1810.] 
names of other countries, of which the 
French are so ridiculously guilty. I 
would certainly not imitate them in en- 
deavouring to naturalise MarcusAurelius ; 
and, though I would not attempt to sub- 
stitute Wien, forVienra, now naturalised 
beyond recal, I would doubtless say 
Taheitee rather than Otaheitee, since the 
prefix is proved to be superfluous. But 
not only do the Swedes always call their 
countryman Linné: the same title 1s 
constantly given to him inGermany; and 
I should have added France, had not Dr. 
Smith assured us, that there they are 
beyinning to use Linneus. Certainly 
this change is of very recent date, and I 
should much doubt its becoming genera’; 
at any rate, the naturalists of Germany 
and of Sweden, more numerous by far 
than those of all the rest of Europe com- 
bined, always use Linné. © The question 
then is, whether a due respect for the 
memory of this great man does not re- 
quire that we should conform to their 
example; whether, in fact, it is not an 
apparent though doubtless unintended 
Insult upon his countrymen, not to 
do so. 
To judge of the validity of this mode 
of reasoning, we should bring the case 
home to ourselves. Suppose that the 
order of the Bath were in this country as 
honourable asthat of the PolarStar in Swe- 
den ; and that in conferring this distinc- 
tion on any one, it were our custom ever 
afterwards to give a Latin termination to 
his name. Sir Joseph Banks would then, 
on becoming a knight of the bath, have 
been called Banksius. Now, would it 
not have been deemed a mark of the 
grossest ignorance or ill-breeding, should 
any Englishman in future have persisted 
in calling his illustrious countryman by 
his former name of Banks? And should 
we not have applied the same epithets 
to any foreign nation, which, after learn- 
ing the new honour conferred upon him, 
persisted in using the old designation ; 
especially if all other countries had 
adopted the new one? But this is pre- 
cisely what we are guilty of in the case 
of the immortal Swede. 
Dr. Smith will urge however, that this 
argument applies only to the vernacular 
name of Linné; that “in Latin, even in 
Sweden, he is now always called Lin. 
nzus ;” and that it_is the Latin title 
whieh we profess to adopt. In reply to 
this I must observe, 1, That if we are 
to admit a iman to be the best judge of 
| the mode of writing hisowa name, Lin- 
| aé’s designation ought to be the same in 
On the Name of the Great Swedish Botanist. 337 
Latin as in Swedish. 
himself in the last edition of his Systema 
Nature? tHe doesnot say Systema, Na 
ture Carol Linnei, but ‘Caroli a 
Linné.” Indeed, not to have preserved 
this designation in Latin, in which lan- 
guage nine-tenths-of his works were 
composed, would have been to give up 
the distinction conferred upon . him, 
2. The assertion that the Swedes in 
Latin now always use Linnzus, is by 
much too unqualified ; and I am greatly 
mistaken if, on re-examination, Dr. Smith 
will not find just the contrary to be more 
nearly accurate. It is true, that in 
Latin composition, where oblique cases 
occur, the Swedes say Linnzi, Linnzeo, 
&c. as they are forced to do to be intel- 
ligible; but in the nominative, they in- 
variably, as far as my experience goes, 
use a Linné, never Linneus. I have now 
before me one of the most recent Latin 
works in natural history, that have been 
received in this country from Sweden 
—Gyllenhal’s Insecta Suecica, published 
in 1808. 
wherever. Linné’s name occurs in the 
nominative case, it is constantly written 
a Jinné; in one case even after the pre= 
position ab. Iam well aware that Lin- 
nzus amalgamates much better with 
Latin composition than a Linné; but I 
do not see that this is any reason for de- 
priving him of his real name and honour- 
able title. Indeed, modern authors seem 
to be getting sensible of the folly of 
Latinising our often barbarous Gothic 
names, and generally leave them as they 
find them—surely the most rational plan. 
Happé, the author of “Icones Plant, 
Crypt.” does not call himself Happzus. 
And the effect upon our jaws will be not 
greatly different whether we read Wig- 
gers, or Wiggersius; Scheuchzer, or 
Scheuchzerus; Schkuhz, or Schkuhzius, 
However strange it may seem to Dr, 
Smith therefore, I am of opinion that 
not only in English, but in Latin, at least 
in the nominative case, we ought to say 
Linné. 
But Dr. Smith will here repeat his ob- 
jection, that to be consistent we ought 
to call him a Linné, or von or de Linné, 
In Latin, f think doubtless we ought to 
follow the Swedes in saying a Linné ; but 
in English,.as I observed in my firstletter 
mn obviating this objection, I conceive we 
may safely jivllow the Germans and 
French, who always say Linné without 
the prefix, -In, matters of this kind, 
custom ig omnipotent; and the decision 
of the majority should be submitted to. 
if 
How does he call. 
In the preface to this work, 
— 
— =~ 
<naapenepmremmantceenininsneepeent 
a 
