EEPTILIA. 
17 
This species was referred by Dr. Anderson to Emmas cccraleo-ocellata of Dumeril and 
Bibron, 1 but it appears to me to differ in several characters. The nasal shields are not 
swollen, the dorsal scales are close together and scarcely any granules can be detected 
amongst them, whereas in E. cmruleo-ocellata they are said not to be very close, and each 
ls SUm) unded by some granules. That species, moreover, has the tail scales keeled ; as a 
j u '> they are smooth in the Turkestan form, and the limbs arc proportionally longer in the 
manor, the hind legs nearly reaching the ear. 
I have already 2 expressed doubts as to whether E. cceruleo-ocellatct is the same as 
■ Ve lox, 3 as the former has no palatal teeth, and the latter appears to possess them ; but if they 
msenible each other at all closely, as is probable from the circumstance of most authors 
Baiting them, I think the species now described differs much in habit, being a more slender 
01 m, and it is also distinguished by having the scales beneath the feet granular and not 
distinctly keeled. 
The closest ally appears to be a species described by Dr. Gunther from the Gobi Desert 
l mder the name of E. multiocellata. It is possible that this may be the same, but it is de- 
coked as having an azygos shield between the postfrontals, a large central scale in the collar, 
a ml eighteen longitudinal rows of scutes across the abdomen. Hone of these differences is of 
nu mli importance, but taking them together, they present a considerable distinction and 
1( nder it possible that other differences exist. I should not think Dr. Gunther would have 
n Ol ‘looked the peculiar character of the nasal shields not being swollen, in which the present 
s P R cies differs from all other Eremias with which I am acquainted. 4 
11a. Eremias yarkandensis var. saturata. PI. II, fig. 4. 
W- Blanf. : Jour. As. Soc. Bengal, 1875, xliv, Pt. 2., p. 191. 
E. yarkandensis magis infuse ala, scuto infraorbitali horizontaliter diviso, parte 
superiori a labro discreta. 
1-13, Valleys of the Kuenluen range, south of Yarkand. 
flu r ^ u ' s _ variety differs from the typical form in being much darker in colour and f re- 
st) having much less distinct ocelli along the sides of the back. In one or two 
--- the back is uniformly slaty-grey. Another difference is generally found, and it 
0 , U cI) if constant, justify the giving a specific name to the variety. This is that the infra- 
1 . is divided below the eye, and does not reach the lip, the lower divided portion 
mmg the seventh supralabial. But in one specimen this infraorbital descends to the 
lb as in the normal form. 
St The specimens were not labelled, and they were amongst the last collected; but Dr, 
3 iczka notices this form in his diary as replacing the ordinary Eremias of the Yarkand 
1 111 at the commencement of the valleys leading to the Kuenluen. 
a Gen. v, p . 295. 
3 p® tern Persia, ii, p. 374. 
4 gj : R< ‘ ise . t P- 718. 
0(!e Hata 100 ^ e a ^ 0VB was written, Dr. Gunther has very kindly compared specimens of E. yarkandensis with the type of E. multi. 
that the'f 311 '* * n ^ orms mo that they are probably the same, the only distinction of any importance, so far as can be detected, being 
to ascerta ° re claws appear much larger in E. multiocellata. The type of this species is so much shrunk, that it is difficult 
I thi n ]. tt' 11 ^ether it had swollen nasals, hut apparently it had not. I leave the account of the species as originally written, but 
eie 18 every probability that E. multiocellata and yarkandensis are identical. 
