A MONOGRAPH OF THE SEA-SNAKES (HYVROPHIINJ2). 247 



labials ; a suture runs from the nostril to the second supralabial (in three examples to 

 the first). Prseoculars, — one. Postoculars, — one or two. Temporals,— 

 two or three small shields. Supralabials, — seven usually, sometimes eight; the 

 third and fourth usually touch the eye (sometimes the fifth also, rarely the fourth 

 only). Inf ralabials. — the fourth is the largest of the series, and in contact with 

 three or four scales behind. Marginals, — a more or less complete row after the 

 second infralabial. Sublinguals, — poorly developed, often so small, they hardly 

 deserve the name. The anterior and posterior fellows are widely separated. Cos- 

 ta Is, — anteriorly 29 to 36, midbody 30 to 45, posteriorly 31 to 42 ; juxtaposed every- 

 where ; the lowest three or four rows distinctly enlarged, and in many males the 

 tubercles are remarkably spinose. Ventrals, — 151 to 219, ill-developed except 

 anteriorly. 



Colour. — Olivaceous with dark, ill-defined dorsal transverse bars, as wide or wider 

 than the interspaces. 



Habitat. — Coasts from the Persian Gulf to Borneo. 



The post-maxillary teeth are grooved. 



Enhydris hardwickii (Gray). 



Lapemis hardwickii, Gray, III. Ind. Z00L, 1834, &> pi- lxxxvii, f. 2, and Cat., 1849, 



p. 44. 

 ,, loreatus, Gray in Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., 1843, xi, p. 46. 

 ,, loreata, Gilnther , Rept. Brit. Ind., 1864, p. 380. 

 Hydrophis pelamidoides, Jan, Icon. Gen., 1872, 41, pi. iii, fig. 1. 

 ,, abbreviatus, Jan, loc. cit., 40, pi. iv, fig. 2, and v, fig. 2. 



,, fayreriana, Anderson in Joum. As. Soc. Bengal, 1871, p. 19. 



Enhydris hardwickii, Giinther, Rept. Brit. Ind., 1864, p. 380, pi. xxv, fig. W ; 



Bonlgr. in Blanford, Fauna Ind. Rept. and Batrach., 

 1890, p. 397, and Cat., iii, 1896, p. 301. 

 ,, ,, Sclater, List Snakes, Ind. Mus., 1891, p. 62. 



., ,, Wall in Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., 1903, p. 96. 



A B C 



Fig. 62. — Enhydris {Hydrophis) hardwickii. After Giinther, Rept. Brit. Ind., 1864, pi. xxv. fig. 4. 



I have examined at least 22 examples. It is an easy snake to recognise. One 

 feature requires special mention as being almost peculiar to itself, i.e., suture runs from 

 the nostril to the first supralabial. I have seen but two exceptions, and it is a feature 

 I have only seen in a few aberrant examples of E. curtus and Distira ornata among all 



