. Bonn zoological bulletin. Zoology. 234 Aaron M. Bauer & Richard Wahlgren rem (1820) himself listed this image in his account of Col- uber fulgidus. Coluber (Natrix) Linkii, another Men-em (1820) name, despite its patronymic epithet, was not as- sociated with a Scheuchzer plate by its author. Schneider's (1801) description of Pseudoboa fasciatus = Bungarus fasciatus is based in part on material in the Bloch collection (now part of the Museum fiir Naturkunde, Berlin) and in part on the Linck specimen illustrated on plate 655, figure 8 by Scheuchzer (1735; Plate 5a). Final- ly, Dipsas multo
. Bonn zoological bulletin. Zoology. 234 Aaron M. Bauer & Richard Wahlgren rem (1820) himself listed this image in his account of Col- uber fulgidus. Coluber (Natrix) Linkii, another Men-em (1820) name, despite its patronymic epithet, was not as- sociated with a Scheuchzer plate by its author. Schneider's (1801) description of Pseudoboa fasciatus = Bungarus fasciatus is based in part on material in the Bloch collection (now part of the Museum fiir Naturkunde, Berlin) and in part on the Linck specimen illustrated on plate 655, figure 8 by Scheuchzer (1735; Plate 5a). Final- ly, Dipsas multomaculata Reinwardt in Boie, 1827 (= Boiga multomaculata) was described in part on the basis of the snake figured in Scheuchzer's plate 657, figure 2 (Plate 5b). THE IDENTITY OF SNAKES FIGURED BY SCHEUCHZER The identity of the snakes illustrated in Linck's Icones and Scheuchzer's Physica Sacra has never been adequately re- solved. The identifications published by Linck (1783-1787) can only be considered tentative as they were Linck's best guesses based on those species known to Lin- naeus at the time of the 12"' edition of Systema Naturae (1766), which Linck used as his main source. Linnaeus's descriptions were often brief and Linck had no special training or knowledge of snakes, so the margin for error was great. Linck may also have been swayed in his iden- tifications by the presumed geographic origin of the snakes. However, the stated origins of most specimens that reached natural history cabinets in the early to mid-18^'^ century were mostly unreliable, as the material generally came through a series of intennediaries, often via Dutch commercial vessels that may have visited any of the main areas from which reptiles were exported, namely Suri- name, the Cape, Ceylon, and the East Indies. In short, Linck's (1783-1787) identifications in the Index cannot be relied upon. Infomiation from Scheuchzer's (1735) text is likewise of little use in identifying the snakes of the Li
Size: 1343px × 1861px
Photo credit: © Library Book Collection / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookcollectionbiodiversity, bookcontributors, booksubjectzoology
