262 FURTHER NOTES ON THE BIRDS OF GILGIT. 
able in the colour of the wings and tail. . Most specimens 
show a faint white streak extending from the nostrils to the 
eye, and a faint circle of white round the eye. I procured 
this Flycatcher also from Darel. 
58.—Cyornis ruficauda, Swainson. (307.) 
This Flycatcher extends into the Darel valley, whence my 
collector brought me several specimens. 
59.—Troglodytes neglectus, Brooks. (333 bis.) 
Birds killed at the same time of year are scarcely distin- 
guishable from T. nipalensis, Hodgs.; but T. neglectus isa 
little smaller and paler underneath. ‘The freshly moulted 
autumn birds and those killed in summer are more distinct, 
and paler than TZ. nipalensis in every way ; but in the winter 
they are hardly distinguishable. 
62.—Hydrobata cashmirensis, Gould. (348.) 
I procured an adult specimen of this Dipper from the 
Deosai plain, but did not meet with it in Gilgit. Dr. Scully’s 
specimen was procured ina valley between Gilgit and Darel, 
where its occurrence is somewhat remarkable, as I received 
from Darel, which is still further to the south, an adult male 
of H. leucogaster (348 bis) in fine plumage—the first instance, I 
believe, of its occurrence on the Indian side of the Himalayas. 
Dr. Scully’s specimen is undoubtedly H. cashmirensis. 
64.—Oreecetes cinclorhynchus, Vigors. (353.) 
I shot a young male of the year, in Gilgit, in August 1880, 
and later observed two adult males. The species appears to 
be common in the Darel valley, whence my man brought me 
back several specimens. Young males of the year are easily 
distinguishable from the females by the white wing-bar, 
which appears to be assumed in the earliest stage of plumage 
and before any trace of blue is apparent. 
66.—Turdus hyemalis, Dybowski. (? 364 dis.) 
The specimen which, in my former paper, I classed as 
T. ruficollis (Ibis, 1881, p. 53), Ihave compared with a large 
number of specimens in the British Museum and other col- 
lections ; and I find that it cannot stand under that name. 
It isa fully adult male, shot in January. The markings are 
essentially the same as those of ZT. rujicullis and T. atrogularis, 
with the exception of the colouring of the tail and breast. The 
tail is rufous, hardly so vivid as in typical specimens of 
T. ryficollis, but much more vivid than in any specimen of 
7. atrogularis. The breast is a fine deep vandyke-brown, much 
