[Taxacom] =?iso-8859-1?q?Genus_Hamadryas_H=FCbner=2C_1806_=28or_1?= =?iso-8859-1?q?808=29?=

[Paul van Rijckevorsel]

From: <Tony.Rees at csiro.au>
Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2010 12:37 AM

> [...] It was not previously apparent to me that H?bner's "Samml. exot.
> Schmett." could refer to more than one work,

***
I am afraid I find this mystifying.  I have seen no indication that H?bner's
"Samml. exot. Schmett." can refer to more than one work. I also don't see
how the work referred to as "the pamphlet by J. H?bner, 1808, entitled Erste
Zutr?ge ..." might be confusable with the earlier: even when ignoring the
accompanying information, these titles are quite different textstrings
(so beloved by the biodiversity informaticians), with lots of different
letters.

It would be somewhat easier to imagine confusion between the
Erste Zutr?ge ... (1808) and the Zutr?ge ... (1818) (at
http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/bibliography/12439 )
but even that would be reaching.
* * *

> also that there were 2 separate instances of Hamadryas H?bner, 1806, one
> rejected, one not... The ICZN official list now makes more sense, i.e.
> being able to say both that Hamadryas H?bner, 1806 [Tentamen] is
> unavailable, and that Hamadryas H?bner, 1808 [Reste Zutr, Samml.
> exot. Schmett.] is unavailable because it is a junior homonym of
> Hamadryas H?bner, 1806,  [...]

***
Again, I am not all that expert on the zoological Code, but this, too, is
obviously in error. It is not "unavailable because it is a junior homonym".
It is unavailable because it is in ""... a work rejected for nomenclatural
purposes",  which is (Art. 8.7.1) "not ... a work in which a name ...
can be made available": it does not exist as a scientific name of a genus
(and thus can cause no confusion).

Or to put it differently if it were a junior homonym (which it isn't),
it would not be unavailable: junior homonyms are available names.

Paul