Zsivny Viktor (szerk.): A Magyar Természettudományi Múzeum évkönyve 30. (Budapest 1936)
Fejérváry, G. J.: Notes on a very little-known lizard: Lacerta princeps Blanf., with description of the male specimen preserved in the Vienna Natural History Museum
pertains: this form being probably the one to which BOULENGER'S allusion applies. BOULENGER, in the description given in his „Monograph" (p. 90} of L. viridis LAUR. var. Woosnami BLGR., says that „in the lepidosis of the body" this variety „approaches L. princeps" — a statement which I am unable to confirm, if such lepidotical details be considered that are really characteristic of. L. princeps. For neither the perusal of BOULENGER'S descriptions of the variety mentioned, nor the examination of a male cotype of it, which I obtained for the Hungarian National Museum from Mr. H. W. PARKER of the British Museum, did afford evidence in support of a similar visualization. 2 Description of the adult male of L. princeps BLANF., based upon the specimen preserved in the Natural History Museum in Vienna, with references to BLANFORD'S, BOULENGER'S and DE MÉHELY'S descriptions the female and young, respectively: Habit: robust, on the whole reminding that of L. ocellaia DAUD. subsp, pater LATASTE. — Head pyramidocephalous, comparatively short, very broad in temporal region, snout rather abruptly pointed, relatively narrow and short; length of head four times contained in length from snout to vent; pileus about 2% times as long as broad; length of snout (taken from anterior corner of eye to its tip) as long as the distance between posterior corner of eye (where eyelids meet) and about the hindmost of pre-tympanal shield rows; temporal hight (from mouth to lateral border of parietal) equalling the distance between anterior corner of eye and about the middle region of nostril, which, in this case, means the point just somewhat rostrad of the lower anterior corner of postnasal; greatest temporal width equalling the distance from tip of snout to posterior corner of the greatest superior postocular; contrarily to BOULENGER'S statement (3, p. 95), there appears not to be much likeness about the shape and proportions of the head — at least in the male — with 2 By the way, I should like to suggest an examination of the question whether DE BEDRIAGA'S L. viridis var. Vaillanti and even the much earlier described L. viridis var. astrabadensis of EICHWALD (cfr. DE BEDRIAGA, op. cit., p. 100), the latter of which seems to have totally escaped BOULENGER'S attention, might be considered, or not, as names that, according to the law of priority obtaining in Nomenclature, should be substituted for BOULENGER'S term: var. Woosnami — for it does not seem impossible to me that the latter denomination might prove to be a synonyme of one — or both — of these designations prevailing in time.
