of Diagora. Unfortunately, however, Moore did not follow this course, selecting instead 

 Diadema persimilis Westwood, [1850] (in Doubleday, Gen. diurn. Lep. (2) : 281 nota). That 

 selection was invalid for Diadema persimilis was not included by Snellen in his genus Diagora 

 and was therefore ineligible for selection as the type-species of the replacement genus 

 Parhestina. The nominal genus Diagora and its replacement Parhestina remained without a 

 type-species until in 1934 I selected Apatura japonica Felder (C.) & Felder (R.), 1862 — one 

 of Snellen's original species — to be the type-species of Diagora Snellen. This action con- 

 stituted automatically the selection of that nominal species to be the type-species of the 

 replacement genus Parhestina Moore. 



As the name Diagora Snellen is a nomenclatorially available name, its replacement name 

 Parhestina is invalid as a junior objective synonym of Diagora Snellen. 



PARIDES Hiibner, [1819], Verz. bekannt. Schmett. (6) : 87. Type-species by selection by 

 Scudder (1875, Proc. amer. Acad. Arts. Sci., Boston 10 : 241) : Princeps echelus Hiibner, 

 [1815], Samml. exot. Schmett. 1 : pi. [126]. 



PARNARA Moore, [1881], Lep. Ceylon 1 (4) : 166. Type-species by original designation : 

 Eudamus guttatus Bremer & Grey, [1852], in Motschulsky, £tud. ent. 1 : 60. 



PARNASSIS Hiibner, [1819], Verz. bekannt. Schmett. (6) : 90. Type-species by selection by 

 Hemming (1939, Proc. R. ent. Soc. Lond. (B) 8 : 136) : Papilio apollo Linnaeus, 1758, Syst. 

 Nat. (ed. 10) 1 : 465. 



The present is one of those cases on which the fact that Hiibner never attributed authors' 

 names to names which he employed, and never indicated which of the names in his books 

 were new names of his own, makes it difficult to interpret his action with confidence. If he 

 had given an indication in either of the above senses, it would have been easy to determine 

 whether the name Parnassis as used in the Verzeichniss was there put forward as a new name 

 or whether it was no more than an emendation of the name Parnassius Latreille, 1804. 

 Hiibner in his works did not show any close acquaintance with Latreille's writings, and it 

 seems likely that he had not seen the volume of the Nouv. Did. Hist. nat. in which the name 

 Parnassius Latreille was published, and that in using the name Parnassis in the same sense 

 as that in which Latreille had used the name Parnassius, he was relying upon some information 

 which he had received at second hand and was perhaps not sure whether the name Parnassius 

 had even been actually published at that time ; this possibility is strengthened by the 

 difference in the spelling which he employed, that difference being readily understandable if 

 he thought that he was dealing only with a manuscript name. From a practical point of 

 view this is not a matter of importance, for Hiibner's Parnassius would have been invalid 

 as a junior objective synonym of Parnassius Latreille, irrespective of whether Hiibner put it 

 forward as a new name or whether he looked upon it as an Emendation of Parnassius Latreille. 

 In the complete absence of any indication by Hiibner as to his view on this subject, it seems 

 best to treat Parnassis as an objectively invalid name put forward by Hiibner himself, and 

 that interpretation is accordingly here adopted. 



PARNASSIUS Latreille, 1804, Nouv. Diet. Hist. nat. 24 (Tab.) : 185, 199. Type-species by 

 monotypy : Papilio apollo Linnaeus, 1758, Syst. Nat. (ed. 10) 1 : 465. 



PARNES Westwood, [Oct. 1851], in Doubleday, Gen. diurn. Lep. (2) : pi. 73, fig. 3. Type- 

 species by monotypy : Parries nycteis Westwood, [Oct. 1851], in Doubleday, ibid. (2) : 

 pi. 73, fig. 3 [text (ibid. (2) : 464) published in December 1851]. 



The name Parnes first appeared in print in 1847 (List. Spec. lep. Ins. Brit. Mus. 2 : 18), 

 but, as there published by Doubleday, it acquired no status in nomenclature ; for no generic 

 diagnosis was provided and no established nominal species were cited, two manuscript species 

 only being included. 



