( 167 ) 



50. Carpodacus rhodochlamys (Brandt). 

 3 c?c? December, 0, 'i ^ Jaimary, 5 ? ¥ l.)eoeml)cr. 



•">!■ Carpodacus erythriniis (Pall.). 



3 c?c?, 1 ¥, May. Two d d agree best with onr Males from the Caucasus, but 

 the third ouc is as red as Indian specimens. 



52. Uragus sibiricus (Pall.). 

 11 (?c? and ? ? : 10 December, 1 IMarch. 



53. Montifringilla brandti (Bp.). 



36 (J cJ and ? ? , February. 



These birds are all typical M. brandti, of which Severzow's pamirensis must be 

 a synonym. The type of the latter is an immature bird, and Dr. Severzow says that 

 he shot both hraiiilfi and pamireiisig out of the same flock. There remains, however, 

 the question of the identity or otherwise of Gonld's haematopyyiu. with typical 

 bmmlti. All the 36 birds mentioned above are identical in colour, and only differ 

 in the presence or absence of pale pink margins to a few of the rump-feathers. 

 Specimens shot during or after the breeding season have a rather different appear- 

 ance from these freshly moulted birds. The grey edges of the feathers of the 

 upperside are worn off, with the result that head, neck, and primaries and tail 

 appear almost black, the rump being uniform grey without any trace of the piak 

 edges. My scries of Himalayan birds is unfortunately entirely conii«iscd of such 

 worn specimens, but they differ conspicuously from equally worn typical hnnulti by 

 being more brown and voi-y distinctly striped above, and having conspicuous red 

 tips to all the rump-feathers. The lesser upper wing-coverts, on the other hand, 

 are decidedly red in both fresh and worn t}'pical hrandti, while in my Himalayan 

 birds there is no red on the wing-coverts. 



I must consequently differ from Dr. Sharpe {Cat. B. XII p. 269), Schalow 

 {Journ.f. Orn. 1901 p. 442), and other authorities, and consider that— 

 Montifringilla brandti brandti and 

 Mont ifrinff ilia brandti haematopygia 

 are two justly separable subspecies. 



I have also a skin from Szechuan (Berezowsky coll.) which at first sight 

 strikes one as being altogether much darker than the darkest of onr Himalayan 

 birds. I believe this to belong to a third subsj)ccies, but do not wish to name 

 it from a single specimen. 



54. Montifringilla arctoa (Pall.). 



5 c?c? January, 2 S 3 December, 1 S November, 2 ? ? January, 1 ? Febnuivy, 

 1 ? December. 



5.j. Montifringilla sordida I'Stoliczka). 

 4 (J c? March, 1 i January, 2 ¥ ? March. 



56. Serinus pusillus (Pall.). 

 4 ? ?, 3 c? J ad., 1 ? juv., February. 



