[The 5th. |] THE VARIOUS EXPLANATIONS. 395 
mal was seen, or to be placed more than commonly far back.” 
And Mr. Anprew Wrtson in his Leisure Time Studies is also 
inclined to this hypothesis: 
“Amongst the fishes, we may find not a few examples of snake- 
like animals, which, admitting the fact of the occurrence of gi- 
gantic developments, may be supposed to mimic very closely the 
appearance of marine serpents. Any one who has watched the 
movements of a large conger-eel, for example, in any of our great 
aquaria, must have remarked not only its serpentine form, but 
also the peculiar gliding motion, which seems frequently to be 
produced independently of the active movements of the tail or 
pectoral fins. | do not doubt, however, that a giant eel might 
by most persons be readily enough referred to its proper place in 
the animal sphere, although, when viewed from some distance, 
and seen in an imperfect and indistinct manner, the spectators — 
all unprepared to think of an eel being so largely developed — 
might report the appearance as that of a marine snake.” 
Mr. Luz in his Sea-Monsters Unmasked, too, asserts: 
“An enormous conger is not an impossibility.” 
As the common eel and the conger or sea-eel are well enough 
known to all my readers, I have not given a figure of it. The 
Symbranchus has nearly the same external features, it has, however, 
no pectoral or ventral fins, and the right and left gill-aperturus , 
or gill-splits, are united together on its throat. The Sphagebranchus 
has also nearly the same external features; it has no ventral fins 
and the very end of its tail is destitute of a fin. 
The four flappers of the sea-serpent and its vertical flexibility 
are strong proofs against this hypothesis. 
The sixth explanation is that which I have accidentally found 
mentioned in Dr. Hippert’s Description of the Shetland Islands , 
1822. The passage runs as follows: 
“The faith in the Edda of the great Serpent that Thor fished 
for, did not, as Dr. Percy conceives, give rise to the notion of the 
sea-snake, but a real sea-snake was the foundation of the fable.” 
I am convinced that Dr. Hisperr is right. All fables have their 
foundation in facts, or in objects of nature, and it is plausible 
that the Norwegians had met with the sea-serpent before the fable 
of Thor’s great Serpent was inserted in their Hddas. 
Dr. Prrcy’s explanation that the notion of the Sea-Serpent springs 
