166 New Name for the Genus Proteus. 



logy, which he justly has to that of Proteus for an Am- 

 phibian and an Infusorian. I hope and believe that the 

 former was the intended meaning of ' Viator,' for it is now 

 generally agreed by naturalists, that no generic term must 

 be common both to Botany and Zoology. 



The question between the two rival claimants to the ti- 

 tle of Proteus, is one of considerable difficulty. The mi- 

 nute and despised Infusorian might plead the undoubted 

 right of priority, its baptism being registered, as observed 

 by ' Viator,' in 1755; whereas the Amphibian, was not drawn 

 from its murky caverns till 1768. Moreover, it might be 

 argued, that the term Proteus is peculiarly expressive of 

 the versatile powers of the animalcule, while it is utterly 

 inapplicable to the Amphibian, whose essential and distin- 

 guishing character is that of undergoing no metamorpho- 

 sis at all. Laurenti, therefore, was guilty of a great over- 

 sight, in giving to his animal a name, which not only had 

 already been appropriated, but which was, perhaps, the 

 most unsuitable one that could have been chosen. On the 

 other hand, it must be remembered, that the Amphibian 

 has now been known by the name of Proteus anguinus, for 

 70 years, and that this name has been universally adopted 

 by the numerous naturalists who have made this extraor- 

 dinary animal their study. This question of names is there- 

 fore too knotty to be decided by an anonymous author, 

 though our thanks are due to him for having directed our 

 attention to it. I trust the time may arrive when a com- 

 mittee of nomenclature may be appointed, out of the whole 

 republic of science, invested with power to revise the sys- 

 tematic terms of Zoology and Botany, and to establish their 

 terminology on a sure foundation. But when changes in 

 nomenclature are attempted by individuals, whose weight 

 in the scientific world is not sufficient to ensure the uni- 

 versal adoption of their improvements, (admitting them to 

 "be such), the science receives more injury by the multipli- 

 cation of synonymes, than benefit by these partial amelio- 

 rations. 



I have only to add that 'Viator' has been unlucky in 

 his choice of the term Thetis as a substitute for Proteus, 

 that name having been adopted, some years since, by Mr. 

 Sowerby, in his Mineral Conchology, vol. xvi. pi. 513, 

 for a genus of fossil shells, and is confirmed by Brown, 

 Lethrea Geognostica, p. 704. — H. E. Strickland. 



