88 



The three ill-defined forms which I think deserve recognition under 

 the names of var. eupJiraticus, forma iyjnca and var. asper, constitute 

 a highly suggestive gradational series ; the condition of the subocular 

 shield pointing to the first being the nearest to the hypothetical primitive 

 Acanthodacfyltis. These forms may be thus contrasted : 



Suboctilar usually bordering the mouth ; first supraocular divided ; 38 to 43 

 scales across middle of body, 14 to 16 between hind limbs ; 23 to 27 femora] 

 pores on each side . . . Var. euphraticus, Blgr. 



Subocular not bordering the mouth ; first supraocular usually divided ; 34 to 

 52 (usually 38 to 43) scales across middle of body, 12 to 16 betiveen hind 

 limbs; 21 to 31 (usually 22 to 2S) femoral pores Forma typiea. 



Subocular not bordering the mouth ; first supraocular usually undivided ; 

 23 to 38 (usually 25 to 35) scales across middle of body, S to 14 between hind 

 limbs ; 15 to 27 (usually 17 to 24) femoral pores . Tar. asper, Aud. 



Habitat. — Palestine, Mesopotamia, Arabia, Coasts of the Eed Sea, 

 Egypt, Nubia and Egyptian Sudan, Tripoli, Tunisia, Algeria, south 

 of the Plateaux and far into the Sahara, to the north-west of Lake 

 Chad.* The reported occurrence of this lizard in Persia, although not 

 improbable in view of its recent discovery in Mesopotamia, awaits 

 confirmation, as based on one of the Aucher-Eloy specimens in the 

 Paris Museum.t 



• PeUegrin, Bull. 3Ius. Paris, 1909, p. 413.— The specimen, which I have 

 examined in the Paris Museum, is a young one, and belongs to the var. asper. 

 t See remarks above, under Laceda viridxs, var. vaillanii (vol. I, p. 77). 



