206 Mr. G. A. Boulengcr on some Jurassic and 



considerable change since 1887, when, commenting on Parker's 

 discovery of at least fifteen somatomes in the cervical region 

 of the embryo of Chelone, he regards the latter author's 

 statement, that " This free suppression of segments suggests 

 a great secular modification by shortening of a form not 

 unlike a Plesiosaur," as a '* proof of the affinity of the Testu- 

 dinata and Sauropterygia." What Dr. Baur proves with so 

 much assurance on one occasion he himself pretends to dis- 

 prove on the next, without even referring to the position he 

 has previously taken up. 



Two recently published contributions throw fresh light on 

 the Jurassic and Cretaceous Squamata, and suggest some 

 further remarks on the subject. 



The first of these contributions is a paper by Gorjanovic- 

 Kramberger (5) , who, ignoring my previously published note 

 and reasoning from a different point of view, arrives at results 

 very similar to mine in dealing with the systematic position 

 of some Cretaceous lizai-ds from Dalmatia. 



He describes a new form, Aigralosaurus, which shows 

 points of affinity to the Dolichosauria, the Pythonomorpha, 

 and the Varanoid Lacertilia, and proposes to establish a group 

 named Ophiosauria to comprise the Aigialosauridae and 

 Dolichosauridaj. It is needless to observe that the term 

 Ophiosauria must be superseded by that of Dolichosauria, 

 which is of older standing, although Kramberger appears to 

 be ignorant of its existence. His definition of the group is, 

 besides, deficient in truly diagnostic characters. 



The Bydrosaurus lesinensis of Kornhuber is incidentally 

 dealt with, and the genus Pontosaurus is established for it in 

 the family Aigialosauridae, which is stated to be distinguished 

 from the Dolichosauridse by the number, 7 to 9, of cervical 

 vertebrge. However, it seems clear to me, after reexami- 

 nation of the figure given by Kornhuber, that H. lesinensis 

 possessed about 15 cervical vertebrae, and I am still at a loss 

 to find how it is to be generically distinguished from Doliclio- 

 scmrus. But this is a matter which cannot well be dealt with 

 without comparing the specimens themselves ; therefore the 

 genus Pontosaurus may be accepted provisionally, provided 

 it be not identical with Acteosaurus of H. v. Meyer or Adrio- 

 saurus of Seeley. 



AigiaIosau7-uSj of which the figure of a nearly perfect 

 specimen is given, is a remarkable lizard, with somewhat the 

 physiognomy of a Monitor or Varanus, but with the jugal in 

 contact with the postfrontal and closing the orbit behind, 

 shorter and stouter ribs, and limbs much of the same type as 

 in Pontosaurus, although more developed. The quadrate is 



