02 
VK'TOIUA RRCilA ” — THE EMBLEM OF THE SOCIETY 
EitryaJe is a inonotypic genus of S.E. Asia from which the Amazons 
plant clearly differs, and Sowerhy transferred Poepiiig’s epithet to Vic- 
toria in 1850. Hooker (1851, 11) rejected the proposal out of hand and 
wrote; “We put wholly aside Evryale Arnazonica Poeppig, well enough 
matched with one of the Furies, but totally unsuited to be in connection 
with the name of Her Most Gracious Majesty, whom it is intended to 
commemorate, and also as being inappropriate to a plant which is neither 
confined to the Amazon River nor was even originally detected there”. 
Lindley (1851) was equally determined to reject the earliest trivial. It 
must be remembered that they were both too close to the patronage of a 
Queen with a mind of her own to express completely detached views ! 
Lawrence (1949) has recently shown that the correct name for the 
plant is Victoria arnazonica (Poeppig) Sowerby (1850), and he gives the 
synonoiny as follows : — 
Eurijale arnazonica Poeppig' (1832) 
Victoria regia Lincll. (1837) 
V. regina J. E. Gray (1838) 
V. regalis Scliomb. (1838) 
Ar^neslea arnazonica Piesl (1844) 
Victoria arnazonica Klotzscli (1847) 
Victoria reginae Hook. (1850) 
From this it would appear that Klotzsch’s combination of 1847 has 
priority over Sowerbj”s of 1850. Klotzscli, however, wrote Victoria 
Amazonum and Mr. N. Y. Sandwith, whose help I most gratefully ac- 
knowledge, observes that ivliile Klotzscli was attempting to do exactly 
what Sowerby did three years later in “pointing out the earlier publica- 
tion of Poeppig’s name for the same species described by Lindley as Th 
regia and recognising the validity of the independent genus Victoria and 
the consequent need for transferring Poeppig’s name to it, he deliberate- 
ly made an unauthorised name-change, and wrote Victoria Amazonum 
genitive plural of a noun). This was not a slip on his part since in the 
synonymy quoted by him he deliberately writes; — Victoria regia, Vic-' 
toria Itegma, Euryale arnazonica, Victoria Cruziana" . Mr. H. K. A. 
Shaw and Mr. Sandwith are agreed that Klotzsch’s “Amazonum’’ should 
be regarded as a “new, substituted, illegitimate, epithet” rather than 
a slip of the pen and they suggest that Professor Lawrence appears to 
have taken the same view’ ; otherwise he w'ould have adopted Klotzsch’s 
combination which by an unfortunate oversight appears as “Victoria 
arnazonica Klotzscli” in his own synonjuny. 
It would seem that the synonj’my should be given as follows; — 
Euryale arnazonica Poeppig (1832) 
Victoria regina Schomburgk (Sept, 1837) 
Victoria regia Lindley (after Oct. 16, 1837) 
Victoria regalis .Scbomburgk (Nov. 1837) 
Anneslea arnazonica (Poeppig) Presl (1844) 
[Victoria Amazonum Klotzscli (1847)— illegitimate] 
Victoria arnazonica (Poeppig) Sowerby (18.50) 
Victoria reginae Hooker (1850) 
To return to the connection of the Royal Water-lily w’ith our own 
afl'airs — After adojition of the emblem in 1837 the Botanical Society of 
