a doubtful amphibious Animal of Germany. 243 
defective and erroneous, that I shall only add, that he considered 
it as a perfect animal, and called it Proteus Anguinus. 
In the year 1772, Dr. Scopoli gave a more exact and cir- 
cumstantial (but not anatomical) description of this animal, in 
his Annus quintus Histor. Natural, p. 75. 
From the accounts of these learned naturalists, and from a 
drawing sent by the last mentioned one, Linnaeus had notice 
of this animal ; but, not being fully acquainted with its nature 
and characters, and observing that it very much resembled the 
larvae of some lizards, he supposed it might be an imperfect 
animal. It is however noticed, with some others of a similar 
structure, in the new edition of his Systema Naturae, by Gmelin. 
Tom. i. P. 3. p. 1056. 
Since that time, nothing has been done to illustrate the 
nature of this curious animal, and to remove the doubts of 
naturalists, very few of whom have taken notice of it ; however, 
J. Hermann, ( Commentarius Tabulae Affinitatum Animalium, 
1783, p. 256. note,) and the celebrated amphibiologist, T. G, 
Schneider, (Histor. Amphib. Fasc. 1. 1799, p. 40. &c. ) think 
themselves fully convinced of its being an imperfect animal : 
they ridicule the ideas of Laurenti and Scopoli, and blame 
Linn^us for hesitating ; though they have no sufficient 
foundation for their own opinion, which is formed merely from 
apparent analogy. 
I should tire the patience of my readers, if I attempted to 
refute the arguments of these two naturalists, or to prove, by 
long deductions and comparisons, that neither they, nor the 
others, had sufficient ground for their conclusions ; I shall 
therefore only give an accurate description of what I have 
observed in a careful anatomical dissection of it ; in the per- 
I i 2 
