118 A CONTRIBUTION TO THE ORNITHOLOGY OF GILGIT. 
under this head, I may mention that I have carefully com- 
pared it, and that it is undoubtedly an example of the white- 
throated form of Cyanecula wolfi in full breeding-plumage. 
I did not obtain another example, unless a female, shot on 
the 1st of September, ought to be assigned to this species, 
93.—Acrocephalus dumetorum, Blyth. (516.) 
A summer visitor only, leaving the district in September. 
In seven specimens the wings measure 2°4 to 2°5 inches ; tail, 
2°15 to 2°33 ; tarsus, 0°84 to 0:9; culmen, 0°64 to0°68 ; second 
primary intermediate between the fifth and sixth. 
94.—Dumeticola major, Brooks. (519 quat.) 
A summer visitor only. In ten specimens tie total length 
varied from 5-9 to 6°45 inches ; wing, 2°2 to 2°35; tail, 2°4 to 
2°65; bill from gape, 0°75 to 0°85. The third or fourth 
primaries are longest, the second equals the seventh or eighth, 
and the exposed portion of the bastard primary averages 0°55. 
96.—Phylloscopus tristis, Blyth. (554.) 
Common in the lower valleys on arrival from the first week 
in March to the middle of April, and again from the third 
week in September to the end of November, on its way to 
the south; in summer only found above 8,000 feet. I cannot 
detect any difference between several of my skins and 
examples of P. sindianus, Brooks, described in Srray FEATHERS, 
VIII., p. 476 (1879) .* 
97.—Phylloscopus lugubris, Blyth. (558.) 
I have no specimen in my collection which can be referred 
to this species. The example obtained by Major Biddulph 
may perhaps have been P. magnirostris, which is closely allied 
to P. lugubris. The latter has hitherto been considered quite 
an Eastern form, not occurring in the north-west of India ; 
while P. magnirostris, according to Mr. Brooks, breeds in 
Kashmir, and is therefore more likely to occur in Gilgit. 
* No superficial examination suffices to distinguish many of these small sylvine 
birds. The eye must be regularly trained to the group. When one has not been looking 
at these Phylloscopi for a few months, it is extremely difficult to separate many of the 
species which after a week’s work, when the eye has become habituated to their minute 
differences, are manifestly distinct. I in like manner doubted the validity of sindianus 
when Mr. Brooks sent me his first specimen, but a careful comparison of all the types 
with our enormous series of tristis showed me (S. F., 1X., 99) that it was quite distinct. 
As arule the colour suffices to separate it from tristis, but occasionally tristis itself 
approaches closely to the neglectus, rama and sindianus type of colouring, and then the 
shape of the little first primary must be looked to, but I have never seen a tristis quite 
the colour of sindianus.—LED,, 8, F. 
