Lizards allied to Lacerta muralis. 251 



whilst I would refer the reader to fig. 1, pi. xvi. of Prof. v. 

 Mehely's paper to show that exceptions to this character occur 

 among- the Archaiolacertse. Besides, I have already pointed 

 out elsewhere very frequent exceptions in both groups. In my 

 paper in the ' Transactions of the Zoological Society ' (xvii. 

 1905) I have carefully recorded them on account of Prof. v. 

 Mlhely'a statement (Ann. Mus. Hung. ii. 1904, p. 368, foot- 

 note) " Ich habe z. B. viele Hunderte von selir verscliiedenen 

 Fundorten her.stammende Exemplare der Lacerta muralis, 

 L. vivipara und L. taurica untersucht und niemals ein Ex- 

 emplar angetroffen, bei dein das erste Postoculare [upper 

 postocular] nicht an das Parietale angestossen hiitte." Is it 

 not very remarkable that when I examine scores instead of 

 hundreds of tiie typical form I come across such exceptional 

 specimens? Itecently on looking over 135 lypical L. mu- 

 ralis from Spain, 1 found 23 such exceptions, or nearly IS per 

 cent. A specimen here figured (tig. 1 B) is from near Vienna. 

 In a recent reply to my ciiticisms (Ann. Mu-;. Hung. v. 

 1907, p. 488) Prof. v. Mehely maintains his statement, and 

 thinks he can explain the exceptions 1 have pointed out by 

 suggesting that I have been deceived in my examination by 

 an occasional division of the last supraocular. How can 

 anyone believe that in such a case I would have reckoned a 

 specimen as not falling into Prof. v. Me'hely's definition? I 

 will let the above figures, traced from photographs, speak for 

 themselves. Besides, it is an incontrovertible fact that 

 L. bedriuyie (Archaolacerta) and L. tiliguerta (Neolacerta) 

 are absolutely identical as concerns the character in question. 



(3) Here again I need only refer the reader to Prof. v. 

 Mehely's own description and figures (pi. xxi.), and to my 

 memoir of 1905, where I have mentioned innumerable excep- 

 tions to the character which I take to be implicitly held by 

 the author as diagnostic of the Neolacertse in opposition to 

 the Archseolacortaj. 



(4) I have before me examples of Palseolacerta? (L. dr >- 

 fordt, bedriagw, and mosoreusis, for example) in which the 

 suture in question is oblique, whilst, on the other hand, 1 

 find many L. muralis, typ., which answer to the d ifinition of 

 the Archajolacerlpe. How much the direction of this suture 

 varies may be seen from the author's figures on pi. xxi. 



(5) The annexed figures of the scaling of the tail (in 

 anterior third), traced from photographs, of an Arclnejlacerta 

 (L. yra'ca) and a Neolacerta (L. muralis, typ.) suffice to put 

 aside a character to which undue importance is attached, 

 although 1 could bring forward many other instances. 1 

 notice that in his descriptions of the species of Palfeolacert* 



lb* 



