Hemming (1967) stated:-
The name Rhopalocampta Wallengren is invalid, as it is a junior objective synonym of Coeliades Hübner, 1818.
Cowan (1970: 22) stated:-
Some surprise is evinced that Wallengren "twice described as new" several genera (e.g. Anthopsyche, Chrysorychia), first in the Nandlingar of 1857 and then in the Ofversigt in 1858. But that was a normal procedure, the Ofversigt (over-sight; review) standing in relation to the Handlingar more or less as do Bulletins and Proceedings vis-a-vis Annals and Transactions.
Papers for the Handlingar were printed as they came, and published individually paginated. That is why Wallengren's paper No. 4 is correctly dated "1857" although Part (1) of the Volume (n.f.) 2 was not completed until 1858. Papers were available for purchase direct from the Akademy as soon as printed. They were virtually ready-made "separates."
The Ofversigt reviewed the Handlingar material and, which is important, often revised it. Wallengren's paper No. 4 of 1857 had several modifications when reported in 1858 in part (2) (of 9) of Ofversigt 15. The replacement name Thespia appeared in place of the original Ptychopteryx; and type-species were designated for several genera (Chrysorychia, Pseudonympha, Rhopalocampta) for which the Handlingar paper had omitted that service.
Cowan (1970: 54) stated:-
"Scudder . . . to read - Wallengren, 1858, Ofvers. K.Vetensk-Akad. Fordhandl. 15 (2) : 81", [this replaces - by selection by Scudder (1875, Proc. amer. Acad. Arts. Sci., Boston 10 : 263, (in Hemming 1967, p.396).
The higher classification used here follows Lamas (2008).
Learn more about Hesperiidae in Wikipedia
Search the Biodiversity Heritage Library (BHL) for references to RHOPALOCAMPTA and included species.