Page:Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal Vol 7, Part 1.djvu/480

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.
On the affinities of Galathea

graphed plate, as though they were all different names of the same family. Now to analyze the sentence : Hitivira I suppose to be a corrupt writing of iff^^T hridivtra l noble in heart,' equivalent to the Pehlevi word beh translated by " excellent." — Airdna cha paramesivara, and the supreme lord of Airtin or Persia, may be read (perhaps better) Air an va Pdrsesivara, the lord of Iran and JFars. For the name, we have severally phd,cha, va, gha, or Jid ! followed by liitigdn or hitikhdn ; and lastly devajanita, as before explained. I am quite at a loss to find owners for such names, and although this is the third time I have alluded to this coin, gaining little by little each time, still I fear we have much to learn before we can unravel its entire history. For the present I leave unnoticed the Pehlevi legend, merely placing under view in the annexed plate, corresponding passages from regular Sassanian coins, which being titles, will soon lead to a knowledge of their alphabet and meaning. III. — Note on the affinities of Galathea of Lamarck ( Potamophila qfSoiverbyJ, a Genus of Fluviatile Testacea. By W. H. Benson, Esq. Bengal Civil Service. Much misapprehension appears to exist with regard to the proper jocation of the Fluviatile bivalve genus Galathea of Lamarck. That distinguished author placed the shell among his " Conques Fluviatiles," and considered it to be nearly allied to Cyrena, referring merely to the teeth as a sufficiently distinguishing character. Rang, more unaccount- ably, either on a cursory examination of the shell only, or of its description and without reference to the indications of the characters of its inhabi- tant, which the testaceous covering exhibits, says that it would perhaps be advisable to unite it to Cyrena. It is true that this writer includes not only the Conchce and Nymphacece, but also the Mactracece, Cardiacece, and Lithophagi in one overgrown section, which he denominates " Conchacees," but this attempt at generalization does not, in any wise, absolve him from the charge of mistaking the place of the genus in question in the family, which he has thought fit to constitute. The fortuitous acquisition of a specimen of this still rather rare shell enables me to offer some observations concerning it, which may serve to illustrate its true affinities, and may not only tend to confirm Lamarck's separa- tion of it from Cyrena, but likewise shew the propriety of its location in a different family from that which he classed it. The remaining genera of Lamarck's Conchce, whether marine or fluviatile, consisting of Cyrena (including the more modern genus Corbicula) Cyclas, Cyprina, Cytherea, fyc, possess the ligament and siphons on the longer side, or that which occupies the dorsal aspect of