FURTHER NOTES ON THE BIRDS OF GILGIT. 267 
daries and wing-coverts broadly margined with pale rufes- 
cent, and the head much infuscated. August specimens have 
nearly reached the hendersoni stage, but still retain a certain 
amount of black on the back. No specimen was procured 
after July of the accepted morio black-and-white type. 
The females vary considerably in the colour of the lower 
throat, which, however, does not appear to be connected with 
the season; it may possibly be a question of age, birds of the 
second year becoming very dark. 
I took a nest of this Chat in Astor on the 26th June, at an 
elevation of 7,000 feet, containing five hard-set eegs. It was 
placed, about a foot deep, in a wall of loose stones supporting 
a built-up road on the mountain-side, over which was constant 
traffic. The eggs were very pale blue, with small dusky-red 
freckles thinly scattered over the surface, slightly tending 
towards a zone at the thicker end, and measured ‘725 inch 
in length by °565 in diameter. 
78.—Saxicola vittata, Zempr. § Ehr. (4910.) 
I procured one specimen, an adult male, in Gilgit, on the 
4th June. Three others were seen at the same time. 
82.—Ruticilla rufiventris, Viedll. (497.) 
I procured a specimen as late as 27th November. It ap- 
parently breeds on the Shandur plateau, whence I received 
an immature specimen in August. 
84.—Ruticilla erythronota, Lversm, (498 bis.) 
A female of this bird was, by mistake, passed as J?. hodgsoni, 
which it much resembles in my former paper (Zdis, 1881, 
p. 62). After noting the specimen I mislaid it, and was 
unable to put my hand on it again. It has since turned up, 
and proves to belong to this species. It is to be distinguished 
from 2. hodgsont by the double wing-bar and conspicuous 
pile edgings to the secondaries. R&. hodgsoni, which is 
much whiter on the abdomen, must be expunged from the 
Gilgit list. 
87 a.—Ruticilla fuliginosa, Vigors. (505.) 
I procured a single specimen, a young bird of the year in 
immature plumage, on the 8th of July. There is nothing 
remarkable in the occurrence of this species in Gilgit; but it 
is somewhat curious that, with the exception of this specimen, 
neither Dr. Scully nor I have observed any of this species 
during a period extending altogether over four years, either 
in or near the Gilgit district. 
