FOSSIL VAEA Nil) AF AND MEGALANIDAE. 
417 
inc.» The type specimen, on which this species is based, consists of the 
distal portion of a right humerus, described and represented in ventral 
and distal aspect by T)e Vis. The humerus is described by De Vis in the 
following terms (p. 98 - 99) : 
«The lacertian remains, so named, consist of a portion of a humerus 
and tibia. In the humerus, which wants the proximal end from the latissi¬ 
mus dorsi insertion exclusive, the family character is recognised in the 
presence of an open ectepicondvlar canal — the generic, as compared with 
Megalania, in the long and contracted 
course of that canal — a specific in 
the position of the medullary foramen, 
which is removed from the radial 
edge of the coronoid fossa to the 
ulnar side of its middle sub-marginal 
point. Its specific affinities are withF. 
varius in the prominence and length 
of its supinator ridge, but with goul- 
dii, punctatus, &c., in the distinct 
rotundity of its ulnar condyle and re¬ 
latively increased prominence of the 
radial which, however, has a form 
peculiar in being contracted at its'dis- 
tal end, with a direction more nearly 
parallel to the long axis of the shaft 
than in modern species ; the facies of 
this region of the bone thus being 
rather Scincoid than Varanoid.» — Besides these statements I would draw 
attention to the fact of this humerus being of a somewhat different 
s hape than is generally the case in Varanus. (Bee text fig. 17). By the form 
of its trochlea and eminentia capitata it seems to most approach, at least 
as regards these parts, the humerus of Varanus ? Lemoinei Nop. from 
the Beims Eocene. Although in other respects of thoroughly Varani a n 
appearance, I see no reason presently for considering its owner as an «In- 
cert æ sedL» Lacertilian, classifiable amongst the forms treated in the chapter 
containing the «Appendix to the family Varanidae », and thus a d m i t 
the generic determination given by its author. According 
to de Vis «The bone is from an adult individual and indicates a species 
not greatly larger than an average V. varius»; concerning dimensions I 
must observe that Mr. de Vis’ above cited enunciation seems somewhat 
exaggerated as regards the bulk of our recent Varanus varius, this species, 
as far as I had the occasion to study its proportions — seeming to be, in 
Annales Musei Nationals Hungarici. XVI. 27 
Fig. 17. t Varanus emeritus De Vis hom. 
ine. — Ventral and distal view of hu- 
meius. — Nat-size. — Kings Creek (Darling- 
Downs). — From De Vis, On Megalania 
&c.. Pl. IV. 
