Ornithology of Northern Africa. 299 
food compels the Rock-Chats to distribute themselves very 
sparsely. 
This bird has been mistaken by Capt. Loche in his catalogue 
for Dromolaa monacha* of Eastern Africa, from which it is quite 
distinct. 
36. Saxicola philothamna +, Tristram, Ibis, 1859, p. 58. 
(Bush-Chat.) (Plate IX. fig. 1 , 2 $ .) 
I have some doubts as to whether this bird should not be 
placed among the Dromolcece, from its structural characters. But 
though the largest of its genus, it is in all its habits certainly a 
Saxicola , and not a Rock-Chat. I have, therefore, proposed to 
allow it to remain in the old genus. I first met with it near 
the caravanseray of A'in eP Ibel, a day's journey north of EP 
Aghouat, and thenceforward until our approach, in the follow¬ 
ing spring, to the Tunisian frontier it occurred sparingly at 
intervals, wherever the nature of the country afforded scope for 
its peculiar habits. I found it near the Dayats of EP Aghouat, 
near Waregla, and far to the north-east at El Mari'er, south-east 
of Biskra. It is a constant resident and a very early breeder in 
those portions of the Desert which are composed of loose sand 
studded with low stunted bushes. Among rocks or in the Salt- 
districts I never detected it. It perches, like the Whinchat, on 
the top of [a bush, uttering incessantly a very similar note. 
The male and female are constantly together, and on being- 
alarmed take refuge sometimes in flight, but more generally 
disappear into a burrow in the sand. The first I shot vanished 
in a moment, and though certain he had fallen, I was compelled to 
relinquish my search. The second disappeared as mysteriously; 
but observing a drop of blood at the entrance of what seemed 
to be a small lizard's hole, I dug down, and, after a quarter of 
an hour's excavation, recovered the bird, quite dead. At this 
* Figured in Temminck’s PI. Col. 359. fig. 1. 
t This species is certainly the same as Loche’s Dromolcea isabellina 
(Cat. Mamm. et Ois. p. 64), as testified by his marked specimens; but it is 
not the bird to which Temminck and Ruppell have given that specific 
name. Dr. Hartlaub, to whom we sent a copy of the figure, with a request 
to assist us in identifying it, informs us that the female is marked S. rufi- 
ceps, Buvrv, in the Berlin Museum.— (Ed.) 
