354 FRANCIS HEMMING 



464), under the ruling given by the Commission in its Opinion 516 (1958, Opin. int. Comm. 

 zool. Nom. 19 : 1-44), in which rulings were given as to the relative precedence to be accorded 

 to works by certain authors — including Fabricius and Cramer — published in 1775. The 

 other name concerned, Papilio iphigenia Fabricius, 1777 {Gen. Ins. : 256, is invalid as being 

 a junior homonym of the name Papilio iphigenia Cramer, [1775]) [Uitl. Kapellen 1 (6) : 105, 

 pi. 67, figs D, E). 



The nominal species Perrhybris eueidias Hiibner is objectively identical with Papilio pyrrha 

 Cramer, through the action of Hemming in 1964 (Annot. lep. (3) : 108) (a) in selecting the 

 specimen figured by Cramer as fig. A on plate 63 in volume 1 of the Uitl. Kapellen, to which 

 the name Papilio pyrrha was given on page 97 of the same volume, to represent the lectotype 

 of that species and (b) in selecting the foregoing lectotype, which, as explained above, was 

 one of the syntypes of Perrhybris eueidias Hiibner, to represent also the lectotype of that 

 nominal species. Prior to the time when it was seen (as shown above) that the name Papilio 

 pyrrha Cramer was invalid under the Law of Homonymy, the present species was generally 

 known by the specific name pyrrha Cramer, that name being a senior subjective synonym of 

 the specific name eueidias Hiibner, the specific name of the type-species of the genus Perrhybris. 

 Under the lectotype-selections described above, existing practice was protected, the specific 

 names pyrrha Cramer and eueidias Hiibner becoming objective synonyms, instead of (as pre- 

 viously) subjective synonyms of one another. In view of the fact that the specific names 

 pyrrha Cramer and iphigenia Fabricius are both invalid under the Law of Homonymy, the 

 oldest nomenclatorially available name subjectively applicable to the present species is 

 pamela Stoll, [1780] {Papilio pamela Stoll, [1780]) {in Cramer, Uitl. Kapellen 4 (27) : 61, 

 pi. 319, fig. A), which thus becomes subjectively the valid name for the type-species of the 

 genus Perrhybris Hiibner, the specific name eueidias Hiibner objectively applicable to the 

 type-species falling as a junior subjective synonym. 



PERROTIA Oberthur, 1916, Etud. Lipid, comp. 11 (texte) : 240. Type-species by selection by 

 Evans (1937, ^ at - Afric. Hesp. Brit. Mus. : 136) : Perrotia albiplaga Oberthur, 1916, 

 ibid. 11 (texte) : 240, pi. 336, fig. 2816. 



The only other nominal species placed in this genus by Oberthur was another new species 

 to which he gave the name Perrotia albimacula {loc. cit. 11 (texte) : 240, pi. 336, fig. 2823). 

 Evans (1937 : 138) took the view on taxonomic grounds that these names applied to the same 

 taxon ; he adopted the specific name albiplaga Oberthur, to which he sank the name albi- 

 macula Oberthur. By this action he made a First Reviser's choice in favour of albiplaga 

 at the same time making albimacula, on the taxonomic view set out above, a junior subjective 

 synonym of albiplaga, which on this basis became the valid name for the type-species of this 

 genus 



PETAVIA Horsfield, [1829], Descr. Cat. lep. Ins. Mus. East India Coy (2) : pi. 1. Type- 

 species by monotypy : Petavia sakuni Horsfield [1829], ibid. (2) : pi. 1. 



The name Petavia first appeared in print in 1828 in the first Part of Horsfield's work, but, 

 as there published (: 59), it was a nomen nudum. 



Horsfield erroneously believed that his species Petavia sakuni was a butterfly, which it is 

 not. 



PETRELAEA Toxopeus, 1929, Tijdschr. Ent. 72 : 242. Type-species by monotypy : 

 Petrelaea dana varia Toxopeus, 1929, ibid. 72 : 242. 



The following is the reference for the nominal species, a new nominal subspecies of which 

 was rather oddly designated by Toxopeus as the type-species of this genus : Nacaduba dana 

 de Niceville, 1884 (/. asiat. Soc. Bengal, Pt II, 52 (3/4) : 73, pi. 1, fig. 15 <$). 



This is one of a number of generic names first published in the paper cited above, in which 

 Toxopeus added a note suggesting that before the appearance of this paper these names 

 might already have appeared in the volume of the serial Treubia for 1929. As has already 

 been explained in the fuller note given on the name Discolampa Toxopeus, another of the 

 names concerned, the paper which Toxopeus had in mind was never published. 



