Hemming (1967) stated:-
The name Papilio cydippe Linnaeus, 1767, has been used almost continuously throughout its history for the Oriental species which is the type-species of the present genus. This usage was however invalid because this name was invalid as a junior homonym of the name Papilio cydippe Linnaeus, 1761 (Faun. svec. (ed. 2) : 281), a name bestowed upon a Swedish Fritillary of the group usually placed in the genus Argynnis Fabricius, 1807. Until the early years of the XXth century the specific name cydippe Linnaeus, as applied to the Fritillary, was generally ignored, that species being known by the name adippe Linnaeus, 1767 (Papilio adippe Linnaeus, 1767, Syst. Nat. (ed. 2) 1 (2) : 786), a name introduced by Linnaeus as a replacement name for his cydippe of 1761 (a name which however was not in need of replacement, not being a junior homonym of any earlier name). Apart from the fact that the junior objective synonym adippe Linnaeus, 1767, was used instead of its senior objective synonym cydippe Linnaeus, 1761, the really serious confusion in regard to the name for the Fritillary took a turn for the worse when in 1913 (J. linn. Soc. Lond., Zool. 32 : 173-191) Verity published. A critical review of the types of certain of the Linnaean butterflies, in which he showed that the name adippe Linnaeus (and its senior synonym cydippe Linnaeus) applied not to the species to which those names had hitherto been thought by all to apply, but to another rather similar, but very distinct, species of the same genus. The confusion created by this discovery proved absolutely intractable, owing to the impossibility, as it was found, of determining which of various XVIIIth century names was the oldest certainly applying to the species for so long erroneously known as adippe Linnaeus. This led, after many years of fruitless controversy, to the submission of an application to the Commission for the use of the Plenary Powers to provide a nomenclatorially available name for the species hitherto wrongly known as adippe Linnaeus. The relevance of this application to the present case lies in the fact it was part of it that the specific name cydippe should be eliminated altogether as a name for a Fritillary and to validate name adippe for use for the species to which it had for so long been - though incorrectly - applied. For the first of these purposes the Commission was asked to suppress, under its Plenary Powers, the specific name cydippe Linnaeus, 1761, as published in the combination Papilio cydippe, and at the same time to invalidate all uses of the foregoing specific name in the above combination published prior to 1767. Under this proposal the specific name cydippe Linnaeus, 1767 (Papilio) given by Linnaeus to the Cethosiid here in question would become the oldest available for that species and would moreover invalidate under the Law of Homonymy any later uses of the name Papilio cydippe for a Fritillary.
The application, of which the above proposals form part was approved by the Commission, its decision being embodied in Opinion 501 published in 1958 (Opin. int. Comm. zool. Nom. 18 : 1-64, 3 pls, 1 text-fig.). Under that Opinion the name Papilio cydippe Linnaeus, 1761 and all usages of that binomen published prior to 1767 were suppressed under the Plenary Powers for the purposes both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homonymy. In consequence, the name Papilio cydippe Linnaeus, 1767, the name of the type-species of Cethosia Fabricius was validated. This decision was completed, so far as the name Cethosia was concerned, by the action of the Commission in placing the specific name cydippe Linnaeus, 1767, as published in the combination Papilio cydippe, on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology as Name No. 1474.
Cowan (1970: 44) stated:-
"1806 to read - 1807", [the genus year].
The higher classification used here follows Lamas (2008).
Learn more about Nymphalidae in Wikipedia
Search the Biodiversity Heritage Library (BHL) for references to CETHOSIA and included species.