ASSYRIAN MONUMENTS. 99 



Miss Amelia Edwards supports Mr. Goodyear in his 

 resolve to make all ancient ornamentations descend from 

 the lotus. She is quite decided that " from the calyx- 

 leaves — and from tliese alone — were derived the volutes 

 of the Ionic capital." We have seen, however, that she 

 was not very accurate about her Nelicuibiuni and her 

 Njinphcea. 



Miss Edwards is also very decided about the so-called 

 honeysuckle pattern — the anthemion of the Greeks. At 

 p. 31 she says: "The well-known 'Greek hone}-suckle 

 pattern,' for instance, is found to be neither Greek nor 

 honeysuckle. The Naukratis pottery furnishes specimens 

 of this design in all its stages. In its most archaic form, 

 it is neither more nor less than the stock ' lotus pattern ' 

 of the Egyptian potters." 



All this may have some truth in it, but it does not at 

 all follow that the date tree head and horns of the sacred 

 tree of the Assyrians have )iot given birth to the antlicimon. 



This difference of view with regard to the origin of 

 architectural and decorative motives leads to a discussion, 

 which we may figuratively style " The battle of the Lotus 

 and the Date tree." 



As Mr. Goodyear has written so much on the lotus- 

 origin of things decorative, I think I cannot do better 

 than examine some of his statements and conclusions, 

 in order to try and disentangle this seemingly intricate 

 and interesting matter. 



