231 



phcea, sufficiently distinguish it. The chief question 

 in dispute is the name. Nelumbium is formed from 

 7ielumboy a Ceylon word of very confined use. If it 

 must have a barbarous appellation, Tamard would 

 be preferable, as being in general use among the 

 learned and the vulgar throughout Hindustan. Hap- 

 pily we have no occasion to adopt either, for the 

 plant has already a classical Greek name of primary 

 authority and antiquity, being the real KvapoQ of 

 Theophrastus ; and therefore the word Cyamus is 

 what by every right and title belongs to it. Ne- 

 lumbo may be retained as a specific name, rather out 

 of deference to Linnaeus and Gaertner than for any 

 good reason ; for Tamard, being more universal, 

 would be more proper; and speciosus, given by Will- 

 denow, more expressive. We wish however to re- 

 spect the right of priority, and to avoid all needless 

 changes. 



" We claim no merit in the restoration of this 

 ancient generic name. Bodaeus AStapel in his Com- 

 mentary on Theophrastus, p. 446, and Hermann in 

 his Paradisus Batavus have amply illustrated the 

 subject ; and others, as Plukenet, have alluded to 

 it. But it is remarkable that no recent writer on 

 the mythological history of the Nelumbo should 

 have been aware of its being the celebrated Kvaftoc 

 or Pythagorean bean, which is so evident from the 

 description in Theophrastus. The * cellular head 

 like a round wasp's nest, with a bean in each cell 

 projecting a little beyond its orifice ; the rose-co- 

 loured flower twice as large as a poppy,' as well as 

 all the rest of his account, are strikingly character- 



