Horváth Géza (szerk.): A Magyar Természettudományi Múzeum évkönyve 16. (Budapest 1918)
Fejérváry, G.J.: Contributions to a Monography on fossil Varanidae and on Megalanidae 16
354 O. J. DE FEJÉR VARY details concerning this species will likewise be given in the part dealing •with system' and phylogeny. Of Vara nus maratJtonensis WEITH. (— V. atticus NOPCSA) the first description given by GAUDRY does not contain any specially important date. The measurements, the breadth excepted («0m, 032»), are not accurate as may be stated from the natural sized figure (Pl. LX, fig. 3 et 4). It s e e m s that ROGER'S IV Hofmanni could be i d e n t i c u 1 to this earlier described species, although one of the dorsal vertebrae 1 at my disposal, and which corresponds exactly with the drawing published in GAUDRY'S description, shows a few slight differences which may be explained by the fact ihat the two smaller vertebrae figured in ROGER'S treatise — the bigger one being in such fragmentary condition as not to permit any comparison with the reproduction 2 — were placed somewhat nearer the region of the neck as the specimen in hand (about XI th vertebra), and might therefore be approximately between the VIII TH and X th , this agreeing also with ROGER'S definition, according to which they formed a part of the «Brustwirbelsäule.» The question of identity will be more amply dealt with hereafter w r hen examining the systematic position of V. Hofmanni. So much however must be stated that with regard to V. Hofmanni, as I was solely d e p e n dent on descriptions and figures, absolutely reliable data cannot be established; thus in spite of the probability or possibility of identity V. Hofmanni will yet be dealt with as an especial species. Let us now examine the European Varanus most recently described under the name of V. deserlicolus BY. 3 AS already mentioned in the historical enumeration, for all material BOLKAY only had the fragment of a derrtary from Beremend at his disposition. To define from this unique remnant its position in the system, at least would have truly been no easy task. In this matter BOLKAY therefore would have been equally justified for presuming a new European species as — if he had acquired knowledge about the existence of V. marathonensis-WEITH. — for describing it on base of palaeobiological considerations under the name oiVaranus c2.? maratlionensis. Lately however, tolerably well preserved vertebrae from Csarnóta have fallen into my hands . and led me to the conviction that as far as can be reckoned V. deser1 ROGER found neither cervical nör caudal vertebrae, these therefore could offer 4io material for comparison. - I ca n n o t here give an opinion as to the relation of this vertebra nor as regards its position in the vertebral column, all the less as the figure suggests a conclusion different to the statement in the description. . ' 8 This form has been described by BOLKAY under the name of V . deserlicolus , which is grammatically wrong, «cola» being an unvariable suffix.
