A CONTRIBUTION TO THE ORNITHOLOGY OF NEPAL. 279 



or iu pairs, in thick small-tree forest where the ground was 

 very damp. 



319 5w.— Siphia rufigularis, Sp. ]\ov. 



Female, Sheopuri Ridge, Ust i/ay.— Lenaf.h, 4-8 ; expanse, 

 8-3; wing, 2-65; tail, 2-0; bill from gape, 0-65 ; bill at front, 

 Krdb ; closed wmgs short of tail, O'S. 



Bill black ; irides dark brown ; feet livid fleshy ; the soles 

 yellow ; claws livid horny. 



A narrow band across "the forehead ; the lores, cheeks, and 

 sides of neck pure bluish grey j upper surface rich olive ; the 

 head darker and tmged with brown, and the rump more bricrht 

 aud slightly washed with rufous ; quills rufous brown on the 

 outer webs, the inner webs black, narrowly margined with ful- 

 vous ; tail with the uropygials black, the rest of the tail fea- 

 thers white at the base for about half their lencrth (increasing 

 m extent f^-om the outermost feathers), black "at the terminal 

 ends, the black tips measuring from 07 to I'O j the chin, throat, 

 and upper breast, uniform bright orange rufous ; the lower 

 breast and flanks dingy olivaceous; middle of belly, vent and 

 lower tail-coverts, albescent. 



_ In this interesting specimen the bill, in size, shape and colour, 

 is precisely the same as in Siplda strophiata ; the upper surface 

 (excepting the frontal band) and wings exactly resemble the 

 same parts in S. strophiata female ; the tail would do for either 

 Siphia or Erythrosterna ; the lower parts and sides of the head 

 and neck are absolutely the same as in Erythrosterna albicilla 

 inbreeding plumage. The bird is a true Siphia, distinguish- 

 able at a glance from strophiata by the absence of the Iblaek 

 chm and throat, and by having the lores and cheeks ashy orey 

 instead of black; and it is certainly no stage of ^. e^^thaca. 

 Mr. Hume tells me that he has seen at least a hundred speci- 

 mens of S. strophiata in all stages, but that he never met with 

 a specimen at all like the one under consideration ; but yet he 

 considers that my bird is only an abnormal example of 

 strophiata, principally, as I understand, because in the colour 

 of the ypper parts it so closely resembles that species, which 

 normally exhibits a decided affinity for Erythrosterna. With 

 all due deference for an opinion from such high authority I 

 must dissent from this view. The coloration of the under 

 surface m my specimen is so well marked and sharply defined 

 that no countenance is given to the hypothesis of a lusm 

 naturm ; while the fact that the colour of the upper parts is 

 like that of Siphia strojohiata cannot certainly be considered a 

 proof that It IS the same species, seeing that it difiers so very 

 materially in other respects. 



36 



