BIHANG TILL K. SV. VET.-AKAD. HANDL. BAND 26. AFD. IV. N:0 1. 7 



From the old collections we find at present in the Royal 

 Museum one specimen with Drottningholm label: Lacerta 

 superciliosa, which specimen is a true Ophryoessa siiperciliosa, 

 and two jars, containing three specimens, bearing the same 

 name, but on labels written by Quensel. Of these one specimen 

 also is an Ophryoessa superciliosa; the other two, kept in 

 the same jar, are Uraniscodon umhra (L.) Kaup, (Boul. cat. 

 Liz. II, p. 179. 1885). No doubt exists that the first one is 

 a specimen from Mus. Drottnh., and it is verj^ probable that 

 the other three also are from the same place, when we must 

 presume that Quensel had not noticed that one of the jars 

 contained two lizards, one of those also being a very small 

 specimen. 



It is quite evident from Linn8eus's description that he 

 used as type for Lacerta superciliosa a specimen of Ophry- 

 oessa superciliosa and not any of Uraniscodon umhra. 



Measureraents of the two o. superciliosa. 



Total length (the specimen with Drottri. label) 380 ram. 



» » (the other specimen) 338 mm. 



Length of the body (to the vent) (tbe Drottnh. specimen) 146 mm. 

 ■■' » :> >. (the other specimen) 102 mm. 



On Uraniscodon umhra see p. 24! 



Lacerta cordylus. 



Linnseus in Amoen, Acad. Tom I, N:o V, p. 132, N:o 18, and 

 N:o XI, p. 292, N:o 18. Mus. Ad. Frid. 1, p. 42. Syst. Nat. Ed. X, 

 p. 202. 



Syn. in Boul. cat. Liz. II, p. 256, Zonurus cordylus (L.) Merr. 



Quensel states in his catalogue five specimens of this 

 lizard to be found in the museum at that time. All these, 

 he says, were from Mus. Drottnh. and the types of Linnseus. 

 Of the specimens, at present kept in the museum, none bears 

 the usual Drottningholm label, but two of them have such 

 of the same kind though they are only marked ^Lacerta» (the 

 paper as well as the printing on these agrees completely 

 with the usual labels, but being only half as broad, it is 

 probable that the specific name has been cut away). Be- 

 side these two specimens there are three others in two jars all 

 labeled by Quensel: Lacerta cordylus. Then, the number of 

 the specimens is the same as given by Qitensel, and there is 

 no reason to doubt his statement that they are from Museum 



