1870.] Observations regarding some species of birds. 115 



in Saugor, Central Provinces. I have, I find, five nests, and at least 

 a dozen eggs, from that locality. 



85. Hirundo erythropygia. — It has not yet I believe been point- 

 ed out, that while this species of mosque swallow belongs as a 

 resident to the plains of India, II. daurica, which is the resident 

 species of the Himalayas, — breeding freely for instance about the 

 bungalows of Simla, — also during the cold season visits the plains 

 reaching at least as far south as Agra. I quite agree with Gould 

 in separating Cecropis rufula, daurica and erythropygia, although 

 occasionally somewhat intermediate forms are met with in Syria 

 and Northern India. 



86. H.fluvicola. — It is not at all unusual for this species to 

 breed against high cliffs. To give one single instance, (and I 

 could give fifty) visiting the river Chambal where the Etawah 

 and Gwalior road crosses it, and following its course downwards 

 to its junction, at Bhurrey, with the Jumna, one will meet with at 

 least an hundred colonies of this species, all with their clustered 

 nests plastered against the faces of the high clay cliffs which over- 

 hang the river. I take this opportunity of noticing that the dif- 

 ferences remarked by Mr. Gould in his Indian specimens are mere- 

 ly due to sex and age. The presence, or absence (more or less 

 entire) of the white marginal spot on the tail feathers is sexual, the 

 white being always strongest in the old males, while the presence 

 of strise on the head is a sign of immaturity. 



90. Ptionoprogne concolor. — I cannot (with very large series of 

 each before me) concur in what Mr. Blanford says of the eggs 

 of this species and L. fluvieola and H. rufieeps. The eggs of con- 

 color are certainly not more spotted than those of rufieeps. So far 

 as the character, extent and intensity of markings go, they are 

 intermediate between those of fluvieola and rufieeps. The ground 

 color is white, and they are all more or less thickly speckled, spot- 

 ted &c, though rarely blotched, with diiferent shades of yellowish 

 and reddish brown. Unlike those of fluvieola, which are as often 

 pure white as not, these eggs are always pretty thickly marked, but 

 the markings, though better defined and darker than those of fluvieola, 

 i are neither so bold nor so bright as in rufieeps. As in both these 

 I species, the markings are always most dense towards the broader 



