VARIETIES OF THE WALL-LIZARD. 151 
Measurements (in millimetres) :— 
i 2. 3. 4 5 6. 
From end of snout tovent . . . . 80 We 68 62 70 80 
% a 5 forelimb <~ . 984 28 26 22 27 35 
hengthwolsheadtmeeenegie ttn a) 29 19 18 14 19 23 
Widthiotuheud@emeaees 4s 15 12 13 9 12 16 
Depiotheadmemmame es) nese LO 10 9 7 10 10 
Horeslimibmeeewee woke ht ole) is Baa BT 25 23 20 24 33 
Eindalimibwamen ae eves fs a od oe 41 39 34 37 47 
Hoot Mites ti (o Hitec <) 68s 27. 22 20 7. 20 26 
1. g, type, Pianosa (Bedriaga Collection). 2-8. g,Pianosa. 4, 9, Pianosa. 5. 2, Scuola, 
near Pianosa (Bedriaga Collection). In column 6 I have added, for comparison with no. 1, 
the measurements of a large male of var. bedriage from Bastelica, one of the types, in the 
Bedriaga Collection. 
This var. insulanica may be regarded as completely connecting the var. brueggemanni 
with the var. ¢iliguerta, differing from the latter in having the belly more or less 
spotted, at least on the sides. As I have previously pointed out (Tr. 1905, p. 384, 
footnote), the smaller var. brweggemanni occurs on Elba, and specimens from S. Piero, 
near Elba, are in the Werner Collection. 
Regarding, with Bedriaga, the Pianosa lizard as also nearly related to the Corsican 
var. bedriage, we may turn to Méhely’s latest paper (1909, p. 486) to see what are 
the characters which, according to him, justify the specitic separation of the latter 
from L, muralis, of which he regards L. brueggemanni as a variety. 
Leaving out the cranial characters, which are likewise inconstant (see above, p. 136), 
but with which I do not propose to deal at present, the following are the points on 
which this author lays greater stress to show that L. bedriaga, or reticulata as he calls 
it, cannot be regarded as a race of LZ. muralis, but is unquestionably entitled to rank 
as a species pertaining to a quite different group. 
1. The robust, stout habitus.—This is true only of males, and a comparison of the male 
figured by me (Tr. 1905, pl. xxix. fig. 7) with one of L. insulanica in the present 
paper (Pl. XVIII. fig. 1) shows how slight such a difference really is (see also 
the comparative measurements given above). Besides, Méhely includes in the 
same species L. sardoa, which, according to his own definition, is more slender than 
I. bedriage. One does not see, therefore, how the robust, stout form can be appealed 
to in justification of the specific distinction. Bedriaga (see above, p. 149) alluded 
specially to the stout form of the Pianosa lizard. 
2. The short frontal——It may be quite as short in LZ. insulanica, and it is not 
at all short in L. sardoa (see Tr. 1905, pl. xxviii. figs. 8 & 9). Big, heavy 
males of var. brueggemanni and filfolensis often have a short frontal, much shorter 
than its distance from the end of the snout. There is nothing in this character. 
VOL. Xx.—PakT II, No. 3.—February, 1913. Y 

