408 
G. J. DE FEJ ÉRVÁR Y 
of processus transversi may be regarded as a striking feature, which I have 
not as yet met with to such a degree in any recent or fossil species of Vcira- 
nus. The ball — viewed from backwards — shows a pea-like shape and seems 
to be considerably smaller than might be presumed on base of the 
proportional relations observed in other species, recent or fossil, between the 
condyle and other parts of the vertebra. The roundish neural canal is 1 a r g e, 
relatively very much larger than in V. marathonensis Weith., and even 
— relatively — larger than in recent species of the genus. The neural arch 
on both sides of the neural canal is well developed, presenting an habitual 
appearance. Proc. spinosus broken. Proc. obi. post, so severely damaged 
that exact statement as to their shape is rendered impossible ; they seem 
to bear, in their habitus, some resemblance to those of F. salvator Laur. 
The hind surface of median part of the neural arch (from upper margin 
of neural canal to hind border of proc. obi. post.) is deeply sunken towards 
the middle, presenting at both sides a large, rhomboidal surface (facies rhom¬ 
boidalis mihi) mentioned already ín V. marathonensis. The inner (deeply 
sunken) border of these facies rhomboidales meet in a straight, somewhat 
elevated, bony ridge (linea medialis mihi) occupying the vertical median 
line. The facies rhomb, seem to be uniform in this species and not split 
asunder by a median subhorizontal ridge, formed by the refraction of 
the surfaces produced in the middle region by a slightly declining angle, 
as pointed out in the description of the dorsal vertebra in V. marathonen¬ 
sis. There are traces suggesting well marked foramina intervertebralia. 
Regarding this fossil Monitor this is all that could be stated on ground 
of Lydekker’s figures, unfortunately accompanied in each case by a very 
summary text, containing practically no descriptions. 
Phylo gene ficai reflexions. A research concerning the 
recent descendant of the Siwalik Monitor, in order to determine 
which of the Holocene Monitors may be regarded as an. epigone of 
that Pliocene species, could but lead to mere speculations. The rests of V. 
sivalensis are too scarce and too fragmentary to permit the establishment 
of an exact or even approximate relationship. Mr. Lydekker 1 compared the 
Siwalik form with one of the largest living Monitors, V. salvator Laur., 
remarking that the «great excess in the size of the fossil over the living 
Varanus salvator may in all probability be regarded as a good specific cha¬ 
racter . . .» He must evidently have overlooked some other, more impor¬ 
tant morphological markings, occurring besides the large 
dimensions, which might prove the well-defined specific distinctness 
of this fossil form. On the other hand, a great resemblance in some osteolo- 
gical characters, as for instance in the formation of the humerus, must be 
1 Siwalik Crocod. Lacert. and Opliid., 1. c. 
