Of special interest is the system suggested by M. Fiirbringer (19OO) 

 based on a study of the musculature of the shoulder area of reptiles. Fiir- 

 bringer and nearly all succeeding researchers considered the gekkonids to be 

 the most primitive group of modern lizards. Close to them are the Scincidae 

 and Gerrhosa\iridae. All three of these families have a relatively high 

 number of primitive characteristics (Fiirbringer, 1900, pp. 58I-582). At the 

 same time, Fiirbringer indicated the relatively isolated position of the 

 gekkonids among all lizards by a number of characters. The phylogenetic line 

 passes from forms resembling the scincids through the Gerrhosauridae to the 

 Lacertidae and, possibly, the Teiidae. Throughout this line, a number of 

 specializations is noted in the musculatiire . Agamids and iguanids , closely 

 related to each other, are considered as highly specialized, aberrant forms 

 of Lacertilia, not at all related to the gekkonids. As will become evident 

 later, Fiirbringer 's views are quite similar to our views with the exception, 

 mainly, of the evaluation of the level of differentiation of the gekkonids. 



Fiirbringer 's ideas were not developed further. Almost all succeeding 

 authors (Gadow, 1901; Camp, 1923) held the opinion that the Gekkota were 

 closely related to the Iguanomorpha but not to the Scincomorpha. This point 

 of view, most completely stated by Camp (1923), is now the most widespread. 

 His classification of lizards is based on a number of structioral details of 

 the skull, branchial skeleton, throat and abdominal muscles, hemipenes , 

 scutellation, etc. 



However, recently more and more data have accumulated in the literature 

 contradicting the Camp's major conclusions.-^ The relationships between the 

 higher taxonomic groups were, evidently, constructed by Camp on the basis of 

 a preconceived idea which prevented him from observing a number of contradic- 

 tions between the classification of lizards represented in linear form and 

 the phylogenetic tree, shown greatly abridged in Fig. 1. 



According to Camp, all lizards can be divided into two basic groups 

 (divisions): Ascalabota and Autarchoglossa. The first group, including the 

 Gekkonomorpha, Iguanomorpha and Chameleonomorpha, unlike the Autarchoglossa 

 (which includes the Scincomorpha group of interest to us) is characterized by 

 high number (over foior) of transverse scale rows on each body segment, a 

 similar structure of imbricate scales (if present) with broad free edges or 

 uniform granular scaJ.es on all parts of the body, a primitive tongue struc- 

 ture, calyculate hemipenes, and a primitive hyoid suspension. All these 

 characters undoubtedly indicate a definite, although not necessarily close, 

 relationship between these fajnilies. However, other ascalabotan characters, 

 which Camp used as the basis of his classification, are clearly secondary, 

 for example, the absence of m, rectus abdominis supervicialis (a character he 

 even introduced into diagnosis) and absence of os intermedium in the wrist. 

 Camp, referring to the embryological works of Maurer (1898), acknowledged 

 that the presence of m. rectus abdominis superficialis is a primary charac- 

 teristic, but nevertheless, felt it possible to derive the autarchoglossans 

 possessing this muscle from the ascalabotans whose representatives have lost 



^Of greatest interest is the research of Malan (19^^). He examined the 

 structure of the olfactory and Jacobson's organ in the majority of lizard 

 families . He believed it necessary to place the Gekkota between the Iguano- 

 morpha and Scincomorpha and to combine them with the latter. 



