HISTORICAL ASPECTS 
The oldest conceivable documentation of parental behavior ina 
lepidosaurian is in the book of Isaiah, 34:15 (McDowell et al., 1982) written 
some time between 745-350 BC (Asimov, 1968). In this account, the Hebrew word 
"lilith," at one time interpreted as an owl (Strong, 1961; Asimov, 1968), is 
referred to as the "arrow snake." This vernacular name may have referred to 
the boid Eryx jaculus (Topsell, 1608; White, 1954). Since E. jaculus is 
viviparous, the snake reputed to "lay eggs and hatch, and gather them under 
her shadow" (McDowell et al., 1982) may refer to an oviparous snake or be 
erroneous, if not simply a fable. 
Much of the pre-Twentieth century natural history literature indicates 
that many authors believed parental behavior was universal in snakes 
(Aristotle, [d. 322 BC]; Nicander of Colophon [135-133? BC]; Gesneri, 1551- 
1587; Topsell, 1608; Chateaubriand, 1827; Sundowner, 1895, 1902). The Second 
Voyage of Sinbad the Seaman, written in the 8th century AD (Burton, 
1885-1888), is an example of early fiction that mentions a giant snake 
(undoubtedly a python) brooding its eggs. The "cockatrice" or "basilisk" was 
reputed to brood her eggs (Gesneri, 1551-1587; Topsell, 1608). It is likely 
that this mythical beast was a fantastical description of a cobra, either 
Ophiophagus hannah or a species of Naja (White, 1954; also see descriptions by 
Pliny the Elder, [d. AD 79]; Gesneri, 1551-1587; Topsell, 1608). Similarly, 
brooding was attributed to the "asp" (= Naja haje?) and the "dipsas" (= 
Bungarus sp.?; White, 1954) by Nicander. Modern documentation confirms that 
these taxa brood their eggs (Table VI). 
Snakes have long been credited with the ability to swallow their young to 
protect them from danger (Topsell, 1608; Carver, 1778; Mease, 1807; Holmes, 
1823; Hunter, 1824; Chateaubriand, 1827; Gosse, 1851; Rivers, 1874; Stanley, 
{19??]; Burroughs, 1908; Meek, 1946). Earliest accounts of this behavior are 
found in hieroglyphics attributed to the ancient Egyptians circa 2300 BC 
(Speck, 1923). So prevalent was (and still is!) this belief, that it was 
incorporated into early fiction, including the pre-Elizabethian poem, The 
Faerie Queene (Spenser, 1590). This alleged behavior, attributed not only to 
snakes but also to the lizard, Lacerta vivipara (Hopley, 1882), has been 
reviewed and discussed by numerous authors for more than 300 years (Browne, 
1646; White, 1787; Hopley, 1882; Noble, 1921; Speck, 1921, 1923; Schmidt, 
1929; Ditmars and Bridges, 1937; Angel, 1950; Klauber, 1972; Russell, 1983; 
Shine, 1988). Despite many inquiries into the plausibility of this behavior, 
no scientific evidence exists for its occurrence (Klauber, 1972; Shine, 1988). 
Among saurians, Scincus scincus was reputed to care for its eggs and 
young (Gesneri, 1551-1587; Topsell, 1608), but no modern observations support 
this contention (Table V). Hoy (1883) suggested that all lizards brooded 
their eggs. In all likelihood, his statement is based upon observations of 
Ophisaurus attenuatus and Eumeces septentrionalis; these are the only 
egg-brooding lizards that he actually observed (Hoy, 1883). The suggestion 
that an amphisbaenian broods its eggs (Gesneri, 1551-1587; Topsell, 1608; 
Aldrovandi, 1640; reviewed in Druce, 1910), has not been verified. 
