1870.] MR. R. B. SHARPE ON ETHIOPIAN HIRUNDINIDR. 311 
bird, where the white patch is very fully developed. I was there- 
fore nearly sure that Professor Sundevall’s H. dimidiata and Mr. 
Cassin’s H. scapularis were one and the same Species in different 
stages of plumage; but as neither in the original description of 
Prof. Sundevall nor in that given by Mr. Layard (/. c.) is any men- 
tion made of this little white patch of feathers, I wrote to the 
former gentleman to ask him if the type specimens possessed the 
peculiarity. Every communication of Prof. Sundevall’s is always 
read with great interest by ornithologists, so that I make no apology 
for giving his answer in his own words. 
“Stockholm, Oct. 24, 1869. 
“My pear Srr,—With regard to your last letter (of Oct. 13th), I 
must mention that I have always considered the Hirundo scapularis 
of Cassin to be the same as my A. dimidiata. But in describing the 
bird I had only three specimens, two males and a female, from Port 
Natal, of which one went to Leyden in 1853 in exchange, and the 
other two (g ) are still here. Now these two specimens have 
the whitish mark on the wings so small and so well hidden by the 
Scapulars that I had not observed it in the least ; and probably it 
was the same in the third specimen ; otherwise I should not have 
given it away. Afterwards (in 1857) I received another specimen, 
a male from the Knysna (Eastern Cape Colony), which has the 
white mark very large and apparent, but in the natural situation of 
the feathers it is perfectly hidden by the scapulars ; and I do not be- 
lieve this character will denote a specific difference, as it seems to 
me to be merely an individual variation. I have seen one more 
specimen from Knysna and one from Damara-land, which had both 
very conspicuous white marks. The species seems to be spread 
over the whole of Southern Africa (and probably breeds in the 
north) ; and if your specimens are from this quarter of the world, I 
think they will certainly be the above-named species. In my spe- 
cimen from Knysna the white mark is a little greyish, and consists 
of the last two greater tectrices of each wing: the last is almost 
wholly whitish ; the next has only the interior (dorsal) web whitish. 
Besides, the last little cubital feather (that is the last of the so- 
called tertiaries) is clouded with grey at the base, with a little white 
basal spot, which I do not observe in the Natal birds ; this marking, 
however, is covered by the whitish tectrices. With regard to the 
Natal birds, there is a little difference in the extent of white in the two 
specimens. The mark is well-defined, and not at all as represented 
in Cassin’s figure, where it is much too large and undefined. In my 
two specimens from Port Natal the marks are very small and greyish, 
only forming a spot on the inner web of the two mentioned feathers, 
and is a little different in the two birds. I think my name of dimi- 
diata must be retained, as it is published in the April part of our 
*@fversigt’ for 1850, Cassin’s description being published in 
the June part of the Philadelphia ‘ Proceedings’ of the same year. 
The same remark applies to my H. holomelas and his A, hamigera. 
To the description of the H. dimidiata I would add that the under. 
side is tolerably pure white when seen directly or straight in front ; 
