1905. | VASCULAR SYSTEM OF LACERTILIA. 485 
related Ophidia. A likeness between Hatteria and the Ophidia 
fits in well with the view that Hatteria, though unquestionably an 
ancient form, is nevertheless to be placed closer to the Squamata 
than to any other group of Reptiles. The Amphisbenids un- 
doubtedly differ much from other Lacertilia, not only in structures 
related to their apodous condition and snake-like habit, but in 
various features which have at least no obvious connection with 
their mode of life. There are no clear indications of their 
relationship to other Lacertilia*. It may be that the fact dealt 
with above is of some suggestiveness as a clue to the position of 
this group, which, judging from its distribution and great modifi- 
cation, would not seem to be a modern type of Lacertilian. 
Other Veins.—It has been recorded by v. Bedriaga that the 
posterior vena cava of Amphisbena shows no divergences from 
the Lacertilian type. The left vena renalis revehens turns 
abruptly to the right at about the middle of the testis, where it 
receives the left spermatic vein, and from the right vena renalis 
revehens where the latter receives the right spermatic vein. In 
its course the vena renalis revehens of the right side (no doubt 
of the left also, though I have not positively ascertained the fact) 
appears to receive several veins from the parietes. These, how- 
ever, really open into a vein to be described later. 
Supra-renal portal veins exist. There were two on the left 
side and two on the right. On the right side, where circumstances 
allowed a more careful study, these veins were seen to open into 
a vein running along the vas deferens as figured by Hochstetter 
for Lacerta viridis. But in Amphisbena this vein runs back to 
the kidney and receives in its course between the testis and the 
kidney four veins from the parietes springing close to the dorsal 
line. In continuation of this series three veins open into each 
kidney. 
This vein is shown in the accompanying figure (text-fig. 68, 
p. 486). It is clearly the equivalent of the vena deferentialis 
figured and described by Hochstetter in Varanus =. He does not, 
however, mention branches to it from the parietes, such as occur in 
Amphisbena. Considering this latter fact and the relations of 
the vein to the vas deferens (Wolffian duct), I imagine that it is to 
be regarded as a persistent, though small, posterior cardinal vein. 
V. Bedriaga, in his illustration § of the viscera and vascular 
canals in Amphisbena cinerea, shows veins from the parietes 
opening into the vena renalis revehens of the left side. But this 
illustration refers to a female example, in which the vein which 
I have just described may not exist. Moreover, veins running 
along the oviducal membrane and opening into the kidney-system, 
such as exist in other Lizards, are obviously not the homologues 
* They are, as it appears to me, rightly regarded by Fiirbringer as a suborder 
equivalent to Lacertilia vera, Chameleonta, &c. 
+ Morph. JB. xix. Taf. xvi. fig. 13. 
& Loe. cit. p. 465, Taf. xvi. fig. 17, v.d. 
§ Arch. f. Naturg. Bd. 1. 1884, pl. iv. fig. 2, 777°. 
