THE ORCHID REVIEW. 37 
not the name of some new sea-urchin, nor the title of some microscopic 
fungus recently discovered ; it is the generic title by which, in future, our 
leading botanists wish us to recognise those Orchids hitherto known as 
tropical Cypripediums. The title is not a new one, for Dr. Pfitzer proposed 
it in 1886, and recently, in the reduced form of Paphiopedium, Mr. R. A. 
Rolfe has put it forward. Discussing the matter in the Botanical Magazine, 
Sir Joseph Hooker states that . . . ‘‘ Dr. Pfitzer also suggested Ascher- 
son’s Cypripedilum for the popular Linnean Cypripedium, but this would 
make what Linnzus wished to be ‘ Venus’ foot Orchids’ into ‘ Venus’ or 
‘ Lady’s slipper Orchids,’ as they are popularly but erroneously known. Sir 
Joseph reminds us that Cypripedium of Linnzus should have been spelled 
Cypripodium to be correct, and suggests that to simplify matters and gain 
uniformity the generic terms Cypripodium, Selenipodium, and Paphiopodium 
might be used if the change referred to becomes desirable ’—on which point 
Sir Joseph Hooker had remarked that ‘the only objection being the 
esthetic one that, considering the shape of the lip of a Cypripodium, the 
compliment to the goddess’s foot is not a flattering one.” (Bot. Mag., 
t. 7573.) 
But is this change either desirable or necessary? The sentimental 
objection may be passed over, for it seems to me that the compliment is 
much the same, whether you speak of the goddess’s foot or her slipper, the 
one evidently being intended to fit the other—and, by the way, can any one 
tell us precisely what the goddess’s foot was like? Her collection of 
slippers, at all events, is pretty extensive and varied, and some of them are 
obviously a very bad fit. And seriously, I think we have had changes 
enough in this group. | Necessary changes are bad enough, but surely this 
is not one of them. _ Linnzeus wrote ‘‘ Cypripedium,” and distinctly stated 
the derivation of the name as from Venus’ foot, and I fail to see by what 
right it was changed to ‘‘ Cypripedilum,” or Venus’ slipper. Long ago 
Reichenbach had something to say on this question, but I fail to lay my 
hands on the reference at this moment, though I remember that he showed 
how the initial letter might be changed by some “ purist,” as well as the 
terminal syllable and one or two in the middle of the word, and it looks as 
if we were coming to it. And in spite of what has been written to the 
contrary I would ask is ‘‘ Cypripedium” so very erroneous? Many Latin 
words were adapted from the Greek, and their derivations have Latin 
terminations, as Epidendrum and Bulbophyllum. And we have the Latin 
word pes, a foot—which comes from the Greek pous, pod-os (conf. Dr. William 
Smith)—and is declined pedis, pede, pedum, &c. Again, in some cases, for 
the sake of euphony, the termination wm becomes tum, so if Linnzus chose 
to write Cypripedium there is no good reason why we should not do the 
