G36 MR. W. T. BLANFORD ON INDIAN REPTILES. [June 20, 



1872, p. 89). With regard to Cabrita jerdoni, it is probable that 

 Dr. Giinther and I have examined different Lizards. Although I 

 thought it remarkable that I should have made so very clumsy a 

 blunder as to mistake an Ophiops for a Cabrita, I carefully reexamined 

 my original specimens of C. jerdoni, and found that they had the 

 well-developed lower eyelids characteristic of the latter genus. On 

 account of its transparency this lower eyelid is easily overlooked ; 

 but it is not likely that Dr. Giinther has made a mistake of this 

 kind ; and as the British Museum possesses Col. Beddome's types, 

 I should be inclined to conclude that I was in error in identifying 

 the Lizard I obtained in the Godavery valley and elsewhere with 

 Cabrita jerdoni, if it were not for Col. Beddome's original descrip- 

 tion of the species*. It is a subject of regret to every Indian her- 

 petologist that Col. Beddome should have published descriptions of 

 his numerous interesting discoveries in Southern India in a medical 

 journal ; and it is very possible that no copy of the work exists at 

 the British Museum. I therefore copy the following paragraphs 

 from the description in question : — 



" Cabrita jerdoni (Bedd.). Two loreals, snout more pointed than 

 in C. leschenaulti ; .... lower eyelid transparent ; .... femoral 

 pores twelve on each thigh, &c. 



" Only a single specimen of this interesting Lizard was procured, 

 between Cotegal and Caverypooram. In its large scales it much re- 

 sembles an Ophiops, but has a distinct lower eyelid. 



"An Ophiops, which I take to be O. jerdoni, Blyth, is very abun- 

 dant near the banks of the Tamboodra, north of Adoni, on red soil ; 

 and I have found the same species at Pothanore. It is very similar 

 in colour to the Cabrita here described, and the scales of the back 

 are similar in size ; it, however, wants the lower eyelid, and differs 

 in the shields of the head, and has a much shorter tail, and only 

 8-9 femoral 'pores on each side. A casual observer, however, might 

 take the two to be the same species." 



Now I think it is impossible to read the above paragraphs (the 

 italics are my own) and to doubt that Colonel Beddome, when he 

 wrote them, was well acquainted with the two species, Ophiops jer- 

 doni and Cabrita jerdoni. I sent a specimen of the Lizard which I 

 identified with the latter to Col. Beddome ; and he assured me it 

 agreed exactly with his type, as I mentioned in my paper, l.s.c. p. 348, 

 note. 



3. Hemidactyltjs coct^i. 



Dr. Giinther unites to this II. bengaliensis, Anderson (already 

 shown to be identical by Stoliczka, I.e. p. 98), H.giganteus, Stoliczka, 

 and Doryura berdmorei of Blyth and others. 



It is very probable that the single specimen of Hemidactylus gi- 

 ganteus examined by Dr. Giinther was a female, and that the tail 

 was entirely renewed, in which case it could not easily be distin- 

 guished from //. coctcei. I have reexamined four specimens of II. 

 giganteas — a pair (male and female) in the Indian Museum, and 

 * Madras Monthly Journal of Medical Science, Jan. 1870, p. 34. 



