NOTES. 497 
WITH REFERENCE to my remarks at p. 480, Vol. IIT, a8 to 
a specimen of Prinia Stewartisent me by Captain Butler, which 
exhibits a very conspicuous whitish line above the lores, I may 
notice that, having referred to my museum, I find that both 
P. socialis and P. Stewarti occasionally exhibit this same 
line more or less conspicuously. 1 take this line to be an in- 
dividual peculiarity and not seasonal, as I have specimens killed 
in March, April, July, October, and November exhibiting it, 
while numerous other birds killed in the same and intervening 
months shew no trace of it. Out of forty specimens of these 
two species, now before me, about one-eighth shew it conspicuous- 
ly and another eighth shew some traces of it. 
I THINK it somewhat doubtful whether Ruticilla nigrogularis, 
Moore, P. Z. S., 1854, p. 29, and Jerd., B. I., Vol. Il, p. 14, 
isa good species. The dimensions are admittedly the same 
as those of R. schisticeps, the descriptions also coincide, und 
Moore says that his species only differs from schisticeps in having 
the throat black instead of white. 
Out of eight males now before me, manifestly all of the same 
species, three have a large white patch on the throat; in two 
there is only trace of the white; the others are intermediate. 
Out of five females, one has a large white patch, three have only 
small white patches, and one has no trace of this. It seems 
probable that the presence and absence of the white patch, on 
which Moore based the distinctness of his nigrogularis from 
Hodgsons schisticeps, is only a seasonal peculiarity. 
AFTER EXAMINING numerous specimens of my Aoreittes 
brunnescens (Ibis is 1872, p. 109, “Srray Featuers,” Vol. ILI, p. 
410.) I begin to suspect that this species may be identical with 
Hodgson’s Horornis fulviventris (P. Z.8., 1845, p. 32, Jerd., 
B. I. 11, 1862). Iam aware that Blyth considered this latter 
identical with Phylloscopus juscatus, Blyth (Sylvia sibirica, 
Middendorff,) but Iam not sure that he had any very certain 
authority for this identification. 
The dimensions of wing given by Hodgson, viz., “not 2” 
are small for brunnescens, the wing of which in good specimens 
is about 2°2, and in his brief description he omits all reference 
to the very rufescent tinge of the upper parts, At the same time, 
unless Blyth’s identification is correct, no one has yet met 
with the true Horornis fulviventris, and my bird is common 
in the localities worked by Hodgson (I have sixteen specimens 
it), and it does not seem likely tbat it should have escaped 
im. 
