88 



Lacertidx. 



Hind limit ...... 



Foot 



Tail 



The three ill- defined forms which I think deserve recognition under 

 the names of var. euphraticus, forma typica and var. asper, constitute 

 a highly suggestive gradational series ; the condition of the subocular 

 shield pointing to the first being the nearest to the hypothetical primitive 

 Acanthodadylus. These forms may be thus contrasted : 



Subocwlar usually bordering the mouth ; first supraocular divided ; 38 to 43 

 scales across middle of body, 14 to 16 between hind limbs ; 23 to 27 femoral 

 pores on each side Var. euphraticus, Blgr. 



Subocular not bordering the mouth ; first supraocular iisually divided; 34 to 

 52 (usually 38 to 43) scales across middle of body, 12 to 16 between hind 

 limbs ; 21 to 31 (usually 22 to 28) femoral pores . . . Forma typica. 



Subocular not bordering the mouth ; first supraocular usually vindivided ; 

 23 to 38 (usually 25 to 35) scales across middle of body, 8 to 14 between hind 

 limbs ; 15 to 27 (usually 17 to 24) femoral pores . . . Var. asper. And. 



Hahifat. — Palestine, Mesopotamia, Arabia, Coasts of the Red Sea, 

 Egypt, Nubia and Egyj)tian Sudan, Tripoli, Tunisia, Algeria, south 

 of the Plateaux and far .into the Sahara, to the north-west of Lake 

 Chad.* The reported occurrence of this lizard in Persia, although not 

 improbable in view of its recent discovery in Mesopotamia, awaits 

 confirmation, as based on one of the Aucher-Eloy specimens in the 

 Paris Museum. t 



Particidars of Specimens E.vaniined. 



Forma typica. 

 r. (type), P.M. 

 Maryut 

 Alexandria . 



(J Eamleh 



* Pellegrin, Bull. Mus. Paris, 1909, p. 413. — The specimen, which I have 

 examined in the Paris Museum, is a young one, and belongs to the var. asper. 

 t See remarks above, under Lacerto- viridis, var. vaillanti (vol. I, p. 77). 



