— 234 — 



are dark rusty-brown. The female lacks the black stripes on 

 the hea<], which is thus here uniform rufous; tho feathers of the 

 back are edged with light greyish brown. The tibias pale 

 rusty-brown. Id other respects they are in agreement with 

 Reich enow's description. 



Wing, tarsus, 



58 mm. 22 mm. 



59 mm. 21 mm. 



Irides dark-brown; bill black (lower mandible with greyish- 

 blue spot); legs faintly flesh-colured. 



The East African form of iwmevs differs from the South 

 African in the head being reddish brown (in the South African 

 rusty-brown) and in the long length of its wing. In South 

 African specimens this is 50 — 55 mm. 



Cisticola rohusta ambigua Sharpe. — Bull. Brit. Orn. Club, 

 vol. XI, 1900, p. 28. 



2 (3^ ad. 10. 4. Nairobi. — 1 ^ ad. 11. 4, Ngong. — 1 (5 ad. 17. 4. Kiambu. — 



3 (3(3 ad. 12. 5., 10. 8. Eldoret. — 5 (3(5 ad. 16. 5., 17. 5., 26. 7. Soy. - 

 3 (3(3 ad. 6. 6., 19. 6 , 24. 7. Mount Elgon. — 1 2 ad. 10. 4. Nairobi. - 

 2 QQ ad. 11. 4. Ngoug. - 2 QQ. ad. 16. 7., 25. 7.; 3 (3(3 juv. 24. 7. 1'5. 7. 



Mount Elgon. — 1 (3 juv. 11. 8. Eldoret. 



This bird was one of the commonest everywhere on the grass- 

 plains. 



Neumann (Journ. f. Orn., 1906, p.p. 264—266) has dealt 

 with the forms of rohusta in detail and separated 5 seemingly 

 good races. I have before me a series of 20 specimens which 

 must all — in spite of small differences — be placed under 

 ambigua. According to Neumann (op. cit.) this form is 

 characterised by being a darker red on the head, right from the 

 crown. The dark streaking of the frontal plate very dull, in 

 many it is not present at all. Pure white or almost white tail 

 tips. Wing: d* 66 — 71 mm., 9 56—60 mm. 



With specimens from Nairobi, Ngong and Kiambu (thus 

 from the Kikuyu country) Neumann's description agrees en- 

 tirely. Yet in some the head patch is more red-brownish, in 

 others brownish yellow. All of them have the dark streaks 

 faintly marked. 



The other specimens from Eldoret, Soy and Elgon are of 

 another type and agree with the description v. Someren has 

 given of birds from Uganda (Ibis, 1916, p. 453) Whether these 

 are aberrants of ambigua or not is doubtful, v. S o nj e r e n , 

 however, has at any rate not expressed any opinion but styles 

 them only C. ? Among these 13 specimens there is only one 

 (9) which approaches the true ambigua from the Kikuyu-country. 

 It therefore seems most probable to me that the dilTerence present 

 is only a difference accompanying the seasons. They cannot be 



