Genus VI. GAZELLA. — 82. THE TIBETAN GAZELLE. GAZELLA PICTICAUDATA ( Hodgs. ). [PLATE LII.] — 83. PRZEWALSKI’S GAZELLE. GAZELLA PRZEWALSKII, Büchn. [PLATE LIII.] — 84. THE MONGOLIAN GAZELLE. GAZELLA GUTTUROSA ( Pall. ). [PLATE LIV.] — 85. THE PERSIAN GAZELLE. GAZELLA SUBGUTTUROSA ( Güld. ). [PLATE LV.] — 86. THE MARICA GAZELLE. GAZELLA MARICA, Thos. [PLATE LVI.] — 87. THE DORCAS GAZELLE. GAZELLA DORCAS ( Linn. ). [PLATE LVII.] — 88. THE EDMI GAZELLE. GAZELLA CUVIERI ( Ogilby ). [PLATE LVIII.] — 89. THE ARABIAN GAZELLE. GAZELLA ARABICA ( Licht. ). [PLATE LIX.] — 90. THE INDIAN GAZELLE. GAZELLA BENNETTI ( Sykes ). [PLATE LX.] — 91. SPEKE’S GAZELLE. GAZELLA SPEKEI, Blyth . [PLATE LXI.] — 92. PELZELN’S GAZELLE. GAZELLA PELZELNI, Kohl. [PLATE LXII.] — 93. LODER’S GAZELLE. GAZELLA LEPTOCEROS ( F. Cuv. ). [PLATE LXIII.] — 94. THE ISABELLA GAZELLE. GAZELLA ISABELLA, Gray . [PLATE LXIV.] — 95. THE MUSCAT GAZELLE. GAZELLA MUSCATENSIS, Brooke . [PLATE LXV.] — 96. HEUGLIN’S GAZELLE. GAZELLA TILONURA ( Heugl. ). [PLATE LXVI.] — 97. THE RED-FRONTED GAZELLE. GAZELLA RUFIFRONS, Gray . [PLATE LXVII.] — 98. THE RUFOUS GAZELLE. GAZELLA RUFINA, THOS . — 99. THOMSON’S GAZELLE. GAZELLA THOMSONI, Günth. [PLATE LXVIII.] — 100. GRANT’S GAZELLE. GAZELLA GRANTI, Brooke . [PLATE LXIX.] — 101. PETERS’S GAZELLE. GAZELLA PETERSI, Günth . — 102. THE BANDED GAZELLE. GAZELLA NOTATA, THOS . — 103. SOEMMERRING’S GAZELLE. GAZELLA SOEMMERRINGI ( Cretzschm. ). [PLATE LXX.] — 104. THE RED-NECKED GAZELLE. Gazella Ruficollis ( Ham. Smith ). [Plate LXXI.] — 105. THE DAMA GAZELLE. GAZELLA DAMA ( Pall. ). — 106. THE MHORR GAZELLE. GAZELLA MHORR ( Benn. ). [PLATE LXXII.]
|
Type. |
| Gazella, Licht. Mag. nat. Freund. Berl. vi. pp. 152 & 171 (1814) |
G. subgutturosa[3]. |
| Dorcas, Gray, Med. Repos. xv. p. 307 (1821) |
G. dorcas |
| Dama, Benn. Tr. Z. S. i. p. 7 (1833) |
G. dama |
| Leptoceros, Wagn. Schr. Säug. Suppl. iv. p. 422 (1844) |
G. leptoceros |
| Procapra, Hodgs. J. A. S. B. xv. p. 334 (1846) |
G. picticaudata |
| Tragops, id. op. cit. xvi. p. 11 (1847) |
G. bennetti |
| Tragopsis, Fitz. SB. Wien, lix. p. 157 (1869) |
G. bennetti |
| Eudorcas, id. tom. cit. p. 159 (1869) |
G. “lævipes” |
| Korin, Gray, Cat. Rum. B. M. p. 39 (1872) |
G. rufifrons |
| Nanger, Lataste, Mamm. Barb. (Act. Bord. xxxix.), sep. cop., p. 173 (1885) |
G. mhorr |
Size medium, but with a considerable range of variation. General form
normal; the muzzle simple, neither expanded as in Pantholops
nor elongated as in Saiga; the neck of ordinary length, and the
back without any evertible fold as in Antidorcas. Coloration
ordinarily sandy, with a white belly, the face generally marked with
dark and light streaks; streaks also generally present on the flanks
and rump. Knee-brushes usually present. Tail short or of medium length.
Skull generally with shallow anteorbital fossæ corresponding to
the anteorbital glands, but occasionally—in the procaprine
section—without any trace of them. Premolars 3/3, as usual in the
Bovines.
Horns generally present in both sexes, the females of the first four
species alone being without them. In the male the horns are strong,
prominently ribbed, and generally of medium length, about the length
of the head, but occasionally considerably longer. With the exception
of their tips they are curved backwards, so as to be convex forwards
below, while their ends are commonly more or less recurved forwards or
upwards. The degrees of curvature seem to be fairly constant within
the species, and to afford very fair specific characters. On the other
hand, in the female the horns are slender, straighter, and shorter than
in the male, very variable in direction, and as a rule showing little
of the characteristic curvature peculiar to the male of each species,
although there is a certain correspondence between the lengths of the
horns in the two sexes.
Range of the Genus. Northern and Eastern Africa, and
Western and Central Asia to Mongolia and British India.
The genus Gazella contains the great majority of the members
of the present subfamily, and forms a very natural and easily defined
group. All the species are lightly built and delicate animals, and
are among the best known of all the Antelopes, on account of their
beauty and the fact that they are common in confinement, so that every
zoological garden is always well provided with examples of them. In
the Zoological Society’s Gardens at the present time no less than ten
species are represented.
The genus Gazella was always a favourite one with Sir Victor
Brooke, who devoted much time to its elucidation, and published in
1873 a monograph of it, which up to the present time has been the
standard work on the subject. From this monograph we venture to
quote the following paragraphs which explain the nomenclature of the
characteristic markings of the Gazelles: they also give an indication
of the difficulties to be met with in working out a genus which, while
the largest contained in the present work, is remarkable for the close
resemblance of the different species to one another and for the absence
of characters which will enable them to be readily separated:—
“For the sake of convenience, and the avoidance of constant
repetition, and also to throw into relief the traces of genetic
affinity afforded by coloration, I will describe the typical
ground-plan which may be seen underlying each variation,
the uniformity of the arrangement of the more salient and
characteristic markings (where they appear) throughout the group
clearly showing the existence of such a plan. To each of these
more prominent features, indicating what may be provisionally
called generic coloration, I will apply a definite name, which I
shall make use of in the following descriptions.
The anterior facial region in Gazelles, from the base of each
horn to the muzzle, is cut off from the sides of the face on
both sides by white streaks, which, starting externally to
the base of each horn, run downwards to within two inches of
the nostrils; the former I shall call the ‘central facial
band,’ the latter the ‘light facial streaks.’
From the corner of the suborbital gland, running downwards
immediately below the light facial streak, and of about equal
width, is a dark line; this I shall refer to as the ‘dark
facial streak.’ Bordering the white of the belly on each
side, and extending from above and behind the ulna to above
and in front of the patella, are two bands, the lower of which
is darker, the upper lighter than the colour of the back and
flanks. The former I shall speak of as the ‘dark lateral
band,’ the latter the ‘light lateral band.’ Lastly,
bordering the white of the rump is frequently seen a narrow
indefinite darkish band, which may be conveniently called the
‘pygal band.’ The difficulty of expressing differences
dependent to a large extent upon shades of colour and texture
of hair sufficiently sharply to give a just impression of the
effect produced by such differences upon the eye may cause the
distinction of some of the forms below mentioned to appear
doubtful. I can only say that upon occasions when I have had
ample opportunity of subsequently verifying my identification,
I have never experienced any difficulty in referring specimens
entirely new to me to their proper name and habitat. The
descriptions must be taken as applying to thoroughly typical
specimens, the intensity of the markings and length and
curvature of the horns being subject to great individual
variation.”
Since Sir Victor Brooke wrote his monograph of the Gazelles, many
species only known to him by descriptions or by imperfect specimens
have become represented in our National Museum by complete examples,
while several additional species have been discovered. Our arrangement
of the species is therefore necessarily different from his, but is, we
fear, still very far from being perfect, as more and better specimens
of most of the forms are still wanted before their exact geographical
distribution, their extent of variation, and their true relationships
to each other can be satisfactorily worked out.
As already noted, we have removed from the genus Gazella, under
the name Antidorcas, the South-African Springbuck, which Sir
Victor Brooke included in it. This being eliminated, the 25 species
which we are prepared to recognize as distinct may be arranged as
follows:—
- A. Tail quite short. No Gazelline face-markings. Females without horns.
- a. Horns strongly curved backwards. Skull 7 in. or less in basal length.
- a1. Horns not hooked at tip. (Tibet.) 82. G. picticaudata.
- b1. Horns hooked at tip. (Mongolia.) 83. G. przewalskii.
- b. Horns but little curved backwards, not hooked at tip. Skull about 9 in.
in basal length. (N. China.) 84. G. gutturosa.
- B. Tail of average length, its terminal half generally more or less
crested with black. Face-markings present. Females (except in
G. subgutturosa) with horns.
- a. Upper part of face white (at least in old age), interrupting the central
facial band.
- a1. No horns in female: size larger. (Central
and Western Asia.) 85. G. subgutturosa.
- b1. Horns present in female: size smaller. (Arabia.) 86. G. marica.
- b. Central dark facial band uninterrupted by white above. Horns present
in the female.
- a1. Dark colour of back not invaded by white of rump.
- a2. Dark lateral band indistinctly marked, not strong and blackish.
- a3. Tip of horns slightly curved inwards or upwards, not bent in to
a right angle.
- a4. Horns of medium length.
- a5. Horns truly lyrate, the middle portion twisted outwards,
the tips reapproaching each other. (Algeria, Egypt, Palestine.) 87. G. dorcas.
- b5. Horns not truly lyrate, more or less evenly diverging
upwards.
- a6. Top of muzzle ordinarily with a black spot on it.
- a7. Nose simple.
- a8. Larger: hair rough. (Algeria.) 88. G. cuvieri.
- b8. Smaller: hair smooth: darker. (Arabia.) 89. G. arabica.
- c8. Smaller: hair smooth: lighter. (India and S. Persia.) 90. G. bennetti.
- b7. Nose with a flabby corrugated elevation on it.
(Somaliland.) 91. G. spekei.
- b6. Top of muzzle without a black spot. (Somaliland.) 92. G. pelzelni.
- b4. Horns long and very slender. Colours very pale. (Algeria
and Egypt.) 93. G. leptoceros.
- b3. Tip of horns hooked inwards or upwards, nearly or quite to a
right angle.
- a4. General colour pale fawn, the lateral band and other markings
also fawn. (Nubia.) 94. G. Isabella.
- b4. General colour brownish fawn, the lateral band blackish.
(Muscat.) 95. G. muscatensis.
- b2. Dark lateral band black and strongly marked.
- a3. Horns abruptly hooked inwards at the ends. (Abyssinia.) 96. G. tilonura.
- b3. Horns not abruptly hooked at end.
- a4. No nose-spot; face uniform rufous.
- a5. Size smaller. (Senegambia.) 97. G. rufifrons.
- b5. Size larger. (Algeria.) 98. G. rufina.
- b4. Nose-spot black. (Masai-land.) 99. G. thomsoni.
- b1. Dark colour of back more or less invaded by white of rump.
- a2. A dark pygal band present.
- a3. Dark colour of back continued in middle line on to the top of
the tail. Size smaller. (E. African Coast.) 100. G. petersi.
- b3. Dark colour of back shut off from tail, which is enclosed in the
white anal disk. Size larger.
- a4. Dark lateral bands obsolete, or, in youth, present below the
light lateral band only. (Interior of East Africa.) 101. G. granti.
- b4. Dark bands present both above and below the light lateral
band, uniting with each other behind. (Northern British E. Africa.) 102. G. notata.
- b2. No dark pygal band.
- a3. Tail black-tipped. Horns hooked inwards. (Abyssinian Coast and Somaliland.) 103. G. soemmerringi.
- b3. Tail all white, or merely tipped with fawn. Horns hooked
upwards and forwards.
- a4. Neck and anterior back alone rufous; lines of demarcation
indistinct. (Kordofan.) 104. G. ruficollis.
- b4. Rufous extending over body and flanks, well defined from the white.
- a5. Sides of thighs white, the rufous of body not joining that
of hind legs. (Senegal.) 105. G. dama.
- b5. Sides of thighs and legs rufous, continuous with that of
body. (Morocco.) 106. G. mhorr.
THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LII
Wolf del Smit lith
Hanhart imp
The Tibetan Gazelle.
GAZELLA PICTICAUDATA.
Published by R. H. Porter
Procapra picticaudata, Hodgs. J. A. S. B. xv.
p. 334, pl. ii. (1846), xvi. p. 696 (1847); Blyth, J.
A. S. B. xvi. p. 725 (1847); Gray, P. Z. S. 1850, p.
116; Horsf. Cat. Mamm. Mus. E. I. C. p. 169 (1851);
Gray, Cat. Ung. B. M. p. 55 (1852); Hooker,
Himalayan Journ. ii. p. 157 (1854); Adams, P. Z. S.
1858, p. 523; Gerr. Cat. Bones Mamm. B. M. p. 232
(1862); Blyth, Cat. Mamm. Mus. As. Soc. p. 173 (1863);
Gray, P. Z. S. 1867, p. 245, fig. (skull); Fitz.
SB. Wien, lix. p. 161 (1869); Kinloch, Large Game
Shooting, p. 10 (1869); Blanf. J. A. S. B. xli. pt. 2, p.
39 (1872); Gray, Cat. Rum. B. M. p. 38 (1872); id.
Hand-l. Rum. B. M. p. 105 (1873); Przewalski, Mongolia
(Russian ed.), pl. i. figs. 2 & 3 (♂ ♀) (1875); Blanf.
P. Z. S. 1876, p. 634; Jent. Cat. Ost. Leyd. Mus. (Mus.
Pays-Bas, ix.) p. 136 (1887); id. Cat. Mamm. Leyd. Mus.
(op. cit. xi.) p. 167 (1892).
Antilope picticaudata, Wagn. Schr. Säug. Suppl.
v. p. 408 (1855); Przewalski, Mongolia (Morgan’s Engl.
Transl.), ii. p. 208 (1876).
Gazella picticaudata, Brooke, P. Z. S. 1873, p.
547; Sternd. Mamm. Ind. p. 467 (1884); W. Scl.
Cat. Mamm. Ind. Mus. ii. p. 161 (1891); Blanf. Faun.
Brit. Ind., Mamm. p. 529 (1891); Flow. & Lyd. Mamm. p.
342 (1891); Ward, Horn Meas. (1) p. 120 (1892), (2) p.
161 (1896); Blanf. P. Z. S. 1893, p. 449; Lyd.
Horns and Hoofs, p. 183 (1893); Percy, Badm. Big Game
Shooting, ii. p. 342 (1894).
Vernacular Names:—Ragoa and Goa
(Hodgson); Ata-dzeren (Przewalski); all of
the Tibetans.
Height at withers about 25 inches. Fur close and thick. General
body-colour pale fawn, darkening posteriorly and becoming almost rufous
brown along the edges of the white anal patch. No lateral nor pygal
bands. Face without any trace of the ordinary Gazelline markings,
coloured like the body, or the top of the muzzle sometimes brown; hairs
on the sides of the muzzle elongated, so as to form a sort of lateral
tuft, which extends backwards under the eyes. Ears short, narrow,
pointed, well haired, coloured like the body. Rump with a prominent
white patch surrounding the base of the tail. Tail quite short,
projecting little beyond the fur, its end black or dark fawn. Limbs
white or very pale fawn; no knee-tufts.
“In the summer the coat is short and of a slaty grey colour”
(Brooke).
Skull rather broad in proportion to its length. Anteorbital fossæ
practically obsolete. Nasals broad behind, evenly tapering forwards.
Basal length 6·4 inches, greatest breadth 3·75, muzzle to orbit 4·0.
Horns slender, of median length, much compressed laterally, very
closely ringed. With the exception of their tips (2–3 inches), after
starting vertically, they curve evenly and strongly backwards,
diverging laterally but little. Tips gently curved upwards and slightly
inwards, reapproaching each other above to a certain extent.
Female. Similar to the male but without horns.
Hab. Plateau of Tibet and adjoining districts of Central
Asia.
Like many other Himalayan and Tibetan animals this Antelope first
became known to science from the researches of the great Indian
naturalist and antiquarian, Bryan Houghton Hodgson, British Resident at
the capital of Nepal. Hodgson described it in 1846, in the ‘Journal of
the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ as Procapra picticaudata, and
gave a very recognizable figure to accompany his letterpress. He wrote
of it as follows:—
“The exceedingly graceful little animal, which is the subject of
our present description, is called by the Tibetans Rágóá, or Góá
simply, and they allege that it is found generally throughout
the plains of middle and eastern Tibet. But those plains, it
must be remembered, are, for the most part, broken by deep
ravines or low bare hills, and it is in such situations, more
especially, that the Góá dwells, either solitarily or in pairs,
or at most in small families, never in large flocks. The species
is said to breed but once a year, and to produce ordinarily
but one young one at birth, rarely two; and it is added that
it browses rather than grazes, preferring aromatic shrubs and
shoots to grass, of which latter, indeed, its habitat is nearly
void. I have not heard that the Góá is ever tamed, but it is
killed for the sake of its flesh, which is esteemed excellent,
and is free from all caprine odour, even in the mature males.”
Hodgson also entered into the structural peculiarities of this
Antelope, which he described at full length. It is quite evident that,
as pointed out by him, the present Gazelle, as also the two allied
species (G. przewalskii and G. gutturosa), present
certain points of difference from the rest of the group, and that
there was, therefore, some justification for Hodgson’s proposal of the
generic term “Procapra,” although we do not think it necessary
to use it. These three species agree among themselves in the females
not possessing horns, in the absence of anteorbital glands, and the
corresponding absence of a fossa in the skull, in having no brushes on
the knees, and in several other characters, which show that they are
really more closely connected to each other than to the more typical
Gazelles. Nevertheless we think that, on the whole, it is best to
include them in the genus Gazella, as no one of these characters
is absolutely confined to them. Thus G. subgutturosa, often,
though wrongly, placed with them, has no horns in the female, while
in other characters it is a true Gazella, and several species
besides these three are without knee-brushes, while the anteorbital
fossæ in others are so shallow as to be practically non-existent.
Fig. 54.
Skull and horns of the Tibetan Gazelle.
(P. Z. S. 1867, p. 245.)
Soon after his discovery of the Goa, Hodgson forwarded specimens of
it to the British Museum, and the species was included in Gray’s
catalogues as Procapra picticaudata. Under this name also Gray
figured a skull and pair of horns of this Gazelle in 1867, in order to
point out its differences from the allied Asiatic form, Gazella
gutturosa. This figure (fig. 54, p. 73), by the kind permission of
the Zoological Society of London, we are now able to reproduce.
In October 1849, Sir Joseph Hooker, as related in his ‘Himalayan
Journals’ (ii. p. 157), met with the Goa feeding on the short grass
near the Cholamoo Lake in Sikim, at an elevation of 17,000 feet
above the sea-level, and in other adjoining localities on the Donkia
Pass between Sikim and Tibet. Through his kindness and that of his
publishers we are enabled to introduce the illustration of this
striking scene (fig. 55) prepared for his well-known work.
Fig. 55.
Goa Antelopes on the Donkia Pass.
(Hooker’s ‘Himalayan Journals,’ ii. p. 139.)
Other travellers and sportsmen have also noticed the Goa or Tibetan
Gazelle in Ladak and on the frontiers of Tibet. But by far the most
complete account of the habits and ways of life of this Antelope is
that given by Major-General Kinloch in the various editions of his
excellent work on Large-Game Shooting in Tibet.
To the east of Ladak, General Kinloch tells us, in the country that
lies between the Upper Indus and the Sutlej, are vast expanses of
undulating hills and valleys of great elevation utterly destitute of
forest and with but scanty indications of vegetation. The greater part
of these wild uplands would appear at first to be a perfect desert,
but, as a matter of fact, on closer inspection, it will be found
that there is hardly a slope, however rocky, or an expanse of sand,
however thirsty-looking, where an occasional tuft of grass or bunch of
sweet-scented herb may not be found, while wherever streams of water
exist their banks are often ornamented by the greenest of turf and
studded with flowers of the most brilliant hues. This bleak country,
General Kinloch continues, the elevation of which varies from 13,000
to 18,000 feet, is the home of the Goa, which is to be found there
scattered about in small parties usually varying from two or three
to about a dozen in number, and in certain localities is decidedly
plentiful. They are not generally very shy, but will seldom allow the
hunter to approach openly within shot.
In 1866 General Kinloch made an expedition to the Tsomoriri Lake in
this district, mainly with a view of hunting the Goa. We subjoin an
account of his adventures, extracted from his work:—
“In 1866 I went to the Tsomoriri Lake and Hanlé, the Goa being
one of my principal inducements to go there. I was accompanied
by a friend, and on the 2nd of June we pitched our camp at
the corner of the lake and ascended the plateau above. We had
not gone far before we discovered some animals feeding at a
distance, and the telescope showed them to be Goa. We made a
most careful stalk, and got within easy shot, but the small
size of the animals deceived us in our estimate of distance,
and we both missed. Soon afterwards we saw some more Goa, but I
again missed a fair chance. We then separated, but I could see
nothing for a long time; at length I caught a glimpse of the
heads of two or three Goas just as they were disappearing over
a ridge; I followed them, and shot a doe through the body as it
was galloping away. A greyhound which I had with me gave chase,
and ran into it after a long course. The next day I determined
to kill a buck, so I ascended the plateau very early in the
morning; I soon discovered some Goa at a great distance, but
after stalking to within seventy yards, I found that they were
all does and young ones. I therefore would not fire at them, but
lay watching the graceful little animals with much interest.
Before long they caught sight of me, but being unable to make me
out distinctly, they advanced towards me, occasionally rising on
their hind legs to obtain a better view. I at length arose and
showed myself, upon which they made off. Further on I found some
does, and shortly afterwards three bucks, but in a place where
they could not be stalked, so I sent a man round to drive them.
The driver failed, the Goas going off in the wrong direction,
but the man who went after them informed me that he had seen
five others, and pointed out the direction in which they had
gone. I crossed the plain, and saw them on the slopes at the
other side, and after a détour, found myself on the hill-side
straight above them. I watched them for some time as they fed
along the foot of the hill: at last they approached a deep but
narrow ravine which ran down the hill; I entered this, which
afforded me capital cover, and on reaching the plain and looking
over the bank, I saw the Goas quietly feeding within about
a hundred yards. Resting my rifle on the bank, I fired very
steadily at the best buck, but to my surprise missed with both
barrels, owing to over-estimating the distance. Dropping behind
the bank, I reloaded, and on again looking over was astonished
to see the Goas still feeding in the same place. I was more
successful this time, wounding one with the first barrel, and
killing another with the second. Even now the Goas did not move
far, and I had time to fire two more bullets, which, however,
missed. Meanwhile I had sent a man to bring my dog, and on his
arrival I slipped him at the Goas, but the wounded one seemed to
recover completely, and it soon distanced the greyhound. The one
I had killed had a very beautiful pair of horns.”
Besides the experiences of the travellers and sportsmen from the
Indian side, the only published record concerning the Tibetan Gazelle,
so far as we know, is that of the great Russian explorer Przewalski,
who, after treating of the “Orongo” of Northern Tibet (Pantholops
hodgsoni), mentions the present species as being found in the same
district, and there known to the Mongols as “Ata-dzeren,” or Little
Antelope[4]. Przewalski, who met with this animal near the headwaters
of the Tatong-gol, in Northern Tibet, and, as he believes, also in the
highlands of Kan-su in China, describes its habits as follows:—
“Like the Orongo it frequents elevated plains, preferring,
however, the valleys in the mountains where water is abundant.
Yet its habits are very different from the Orongo’s, and it is
without exception the most graceful and the swiftest of the
antelopes of Mongolia and Northern Tibet. It generally moves in
small herds of from five to seven (seldom as many as twenty),
though solitary males are often seen. It is extremely wary,
especially in those districts where it has learnt to fear man;
on the banks of the Muruiussu it is a little less timid. Its
swiftness is amazing; it bounds along like an india-rubber
ball, and when startled seems absolutely to fly. During their
breeding-season, which begins towards the close of December and
lasts a month, the males chase one another from their herds, but
we never saw them fighting like the Orongo, nor did we ever hear
them utter any sound other than a snort on seeing a man; and the
does when startled gave a short loud cry. They scrape themselves
trenches a foot deep, in which they lie at night (and probably
during the day), and in these we found heaps of their droppings.
“This little antelope is more difficult to shoot than the
Orongo, besides being much scarcer and extremely tenacious
of life. Its ashy-grey colour, exactly resembling the soil,
renders it almost invisible at a distance, and it is only by
its conspicuous white rump, and its snort, that you are able to
discover its presence.”
There are many specimens of this Antelope in the British Museum
presented by Mr. Hodgson, amongst which is the type of the species.
There are also in the National Collection skulls from Kumaon and other
localities presented by Mr. A. O. Hume, C.B.; from the Changchenmo
Valley, Ladak, presented by Mr. R. Lydekker; and from the confines of
Tibet north of Sikim, collected by Mandelli and presented by Dr. W. T.
Blanford, F.R.S.
There is also a good series of specimens of this Gazelle in the Museum
of the Academy of Sciences of St. Petersburg, obtained by the Russian
explorers in Northern Tibet and in the mountains of Nan-shan.
Our figure (Plate LII.), which has been put on the stone by Mr. Smit
from a sketch prepared for Sir Victor Brooke by Mr. Wolf, represents
a male and two females of this species, probably the specimens in the
British Museum.
January, 1898.
THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES PL. LIII.
J Smit del, et lith.
Hanhart imp.
Przewalski’s Gazelle.
GAZELLA PRZEWALSKII.
Published by R H Porter
Antilope gutturosa, Przewalski, Mongolia (Russian
ed.), p. 18, pl. i. fig. 1 (♂) (1875); id. op. cit.
Morgan’s Engl. Transl. i. pp. 20 & 28 (1876).
Antilope cuvieri, Przewalski, Cat. Coll. (Russian)
p. 110 (1888) (nec Ogilb.).
Gazella przewalskii, Büchn. Mélang. Biol. xiii. p.
164 (1890).
Vernacular Name:—Dzéren of Mongols
(Przewalski)—applied to all the Gazelles of Central Asia.
Size rather greater than in G. picticaudata. General colour deep
fawn in summer, pale finely grizzled fawn in winter. Sides of neck (at
least in winter) and top of muzzle slaty brown; no ordinary gazelline
face-markings. Ears short, acutely pointed[5]; coloured like the back.
Rump with the white of the anal region running up on to the upper
surface, divided in its centre by a narrow fawn-coloured line running
from the back on to the tail. Tail very short, hidden in the fur; fawn
along its top, inconspicuously pale brown at its tip. Front of limbs
more or less brownish; no knee-tufts.
Skull short and stoutly built. No anteorbital fossæ. Nasals broad and
short; premaxillæ not reaching up to the latter, the nasal opening
unusually large and broad. Basal length of an adult male 7 inches,
greatest breadth 3·8, muzzle to orbit 4.
Horns of median length and thickness, much compressed laterally; with
the exception of their terminal two inches, they are evenly curved
backwards and divergent outwards, the divergence increasing above;
tips abruptly hooked inwards and slightly upwards, at a sharper angle
with the rest of the horn than a right angle.
Female. Similar to the male, but without horns.
Hab. Mongolia; Koko Nor, northern part of Kan-su, and
Ordos.
Przewalski’s Gazelle, which has been most appropriately named after
the famous explorer who discovered it, was first described and figured
by Przewalski himself in 1876, but erroneously confounded with the
allied form G. gutturosa. Twelve years later, it appears,
Przewalski discovered his error, and proposed to rename the animal
Antilope cuvieri. But this specific term properly belongs
to another species which had been described by Ogilby many years
previously. Under these circumstances Dr. Büchner in his account of the
Mammals of the Kan-su Expedition of Messrs. Potanin and Beresowski,
proposed that this Gazelle should in future be known as Gazella
przewalskii—Przewalski’s Gazelle.
In the English translation of Przewalski’s ‘Mongolia’ the habits of
this species are described as follows:—
“These antelopes are gregarious, their herds sometimes numbering
several hundreds or even thousands in those parts where food is
plentiful, but they are most frequently seen in smaller numbers
of from fifteen to thirty or forty head. Although they avoid the
neighbourhood of man, they always select the best pasturages
of the desert, and, like the Mongols, migrate from place to
place in search of food, sometimes travelling great distances,
especially in summer, when the drought drives them to the rich
pasture-lands of Northern Mongolia, and as far as the confines
of Trans-Baikalia. The deep snows of winter often compel them
to travel several hundred miles in search of places almost or
entirely free from snow. These animals belong exclusively to the
plains, and carefully avoid the hilly country, but sometimes
appear in the undulating parts of the steppe, particularly in
spring, attracted by the young grass, which shoots up under
the influence of the sun’s warmth. They shun thickets and high
grass, excepting at the time of parturition, which is in May,
when the doe seeks the covert to conceal her new-born offspring.
But a few days after their birth the fawns follow their mothers
about everywhere, and soon rival the fleet-footedness of their
sires. They very seldom utter any sound, though the males
occasionally give a short loud bleat. Nature has endowed them
with excellent sight, hearing, and smell; their swiftness is
marvellous and their intelligence well developed, qualities
which prevent their falling so easy a prey as they otherwise
would to their enemies—man and the wolf.
“The Mongols, armed with their poor matchlocks, hunt the dzerens
in the following way. In those parts of the steppe where these
antelopes abound they dig small pits at certain distances
apart. These holes at first excite mistrust, so the animals are
left alone for some weeks to get used to them. The hunters then
repair to their allotted stations, and conceal themselves in the
pits, while others make a wide circuit to windward and drive the
herd towards the ambush. No gun is fired till they are within
a distance of fifty paces or even less. The drivers must know
their business and be thoroughly familiar with the habits of the
animal, otherwise their labour will be lost. They must never
gallop suddenly up to the herd—because if they do the antelopes
almost always escape. The usual plan is to make a circuit round
the herd, slowly narrowing the circle with repeated halts, or
else to ride on one flank at a foot’s pace, gradually edging the
herd towards the ambush.
“Towards the end of summer the dzerens are very fat, and are
eagerly hunted by the Mongols for the sake of their delicate
flesh, and also for their skins, which are made into winter
clothing. The nomads, however, rarely wear the skins themselves,
but sell them to Russian merchants at Urga and Kiakhta. Dzerens
are also snared in traps made in the shape of a shoe of tough
grass. When caught by the leg in one of these the animal lames
itself in its struggles to get free, and becomes unable to move.”
Besides the Russian explorers already mentioned, the only traveller,
so far as we are aware, that has met with Przewalski’s Gazelle in its
native wilds is the well-known explorer Mr. St. George Littledale,
F.R.G.S., who brought home a skin and skull of this species from his
adventurous journey across Central Asia in 1893, and presented them to
the British Museum. In the narrative of Mr. Littledale’s expedition,
which is contained in the third volume of the ‘Geographical Journal’
(p. 465), will be found an allusion to this Antelope as observed by
him near the Lake Koko Nor. The north shore of this lake, first seen
by Mr. Littledale on the 3rd of August, 1893, was flat and swampy, and
there were many of these antelopes feeding on it in company with Wild
Asses (Equus kiang). In some MS. notes with which Mr. Littledale
has kindly favoured us on this subject it is stated that he first saw
examples of this Gazelle south of the Nan-Shan mountains in about lat.
38° 30´ N. and long. 96° 30´ E. On that occasion, he says, they were
high up above the party, and nearly all males, but, as Mr. Littledale
was then expecting an attack from the Tanguts, he did not like to leave
the caravan to try after them. As the valley of the Buhain-Gol (the
river which flows into Lake Koko Nor) was descended, the old males
became scarcer, and round the lake, where he procured the specimen now
in the British Museum, there were large bands of females accompanied by
young males.
Besides Mr. Littledale’s specimens already mentioned, the British
Museum contains a beautiful pair of this Antelope obtained in exchange
from the Museum at St. Petersburg, from which our figures representing
both sexes (Plate LIII.) have been prepared by Mr. Smit. It will be
observed at once that though in its general form and coloration this
species is somewhat similar to G. picticaudata, the shape of its
horns is quite different, and readily distinguishes this species from
its allies.
When at St. Petersburg in August 1897, Sclater had the opportunity of
examining, under the kind guidance of Herr Büchner, the fine series of
specimens of this Antelope in the Zoological Museum of the Imperial
Academy of Sciences of that city. The specimens had been obtained in
the region of the Koko Nor, in the most northern part of the Chinese
province of Kan-su, and in Ordos, which is the country encompassed by
the great northern bend of the River Hoang-Ho. In the southern part of
this district Przewalski’s Gazelle was met with in great numbers during
the Kan-su expedition already mentioned, and many specimens of it were
obtained for the Imperial Museum at St. Petersburg.
January, 1898.
THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LIV
Wolf del J Smit lith.
Hanhart imp.
The Mongolian Gazelle
GAZELLA GUTTUROSA
Published by R H Porter
Caprea campestris gutturosa, J. G. Gmel. N. Comm.
Petrop. v. p. 347, pl. ix. (1760).
Antilope gutturosa, Pall. Spic. Zool. fasc.
xii. p. 46, t. ii. (1777); Zimm. Geogr. Gesch. ii. p.
120 (1780); Herm. Tabl. Affin. Anim. p. 108 (1783);
Bodd. Elench. Anim. p. 143 (1785); Schreb.
Säug. pl. cclxxv. (1787); Gmel. Linn. S. N. i. p. 186
(1788); Kerr, Linn. An. K. p. 310 (1792); Donnd.
Zool. Beytr. i. p. 627 (1792); Latham & Davis, Faunula
Indica, p. 4 (1795); Link, Beytr. Nat. ii. p. 99
(1795); Bechst. Uebers. vierf. Th. ii. p. 645 (1800);
Shaw, Gen. Zool. ii. pt. 2, p. 342 (1801); Turt.
Linn. S. N. i. p. 113 (1802); G. Cuv. Dict. Sci. Nat.
ii. p. 228 (1804); Desm. N. Dict. d’H. N. (1) xxii. p.
499, xxiv. Tabl. p. 33 (1804); Pall. Zoogr. Ross.-As.
i. p. 251 (1811); Licht. Mag. nat. Freund. Berl. vi.
p. 171 (1814); G. Fisch. Zoogn. iii. p. 431 (1814);
Afzel, N. Act. Ups. vii. p. 220 (1815); Desm.
N. Dict. d’H. N. (2) ii. p. 182 (1816); G. Cuv. Règne
Anim. i. p. 260 (1817); Goldf. Schr. Säug. v. p.
1221 (1818); Schinz, Cuv. Thierr. i. p. 387 (1821);
Desmoul. Dict. Class. i. p. 441 (1822); Desm.
Mamm. ii. p. 452 (1822); H. Sm. Griff. An. K. iv. p.
229, v. p. 336 (1827); Less. Man. Mamm. p. 371 (1827);
J. B. Fisch. Syn. Mamm. p. 458 (1829); Oken,
Allg. Nat. vii. p. 1267 (1838); Laurill. Dict. Univ.
i. p. 615 (1839); Gerv. Dict. Sci. Nat. Suppl. i. p.
260 (1840); Less. N. Tabl. R. A., Mamm. p. 176 (1842);
Wagn. Schr. Säug. Suppl. iv. p. 416 (1844), v. p. 408
(1855); Reichenb. Säug. iii. p. 104, pl. xxxi. fig. 180
(1845); Schinz, Syn. Mamm. ii. p. 409 (1845); id.
Mon. Antil. p. 11, pl. x. (1848); Sund. Pecora, K.
Vet.-Ak. Handl. 1845, p. 270 (1847); id. Hornschuch’s
Transl., Arch. Skand. Beitr. ii. p. 266; Reprint, p. 86 (1848);
Gieb. Säug. p. 312 (1853); Radde, Ost-Sibirien, p.
254, pl. xi. fig. 1 (1862); Brehm, Thierl. iii. p. 201
(1880).
Cerophorus (Antilope) gutturosa, Blainv. Bull.
Soc. Philom. 1816, p. 75.
Cemas gutturosa, Oken, Lehrb. Nat. iii. pt. 2, p.
737 (1816).
Gazella gutturosa, Gray, Ann. Mag. N. H. (1)
xviii. p. 231 (1846); id. List Ost. B. M. p. 56 (1847);
id. Knowsl. Men. p. 3 (1850); Brooke, P. Z.
S. 1873, p. 546; Flow. & Lyd. Mamm. p. 342 (1891);
Ward, Horn Meas. (1) p. 119 (1892), (2) p. 160 (1896);
Lyd. Horns and Hoofs, p. 182 (1893); Percy, Badm.
Big Game Shooting, ii. p. 341 (1894).
Procapra gutturosa, Gray, P. Z. S. 1850, p. 115;
id. Cat. Ung. B. M. p. 54 (1852); Gerr. Cat. Bones
Mamm. B. M. p. 232 (1862); Gray, P. Z. S. 1867, p. 244,
fig. (skull); Fitz. SB. Ak. Wien, lix. p. 161 (1869);
Gray, Cat. Rum. B. M. p. 37 (1872); id. Hand-l.
Rum. B. M. p. 105 (1873); Flow. & Gars. Cat. Coll. Surg.
ii. p. 266 (1884); Jent. Cat. Ost. Leyd. Mus. (Mus.
Pays-Bas, ix.) p. 136 (1887); id. Cat. Mamm. Leyd. Mus.
(op. cit. xi.) p. 167 (1892).
Chinese Antelope, Penn. Syn. Mamm. p. 35 (1771).
Antilope tzeiran, Zimm. Spec. Zool. Geogr. p. 543
(1777).
Antilope orientalis, Erxl. Syst. R. A. p. 288
(1777); Gatt. Brev. Zool. i. p. 82 (1780); Desm.
N. Dict. d’H. N. (1) xxiv. Tabl. p. 33 (1804).
Vernacular Names:—Dzéren of Mongols, the
male Scharcholdsi, the female Ohno, the kid
Ingdacha. Hoang-yang (Yellow Goat) of Chinese.
Tzonrah (♂) and Vgovóh of Tanguts (Pallas).
Size fairly large; height at withers rather over 30 inches; form
stout and thick. General colour fawn, paler than in most of the other
species, but the rump and sides are white, as is the whole of the
limbs. Gazelline face-markings absent; top of the muzzle browner than
the rest of the head; sides of the muzzle and cheeks white. Ears short
but pointed, thickly furred, their backs pale fawn, nearly white. No
lateral bands, either dull or light. No knee-brushes. Tail very short,
white, its tip brown.
According to Radde all the parts which are fawn in winter are in summer
of an intense isabel-yellow.
Skull long and narrow, with a heavy muzzle. Anteorbital fossæ obsolete.
Nasals long and broad. Basal length (in a not fully adult specimen) 9
inches, greatest breadth 4·1, muzzle to orbit 5·5.
Horns short in proportion to the size of the animal; heavily and
closely ringed; basally they are parallel to each other, diverging
above, with their tips again gently curved in towards each other.
Female. Similar, but without horns.
Hab. Northern and Eastern Mongolia, and southern borders
of Russian Transbaikalia.
The great traveller and naturalist, Peter Simon Pallas, whose name
we have already often mentioned in the course of this work, was the
first technical describer of this Antelope, although he was by no
means its discoverer, for he himself quotes previous references to it
in the works of older authors. But Pallas, in the Supplement to his
memoir on the Antelopes, published 1777, gave us the first scientific
description of it, and selected for it the appropriate scientific name
gutturosa, by which it has been ever since known. According to
Pallas, the first Europeans to become acquainted with this Gazelle
were the Jesuit missionaries in China, one of whom, Pereira, as quoted
by Witsenius, mentions it as a Chinese animal; while Du Halde, in his
great work upon China, describes it, under the name “Hoang-yang” or
Capra flava, as wandering about in large flocks in the deserts
of Mongolia. Further accounts of this Antelope were subsequently given
by Messerschmidt and Gmelin in the Commentaries of the St. Petersburg
Academy. These are also quoted by Pallas, who himself met with this
animal on the upper course of the River Onon, on the southern frontiers
of Transbaikalia. Pallas concludes his history of this species with
a lengthened description of its external form and anatomy, and gives
an uncoloured figure, in which the peculiar swollen condition of
the throat in the male in the breeding-season (whence it was termed
gutturosa) is correctly shown.
Pallas’s posthumous work, ‘Zoographia Rosso-Asiatica,’ contains little
more than a summary of his previous account of this animal.
The numerous authors who followed Pallas added little or nothing to
our knowledge of the Mongolian Gazelle, and were content to base their
notices of it almost entirely upon his publications. It is not, in
fact, until we come to nearly modern days that we obtain any further
original information concerning this animal.
Dr. Gustav Radde, now Director of the Museum at Tiflis, made extensive
journeys in South-eastern Siberia, under the patronage of the Imperial
Geographical Society of Russia, in 1855 and the three following years,
and amassed large zoological collections. One of the volumes of his
‘Reisen im Süden von Ost-Sibirien,’ published at St. Petersburg in
1862, is devoted to an account of the Mammals of South-eastern Siberia,
and is, and will long remain, our standard work on this subject. Dr.
Radde brought home five good specimens of this Antelope, and commences
his account of it with accurate descriptions of its summer and winter
pelages. He adds a detailed description of its skull and dentition,
and compares them at length with those of Gazella subgutturosa.
As regards its distribution in the present epoch, Dr. Radde points
out that, like the Dziggetai (Equus hemionus) and the Argali
Sheep (Ovis ammon), the Mongolian Gazelle has retreated to the
south and east from the Russian frontiers since the days of Pallas.
There are at present only two places on the southern borderlands of
Transbaikalia in which this Antelope remains during the summer and
breeds every year. One of these is a district east of the Dsŭn-tarei
which is seldom entered even by the shepherds of the Cossacks. It is
an uninhabited and rather mountainous country, without wood or bushes,
varied by salt-and some freshwater lakes, and covered only with yellow
Elymus-grasses. The other district, which is of a similar
character, lies north of the left bank of the Argunj, where this river
enters into the Russian territories between the border-posts of Soktui
and Abagaitui.
Dr. Radde gives the following account of the habits of this animal as
observed by himself and as obtained from the reports of the natives in
1856:—
“About the middle of June the doe produces generally two young
ones which remain quiet for three days, but after that are
strong enough to follow the mother wherever she goes. If caught
when young they quickly become tame. Shortly after my arrival
at Zagan-olui in May 1856 I saw a fawn of this Antelope feeding
with the sheep and goats without requiring any particular
attention.
“In summer these Antelopes are seldom hunted because they
are only occasionally to be found, but they are much pursued
during the early winter. There are, however, but few good
Antelope-hunters, especially amongst the Russians. Various
methods are adopted to get within shot. So long as no snow has
fallen the Antelopes usually proceed about midday in small
flocks to the freshwater lakes, where they break the thin ice
with their hoofs in order to drink. They select the same spot
every day for this purpose, and there it is that the hunter
makes his hiding-place. Driven on to the thin ice, the Antelopes
often fall through and thus become an easy prey.
“The ordinary way of hunting these Antelopes requires two
sportsmen, one of whom acts as driver for the other. One of
the hunters, as soon as he sees the Antelopes at a distance of
4 or 5 versts, lies down flat behind a marmot’s hillock, or
finds some other hiding-place amongst the grass, and holds his
gun ready, whilst the other makes a long circuit and drives
the Antelopes towards his companion. The flying Antelopes
generally depart in a line; but the old males do not always
keep in front, an old female sometimes occupying that position.
Pursued by the driver, the frightened animals proceed sometimes
at a walk, at other times in a hasty gallop, during which they
occasionally utter a sharp clear cry. When they come within
range the driver imitates the call of a raven or the howl of a
wolf to awake the attention of the animals and to allow the
shooter to choose out his victim more readily. The Tunguts of
the Steppes are especially skilled in finding and pursuing the
Antelopes, and even the young maidens of these tribes take part
in the chase. At one of the border-posts there was a celebrated
hunter who in many winters had obtained as many as 200 of these
Antelopes, which at this season go about in large herds. They
are occasionally so crowded together, as this hunter assured me,
that he had sometimes killed three and even four individuals
with one bullet.
“In what large numbers this Antelope sometimes assembles I was
able to convince myself in October 1856, when I was on the other
side of the Argunj in Mongolian territory, for their tracks and
their droppings were so numerous that it appeared as if some
thousands of sheep had gone by.
“The winter pelts of this Antelope make very warm and durable
coats (locally called dachas), which are worn with the hair
outside: the hair is not so brittle as that of the Roe. They
are valued at about one and a half roubles apiece. The flesh of
this Antelope is very palatable and the old bucks in the autumn
become extraordinarily fat.”
Fig. 56.
Skull and horns of the Mongolian Gazelle.
(P. Z. S. 1867, p. 245.)
In 1867 Dr. Lockhart brought home with him from Pekin two skulls of
this Antelope and presented them to the British Museum. Dr. Gray read
some notes on them at a meeting of the Zoological Society of London in
February of that year. These notes were subsequently published in the
‘Proceedings,’ accompanied by an outline figure of one of the heads,
which, by the kind favour of the Society, we are enabled to reproduce.
Dr. Lockhart gave to Dr. Gray the following information as to this
Antelope:—
“The animal to which they belong is called Hwang-Yang,
the Yellow or Imperial Sheep. It is brought into Peking from
Mongolia in large numbers in a frozen state, and sold for food.
The flesh is much esteemed for its fine flavour and tenderness,
and is eagerly purchased both by natives and foreigners.
“The European gentlemen in Peking used to go into Mongolia
on shooting-expeditions for the purpose of hunting the
Hwang-Yang. The animal, however, is very wary and
generally keeps a long way out of range, so that the hunters are
not very successful. It is considered a great feat to kill one
of them.”
Besides an adult stuffed specimen of this species in the British
Museum, stated, but probably erroneously, to have come from the Kirghiz
Steppes, there are several skins and skulls in the collection obtained
by the late Consul R. Swinhoe at Pekin, besides the two heads and horns
already spoken of as brought home by Dr. Lockhart.
Our illustration (Plate LIV.), which represents both sexes of this
Antelope, was put upon the stone by Mr. Smit from a sketch drawn by Mr.
Wolf for the late Sir Victor Brooke. We have no record of what were the
exact specimens figured.
January, 1898.
THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LV.
J. Smit del. et lith.
Hanhart imp.
The Persian Gazelle.
GAZELLA SUBGUTTUROSA.
Published by R. H. Porter.
Antilope subgutturosa, Güld. Act. Ac. Sc. Imp.
Petrop. 1778, pt. i. p. 251 (1780); Schreb. Säug. pl.
cclxx. B (1785); Gmel. Linn. S. N. i. p. 186 (1788);
Kerr, Linn. An. K. p. 311 (1792); Donnd. Zool.
Beytr. i. p. 628 (1792); Link, Beytr. Nat. ii. p. 99
(1795); Bechst. Uebers. vierf. Thierr. ii. p. 645
(1800); Shaw, Gen. Zool. ii. pt. 2, p. 343 (1801);
Turt. Linn. Syst. Nat. p. 113 (1802); G. Cuv.
Dict. Sci. Nat. ii. p. 227 (1804); Pall. Zoogr. Ross.-As.
i. p. 252 (1811); Afzel. N. Act. Ups. vii. p. 220
(1815); Desm. N. Dict. d’H. N. (2) ii. p. 185 (1816);
Goldf. Schr. Säug. v. p. 1196 (1818); Desm. Mamm.
ii. p. 454 (1822); H. Sm. Griff. An. K. iv. p. 210, v.
p. 331 (1827); Less. Man. Mamm. p. 373 (1827); J. B.
Fisch. Syn. Mamm. p. 460 (1829); Hohenacker, Bull.
Soc. Mosc. 1837, viii. p. 137 (Transcaucasia); Ménétriés,
Cat. rais. Zool. Caucase, p. 24 (borders of Caspian Sea);
Less. Compl. Buff. x. p. 287 (1836); Oken, Allg.
Naturg. vii. p. 1268 (1838); Gerv. Dict. Sci. Nat.,
Suppl. i. p. 261 (1840); Démidoff, Voy. Russ. Mérid.
iii. p. 61 (1840) (Transcaucasia); Eichwald, Faun.
Caspio-Caucas. p. 39 (1841); Less. N. Tabl. R. A., Mamm.
p. 176 (1842); Wagn. Schr. Säug. Suppl. iv. p. 406
(1844), v. p. 404 (1855); Schinz, Syn. Mamm. ii. p. 402
(1845); Reichenb. Säug. iii. p. 114, pl. xxxiv. (1845);
Sund. Pecora, K. Vet.-Ak. Handl. 1845, p. 269 (1847);
id. Hornschuch’s Transl., Arch. Skand. Beitr. ii. p. 265;
Reprint, p. 85 (1848); Gieb. Säug. p. 307 (1853); De
Fil. Viagg. in Persia, p. 344 (1865); Fitz. SB. Wien,
lix. p. 160 (1869).
Antilope (Gazella) subgutturosa, Licht. Mag. nat.
Freund. vi. p. 171 (1814).
Cerophorus (Gazella) subgutturosa, Blainv. Bull.
Soc. Philom. 1816, p. 75.
Gazella subgutturosa, Gray, List Mamm. B. M.
p. 160 (1843); id. Ann. Mag. N. H. (1) xviii. p. 231
(1846); Hutt. J. A. S. B. xv. p. 151 (1846) (Candahar);
Gray, Knowsl. Men. p. 4 (1850); id. P. Z.
S. 1850, p. 113; id. Cat. Ung. B. M. p. 58 (1852);
Temm. Esq. Zool. Guin. p. 193 (1853); Blyth,
Cat. Mamm. Mus. As. Soc. p. 172 (1863); Wolf, Zool.
Sketches, pl. xxii.; Scl. P. Z. S. 1869, p. 602;
Blanf. Zool. Abyss, p. 261, pl. i. fig. 4 (horns)
(1870); Gray, Cat. Rum. B. M. p. 38 (1872); id.
Hand-l. Rum. B. M. p. 107 (1873); Blanf. P. Z. S.
1873, p. 313 (distribution); Brooke, P. Z. S. 1873, p.
545; Przewalski, Mongolia (Russian ed.), pl. i. fig. 2
(1875); id. Morgan’s Engl. Transl. i. p. 207 (1876);
Blanf. E. Persia, ii. p. 91 (1876); Severtz.
Ann. Mag. N. H. (4) xviii. p. 170 (1876); Danf. & Alst.
P. Z. S. 1877, p. 276 (Tigris); iid. P. Z. S. 1880, p.
55; Scl. List An. Z. S. (8) p. 141 (1883), (9) p. 155
(1896); Sterndale, Mamm. Ind. p. 466 (1884); Scl.
P. Z. S. 1886, p. 2; Scully, J. A. S. B. lvi. pt. 2, p.
76 (1887); Jent. Cat. Ost. Leyd. Mus. (Mus. P.-B. ix.)
p. 136 (1887); Thos. Linn. Trans. (2) v. p. 64 (1889);
Büchn. Mél. Biol. xiii. p. 160 (1890); W. Scl.
Cat. Mamm. Calc. Mus. ii. p. 160 (1891); Blanf. Faun.
Brit. Ind., Mamm. p. 528 (1891); Jent. Cat. Mamm. Leyd.
Mus. (Mus. P.-B. xi.) p. 168 (1892); Ward, Horn Meas. (1)
p. 118 (1892), (2) p. 159 (1896); Lyd. Horns and Hoofs,
p. 180 (1893); Percy, Badm. Big Game Shooting, ii. p.
342 (1894); Satunin, Zool. JB. Syst. ix. p. 310 (1896)
(Transcaucasia).
“Antilope dorcas, var. persica, Rüpp.,”
Gray, List Mamm. B. M. p. 160 (1843).
Gazella subgutturosa, var. yarkandensis,
Blanf. J. A. S. B. xliv. pt. 2, p. 112; id. Yark.
Miss., Mamm. p. 88, pl. xv. (1879).
Gazella hillieriana et G. mongolica, Heude,
Mém. Hist. Nat. Chine, ii. p. 245, pls. xxxvi. & xxxvii. (1894).
Vernacular Names:—Dshairan (Pallas),
Ahu (Blanford) of Persians; Karakeuruk (=
Black-tail) of Khirghiz Tartars (Pallas); Kik
(or Sai-kik) and Tairan of Turkis of Yarkand
(Blanford).
Size medium, height at withers about 26–27 inches. General colour
dark sandy fawn. Face-markings indistinct, the central band visible
in youth gradually interrupted and replaced by white as age advances.
Dark facial streaks in front of eyes present, but little defined.
An anteorbital gland present. Larynx swollen, forming a peculiar
projection in front of the neck. Ears of medium length, pointed, their
backs short-haired even in winter, pale fawn. Dark lateral band not,
or scarcely, darker than the back, from which it is separated by an
indistinct light lateral band. Pygal band present, not strongly marked.
Tail 8 or 10 inches long, crested, black. Knee-brushes present, brown
or black.
Skull stoutly built; nasals broad and short; anteorbital fossa well
marked. Basal length 8 inches, greatest breadth 3·8, muzzle to orbit
4·6.
Horns of medium length, thick, evenly diverging from each other as
they curve backwards; their tips decidedly, though not abruptly, bent
inwards and slightly upwards.
Female similar to the male, but without horns, or occasionally
with minute rudiments of them.
Hab. Western Asia from Asia Minor and Caucasia in the
west to Turkestan, Yarkand, and Mongolia in the east.
The Persian Gazelle, as it is commonly called, is by no means
restricted to Persia, but, as we shall presently show, has a wide
range through the steppes of Central Asia from the borders of Asia
Minor to Northern China. It was first made known to science by Anton
Güldenstädt, an enterprising Russian traveller and naturalist of the
last century, who met with it in 1772 in the course of his explorations
of the countries adjacent to the Black and Caspian Seas. Güldenstädt
wrote an elaborate description of it in 1878 in a memoir published two
years later in the ‘Acta’ of the Imperial Academy of Sciences of St.
Petersburg, and named it “subgutturosa,” “because its throat
protruded slightly, but not so much as in Antilope gutturosa.”
Pallas, who also observed this Antelope during his travels in Central
Asia, included it under Güldenstädt’s name in his ‘Zoographia
Rosso-Asiatica.’
After Güldenstädt and Pallas several other Russian
naturalists—Hohenacker, Nordmann, and Eichwald—recorded this Gazelle
as being met with on the plains of Transcaucasia. Ménétriés, in his
memoir on the Zoology of the Caucasus published in 1832, tells us that
at that period it was very common, especially in winter, on the vast
steppes bordering the Caspian between Baku and Kur, whence, as Herr
Büchner has kindly informed us, it extends up the valley of the Kur
nearly to Tiflis. Satunin, our most recent authority on the Mammals
of this district, states that he found it throughout the steppes of
Eastern Transcaucasia, and especially numerous on the Mugan Steppe.
Whether this is the Gazelle found on the upper plains of the Tigris and
Euphrates, as reported by Danford from hearsay, seems to be uncertain,
though it probably penetrates into the highlands of Asiatic Turkey
adjacent to Mount Ararat, and is certainly found in the valley of the
Araxes.
In Persia, Dr. Blanford tells us, in his volume on the zoology of
that country, G. subgutturosa is the Gazelle of the highlands,
and is found in almost all the valleys and plains from about 3000 to
about 7000 feet above the sea-level, ranging higher in winter and lower
in summer, but keeping generally within the limits mentioned. It is
unknown in the plains of Mesopotamia, and on the lower ground along the
Persian Gulf and the Arabian Sea.
Dr. Blanford adds the following notes from the pen of the late Sir
Oliver St. John, who was very well acquainted with Persia and its
animals:—
“This is the common Gazelle of Persia, and is found everywhere
away from the forests of the Caspian and the shores of the
Persian Gulf, in which last locality it is replaced by another
species (probably G. bennetti). Like the Wild Ass, it
especially affects the neighbourhood of the salt deserts. It
appears to retire generally to the valleys at the base of hills
to breed, and is most commonly seen in small parties of three
to half-a-dozen. I do not remember ever having seen twenty
together. The fleetest greyhounds cannot come up with the
Gazelle when it gets a fair start, but when suddenly roused from
a hollow, or when the ground is heavy after rain, good dogs will
often pull down males.”
Dr. Blanford has included this Gazelle in the ‘Fauna of British India,’
because, as ascertained by the late Sir Oliver St. John, it occurs in
Pishin north of Quetta, now in British territory, though it is not met
with in any other part of the Indian Empire.
Throughout the sandy plains along the northern boundary of Afghanistan
this Gazelle is abundant. Dr. J. E. T. Aitchison, who accompanied the
Commission for the delimitation of the Afghan boundary in 1884, tells
us that it was occasionally seen along the whole route from Quetta
to Khusan. In the low hills and great gravel plains of the valley of
the Hari-rud they were observed everywhere, but were very wary and
difficult of approach. In June 1885, at Chinkilok, to the north-west
of Herat, between that city and the range of the Parapomisus, Dr.
Aitchison caught a young female Gazelle of this species about a day
old, and subsequently, on his way home through Persia, obtained three
others of about the same age. These four Gazelles, as we have been
told, were carried many hundred miles through Persia in large covered
baskets on each side of two camels, and were commonly believed by
the natives to be Dr. Aitchison’s four wives, the baskets being of
the same fashion as those generally used in that country for the
conveyance of women! Dr. Aitchison brought his four pets safely home to
the Zoological Society’s Gardens, where they throve well and bred in
1887, 1888, and in several succeeding years. Two of the males of this
family, born in the Society’s Menagerie in 1892 and 1894, are still
living there.
According to Herr Büchner, who has kindly supplied us with some
valuable notes on the Asiatic Gazelles, this species is found in
suitable localities all over the Transcaspian Provinces of Russia, and
ranges northwards to the steppes between the Caspian and the Aral,
and eastwards to Lake Balkash. Far beyond this it extends across
the southern portions of the great Desert of Gobi into the Chinese
Provinces of Zaidam, Alaschan, and Ordos.
On crossing the high range north of the Hindu Koosh into Eastern
Turkestan a Gazelle very similar to the Persian Gazelle is met with.
Six examples of this form were obtained by the naturalists of the
Second Yarkand Mission in 1873–74, and were described by Dr. Blanford
in his memoir on the Mammals of that Mission. Dr. Blanford says that
it is perhaps a question whether the Eastern Turkestan Gazelle should
not be raised to the rank of a species. It differs principally from
the typical form in the very much darker markings on the face and in
the much smaller degree to which the horns diverge. The size appears
rather larger than that of the typical Persian form. But as there are
some variations in the face-markings of Persian specimens, Dr. Blanford
has considered it better to regard the Yarkand race as only a variety,
which he has proposed to call Gazella subgutturosa yarkandensis.
Of this subspecies an excellent coloured figure, drawn by Smit, is
given in the above-named work. It represents both sexes, and shows the
black markings on the face very distinctly.
As pointed out by Dr. Blanford, it is nearly certain that the Gazelle
to which Shaw refers, in his volume on ‘High Tartary, Yarkand, and
Kashgar’ (page 221), as having been brought to him at Yarkand, and
of which he says the Yarkand name is “saikeek,” was of the
present species—that is, of the local form Gazella subgutturosa
yarkandensis.
We have already mentioned the four living examples of this Gazelle
brought to London by Dr. Aitchison and presented to the Zoological
Society’s Collection. These, however, were not the first specimens of
this animal brought to England alive. As long ago as 1852 females of
the present species were obtained from Bussorah on the Persian Gulf
and presented to the Society by Alderman Finnis, and in 1869 examples
from the same country were given to the collection by the late Mr.
T. K. Lynch, F.Z.S. Other specimens, mostly from the same country,
were received in subsequent years[6]. The examples of this animal just
spoken of as being the first to arrive in England formed the subjects
of a beautiful drawing by Mr. Wolf, a coloured lithograph taken from
which has been published in the first volume of Wolf and Sclater’s
‘Zoological Sketches’ (plate xxii.).
Our figures of this species for the present work (Plate LV.) have been
prepared by Mr. Smit from the descendants of the animals brought by Dr.
Aitchison from Northern Persia, now living in the Society’s Gardens.
The series of specimens of this species in the British Museum comprises
a skull from near Ispahan in Persia, presented by Dr. W. T. Blanford,
F.R.S.; a head-skin and some horns from Gulran and Galicha, on the
Afghan frontier, collected by Dr. Aitchison during the Afghan Boundary
Commission; and some skins and skulls from the Saiar Mountains, Altai,
presented by Mr. St. George Littledale. There are likewise a skin
from the River Aksu, in Chinese Turkestan, presented by Major C. S.
Cumberland, and several fine skulls and pairs of horns from the plains
of Yarkand, obtained by the late Mr. Dalgleish, and presented to the
Museum by Mr. A. C. Hume, C.B. All these last-named specimens represent
the Yarkand subspecies, Gazella subgutturosa yarkandensis.
January, 1898.
THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LVI.
J. Smit del. et lith.
Hanhart imp.
The Marica Gazelle.
GAZELLA MARICA.
Published by R. H. Porter.
Gazella bennetti, Scl. List Vert. An. Z. S. 1896,
p. 155, ex. f. (err.).
Gazella marica, Thos. Ann. Mag. N. H. (6) xix. p.
162 (1897).
Vernacular Name:—Reem of Arabs of Nejd
(Jayakar).
Closely allied to G. subgutturosa, with which it shares the
substitution of white for the dark colour of the central facial band,
the general plan of coloration, and the curvature of the horns. Size,
however, very markedly smaller. General colour pale fawn. Facial
markings almost obsolete; when distinguishable they are only of the
general body-colour and very slightly defined from the paler bands
between them. Ears long, their backs whitish fawn. Pale lateral
band scarcely visible; dark lateral band and pygal band pale brown,
little marked, scarcely darker than the dorsal colour. Limbs whitish
throughout; distinct knee-tufts present.
Skull and horns, so far as the male is concerned, very much as in G.
subgutturosa, although much smaller. Basal length of skull (in an
old male) 6·1 inches, greatest breadth 3·15, muzzle to orbit 3·45.
Female. Similar, but horns only from 3 to 5 inches in length,
slender, straight or slightly curved.
Hab. Arabian Desert, from Nejd in Central Arabia to
Western Oman.
This little Gazelle is a recent discovery of Surgeon Lieut.-Col. A. S.
G. Jayakar, C.M.Z.S., who has been for many years resident at Muscat
in the service of the British Indian Government. Surgeon Jayakar,
whose magnificent collections of Muscat fishes are known to all
ichthyologists, has during the past years collected and presented
to the National Museum several consignments of mammals from this
little-known country. Of these Thomas published an account in the
‘Proceedings’ of the Zoological Society for 1894, the most remarkable
of them being a new Wild Goat, from the Akhdar Range behind Muscat,
which was named Hemitragus jayakari after its discoverer.
In 1897 the British Museum received from Surgeon Jayakar another
consignment of mammals collected at Muscat within the previous two
years. In this last series, besides the Oman specimens which were
referable to species already recorded in Thomas’s paper, there were
several skins and skulls of the present Gazelle, obtained from the Nejd
or Nedsched Desert in the interior of Arabia. Thomas established his
Gazella marica upon these examples.
In a letter addressed to Thomas, Dr. Jayakar says that four of the
“Reem Gazelles” were from the Nejd Desert and one from Dahireh, the
north-western district of Oman. “It is probable,” he continues,
“that the species extends down to the desert behind Oman, as that
is continuous with the Nejd Desert.” Surgeon Jayakar subsequently
presented to the Museum a sixth (female) specimen from Aboor near Adam
in Oman.
The Marica Gazelle is clearly a close relative of the Persian Gazelle,
which it seems to represent in Arabia. But it is considerably smaller
in size, paler in colour, and is nearly free from face-markings,
besides having horns in the female sex. This last point is interesting,
as it shows how little importance, in a generic sense, should be
attributed to the presence or absence of horns in the female of an
Antelope; for it appears that this species, in which the horns are
present in the female, is unquestionably more nearly related to one
in which the horns are absent in the female than to the group of
Gazella dorcas, in which the horns are developed in both sexes.
In February, 1892, the Zoological Society of London received as a gift
from Lt.-Col. Talbot, then British resident at Muscat, along with a
Beatrix Antelope (Oryx beatrix), a small female Gazelle, with
the information that it had been obtained from the Bahrein Islands, in
the Persian Gulf. Sclater was at first much puzzled to give a name to
this Gazelle, but after some hesitation came to the conclusion that it
might be a small female of the Indian Gazella bennetti, which is
known to extend along the coast of Baluchistan nearly to the Persian
Gulf, and accordingly entered it in the Society’s Register[7] under
that name. This animal, however, which is still living in the Society’s
Gardens, is undoubtedly a female of the present species. On reference
to the late Theodore Bent’s paper on the Bahrein Islands (P. R. G.
S. xii. p. 8, 1890) it will be found stated that on the desert which
occupies the greater part of the largest island of the group “a small
Gazelle is abundant,” and is often hunted by the Bahreini Arabs with
hawk and hounds. There can be little doubt that this Gazelle is G.
marica.
Our illustration of the Marica Gazelle (Plate LVI.) has been taken by
Mr. Smit from the typical specimen from Nejd in the British Museum, and
represents an adult male.
January, 1898.
THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES PL. LVII.
Wolf del J Smit lith
Hanhart imp.
The Dorcas Gazelle.
GAZELLA DORCAS.
Published by R. H. Porter
Gazella africana, cornibus brevibus, Ray, Quadr.
p. 80 (1693), whence
Capra dorcas, Linn. Syst. Nat. (10) i. p. 69
(1758), (12) i. p. 96 (1766).
Antilope dorcas, Pall. Spic. Zool. i. p. 11
(1767), xii. p. 15 (1777); Müll. Natursyst. Suppl. p. 54
(1776); Erxl. Syst. R. A. p. 285 (1777); Zimm.
Spec. Zool. Geogr. p. 543 (1777); id. Geogr. Gesch.
ii. p. 117 (1780); Gatt. Brev. Zool. i. p. 82 (1780);
Herrm. Tab. Aff. Anim. p. 108 (1783); Schreb.
Säug. pl. cclxix. (1785); Bodd. Elench. Anim. p. 142
(1785); Gmel. Linn. S. N. i. p. 187 (1788); Kerr,
Linn. An. K. p. 313 (1792); Donnd. Zool. Beytr. i. p.
630 (1792); Link, Beytr. Nat. ii. p. 99 (1795); G.
Cuv. Tabl. Élém. p. 163 (1798); Bechst. Uebers.
vierf. Thierr. ii. p. 644 (1800); Lac. Mém. de l’Inst.,
Sci. Phys. iii. p. 498 (1801); Shaw, Gen. Zool. ii. pt.
2, p. 350 (1801); Turt. Linn. S. N. i. p. 113 (1802);
G. Cuv. Dict. Sci. Nat. ii. p. 225 (1804); Desm.
N. Dict. d’H. N. (1) xxiv. Tabl. p. 32 (1804); Tied.
Zool. i. p. 409 (1808); Licht. Mag. nat. Freund. vi.
p. 168 (1814); G. Fisch. Zoogn. iii. p. 426 (1814);
Afz. N. Act. Ups. vii. p. 220 (1815); Blainv.
Bull. Soc. Philom. 1816, p. 75; Desm. N. Dict. d’H.
N. (2) ii. p. 183 (1816); G. Cuv. Règne Anim. i. p.
259 (1817); Schinz, Cuv. Thierr. i. p. 386 (1821);
Desm. Mamm. ii. p. 453 (1822); Desmoul. Dict.
Class. d’H. N. i. p. 440 (1822); Less. Man. Mamm. p.
372 (1827); H. Sm. Griff. An. K. iv. p. 212, v. p.
332 (1827); J. B. Fisch. Syn. Mamm. p. 459 (1829);
Less. Compl. Buff. x. p. 286 (1836); Oken, Allg.
Naturg. vii. p. 1369 (1838); Laurill. Dict. Univ. d’H.
N. i. p. 614 (1839); Less. N. Tabl. R. A., Mamm. p. 176
(1842); Forst. Descr. Anim. p. 386 (1844); Wagn.
Schr. Säug. Suppl. iv. p. 405 (1844), v. p. 403 (1855);
Schinz, Syn. Mamm. ii. p. 398 (1845); Sund.
Pecora, K. Vet.-Ak. Handl. 1845, p. 267 (1847); id.
Hornschuch’s Transl., Arch. Skand. Beitr. ii. p. 263; Reprint,
p. 83 (1848); Schinz, Mon. Antil. p. 3, pl. i. (1848);
Gieb. Säug. p. 305 (1853); Heugl. Ant. u. Buff.
N.O.-Afr. (N. Act. Leop. xxx. pt. 2) p. 5 (1863) (in part);
id. N.O.-Afr. ii. p. 99 (1877); Brehm, Thierl.
iii. p. 205 (1880).
Cemas dorcas, Oken, Lehrb. Nat. iii. pt. 2, p. 737
(1816).
Dorcas dorcas, Gray, Med. Repos. xv. p. 307 (1821).
Gazella dorcas, Og. P. Z. S. 1836, p. 137;
Gray, List Mamm. B. M. p. 160 (1843); id. Ann.
Mag. N. H. (1) xviii. p. 231 (1846); id. List Ost. B. M.
p. 56 (1847); id. Knowsl. Men. p. 4, pl. iii. (1850);
id. P. Z. S. 1850, p. 112; id. Cat. Ung. B. M.
p. 55 (1852); Temm. Esq. Zool. Guin. p. 193 (1853);
Loche, Cat. Mamm. Algérie, p. 13 (1858); Tristram,
Gt. Sahara, p. 387 (1860); Gerr. Cat. Bones Mamm. B.
M. p. 232 (1862); Blyth, Cat. Mamm. Mus. As. Soc. p.
172 (1863); Loche, Expl. Alg., Mamm. p. 67 (1867);
Fitz. SB. Wien, lix. pt. 1, p. 159 (1869); Gray,
Cat. Rum. B. M. p. 38 (1872); id. Hand-l. Rum. B. M. p.
106 (1873); Brooke, P. Z. S. 1873, p. 537; Danf. &
Alst. P. Z. S. 1877, p. 276 (Asia Minor); iid. P.
Z. S. 1880, p. 55; Scl. List Vert. An. Z. S. (8) p. 140
(1883), (9) p. 154 (1896); Flow. & Gars. Cat. Coll. Surg.
ii.p. 263 (1884); Lataste, Mamm. Barb. (Act. Soc. Linn.
Bord. xxxix.) sep. cop. p. 171 (1885); id. Mamm. Tunisie,
p. 36 (1887); Jent. Cat. Ost. Leyd. Mus. (Mus. Pays-Bas,
ix.) p. 136 (1889); W. Scl. Cat. Mamm. Calc. Mus. ii. p.
157 (1891); Ward, Horn Meas. (1) p. 114 (1892), (2) p.
157 (1896); Jent. Cat. Mamm. Leyd. Mus. (Mus. Pays-Bas,
xi.) p. 167 (1892); Lyd. Horns and Hoofs, p. 180 (1893);
Thos. P. Z. S. 1894, p. 467 (Algeria); Scl. P.
Z. S. 1895, p. 523 (Egypt); Pease, P. Z. S. 1896, p.
812 (range in Algeria); Whitaker, P. Z. S. 1896, p. 815
(range in Tunis).
La Gazelle, Buff. Hist. Nat. xii. p. 249, pl.
xxiii. (1764), whence
Antilope gazella, Pall. Misc. Zool. p. 7 (1766);
Bodd. Elench. Anim. p. 140 (1785); Kerr, Linn.
An. K. p. 316 (1792); Donnd. Zool. Beytr. i. p. 638
(1792); Latham & Davies, Faunula Indica, p. 4 (1795);
Bechst. Uebers. vierif. Thierr. ii. p. 642 (1800);
Shaw, Gen. Zool. ii. pt. 2, p. 316 (1801); Turt.
Linn. Syst. Nat. i. p. 114 (1802) (nec Capra gazella,
Linn.).
Le Kevel, Buff. Hist. Nat. xii. p. 258, pl. xxvi.
(1764), whence
Antilope kevella, Pall. Misc. Zool. p. 7 (1766);
id. Spic. Zool. i. p. 12 (1767), xii. p. 15 (1777);
Müll. Natursyst. Supp. p. 54 (1776); Erxl. Syst.
R. A. p. 287 (1777); Zimm. Spec. Zool. Geogr. p. 543
(1777); id. Geogr. Gesch. ii. p. 117 (1780); Gatt.
Brev. Zool. i. p. 82 (1780); Schreb. Säug. pl. cclxx.
(1785); Bodd. Elench. Anim. p. 142 (1785); Gmel.
Linn. S. N. i. p. 187 (1788); Kerr, Linn. An. K. p. 313
(1792); Link, Beytr. Nat. ii. p. 99 (1795); Shaw,
Gen. Zool. ii. pt. 2, p. 351 (1801); Desm. N. Dict. d’H.
N. (1) xii. p. 380 (1803), xxiv. Tabl. p. 33 (1804); G.
Fisch. Zoogn. iii. p. 436 (1814); Desm. N. Dict. d’H.
N. (2) ii. p. 184 (1816); H. Sm. Griff. An. K. iv. p.
213, v. p. 332 (1827).
Cerophorus (Gazella) kevella, Blainv. Bull. Soc.
Philom. 1816, p. 75.
Cemas kevella, Oken, Lehrb. Nat. iii. pt. 2, p.
738 (1816).
Gazella kevella, Jard. Nat. Misc. (1) vii. p. 208,
pl. xxvi. (1842).
La Corine, Buff. Hist. Nat. xii. p. 261, pl.
xxvii. (1764), whence
Antilope corinna, Pall. Misc. Zool. p. 7
(1766); Erxl. Syst. R. A. p. 291 (1777); Zimm.
Geogr. Gesch. ii. p. 118 (1780); Schreb. Säug. pl.
cclxxi. (1785); Bodd. Elench. Anim. p. 143 (1785);
Gmel. Linn. S. N. i. p. 188 (1788); Kerr,
Linn. An. K. p. 313 (1792); Link, Beytr. Nat. ii. p.
99 (1795); Bechst. Uebers. vierf. Thierr. ii. p. 645
(1800); Desm. N. Dict. d’H. N. (1) vi. p. 219 (1803),
xxiv. Tabl. p. 33 (1804); G. Fisch. Zoogn. iii. p. 430
(1814); Desm. N. Dict. d’H. N. (2) ii. p. 184 (1816);
Goldf. Schr. Säug. v. p. 1193 (1818); H. Sm.
Griff. An. K. iv. p. 214, v. p. 333 (1827).
Cerophorus (Gazella) corinna, Blainv. Bull. Soc.
Philom. 1816, p. 75.
Cemas maculata, Oken, Lehrb. Nat. iii. pt. 2, p.
738 (1816).
Gazella dorcas sundevalli, Fitz. SB. Wien, lix.
pt. 1, p. 159 (1869).
Vernacular Names:—Rhozal or Hemar
of Arabs of Algeria (Pease); Ghasala of Arabs
(Tristram).
Size small; height at withers 21–22 inches. General colour pale fawn,
rather variable in tone. Facial markings distinct; central band
rufous fawn; streaks from eye to mouth brownish fawn, contrasting
with the white bands between them. Ears long, whitish fawn behind.
Light lateral band present, but not strongly marked; dark lateral band
brown, considerably darker than the back, but not black. Pygal band
indistinct. Knee-tufts present.
Skull rather lightly built; nasals narrow; anteorbital fossæ large and
deep. Basal length 6·6 inches, greatest breadth 3·35, muzzle to orbit
3·55.
Horns of medium length, but quite different in their shape to those of
any other species, although the difference is not very easy to explain.
Primarily it may be said that they are flattened laterally, are evenly
divergent as they curve backwards, reapproach terminally, and have
their tips bent upwards in a well-marked curve. But in addition to this
simple curvature, the middle portion of each horn is lyrated outwards,
so that the longest diameter of the horn-section above is quite in a
different plane to what it is at the base; it is in consequence of
this lyration that the horns, apart altogether from the curved tips,
reapproach each other terminally, while in all other species such
reapproach as occurs is entirely due to the incurving of the tips. The
lyration and curvature of the horns are well shown in our figure (p.
108), and a comparison of it with those of GG. przewalskii,
marica, tilonura, and soemmerringi will show how
different the method of terminal approximation is in this species as
compared with them.
Female. Similar to the male, but horns slender, slightly curved,
from one-half to three-fourths the length of those of the male.
Hab. Morocco and Algeria, and extending through Egypt
into Palestine and Syria.
Like other Antelopes known to Linnæus, the Dorcas Gazelle was placed by
the great founder of systematic nomenclature in the genus Capra,
and called Capra dorcas. The specific term selected was taken
from the Greek, in which language it signifies primarily a wild goat
or fawn, and subsequently the name of a woman, being, as we know
from a familiar passage in the New Testament, the equivalent of the
Syriac “Tabitha.” The term “dorcas,” however, according to
good authorities, was also applied to the present animal by Ælian and
other ancient writers. Linnæus based his Capra dorcas upon the
Gazella africana of Ray’s ‘Synopsis of Quadrupeds,’ which there
can be little doubt was intended for the present species, although it
has been supposed by some authors to be rather applicable to the Bubal
(Bubalis boselaphus).
In his memoir on the Antelopes, published at Berlin in 1767, Pallas
placed Antilope dorcas eighth in the list, basing it on Buffon’s
“La Gazelle,” which it is evident, both from the figure and the
description, was taken from a specimen of the present animal.
Besides “La Gazelle” in the twelfth volume of his ‘Histoire Naturelle,’
Buffon also described and figured another Antelope, “Le Kevel,” of
which he does not state the locality. Some authors have been disposed
to refer Buffon’s Kevel to the larger Antelope of Algeria, which is
generally called Gazella cuvieri. But Buffon’s description of
the colour of the face and the length he attributes to the ears, as
likewise his phrase that the Kevel is “plus petit que la Gazelle,”
taken together form conclusive evidence against this view, and
there can practically be no doubt that Buffon’s “Kevel” was a small
individual of Gazella dorcas.
A third name invented by Buffon for one of the Gazelles, “La Corine,”
has likewise been the source of some confusion. His figure and
description were taken from a female animal at one time living in
the park of Saint Cloud, but its locality was not given. Owing to
the fact that some horns, brought home by Adanson from Senegal, were
subsequently referred to Buffon’s “Corine,” the name Gazella
corinna (founded upon Buffon’s “Corine”) has been sometimes
applied to the Gazella rufifrons of Senegal. But, so far as
we can judge from Buffon’s figure and description, the real type
of Buffon’s “Corine” must have been merely an ordinary female of
Gazella dorcas, although there is some difficulty on the
subject in consequence of the discrepancy between Buffon’s figure and
his description. As Thomas has shown in his observations upon this
point (P. Z. S. 1894, p. 469), it seems that a wholly satisfactory
determination of Buffon’s “Corine” is barely possible.
It is manifest, however, that the names “kevella” and
“corinna” cannot be safely assigned to any other Gazelle than
Gazella dorcas.
The many systematists whose works we have quoted above in our list of
synonyms added very little to our knowledge of this Gazelle beyond
the fact that it was supposed to be distributed all over North Africa
from Morocco to Egypt and to be also found in Palestine and Syria. It
is only quite recently that we have ascertained some precise facts
respecting the ranges of this and other Gazelles in the countries above
mentioned, and even now our information on this subject is by no means
perfect.
Commencing with Morocco, there is no doubt, we believe, from the
testimony of various travellers, that a small Gazelle of this group
does occur in the interior of that country and that it is probably
of this species, but we have never had an opportunity of examining
Moroccan specimens. In Algeria we have more definite information
available.
From the days of Shaw the “Common Gazelle” has been recognized
as an inhabitant of the “Barbary States.” The French naturalist
Loche included it in his catalogue of 1858, but is not clear in
distinguishing it from its allied species. Canon Tristram, in the
‘Great Sahara,’ published two years later, informs us that this
Gazelle is found in small troops in every portion of the Sahara, and
is the principal large game to be depended on for food, especially in
the neighbourhood of the dayats beyond Laghouat, where pasturage is
abundant. The fawns are dropped in the early summer, and follow the dam
until towards the end of the autumn. The Bedouin gather the droppings,
which have a strong aromatic scent, to mix with snuff.
In the pages of the ‘Exploration Scientifique de l’Algérie’ devoted
to Mammals, likewise from the pen of Loche, we find a little more
information concerning the Algerian Gazelles, but it does not appear
that Loche was at all clear in discriminating the various species that
are there met with.
Good and precise information has, however, been given us on this
subject by Mr. Alfred E. Pease, M.P., in his article on the “Antelopes
of the Aures and Eastern Algerian Sahara,” published in the Zoological
Society’s ‘Proceedings’ for 1896, the principal portion of which we
must quote at full length:—
“It is with great respect and diffidence that I object to the
Dorcas being described (see P. Z. S. 1894, p. 467) as ‘the
common Gazelle of the Algerian Sahara generally,’ for the Dorcas
is not met with in the Sahara proper, so far as I can learn,
and in the Eastern Algerian Sahara at least is not to be found
south of lat. 33°. The Dorcas in the Eastern Province and in
Tunisia is the common Gazelle of the plains immediately south
of the Aures Range, which form a sort of transitional zone
between the mountains and the Sahara proper. Roughly speaking,
this Gazelle is confined to a belt of country not more than 120
or 150 miles wide (and generally very much narrower). It may
be found in plains, or even in low hills, within the southern
mountain-chains, and on or near some of the sand-dunes on
the confines of the Chotts. I have frequently seen it in the
neighbourhood of the Chotts, but once into the Oued Souf and
sand desert and all trace of it is lost and the Rhime takes its
place. In the district of Sef el Menadi, where I have been twice
with Sir E. G. Loder, and where he secured the first specimen
of the Gazelle (the Rhime) which now bears his name, we found
both Rhime and Dorcas on the same ground; and this place may be
marked as the most northern limit which the Rhime ever inhabits,
as it never leaves the sand, I think, whilst the Dorcas does not
go much further south than this. Probably there are several of
these isolated islands of sand where the Rhime may be found.
“The best male Dorcas that I have shot had horns a little over
31 cm. in length, the best female 25 cm. (measured along the
curve).
“They vary a good deal in colour according to the ground they
frequent, and there is a slight variety among members of
the same band. In 1893 there was on the plain of Aïn Naga a
pure white one, no doubt an albino; but though my hunter had
frequently seen it, he was never able to find it for me.”
Passing on to the Beylik of Tunis, we have excellent notes on the
Gazelles of this country drawn up by Mr. Joseph I. S. Whitaker, F.Z.S.,
published in the same volume of the Zoological Society’s ‘Proceedings.’
Mr. Whitaker writes of this Gazelle as follows:—
“The common Dorcas Gazelle is to be met with throughout the
greater part of Central and Southern Tunisia, frequenting the
vast semi-desert plains abundant in those districts, but not the
more sandy inland country of the extreme south of the Regency,
where it is replaced by another species. So far as I can
ascertain, the Dorcas Gazelle never occurs in the Tell country;
but I have observed it in the neighbourhood of Kairouan, which
is probably the extreme northern limit of the range of this
species in the Regency. On the extensive plains to the west of
Gafsa I have found it particularly abundant; and I understand
it is plentiful in the neighbourhood of the Chott Djerid, and
throughout a considerable portion of the coast-country of
the south, but not in the true desert further inland, where
sand-dunes take the place of the stony scrub-covered plains.
It may occasionally stray into the sand country, but this is
exceptional.
“In winter the Dorcas Gazelle congregates in large herds, often
numbering over one hundred individuals; but in spring these
herds break up, and one then meets with the Gazelles in small
parties or singly. The female G. dorcas, I am told, gives
birth to but one young one at a time, and this generally in the
month of April.
“The horns of this species vary considerably both in size and
in shape. As a rule, those of the adult male are stout, deeply
annulate, and lyrate, measuring from 10 to 13 inches in length
along the front curve; those of the female are much shorter,
straighter, smoother, and more slender.
“I may here mention that I have specimens of the Dorcas Gazelle
from the country south of the Chott Djerid, which are somewhat
paler in colour than the ordinary form. No doubt this variation
in colouring is due to some difference in the nature of the soil
and surroundings of the districts from whence these particular
specimens came.”
So little is known of the natural history of Tripoli and Barca that
we can only presume that the Dorcas Gazelle ranges through these
countries on its way to Egypt, where it is well known to be abundant
in the Western Desert. Sclater examined large numbers of both sexes of
this species in the Zoological Garden of Gizeh near Cairo in 1895 from
this locality[8], and several specimens from the same source have been
received in exchange by the Zoological Society of London. Our figures
of both sexes of the Dorcas Gazelle (Plate LVII.) have been prepared by
Mr. Smit from examples thus obtained.
In the eastern desert of Egypt the Dorcas Gazelle appears in these days
to be not nearly so common. Mr. E. N. Buxton, who traversed the eastern
desert in his expedition after Capra sinaitica, tells us that
two or three Gazelles together were the most he ever saw at one time.
Between the Nile and the granite mountains 80 miles to the east, a
very arid district, Mr. Buxton only saw Gazelles once. They were more
numerous among the foot hills of the Kettar range and the porphyry
mountains, for the obvious reason that there is more vegetation there.
The Gazelles frequently depicted in the paintings of the ancient
Egyptian tombs and temples were, no doubt, usually Gazella
dorcas in Lower, and G. isabella in Upper Egypt, although
they were probably also well acquainted with G. arabica. Dr.
Hartmann in his interesting disquisition on the animals of these
paintings (Zeitschr. f. Aegyptische Sprache und Alterthumskunde,
1864, p. 22) gives us the hieroglyphic symbols of the Gazelle, and its
corresponding name as “Gahés.” It was evidently a common object
of chase even in those days.
Crossing over into the Holy Land, we find the Dorcas Gazelle registered
in Canon Tristram’s ‘Fauna and Flora of Palestine’ as met with in all
suitable localities. From the same author’s ‘Natural History of the
Bible’ we extract the following passages relating to this favourite
animal:—
“The Gazelle (Gazella dorcas) is by far the most abundant
of all the large game in Palestine; indeed it is the only wild
animal of the chase which an ordinary traveller has any chance
of seeing. Small herds of gazelles are to be found in every part
of the country, and in the south they congregate in herds of
nearly 100 together. One such herd I met with at the southern
end of the Jebel Usdum, or salt mountain, south of the Dead Sea,
where they had congregated to drink of the only sweet spring
within several miles, Ain Beida. Though generally considered an
animal of the desert and the plains, the gazelle appears at home
everywhere. It shares the rocks of Engedi with the wild goats;
it dashes over the wide expanse of the desert beyond Beersheba;
it canters in single file under the monastery of Marsaba. We
found it in the glades of Carmel, and it often springs from its
leafy covert on the back of Tabor, and screens itself under the
thorn bushes of Gennesaret. Among the grey hills of Galilee it
is still ‘the roe upon the mountains of Bether,’ and I have
seen a little troop of gazelles feeding on the Mount of Olives,
close to Jerusalem itself. While in the open grounds of the
south it is the wildest of game, and can only be approached,
unless by chance, at its accustomed drinking-places, and that
before the dawn of morning; in the glades of Galilee it is very
easily surprised, and trusts to the concealment of its covert
for safety. I have repeatedly startled the gazelle from a brake
only a few yards in front of me, and once, when ensconced out
of sight in a storax bush, I watched a pair of gazelles with
their kid, which the dam was suckling. Ever and anon both
the soft-eyed parents would gambol with it as though fawns
themselves.”
Canon Tristram describes the mode of hunting Gazelles practised by the
Arabs as follows:—
“The usual way of hunting the Gazelle is by lying in wait,
either at its watering-places, which are always known to
the Arabs, or in the defiles in the rocky districts. A more
wholesale mode is practised in the Houran, by driving a herd
into a decoy-enclosure, with a pitfall on the other side, where
they are easily taken. When in company with great sheikhs, I
have more than once had an opportunity of witnessing the chase
of the Gazelle, after the only fashion which the high-bred
Bedouin thinks sportsmanlike, viz. with the greyhound or the
falcon, or more often with both combined. When the greyhound,
which is the large Persian dog, with long silky ears and silky
tail, is employed alone, success is very uncertain, and the
‘roe’ often ‘delivers itself from the hand of the hunter.’
When the chase is conducted with the falcon alone, the bird is
trained to dash repeatedly at the head of the victim, taking
an instinctive care not to impale itself on the horns (which,
nevertheless, often happens), and by its feints so to delay the
quarry that the horsemen are able to come up with it. But the
favourite chase is by both bird and dog. The birds are first
swung off at the Gazelle, and make repeated swoops, while the
greyhound gains upon it and seizes it. With a well-trained bird
the poor beast can rarely escape in this chase, unless he have
a long start of the hunter. The flesh of the Gazelle, though
of high repute, we did not find so savoury as that of the wild
goat. Indeed it was generally very dry and always lean, but our
taste is not that of the Arabs.”
In the desert country east of the Jordan, Canon Tristram tells us, the
Dorcas Gazelle is replaced by the Arabian Gazelle (G. arabica);
but a Gazelle, probably of this species, is found in the Syrian Desert
north of Damascus, as testified by many writers.
In his interesting volume on ‘Palmyra and Zenobia,’ Dr. William Wright,
describing his journey between Damascus and Palmyra, says:—
“We passed several gazelle-traps near Karyetan. Little walls
converge to a field from a great distance, increasing in height
as they approach the field. The field is walled round, leaving
gaps at intervals, outside of which there are deep pits. The
Gazelles, led on by curiosity, and guided by the little walls,
march boldly into the field, and when they are startled, they
rush out wildly in a panic, at the breaches, and tumble into the
pits. Sometimes forty or fifty are taken out of a pit alive at
one time.”
But, as we are informed in the valuable papers on the Mammals of
Asia Minor published by Messrs. Danford and Alston in the Zoological
Society’s ‘Proceedings’ for 1877 and 1880, the Dorcas Gazelle ranges
far north of Syria. Danford states that it is “not uncommon” on the
plain of Tchukurova and about Tarsus and Adana in the south-east of
Asia Minor, and that it is “common” in the wooded valley of the Pyramus
on the plain of Bazardjik and extends thence into the stony wooded
uplands on the right bank of the Northern Euphrates.
When taken young, the Dorcas Gazelle is easily tamed and becomes very
docile and affectionate. It is frequently kept in captivity by the
Arabs and thus passes into the hands of Europeans who visit the East.
As will be seen by reference to the Zoological Society’s List of
Animals, specimens of this species reach the Gardens every year. But
they cannot be said to thrive in the climate of England, where they
miss the bright sun and dry air of their native deserts, and seldom
produce young.
The series of examples of this Gazelle in the National Collection is
by no means a full one, and wild-killed examples with ascertained
localities from different parts of its range are much wanted. At the
present time, besides a number of old specimens without localities,
there are only in the collection an adult male from Biskra in
Algeria presented by Sir Edmund Loder, a pair of skins from the same
place presented by Messrs. Rowland Ward and Co., and a skull from
Egypt presented by the late Sir Gardner Wilkinson. The accompanying
illustration (fig. 57) gives a front view of a good head of this
Gazelle prepared by Mr. Smit from these specimens.
January, 1898.
Fig. 57.
Head of the Dorcas Gazelle, ♂.
(From specimens in the British Museum.)
THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LVIII.
J. Smit del. et lith.
Hanhart imp.
The Edmi Gazelle.
GAZELLA CUVIERI.
Published by R H Porter.
Kevel gris, F. Cuv. H. N. Mamm. (fol.) iii. livr.
lvii. (1827), and iv. livr. lxix. (1833).
Antilope cuvieri, Og. P. Z. S. 1840, p. 34
(Mogador); Schinz, Syn. Mamm. ii. p. 399 (1845);
id. Mon. Antil. pl. 2 a (1848); Fraser, Zool. Typ.
pl. xvii. (1849).
Gazella cuvieri, Gray, Hand-l. Rum. B. M. p. 107
(1873); Brooke, P. Z. S. 1873, p. 542; Scl. List
Vert. An. Z. S. (8) p. 140 (1883), (9) p. 154; Ward, Horn
Meas. (1) p. 126 (1892), (2) p. 168 (1896); Lyd. Horns
and Hoofs, p. 233 (1893); Thos. P. Z. S. 1894, p. 467;
Pease, P. Z. S. 1896, p. 814; Whitaker, P. Z. S.
1896, p. 815.
Gazella dorcas, var. 3, Gray, Cat. Ung. B. M. p.
57 (1852).
Gazella cineraceus, Temm. Esq. Zool. Guin. p. 193
(1853) (from Kevel gris, F. Cuv.).
Gazella corinna, Loche, Cat. Mamm. Alg. p. 13
(1850); id. Expl. Alg., Mamm. p. 68 (1867) (nec
Pall.).
Gazella kevella, Tristram, Great Sahara, p. 387
(1860); Lataste, Mamm. Barbarie (Act. Soc. Linn. Bord.
xxxix.), sep. cop. p. 172 (1885); Buxton, P. Z. S. 1890,
p. 363.
Vernacular Names:—Edmi of Arabs of Algeria
(Pease); Edem in Tunis (Whitaker).
Size comparatively large; height at withers about 26 or 27 inches. Hair
rather long, rough and coarse. General colour dull fawn. Face-markings
distinct; the central facial band brownish fawn, with a black patch on
the top of the nose, in front of which the muzzle is white. Ears long,
pointed, their backs fawn. Dark lateral line and pygal band distinct,
darker than back; light lateral line present, but little defined.
Knee-brushes distinct.
Basal length of skull 7·35 inches, greatest breadth 3·6, muzzle to
orbit 4·45.
Horns rather short in proportion to the size of the animal, thick,
strongly ribbed, very slightly curved backwards, and but little
divergent from each other; the tips slightly curved upwards and
forwards.
Female. Similar, but horns shorter, slenderer, and straighter.
Hab. Morocco, Algeria, and Tunis.
The “Edmi” or Mountain Gazelle of Algeria, though it has often been
confounded with the Dorcas, and has only been accurately known within
the last few years, is without doubt an absolutely different species
not only in structure, but in habits and mode of life. As Sir Victor
Brooke has pointed out, it is easily distinguished from all its allies
by its larger size, rough coat, dark colour, and long ears.
The first published information that we can certainly refer to this
species is that of Frédéric Cuvier, who figured both sexes in his folio
work on Mammals from specimens living in the Jardin des Plantes at
Paris, but called it only “le Kevel gris,” without giving it any
scientific designation.
Some time in 1839 a living female example of this Antelope was
presented to the Zoological Society of London by Mr. W. Willshire, one
of their corresponding members, who had procured it at Mogador. After
its death in May 1840, Mr. Ogilby, who was at that time Secretary of
the Society, and was specially interested in the study of mammals,
brought the specimen before the notice of the Zoological Society at
one of their scientific meetings, and proposed to name the species
“cuvieri” after M. Frédéric Cuvier. Ogilby stated that he had
observed examples of the same Gazelle in the Paris Museum, and that M.
Cuvier would have described it had he, Ogilby, not done so. There can
be no question therefore of Ogilby’s animal being the same as Cuvier’s
“Kevel gris,” and that Gazella cuvieri is the earliest certain
name to adopt for it.
In 1849 Fraser published a figure of this species in his ‘Zoologia
Typica,’ taken from Ogilby’s typical specimen, which is now in the
British Museum. Although imported from Mogador there can be little
doubt that this example was originally obtained from the chain of
the neighbouring Atlas. The Gazelles observed in the Great Atlas in
company with Wild Sheep (Ovis tragelaphus) by Mr. W. B. Harris,
F.R.G.S., on his journey from Morocco to Tafilat in 1893, were no doubt
Gazella cuvieri.
Passing on to Algeria we find that Loche appears to have referred to
this Antelope under the name Gazella corinna, and that Canon
Tristram and Lataste have called it Gazella kevella. We have
already shown, however, that both these names are properly to be
applied to the Dorcas Gazelle.
In 1890, Mr. Edward Buxton met with this Gazelle during a shooting
excursion into the Atlas, of which he has given us a most interesting
account in one of the chapters of his ‘Short Stalks.’ Mr. Buxton’s
principal object of pursuit on that occasion was the Aroui or Barbary
Sheep (Ovis tragelaphus), but he also had the good fortune to
obtain a fine head of the Mountain Gazelle, which he exhibited at a
meeting of the Zoological Society on March 31st of that year (see P. Z.
S. 1890, p. 363).
Mr. Buxton tells us, in the course of the remarks he made on this
occasion, that the Mountain Gazelle of Algeria is “about twice the size
of the Gazelle of the plains (Gazella dorcas), and has straight
instead of lyre-shaped horns. It lives on the same kind of steep ground
as the Aroui, perhaps at a rather lower elevation. The fact that it is
essentially a mountain animal is, I think, shown by its large callous
knees, like those of a London cab-horse. The Aroui has the same. They
are, I think, absent in Gazella dorcas. Another feature consists
in the curious hollows or pouches on each side of the testicles.”
In his ‘Short Stalks’ Mr. Buxton gives us full particulars of his
adventures in obtaining the much-coveted head of this animal above
referred to, and illustrates them by a beautiful picture of a group of
these Gazelles drawn and engraved after his instructions by Mr. G. E.
Lodge.
In his field-notes on the Antelopes of Eastern Algeria, published in
the Zoological Society’s ‘Proceedings’ for 1896, Mr. A. E. Pease speaks
as follows of the present species:—
“This Gazelle is by no means so rare as is generally supposed,
though it is difficult to secure, its quickness and facility for
eluding observation being equal almost to that of the Larrowi
(Ovis tragelaphus). There is hardly a mountain in the
southern ranges of the Aures where they are unknown, and I have
seen them on almost every mountain from far to the N.W. of
Biskra to the Tunisian frontier at Negrine. I know that they are
common on the Djebel Cherchar, and I have seen them as far north
as the hills and woods of Melagon, near Chelia. I have seldom
seen more than eight in a herd, and far more frequently they are
met with singly and in pairs, or bands of three to five. While
frequenting the same difficult ground as the Larrowi, it is more
usual to find them in larger numbers on those mountains which
are lower than the highest. I have seen them on the plateaux and
plains among the mountains, and they frequently descend at night
to feed on the barley in the valleys, as also does the Larrowi.
The best male horns I have measure rather more than 36 cm. along
the curve.”
Crossing the frontier of Algeria into Tunis we find the Edmi Gazelle
prevalent in suitable districts throughout that country. Mr. J. I.
S. Whitaker, F.Z.S., who knows Tunis and its birds and mammals well,
writes, in the same volume of the ‘Proceedings’ as we have quoted
above, of his experiences of this animal as follows:—
“The Mountain Gazelle, the Edmi or Edem of the
Arabs—the Tunisians use the latter name—is to be found
sparingly on most of the mountains throughout the Tunisian
Regency. Essentially a mountain species, as its name implies,
it never occurs, so far as I am aware, on the plains, or at any
distance from hilly country.
“I have met with the Edmi, and obtained specimens of it, on some
of the higher ranges near Kasrin, in Central Tunis, and have
found it in the south near Gafsa and Tamerza. In the north of
the Regency it seems to occur on the mountains near Zaghouan,
the extreme eastern range of the Atlas, and in the neighbourhood
of Ghardimaou, on the Algerio-Tunisian frontier, from both of
which places M. Blanc, the naturalist in Tunis, tells me he has
received specimens in the flesh. I myself have also been offered
Edmi-shooting on an estate only some twenty miles or so south
of Tunis. It seems evident, therefore, that the species has a
wide range in the Regency, although perhaps it is nowhere very
abundant.
“The Edmi is to be found either in small herds or singly, and
occasionally, though not as a rule, at a considerable elevation.
On the Djebel Selloum and Djebel Semama, near Kasrin, both of
which mountains are nearly 4000 feet above sea-level, I found
the Gazelles about halfway up. These mountains, although steep
in places and with some very rugged scarps, are in great part
well-wooded with Aleppo pines, and on the lower slopes with a
thick undergrowth of the usual maquis vegetation. In this
brushwood the Gazelles easily escape detection and are naturally
not very often seen. Although fond of cover, the Edmi will adapt
itself to circumstances, and seems equally at home on the arid
mountains of the south, where there is but little vegetation,
and that merely of a dwarf description, affording slight
shelter. In the spring, when my hunting-trips after Aoudad
(Ovis tragelaphus) and Edmi have taken place, there has
always been a little water on these mountains; but for some
months of the year, I am told, the watercourses are dry, and
the animals then, should they wish to drink, must travel some
distance. That both these species, however, shift their quarters
constantly I feel convinced, force of circumstances rendering
them as much nomads as the Arabs themselves.
“The Edmi is very much larger than the Dorcas Gazelle, its
weight being almost double. Its coat is darker in colour
and with rather longer and coarser hair, while its knees,
besides having very strongly developed brushes, show distinct
callosities. The horns in the adult male are very stout and
deeply annulated, and generally with but little curve, measuring
about 13 inches, or even more in fine specimens. Those of the
female are much more slender and smoother, but sometimes of fair
length, some in my possession measuring 11 inches.”
Among the wood-blocks left ready for use by the late Sir Victor Brooke
was a figure of a fine head of a male of this Gazelle drawn by Mr.
Smit, of which we now give an impression.
Fig. 58.
Head of Edmi Gazelle, ♂.
(Drawn by Smit under the direction of
the late Sir Victor Brooke.)
The Edmi Gazelle is not often brought alive to Europe, but besides
Ogilby’s type specimen, which we have already mentioned, at least three
others have been exhibited at various times in the Zoological Society’s
menagerie. An example of this species was first obtained in 1839,
as mentioned in the Report of the Council for 1840, and another was
acquired in November 1862. Others were presented by Capt. Alan Gardner,
R.N., in June 1865, and by Rear-Admiral Sir William Hall, R.N., in
May 1867. Sclater observed a female of this Gazelle in the Zoological
Garden of Berlin in September 1897 (see P. Z. S. 1897, p. 813).
As we have already stated, the typical specimen of this Gazelle,
formerly in the Zoological Society’s Collection, is now in the British
Museum, as is also a stuffed female, originally presented by H.M.
the Queen to the Zoological Society, but transferred to the National
Collection in 1855. In the British Museum Gallery of Mammals will be
found a good adult stuffed specimen of this Gazelle stated to be from
near Biskra, Algeria, and presented by Mr. J. I. S. Whitaker. There are
also some frontlets and horns of this species from the same locality
presented by Messrs. Rowland Ward & Co.
We are greatly indebted to Sir Edmund Loder for a photograph of a head
of a female of this Gazelle, taken from a specimen in his collection,
which he himself shot on the 27th of February, 1893, on the Ahmar
Khaddou Mountains, two days’ march east of Biskra. It shows very
clearly the inferior size of the horns in this sex, and the long ears
characteristic of the species.
Fig. 59.
Front view of head of Edmi Gazelle, ♀.
(From a photograph.)
Our illustration of the male of this Gazelle (Plate LVIII.) has been
drawn by Mr. Smit from the Algerian specimen in the British Museum
above referred to.
January, 1898.
THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LIX.
J. Smit del. et lith.
Hanhart imp.
The Arabian Gazelle.
GAZELLA ARABICA.
Published by R. H Porter.
Antilope arabica, Licht. Darst. Säug. pl. vi.
(1827); Ehrenb. Symb. Phys. Decas i. pl. v. (1828);
Fisch. Syn. Mamm. p. 460 (1829); Less. Compl.
Buff. x. p. 287 (1836); Waterh. Cat. Mamm. Mus. Z.
S. (2) p. 40 (1838); Oken, Allg. Nat. vii. p. 1371
(1838); Gerv. Dict. Sci. Nat. Supp. i. p. 261 (1840);
Less. N. Tabl. R. A. Mamm. p. 176 (1842); Wagn.
Schr. Säug. Suppl. iv. p. 407 (1844), v. p. 403 (1855);
Reichenb. Säug. iii. pl. xxxiii. fig. 188 (1845);
Schinz, Syn. Mamm. ii. p. 399 (1845); id. Mon.
Antil. p. 4, pl. ii. (1848); Gieb. Säug. p. 307 (1853);
Heugl. Faun. roth. Meer, Peterm. Mitth. 1861, p. 16;
id. Ant. u. Büff. N.O.-Afr. (N. Act. Leop. xxx. pt. 2) p.
5 (1863).
Gazella arabica, Temm. Esq. Zool. Guin. p. 193
(1853); Tristr. P. Z. S. 1866, p. 86; id. Faun.
& Flor. Pal. p. 26 (1884) (Palestine); Fitz. SB. Wien,
lix. p. 159; Blanf. Zool. Abyss, p. 261, pl. i. fig. 3
(horns) (1870); Brooke, P. Z. S. 1873, p. 544, 1874, p.
141 (fig., head); Scl. List Vert. An. Z. S. (1) p. 140
(1883), (2) p. 981 (1896); Jent. Cat. Ost. Leyd. Mus.
(Mus. Pays-Bas, ix.) p. 137 (1887); W. Scl. Cat. Mamm.
Calc. Mus. ii. p. 458 (1891); Jent. Cat. Mamm. Leyd. Mus.
(Mus. Pays-Bas, xi.) p. 168 (1892); Ward, Horn Meas. (1)
p. 114 (1892), (2) p. 156 (1896); Lyd. Horns and Hoofs,
p. 179 (1893); Scl. P. Z. S. 1897, p. 812 (Hodeidah).
Antilope cora, H. Sm. Griff. An. K. iv. p. 216, v.
p. 333 (1827); Less. Compl. Buff. x. p. 287 (1836).
Gazella cora, Gray, List Mamm. B. M. p. 161 (1843).
Antilope dorcas, var. δ, Sund. Pecora, K. Vet.-Ak.
Handl. 1845, p. 268 (1847); id. Hornschuch’s Transl.,
Arch. Skand. Beitr. ii. p. 264; Reprint, p. 84 (1848).
Gazella vera, Gray, Knowsl. Men. pl. iii. (1850)
(cf. Scl. P. Z. S. 1896, p. 984).
Gazella bennetti, Yerb. & Thos. P. Z. S. 1895, p.
555 (Aden).
Vernacular Names:—Ghasal of Arabs, like
G. dorcas; Ariel or Aiel in Syria
(Ehrenberg).
Size medium; height at withers about 24 or 25 inches. General colour
dark smoky fawn, much darker than in the allied species. Facial
markings distinct; central facial band dark rufous-fawn, with a black
spot on the nose. Ears of medium length, brownish-fawn behind. Dark
lateral and pygal bands smoky brown; light lateral band very slightly
lighter than the back. Limbs more rufous than body; knee-brushes brown
or black.
Skull with short broad nasals; anteorbital fossæ shallow in the only
good skull available. Basal length 6·75 inches, greatest breadth 3·3,
muzzle to orbit 3·7.
Horns thick and rather short, almost straight and parallel to each
other, a little curved backwards below, and forwards above.
Female. Similar to the male, but horns short and straight.
Although the Arabian Gazelle was described and figured as long ago as
1827, and specimens of it are by no means rare in captivity, we have
as yet received little information about its exact range and its mode
of life. But the great peninsula of Arabia still remains, we must
recollect, one of the largest tracts on the earth’s surface that has
been least explored by scientific travellers.
Hemprich and Ehrenberg, the discoverers of this Gazelle, met with
it during their travels on the eastern coast of the Red Sea, and
transmitted specimens of both sexes to the Berlin Museum. Here they
were first described and figured by Lichtenstein in his ‘Darstellung
der Säugethiere’—a work devoted to making known the riches of the
Mammal-collection of the great Institution of which he was the Director.
Following Hemprich and Ehrenberg’s MS., Lichtenstein named the species
“Antilope arabica,” and a short time afterwards it was again
described and figured by Ehrenberg in his ‘Symbolæ Physicæ’ under the
same designation.
Ehrenberg informs us that he and his fellow-traveller Hemprich obtained
their first specimens of this Gazelle at Hamam el Faraun, on the coast
of the Sinaitic Peninsula between Suez and Tor, and subsequently found
it abundant on the island of Farsan on the Arabian coast of the Red
Sea. They also observed Gazelles which they believed to be of the same
species near Baalbec in Syria, but these, we think, are more likely to
have been Gazella dorcas.
Succeeding authorities have added very little to our knowledge of
this Gazelle. Canon Tristram, in his ‘Fauna and Flora’ of Palestine,
mentions a Gazelle occurring in the “desert-country east of the Jordan”
as being probably of this species; but we believe that he did not
obtain any good specimens of it. Dr. Blanford, in his volume on the
‘Geology and Zoology of Abyssinia,’ has figured (for comparison) a head
of this species obtained by Captain Heysham near Mocha, S.W. Arabia;
and in the Zoological Society’s ‘Proceedings’ for 1874, the late Sir
Victor Brooke gave a woodcut of the head of this Gazelle, which, by the
kind permission of the Society, we are enabled to reproduce.
Fig. 60.
Head of Arabian Gazelle.
(P. Z. S. 1874, p. 141.)
Living examples of the Arabian Gazelle are easily obtained at Aden and
at Hodeidah, Jeddah, and other Arabian ports on the Red Sea, and are
often brought to Europe. We have little doubt that the Gazelles in the
Derby Menagerie figured by Waterhouse Hawkins in the third plate of
the ‘Gleanings,’ and there called by Lord Derby’s MS. name, Gazella
vera, were of this species, though in the text they are referred to
as G. dorcas and in the list of plates as G. cuvieri.
The Zoological Society of London appear to have received their first
specimens in 1874[9], and since that date (as will be seen by their
published Lists of Animals) have acquired many examples, chiefly by
presentation. At the present time there are two fine males in the
Society’s Gardens, both brought from Aden and presented—one by Mr. R.
G. Buchanan and the other by Mr. J. Benett Stanford, F.Z.S. From the
former of these Mr. Smit’s drawing (Plate LIX.) was taken.
The British Museum has lately acquired from the Zoological Society
a good male example of this Gazelle, which was obtained at Aden and
brought alive to London. It has been mounted for the Mammal Gallery.
The Museum also has the skull from Mocha figured by Dr. Blanford, as
already mentioned, and since presented by him to the collection, and
the skin of a young animal from Gilead, obtained by Canon Tristram, the
determination of which is, however, somewhat doubtful.
January, 1898.
THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LX.
J. Smit del. et lith.
Hanhart imp.
The Indian Gazelle.
GAZELLA BENNETTI.
Published by R. H. Porter.
Antilope bennettii, Sykes, P. Z. S. 1831, p. 104;
Less. Compl. Buff. x. p. 287 (1836); Waterh. Cat.
Mamm. Mus. Z. S. (2) p. 40 (1838); Laurill. Dict. Univ.
d’H. N. i. p. 617 (1839); Gerv. Dict. Sci. Nat. Supp. i.
p. 261 (1840); Less. N. Tabl. R. A., Mamm. p. 176 (1842);
Schinz, Syn. Mamm. ii. p. 400 (1845); id. Mon.
Antil. pl. iii. b (1848); Reichenb. Säug. iii.
p. 111 (1845); Fraser, Zool. Typica, pl. xvi. (1849);
Horsf. Cat. Mamm. E. I. C. p. 166 (1851); Wagn.
Schr. Säug. Supp. v. p. 405 (1855).
Gazella bennettii, Gray, List Mamm. B. M. p. 161
(1843); id. Ann. Mag. N. H. (1) xviii. p. 231 (1846);
Hutton, J. A. S. B. xv. p. 150 (1846) (Neemuch);
Gray, List Ost. B. M. p. 56 (1847); id. Knowsl. Men.
p. 4 (1850); Temm. Esq. Zool. Guin. p. 193 (1853);
Jerd. Mamm. Ind. p. 280 (1867); Blanf. J. A. S.
B. xxxvi. p. 196 (1867); Kinloch, Large Game Shooting,
p. 57, pl. (1869); McMaster, Notes on Jerdon, pp. 141
& 249 (1870); Blanf. Zool. Abyss. p. 261, pl. i. fig.
2 (horns) (1870); Stoliczka, J. A. S. B. xli. p. 229
(1872); Blanf. P. Z. S. 1873, p. 315 (distribution);
Brooks, P. Z. S. 1873, p. 544; Blanf. E. Persia,
ii. p. 91 (1876); Ball, P. A. S. B. 1877, p. 172;
Scl. List Vert. An. Z. S. (8) p. 141 (1883), (9) p. 155
(1896); Flow. & Gars. Cat. Coll. Surg. ii. p. 264 (1884);
Sterndale, Mamm. Ind. p. 463 (1884); Murray, Zool.
Sind, p. 56 (1884); Blanf. Faun. Brit. Ind., Mamm. p.
526 (1891); W. Scl. Cat. Mamm. Calc. Mus. ii. p. 159
(1891); Jent. Cat. Mamm. Leyd. Mus. (Mus. Pays-Bas,
xi.) p. 168 (1892); Ward, Horn Meas. (1) p. 124 (1892),
(2) p. 166 (1896); Lyd. Horns and Hoofs, p. 175 (1893);
Percy, Badm. Big Game Shooting, ii. p. 355 (1894).
Tragops bennettii, Hodgs. J. A. S. B. 1847,
p. 11, & xvi. p. 695; Gray, P. Z. S. 1850, p. 116;
id. Cat. Ung. B. M. p. 62 (1852); Adams, P. Z.
S. 1858, p. 522 (Punjab); Gerr. Cat. Bones Mamm. B. M. p. 233
(1862); Blyth, Cat. Mamm. Mus. As. Soc. p. 173 (1863);
Gray, Cat. Rum. B. M. p. 39 (1872); id. Hand-l.
Rum. B. M. p. 108 (1873).
Tragopsis bennettii, Fitz. SB. Wien, lix. p. 157
(1869).
Antilope arabica, Elliot, Madr. Journ. x. p. 223
(1839) (Mahratta Country).
Gazella christii, Gray, Blyth, J. A. S. B.
xi. p. 452 (1842); Hutton, J. A. S. B. xv. p. 151 (1846).
Antilope hazenna, I. Geoffr. St.-Hil. Voy. Jacq.,
Mamm. p. 74, Atl. pl. vi. (1844); Schinz, Mon. Ant. pl.
xxi. a (1848); Wagn. Schr. Säug. Supp. v. p. 406
(1855).
Gazella hazenna, Temm. Esq. Zool. Guin. p. 193
(1853).
Tragopsis hazenna, Fitz. SB. Wien, lix. p. 157
(1869).
Gazella fuscifrons, Blanf. P. Z. S. 1873, p.
317 (fig., head ♀) (Jalk, Persia); Brooke, P. Z. S.
1873, p. 545; Blanf. E. Persia, ii. p. 92 (1876);
Sterndale, Mamm. Ind. p. 465 (1884); W. Scl. Cat.
Mamm. Calc. Mus. ii. p. 160 (1891).
Vernacular Names:—Chinkára, Chikára,
Kol-punch in Hindustani; Phaskela in N.W.
Provinces; Ask or Ast and Ahu in
Baluchistan; Khazm in Brahmi; Kalsipi in Mahratta;
Tiska, Budári, or Mudári in Canarese;
Sank-húlé in Mysore; Porsya ♂, Chari ♀ in
Baori; Burudu-jinka in Telugu; Ravine-Deer of many
Anglo-Indians.
Size medium; height at withers 24 to 25 inches. General colour dull
fawn. Facial markings distinct, the darker ones rufous-fawn; a black
spot on the top of the nose. Ears of medium length, fawn-coloured
behind. Dark lateral and pygal bands brownish fawn, scarcely darker
than the back; light lateral bands scarcely perceptible; knee-brushes
present.
Skull with deep anteorbital fossæ:—Basal length 7·2 inches, greatest
breadth 3·45, muzzle to orbit 4.
Horns thick, heavily ribbed, close together, diverging little but
evenly, gently curved backwards below and forwards at their tips.
Female. Similar to the male, but horns straight, simple, about
two-thirds the length of those of the male.
Hab. Indian Peninsula, extending westwards through
Baluchistan to the Persian Gulf.
Like the Lion and the Cheetah this Gazelle belongs to an Ethiopian type
of mammals, and was originally, no doubt, an intruder into India from
the west. But, as will be seen when we come to describe its range, it
has now spread itself over the greater part of the peninsula except on
the eastern side. On the west the Indian Gazelle extends far along the
Mekran coast to the Persian Gulf, and there meets the Arabian Gazelle,
of which it is undoubtedly a very close ally, although the latter is
always much darker on the back.
Although the Indian Gazelle, or “Ravine-Deer,” as it is usually termed
by Europeans, was doubtless known to the sportsmen of British India
long ago, it was not made known to science until 1831, when Col. Sykes,
one of the earliest pioneers in Indian natural history, described it
in a communication made to the Zoological Society of London. Sykes, in
his paper on the Mammals of the Deccan read before the Society in July
of that year, proposed to name it Antilope bennetti, after the
late Edward Turner Bennett, a well-known naturalist, who was at that
time Vice-Secretary of the Society. Sykes met with this Antelope on the
rocky hills of the Deccan “in groups rarely exceeding three or four
in number, and very frequently solitary.” In 1849, Fraser published
a figure of this species in his ‘Zoologia Typica,’ taken from one of
Sykes’s male specimens in the British Museum, which is still in the
National Collection, although not in the exhibition gallery. In 1844,
in his description of the mammals of Jacquemont’s ‘Voyage dans l’Inde,’
Isidore Geoffr. St. Hilaire described and figured an Antilope
hazenna, which he at that time considered to be different from
the present animal. But there can be no doubt that Jacquemont’s
specimens, which were obtained at Malwa in Central India, are the
same as Gazella bennetti, and Sykes’s term being the oldest
has been universally employed as the designation of this species. As
we shall presently show, Gazella christii of Gray, from Sind,
and Gazella fuscifrons of Blanford, from Baluchistan, are names
which have been based on what are merely slightly divergent forms of
Gazella bennetti.
From the researches of Elliot, Jerdon, Blyth, Blanford, and other
authorities on the mammals of British India, we are now well acquainted
with the range of this Gazelle in the peninsula and adjoining lands
to the west. Dr. Blanford describes it as extending throughout the
plains and low hills of North-western and Central India, and thence
through Baluchistan to the eastern shore of the Persian Gulf. In the
Indian peninsula, he continues, the Indian Gazelle ranges in suitable
localities throughout the Punjab, Sind, Rajputana, the N.W. Provinces,
and the whole of the Bombay Presidency with the exception of the
Western Ghats and Konkan; it also occurs in Central India as far east
as Palamow and Western Sargiya, and in the Central Provinces as far
east as Seoni and Chánda, together with the Hyderabad territories and
the Madras Presidency to a little south of the Kistna, Gazelles being
found at Anantapur, south of Kurnool, and in Northern Mysore.
For an account of the habits of the Indian Gazelle and the modes of its
chase, we cannot do better than refer to the last edition of General
Kinloch’s ‘Large Game Shooting,’ where they are described as follows:—
“The favourite haunts of this Gazelle are extensive wastes
of sandy or rocky ground, sprinkled with low bushes, and
interspersed here and there with patches of cultivation. Thick
jungles they avoid; and they are seldom to be met with in
districts which are entirely under crop. During the daytime
they resort to secluded spots where they are not subject to
annoyance, and in the mornings and evenings they frequently
repair to fields of young grain, sometimes in close proximity to
villages.
“In some places they are extremely wild, and can only be
approached by the most careful stalking; in other localities
they are comparatively tame, and will allow the sportsman to
walk openly to within easy range. At most times, however, they
are restless little animals, continually on the move, and they
have a provoking way of trotting off with a switch of their
black tails the moment that they suspect danger.
“On open plains the best way of getting within shot of them is
under cover of a steady shooting horse. As they afford but a
small mark, and seldom remain still very long, quick as well as
accurate shooting is required, and beginners in the art of rifle
shooting will find them excellent practice.
“The officers of the Guides used to hawk the Gazelle in the
neighbourhood of Hótó Mardán, the Falcons used for the purpose
being nestling ‘charghs’ (Falco sacer). Adult
caught birds cannot be trained for this sport, and the nestlings
had to be obtained from the distant province of Balkh by the
assistance of some of the Kábúl Sirdárs. In the present state of
our relations with Áfghánístán, the Falcons cannot be procured,
and the sport has, for the present at any rate, died out. The
hawks alone could not kill a Gazelle, but were assisted by
greyhounds, which used to pull it down after the hawks had
confused and stunned it by repeated blows. I regret that I never
had an opportunity of witnessing the flight, which has been
described to me as very interesting and exciting.”
Dr. Blanford tells us that this Gazelle lives on grass and on the
leaves of bushes, and, so far as he is aware, never drinks. “I have
seen it,” he says, “in the deserts of Sind in places where the only
water for twenty miles round was procured from wells; and in spots in
Western and Central India where, in the hot weather, the only water
to be obtained was in small pools remaining in the beds of streams.
But around these pools, in which the tracks of almost every animal
in the forest was to be seen, I never yet saw the very peculiarly
formed tracks of the Gazelle, although it frequently abounded in the
neighbourhood. The four-horned Antelope, on the other hand, drinks
habitually.”
Gazella christii, which we have alluded to above as synonymous
with this species, was a MS. name of the late Dr. Gray, which appears
to have been first published by Blyth in 1842, and applied to a pale
form of the present animal from Kutch and Sind. But more recent
researches have shown that it is not properly separable from the
typical Gazella bennetti.
Gazella fuscifrons, another synonym also mentioned above, was
based by Dr. Blanford in 1873 on a doe with distinctly ringed horns and
with portions of the face dark brown, obtained in Baluchistan. But the
late Sir O. B. St. John subsequently procured what he justly concluded
to be the male of this form, which, as acknowledged by Dr. Blanford
himself, proved to be not distinct from Gazella bennetti. By
the kindness of the Zoological Society we are enabled to reproduce Dr.
Blanford’s figures of the head of Gazella fuscifrons, which,
except for the slight differences above mentioned, give an equally good
idea of the head of the typical G. bennetti.
Fig. 61.
Head of Gazella fuscifrons, ♀.
(P. Z. S. 1873, p. 317.)
The Indian Gazelle is frequently brought to Europe alive, though it
is not so common in our menageries as Gazella dorcas, G.
subgutturosa, and some other species. According to the Zoological
Society’s books, the first examples were received in 1838, and since
1860, as will be seen by the printed lists, about twelve specimens
have been exhibited. A pair presented by Capt. H. J. Hope Edwards, in
April 1883, bred, and the female gave birth to a young one in November
of that year; but, like other Gazelles, this species does not usually
thrive in the dull climate of England.
As is the case with many common animals, the British Museum does
not contain a good series of this Gazelle, and specimens with exact
localities from all parts of its range are much required. Besides
the old mounted examples from the Deccan presented by Col. Sykes and
already alluded to, it possesses only a skin from Sind received from
the Karachi Museum, and several skulls and pairs of horns from the Salt
Range of the Punjâb and Kelat, received in the Hume Collection.
Our figures of this species (Plate LX.) have been prepared by Mr.
Smit—the male from the skin received from the Karachi Museum, and the
female from Col. Sykes’s specimen.
January, 1898.
THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LXI.
J. Smit lith.
Hanhart imp.
Speke’s Gazelle.
GAZELLA SPEKEI.
Published by R. H. Porter.
Gazella, sp.?, Blyth, J. As. Soc. Beng. xxiv. p. 297
(1856).
“Gazella cuvieri, Blyth,” Speke, Rep. Zool. Coll. Somali,
p. 8 (1860).
Gazella spekei, Blyth, Cat. Mamm. Mus. As. Soc. p. 172
(1863); Blanf. Zool. Abyss. p. 261, pl. i. fig. 5 (horns)
(1870); Brooke, P. Z. S. 1873, p. 543; Kohl, Ann. Mus.
Wien, i. p. 77, pls. iii., iv. fig. 3, & v. fig. 1 (animal & skull)
(1886); Thos. P. Z. S. 1891, p. 210; W. Scl. Cat. Mamm.
Calc. Mus. ii. p. 158 (1891); Scl. P. Z. S. 1892, pp. 100 & 118;
Swayne, P. Z. S. 1892, p. 306; Ward, Horn Meas. (1) p.
112 (1892), (2) p. 153 (1896); Lyd. Horns and Hoofs, p. 234 (1893);
Swayne, Somaliland, p. 316 (fig., head) (1895); Hoyos,
Aulihan, p. 179, pl. x. fig. 3 (1895); Elliot, Publ. Chicago
Mus., Zool. i. p. 120 (1897); Scl. P. Z. S. 1897, p. 920 (fig., head).
Gazella, sp. inc., Lort Phillips, P. Z. S. 1885, p. 932.
Gazella naso, Scl. P. Z. S. 1886, p. 504, pl. li. (head);
id. in James’s Unknown Horn of Africa, p. 268, pl. iii. (1888).
Vernacular Name:—Dhero of Somalis (Swayne).
Size slightly greater than in G. dorcas; height at withers 23–24
inches. Body pale brownish fawn, the light lateral band but little
paler than the back, then dark or dull blackish, not sharply defined.
Central facial band brownish fawn; top of muzzle, over nasal bones,
with a distinct blackish patch, in front of which there is a peculiar
swollen and corrugated cushion of skin raised up above the level of the
face, and extensible at the pleasure of the animal. Dark cheek-band
narrow, indistinct, the light band above it broad and extending to
the muzzle. Ears long, narrow, pointed, their backs whitish fawn.
Knee-tufts present, brownish fawn. Pygal band very indistinct.
Skull with short broad nasals, the premaxillæ not or barely touching
their outer corners. Basal length in an old male 6·5 inches, greatest
breadth 3·35, muzzle to orbit 3·6.
Horns but slightly divergent, evenly and strongly curved backwards for
three-fourths their length, their tips gently recurved upwards.
Female. Like the male, but the horns slender, little ridged,
less curved, about three-fourths the length of those of the male.
Hab. Interior Plateau of Somaliland.
There can be no doubt that the two Gazelles which inhabit the maritime
plain and the high inland plateau of Somaliland respectively, although
they are closely allied, and have been confused together by some
writers, belong to distinct species, distinguishable by well-marked
characters. The Gazelle of the interior plateau, which we treat
of first, when compared with that of the coast-land is at once
recognizable by the generally browner colour, the darker lateral band,
the black nose-spot, and above all by the wrinkled and elevated nose of
the adult, which is not met with in the sister species.
Speke’s Gazelle was first discovered by the energetic African
explorer, whose name it appropriately bears, during his expedition
to Harar in the summer of 1854 in company with the late Capt. Sir
Richard Burton[10]. Speke, who attended to the natural history of
the expedition, forwarded the collections made upon this occasion
to Blyth, at that time curator of the Asiatic Society’s Museum at
Calcutta, and in the zenith of his zoological work. In his report upon
the collection, which was published in the twenty-fourth volume of
the ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ Blyth did not venture
to bestow a new name on this Gazelle, although he gave an accurate
description of it, and added a note (obtained from Burton) calling
special attention to “the elevation of loose replicated skin upon the
nose,” so that there can be no doubt as to which of the two allied
species Speke’s specimens (which are still in the Calcutta Museum[11])
belong.
In the reprint of Blyth’s ‘Report,’ which was edited by Speke in
1860 after his return to this country, this Gazelle was erroneously
referred to G. cuvieri of Ogilby. In 1883, however, Blyth, who
had discovered that this was a mistake, proposed the name Gazella
spekei for this species in his ‘Catalogue of the Mammals of the
Asiatic Society’s Museum,’ and this appellation has been generally
adopted for it ever since.
When the late Sir Victor Brooke wrote his Monograph of the Gazelles in
1873 Speke’s Gazelle was hardly known in this country, and Brooke was
only acquainted with it from photographs of the type specimens in the
Calcutta Museum. But since that date Somaliland has been fully opened
to British travellers, and the numerous explorers and sportsmen who
have visited that much-hunted country have brought back good sets of
specimens both of Speke’s and of Pelzeln’s Gazelle, and made us well
acquainted with the ranges and other peculiarities of these two species.
One of the first British travellers who visited Somaliland, and made
the acquaintance of Speke’s Gazelle, was the late Mr. F. L. James, who
proceeded there on a shooting-expedition in January 1884, accompanied
by his brother and Mr. E. Lort Phillips[12]. Mr. Lort Phillips read
some notes on the Antelopes obtained on this occasion before the
Zoological Society in December 1885, and in alluding to this Gazelle
called it the “Flabby-nosed Gazelle,” to which term Sclater
attached a footnote stating that it was “probably of a new species,”
but required further examination. This examination Sclater bestowed
upon Mr. Lort Phillips’s specimens shortly afterwards (see P. Z. S.
1886, p. 504), and came to the correct conclusion that the so-called
Flabby-nosed Gazelle was quite distinct from the species of the coast
land. He unfortunately did not perceive that it was the species of
the high plateau and not that of the coast land, which had already
been named Gazella spekei by Blyth, and therefore gave it a new
name, Gazella naso, under which appellation it will be found
described and its characteristic head figured in Sclater’s article in
the Zoological Society’s ‘Proceedings’ for 1886. But, as Thomas has
subsequently shown (P. Z. S. 1891, p. 210), there can be no doubt that
Gazella naso is merely a synonym of Gazella spekei.
Another well-known author, who must not fail to be quoted in any
reference to the game animals of Somaliland, is Capt. H. G. C. Swayne,
R.E. Capt. Swayne has made no less than seventeen trips to that
attractive country, and is probably better acquainted with its larger
mammals than any other living individual. In his excellent narrative
of his adventures[13], Capt. Swayne has given us some capital notes on
Speke’s Gazelle and its near ally Pelzeln’s Gazelle, both of which are
known to the natives by the same name “Dhero.”
Fig. 62.
Head of adult male Speke’s Gazelle.
(Brit. Mus.)
Capt. Swayne calls the former Antelope the “Ogo, or Plateau
Gazelle,” and the latter the “Guban, or Lowland Gazelle,” and
describes the peculiarities of the present species as follows:—
“The Plateau Gazelle, which has the ridges of loose skin
over the nose well developed, inhabits the elevated country,
commencing about thirty-five miles inland. It is found south
of Gólis, in Ogo and in the Haud, as well as in Ogo-Gudan, the
country near Hargeisa where Guban rises gradually into Ogo.
“I have shot large numbers of Gazelles for food at various
times, and have always noticed that the plateau variety has a
much thicker and longer coat than the other. This is possibly
the result of natural selection, as the high plains of the Ogo
and the Haud, where it lives, are subject to sweeping cold
winds, and the nights are very cold indeed. The altitude of
these plains inhabited by the Plateau Gazelle is from three
thousand to over six thousand feet, but doubtless they go
much lower towards Ogádén. The great steppe of Gólis, with
its prolongations east and west, which rises some forty miles
inland, and separates Guban, the low coast country, from Ogo,
the high interior country, forms the natural line of demarcation
between these two Gazelles.”
Fig. 63.
Head of adult female Speke’s Gazelle.
(Mr. F. Gillett, F.Z.S.)
A still more recent explorer of Somaliland, Mr. A. E. Pease, M.P.,
F.Z.S., has most kindly favoured us with some excellent notes on
Speke’s Gazelle and its sister species, which we cannot do better than
reproduce. Mr. Pease has also sent us along with his MS. remarks a
sketch-map of the northern part of Somaliland, in which the ranges of
these two species are accurately shown.
He writes as follows:—
“Speke’s Gazelle is called ‘Dhero’ by the Somalis, who do not
distinguish it by name from Gazella pelzelni. It is a
‘Dhero,’ just as the other, and yet there is no Somali shikari
or any other observer who cannot discriminate at a glance
between these two very distinct species—distinct in colour,
size, horns, and habitat, whilst the peculiar nose, covered with
soft pliable folds of loose skin, of the G. spekei is
alone sufficient to mark it as a species apart.
“The Speke’s or Plateau Gazelle has been termed the Mountain
Gazelle by some writers; but it is not strictly a mountain
Gazelle, but one that frequents the higher plains and low
foot-hills north and south of the Golis. But with its
distribution I will deal later.
“In colour the Speke’s Gazelles are much darker than Pelzeln’s
Gazelles, the predominating colour in life being a rich
strong burnt-sienna buff, distinctly darker over the back.
The side-stripes are very dark brown, strongly marked, and
maintaining their depth of colour to the edge of the white under
the ribs and belly. The tail is a dark reddish brown, and the
colour on the quarters towards the tail is of a deeper shade.
The coat, though fine in texture, is very long for a Gazelle,
being sometimes fully two inches long on the withers, and the
stern is heavily feathered with long white hair. Altogether it
is one of the most beautifully coloured of all the Gazelles.
The head is also strongly marked, the deep dark brown patch
on the nose and the tear-mark sprinkled with dark hairs are
very distinctive. The enlargement of the nose is covered with
three or four folds of loose pliable skin. The horns are more
curved back and forward towards the tips than those of Pelzeln’s
Gazelle, and on the average do not reach to quite the same
length as in that species. Twelve inches along the curve would
be an abnormally long horn for G. spekei, whilst this
measurement is not uncommon in Pelzeln’s Gazelle. The female is
very slightly lighter in colour, and has weak horns, reaching
to about 9 inches in old ones, with slight indications of the
annulations, which are deep and strong in the male.
“This Gazelle I have observed in large numbers on both sides of
the Golis range. I have seen it in bands numbering from fifteen
to twenty on the plateaux behind (S. of) Gan Libah and Dunanoof.
In the Gadabursi country, on the northern limits of the Haud,
west of Lija Uri, I have seen them frequently in small bands
of from five to eight, and herds of this size may be said to
be the rule in the zone north of the Golis Range and south of
the Maritime Plain. I cannot call to mind having seen them much
further south than the grass plains of Toyo, but there I have
observed them mixed up with the Aoul or Soemmerring’s Gazelle.
“I should put down the height of this Gazelle at about 24
inches, and its weight, when living, at about 40 pounds.”
So far as we know, but one specimen of Speke’s Gazelle has as yet
reached this country alive. This was a young male, presented to the
Zoological Society’s Menagerie in November last year by Dr. L. de
Gébert, who had obtained it at Djibutil, the French port of Abyssinia.
Unfortunately it did not live long in captivity, but after its death
Sclater, with Mr. F. E. Beddard’s kind assistance, was able to examine
the specimen more closely. It exhibited a slight protuberance on the
nose, as shown in the figure (fig. 64), which by the kindness of the
Zoological Society we are enabled to reproduce on the present occasion.
Underneath the skin of the nose was a slight cavity, which was easily
inflated into a protuberance by blowing air into the nostrils. But
dissection, which was carried out by Mr. Beddard, revealed no trace of
any glandular structure.
Fig. 64.
Head of young male Speke’s Gazelle.
(P. Z. S. 1897, p. 920.)
The collection of the British Museum contains a good mounted example
of this Gazelle (procured from Herr Menges, and originally obtained
from Gerbatir in Somaliland), from which the coloured figure (Plate
LXI.) has been prepared by Mr. Smit. There is likewise in the Museum
a good series of skins and skulls from different places in Somaliland
collected and presented by Mr. T. W. H. Clarke, Capt. H. G. C. Swayne,
R.E., Col. Arthur Paget, and Mr. Ford G. Barclay. From one of these our
figure (p. 128) of a good adult head of this Gazelle has been prepared
by Mr. Smit; while that of the female (p. 129) has been drawn from
a mounted head kindly lent to us for that purpose by Mr. Frederick
Gillett, F.Z.S.
May, 1898.
THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LXII.
J. Smit lith.
Hanhart imp.
Pelzeln’s Gazelle.
GAZELLA PELZELNI.
Published by R. H. Porter.
Gazella spekei, Scl. P. Z. S. 1884, p. 540;
Lort Phillips, P. Z. S. 1885, p. 931 (nec Blyth).
Gazella pelzelni, Kohl, SB. zool.-bot. Ges. Wien,
1886, p. 4; id. Ann. Mus. Wien, i. p. 76, pls. iii. & iv.
fig. 1 (animal & skull) (1886); Thos. P. Z. S. 1891, p.
211; Scl. P. Z. S. 1892, pp. 100 & 118; Swayne,
P. Z. S. 1892, p. 306; Ward, Horn Meas. (1) p. 113
(1892), (2) p. 155 (1896); Lyd. Horns and Hoofs, p.
238 (1893); Swayne, Somaliland, p. 316 (fig., head)
(1895); Hoyos, Aulihan, p. 178, pl. x. fig. 1 (1895);
Elliot, Publ. Chicago Mus. Zool. i. p. 119 (1897).
Vernacular Name:—Dhero of Somalis (in common
with the last species) (Swayne).
Size rather greater than in G. spekei; height at withers
about 25 inches. Colour brownish fawn, rather more rufous than G.
spekei. Light lateral band distinct; dark band rufous brown,
similar to that of the back but rather darker in tone, not blackish.
Pygal band distinct, brown. Centre of face dark fawn, without either
the black spot or the pale swollen cushion characteristic of G.
spekei. Dark and light cheek-bands short and indistinct. Knee-tufts
dark brown.
Skull narrower than in G. spekei, and with long narrow nasals,
which articulate broadly with the premaxillæ. Basal length in an old
male 6·87 inches, greatest breadth 3·25, muzzle to orbit 3·75.
Horns more evenly divergent, much straighter and less curved backwards
than in G. spekei, but otherwise similar. In length they attain
to about 11 or 12 inches.
Female. Like the male, but the horns much smoother and
slenderer, and only about three-fourths the length.
Hab. Maritime plains of Northern Somaliland.
As we have already mentioned in our account of the last species, the
late Mr. F. L. James and his party, who visited Somaliland in 1884,
appear to have been the first to bring to England examples of the two
allied Gazelles of Somaliland. Unfortunately, however, though perhaps
not unnaturally, Sclater, who assisted Mr. E. Lort Phillips in the
determination of the Mammals obtained during that expedition, referred
the coast-land specimens to Gazella spekei, and described
the examples from the high plateau as belonging to a new species,
Gazella naso. About two years later, however, this error was
corrected by Herr H. F. Kohl, of the Natural History Museum of Vienna,
who, in an article upon new and rare Antelopes collected by Herr L.
Menges in Somaliland, among which examples of both these Gazelles were
comprised, rightly referred the upland species to Gazella spekei
of Blyth and gave to the lowland species, then still unnamed, the
title of Gazella pelzelni, after the late August von Pelzeln,
a well-known naturalist, who was at that time Custos of the Imperial
Museum of Natural History.
Thomas, in his article on the Antelopes collected in Somaliland by Mr.
T. W. H. Clarke, published in the Zoological Society’s ‘Proceedings’
for 1891, was the first to make this matter perfectly clear, and to
establish the name Gazella pelzelni as the permanent designation
of the coast-land Gazelle of Somaliland. Since that date the
distinctions between the two allied species have become well recognized
and understood, and numerous examples of both species have been
obtained by the naturalists and sportsmen who have recently visited
that country.
Capt. Swayne, in his well-known work on Somaliland and its wild animals
(from which, by the kind permission of Messrs. Rowland Ward & Co.,
the publishers, we have been allowed to borrow illustrations of the
heads of both sexes of this Gazelle), tells us that the “short-coated,
light-coloured Lowland Gazelle” carries rather longer horns than those
of the Plateau Gazelle (Gazella spekei), which are “shorter,
thicker, more curved, and better annulated.” “The habits of both,” he
continues, “are nearly alike; they go in moderate-sized herds of from
three to ten, and resort mostly to stony or sandy undulating ground
or ravines thinly dotted over with mimosas. Both species are fond of
salt and do not require water. It is hard to understand what they can
pick up to eat in the wretched ground which they frequent. They have a
curiosity which amounts almost to impudence, but are wonderfully on
the alert, and hard to shoot, seeming to know perfectly well the range
of a rifle, and presenting but a very small target.”
Capt. R. Light, writing to Sclater in 1892, tells us that when he
visited Somaliland in 1891 he found this Gazelle between Berbera and
Zeila, close down by the sea: “they were often observed feeding side by
side with camels and flocks of sheep and goats. When startled they move
off the ground in a quick trot, taking bounds over any obstacles and
finally breaking into a gallop.”
Fig. 65.
Head of Pelzeln’s Gazelle, ♂.
(From Swayne’s ‘Somaliland,’ p. 317.)
Fig. 65a.
Skull of Pelzeln’s Gazelle, ♀.
(From Swayne’s ‘Somaliland,’ p. 317.)
Mr. Pease, who has kindly supplied us with notes on this Gazelle as
well as on the preceding species, writes that Pelzeln’s Gazelle is
essentially the species of the maritime plain and could be seen within
shot of the town of Bulhar when he was there in 1896, and within a
mile or so of Berbera. “In life it appears of a light rich yellow-buff
in colour, with the usual Gazelline marks rather faintly indicated.
Its coat is short and fine, and its horns are straighter and longer
than those of G. spekei. The horns of the female are weak and
almost smooth, like those of Speke’s Gazelle.” “Within fifty miles of
the sea-shore,” he continues, “this Gazelle is exceedingly numerous in
suitable places. Half-a-dozen herds may be often seen at a time, but I
have seldom observed more than twenty in a single band. In size G.
pelzelni is larger than G. spekei, the average height being
about 25 inches, while the weight of the carcase is usually a little
over 40 lbs.”
Mr. D. G. Elliot, who made a successful expedition to Somaliland in
1896, for the purpose of obtaining specimens for the Field Columbian
Museum of Chicago, gives us the following account of his experiences
with the present species:—
“This is the Gazelle of the lowlands and is not often seen much
beyond Laferug on the road to Hargeisa, where the following
species begins to make its appearance. It is the larger animal
of the two, and they resemble each other very much in their
habits.
“Pelzeln’s Gazelle frequents dry and stony places, covered
with low bushes, and it is difficult to see where or how it
can obtain sufficient nourishment from the barren, forbidding
districts it inhabits. It goes in small troops of from two or
three to nearly a dozen individuals. I think eleven was the
greatest number I ever saw together at one time. As a rule,
it is not a wild creature and readily permits an approach
sufficiently near to ensure a fatal shot, but of course
when much hunted becomes wary. The males were often seen by
themselves, and then it was not difficult to stalk them. Their
horns are almost straight and annulated nearly to the tips. The
female also carries horns, much straighter and much more slender
than those of the male. There is considerable variation in the
coloring of individuals and I hardly know what causes it. The
typical style has a broad conspicuous chestnut band running
lengthwise along the body just above the white of the belly. But
some individuals, evidently of equal age, killed practically
at the same time and in the same condition of coat, were
entirely without the distinguishing mark. It may be possibly an
exhibition of individual variation, for these specimens were
not confined to any especial locality. I do not think, however,
it was in any way an indication of age, for fully adult animals
were without the stripe, neither was this peculiarity confined
to either sex.”
The British Museum contains a good male specimen of Pelzeln’s Gazelle,
mounted from a skin obtained by Herr Menges near Berbera in Somaliland.
Mr. Smit’s figures of this species (Plate LXII.), which represent the
male in two positions, have been prepared from it. The Museum also
contains two skins from the plains of Berbera, collected by Capt.
Swayne and originally sent home to Sclater.
May, 1898.
THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LXIII.
J. Smit lith.
Hanhart imp.
Loder’s Gazelle.
GAZELLA LEPTOCEROS.
Published by R. H. Porter.
Antilope leptoceros, Geoffr. St.-Hil. et F. Cuv.
H. N. Mamm. (fol.) pls. 473, 474, livr. 72 (1842) (Sennaar?);
Wagn. Schr. Säug. Suppl. iv. p. 422 (1844), v. p. 407
(1855); Schinz, Syn. Mamm. ii. p. 445 (1845); id.
Mon. Antil. p. 34, pl. 38 (1848); Sund. Pecora, K.
Vet.-Ak. Handl. 1845, p. 269 (1847); id. Hornschuch’s
Transl., Arch. Skand. Beitr. ii. p. 265; Reprint, p. 85 (1848);
Gieb. Säug. p. 309 (1853); Heugl. Reise N.O.-Afr.
ii. p. 100, cum tab. (1877).
Gazella leptoceros, Temm. Esq. Zool. Guin. p. 193
(1853); Brooke, P. Z. S. 1873, p. 543; Lyd. Horns
and Hoofs, p. 234 (1893).
Gazella dorcas, var. 4, Gray, Cat. Ung. B. M. p.
57 (1852).
Leptoceros abuharab et L. cuvieri, Fitz.
SB. Wien, lix. pt. 1, p. 160 (1869).
Gazella loderi, Thos. Ann. Mag. N. H. (6) xiii.
p. 452 (1894) (Algeria); id. P. Z. S. 1894, p. 470, pl.
xxxii. (animal); Loder, P. Z. S. 1894, p. 473 (habits);
Scl. P. Z. S. 1895, p. 522 (Egypt); Bramley, P. Z.
S. 1895, p. 863 (Egypt); Scl. P. Z. S. 1896, p. 780 (Viv.
Soc. Zool.); Pease, P. Z. S. 1896, p. 813 (Algeria);
Whitaker, P. Z. S. 1896, p. 816 (Tunis); Ward,
Horn Meas. (2) p. 169 (1896).
Vernacular Names:—Abu el harabat or Abu el
haráb in Arabic (Heuglin); Reem of Arabs in
Algeria (Loder); Ghazal abiad (White Gazelle) of
Arabs in Tunis and Egypt (Whitaker & Bramley).
Height of male at withers about 25 inches. General colour very pale
sandy fawn, the Gazelline markings little defined. Central facial
band and darker cheek-bands sandy, not rufous, and but little
contrasting with the light facial streaks. Light lateral bands scarcely
perceptible, and the darker ones below them only pale sandy with a
tinge of brownish, as are the pygal bands, neither being much darker
than the general dorsal colour. Ears long, narrow, pointed, pale
whitish buff externally. Tail sandy at base, darkening terminally to
brownish black. Front of fore limbs sandy, of hind limbs whitish;
knee-brushes distinct, but little darker than the general colour. Hoofs
variable in shape, those of specimens from the sandy regions of the
Sahara much elongated, while in other regions they are of the usual
shape.
Skull of normal proportions; premaxillæ broadly articulating with
nasals. Basal length in an old male 6·45 inches, greatest breadth 3·3,
muzzle to orbit 3·6.
Horns of male long, about twice the length of the skull, slender,
closely and heavily ringed nearly to the tip. They are very variable as
to their exact curvature, but are ordinarily rather straighter than in
other species, curving but slightly backwards; they are near together
basally, diverging above, sometimes very widely, so as to make them
resemble divergent horns of G. granti in miniature.
Female. Similar to the male, but the horns, although nearly
equally long, are much slenderer and even less curved than in the male.
Hab. Sandy tracts of the interior of Algeria, Tunisia,
and Western Egypt, south to Nubia and Sennaar.
The great folio work of Geoffrey St.-Hilaire and Frédéric Cuvier
entitled ‘Histoire Naturelle des Mammifères,’ which was issued in
livraisons from 1824 to 1842, contains a long series of coloured
figures of mammals, mostly taken from examples living in the well-known
Menagerie attached to the Jardin des Plantes. Amongst these in
the seventy-second livraison, published in 1842, were the first
descriptions and figures given of both sexes of the present Gazelle,
from examples stated to have been brought from Sennaar by Burton.
They had lived in the Menagerie, we are told, two years, and had bred
a young one, which resembled its parents in most particulars. The
appropriate scientific name “leptoceros,” from the long thin
horns, had been given to this species, we are informed, by Georges
Cuvier, and was adopted by the authors of the work referred to, who,
however, called it at the head of their article, after their usual
fashion, only by the French name “Antilope à longues cornes.”
Very little more information was acquired concerning this Gazelle for
many years. Most of the systematists were entirely unacquainted with
it, and could only quote the original descriptions. Sundevall and Gray
considered it to be merely a variety of Gazella dorcas. Rüppell,
during his extensive travels in East Africa, seems never to have come
across it, and does not mention it in any of his publications.
The first author after its describers to recognize its existence
was Heuglin, who in 1877, in the second volume of his ‘Reise in
Nordost-Afrika,’ writes of this species, the name of which he had
previously misapplied to another Gazelle, and gives a coloured figure
of its head and figures of two pairs of its horns. Heuglin met with
G. leptoceros in the Libyan desert of Egypt, near the Natron
Lakes and the Fayoum, where he states its Arabic name is “Abu el haráb.”
Sir Victor Brooke had never seen specimens of this Gazelle, and in his
‘Monograph’ relies mainly upon Heuglin’s description.
So matters remained until recent years, when examples of this Gazelle,
or of a very closely allied form, turned up unexpectedly from a new
quarter.
Loche, Lataste, and other authorities on the zoology of Algeria had
mentioned the existence far in the interior of that country of an
Antelope called “El Rim,” and examples of the horns of a problematical
Gazelle called “El Reem” had been brought to England from the shops at
Biskra. In 1894 an enthusiastic sportsman and naturalist, Sir Edmund
Loder, F.Z.S., resolved to make a serious attempt to discover this
mysterious animal, and proceeded to Algeria for that purpose. We cannot
do better than transcribe for our readers Sir Edmund’s own account of
the results of this successful expedition, which was read before the
Zoological Society of London on June 5th, 1894:—
“Seventeen years ago (in 1877) I bought in the bazaar at
Biskra several pairs of Gazelle horns. They obviously belonged
to three species: Gazella dorcas, called by the Arabs
‘Rezal’; Gazella cuvieri, which they call ‘Admi’; and a
third called ‘Reem,’ which I was not able to identify with any
described species. All these horns were on frontal bones only.
It is very rarely that the Arabs bring in any whole skulls or
skins for sale, and I have never seen anything but frontlets of
the ‘Reem.’
“In 1891 and again in 1893 I went out to Algeria for the purpose
of hunting Mouflon (Ovis tragelaphus).
“In 1877 I had been prevented from going after them except for a
few hours at a time. On these later trips I was more successful
and secured some fine male Mouflon, a female of the large
Mountain Gazelle (Gazella cuvieri), and a few specimens
of Gazella dorcas.
“At Biskra I again found horns of the Reem, but got no
information about it except that it was reported to live in the
sand. I heard a French name for it for the first time, ‘Gazelle
des sables.’
“As my friend Mr. Alfred Pease was spending a second winter at
Biskra and had made the acquaintance of several native hunters,
I requested him to try what he could do to find out the habitat
of the Reem. About Christmas-time last year he wrote to me that
he believed he had reliable information that the Reem was to be
found in the desert near Chegga, only about 50 kilometres south
of Biskra on the caravan-route to Touggourt.
“We made arrangements for a camping trip, and I left England on
February 1st, and started from Biskra with Mr. and Mrs. Alfred
Pease on February 8th of this year.
“After two days’ marching we got to Chegga and made inquiries
respecting the Reem. No one seemed to know anything about the
animal except one Arab, who said that if we went on farther
south we should come to a place called Ain Gebberah, where there
were a few Reem, but if we went on still farther to Hamraia we
should find the Reem in quantities.
“We therefore travelled on for two or three more days until we
came to Hamraia, but on making inquiries about the Reem the
answers were very unsatisfactory. We determined, however, before
giving up the search, to stay here a day to hunt and see what
game there was in this part of the desert.
“In the early morning of the next day Pease started off from
camp with an Arab in one direction, while I went off in the
other. By the evening we had covered a considerable extent of
country and had used our glasses from every available rise in
the ground. We saw several small herds of Gazella dorcas,
but no tracks even of any other Gazelle. We did not seem to be
any nearer to obtaining a Reem than when we started from Biskra.
“At night, when we got back to camp, we were told that a negro
camel-herd had been there during the day, and had said that
we were not at all in the right country for Reem, that he was
well acquainted with the animal and knew where it was to be
found. He came into camp again the next morning and told us
that the Reem had long slender hoofs and tender feet, lived
only in the soft sand, and would be unable to run on hard stony
desert such as that round Hamraia. He said he could take us to
the Reem country, in rolling sand-hills, but we should not be
able to camp very near as there was no water for our horses and
pack-animals.
“We agreed to go with him, and he led us a day’s march still
farther south towards the Oued Souf, and then turned off the
caravan-track to the east and chose a camp in the sand about an
hour and a half from water. (Almost all the water in the desert
is brackish and bad, but the water here was positively nasty.)
“The next morning we left camp very early on horseback, with the
negro on foot and an Arab hunter riding a mule. The negro led
the way at a tremendous pace, keeping up a good trot in the soft
sand and sometimes running fast for a couple of miles without a
stop across the dry arm of a chott, keeping us at a hand-gallop
most of the time.
“After two hours and a half the negro pointed out the first
track of the Reem, which is quite easily to be distinguished
from that of Gazella dorcas from its much greater length.
We now unsaddled the horses, tied them up, and went off in two
parties to hunt for Reem. The negro led the way in front of me,
going slowly and with great caution, as the Reem is extremely
wary and against the nearly white sand can detect a moving
object a long way off. We had not walked very far when we saw
the head of a Reem looking over the top of a sand-ridge at
about 300 yards distance. We stayed for a long time perfectly
still behind a tuft of tall alpha grass, till at last the head
disappeared. As soon as it was out of sight we ran as hard as
we could across the bare sand to the top of the next ridge, and
again sheltered ourselves behind a tuft of alpha. When we looked
out cautiously we saw that the Reem had moved on to another
sand-hill more to our left, and was again showing just the top
of his head over it. We had, however, considerably reduced the
distance. Again he stopped perfectly still for a long time and
then turned and moved off. We ran to another ridge, and I caught
sight of him trotting to the top of the sand-hill beyond at
about 150 yards. At the top he turned and I fired at once and
got him. A lucky shot! as the distance was long for so small an
animal. It was a good male, with horns 13 inches long. I have
not seen any much longer than these.
“After taking the Reem back to the place where we had left the
horses, we started off again, and during the day saw several
small lots containing both males and females (4, 5, and 2), but
did not get a chance of another shot. Pease also saw a few.
“We hunted the sand-hills for two more days; on the third day
our negro guide took us much farther from camp, running before
us with surprising speed and endurance for three and a half
hours before we halted and tied up our horses. In the evening,
after walking all day in a hot sun and on soft sand, he showed
himself still untired and ready to run at the same pace back
again to camp. This remarkable man said that he had lived for
seven years in the desert without sleeping in a house or tent,
and had hardly tasted water, meat, or bread; during the whole
of that time his food consisted of dates and camel’s milk, and
he attributed his strength to this diet. The long distance of
our camp from the sand-hills where the Reem is found was a great
hindrance, as we could not hunt for them at the time they were
feeding. By the time we got to the ground they were already
lying down for the day, generally on the top of the sand-ridges,
and keeping a watchful look-out. We saw several small herds each
day, but neither of us ever got another chance of a shot.
“We were lucky in having calm weather, as a sand-storm in that
country is a very serious matter. The air gets as thick as
during a bad London fog and one cannot see even a few yards
ahead, making it quite impossible to regain camp, all tracks
being blotted out in a few minutes by the wind. Our experience
of sand-storms was limited to one day, our last day
in the desert, luckily for us well outside the region of the
sand-hills, when leaving our caravan behind we rode in 50
kilometres to Biskra in the teeth of a cutting wind filled with
dust and sand, an extremely painful experience; but we were in
no danger of losing our way as we were then on the broad track
worn by the caravans travelling between Biskra and Touggourt.
“The Reem is remarkable for its light and uniform coloration,
the ordinary Gazellemarkings being hardly noticeable. The long
slender hoofs are also very peculiar, reminding one of those
of Tragelaphus spekii, which lives in the swamps on the
borders of lakes and rivers.
“It is quite certain that the Reem can never drink, as there is
no water in this country at all, except in the comparatively
deep wells dug by the natives.
“The following measurements of the male Reem were taken directly
after it was killed:—Height at shoulder 2 ft. 4 in.; girth at
brisket 2 ft. 1 in.; length of horns 13 in. It weighed, after
being brought into camp (without entrails), 34 lb. These are
about the measurements and weight of Gazella dorcas.
“For comparison I give the measurements of a good male
Gazella cuvieri which I killed in the mountains a few
weeks after the Reem:—Height at shoulder 2 ft. 7 in.; girth at
withers 2 ft. 8½ in.; weight without entrails 58 lb.
“As to the distribution of these species, I may say that
Gazella cuvieri is found entirely in the mountains, never
down in the true desert. It climbs like a Chamois to the tops of
the highest mountains in the rockiest ground, and is often found
in the juniper-forests on the mountain-slopes. These are also
the haunts of the Mouflon, the two animals being constantly seen
on the same ground.
“Gazella dorcas is found all over the hard stony desert
and also on the foot-hills, so that it sometimes overlaps the
range of the Admi. I have seen a few in the sand-hills, the true
country of the Reem; but I believe that still farther south
it is not found, its place being taken entirely by the Reem.
I quite believe the statement of the natives that the Reem is
never found off the soft sand.”
On his return home Sir Edmund Loder submitted his series of specimens
of the Gazelles obtained during this and his former journeys in Algeria
to Thomas, who, at the same meeting of the Zoological Society at which
Sir Edmund’s notes were read, proposed to refer his examples of the
“Reem” to a new species to be called Gazella loderi, after the
energetic traveller who first made known its existence in Algeria.
Mr. Pease, in his notes on the Antelopes of Eastern Algeria published
in the Zoological Society’s ‘Proceedings’ for 1896, gives us the
following additional information:—
“The Rhime (Gazella loderi), Arab ‘El Rhime,’ Tamahaq
‘Hankut,’ is the common Gazelle of the Sahara. Enormous numbers
are killed by the Arabs in the neighbourhood of Rhadamis and
their skins dressed and dyed with a dye made from the rind of
pomegranates and exported from Rhadamis. They are to be found
throughout the region of the great Ergs and everywhere in the
Sahara sands where there is vegetation sufficient to support
them. The only places where they are to be met with, north of
El Oued Souf, are to the south-west of Bou Chaama and near Sef
el Menadi. A number of their horns are always on sale at Biskra
and sometimes the skins. The male horns of the Rhime sometimes
bear so close a resemblance to those of the Admi (Gazella
cuvieri) that they are often sold and bought as such.”
Mr. Pease also points out that in the “Rhime” the horns in their main
outline form a long evenly tapering V, whilst in the Admi the horns are
more inclined to be parallel, and towards the points usually take an
inward and forward turn, as shown in the diagrams (Fig. 66, a,
b) which by the kindness of the Zoological Society we are able
to reproduce. The annulations, also, Mr. Pease states, are deeper and
more marked in the Admi, and stop more abruptly towards the points than
in the “Rhime.”
Fig. 66.
Diagram of horns of Rhime (a) and Admi (b).
(P. Z. S. 1896, p. 814.)
This Gazelle occurs also in Southern Tunis, as we learn from Mr. J.
S. Whitaker, F.Z.S., who has written the following notes on it in the
Zoological Society’s ‘Proceedings’:—
“This pale desert Gazelle is known to the Tunisian Arabs by
the name of ‘Ghazel abied’ or ‘Resêl abied,’ meaning the White
Gazelle, its Algerian name ‘Reem’ or ‘Rim’ being apparently
unknown in Tunis.
“It seems to be a true desert species, never occurring out of
the sand-dune country, where it replaces G. dorcas;
and while the home of the latter species is the semi-desert
country, with its vast stony plains, covered with scanty scrub
vegetation, the habitat of G. loderi is undoubtedly the
more arid region of sand wastes further south.
“Herr Spatz, who has resided for several years in the south of
Tunis, and is well acquainted with this Gazelle, informs me
that it is common in the inland country of the extreme south
of the Regency, being first met with at about 25 to 30 miles
south of the Chott Djerid. In the districts where it occurs it
is plentiful, and is generally to be found in small herds; but
owing to its very pale colour, which harmonizes so well with
that of the desert surroundings, it is not easily distinguished
at a distance, and being, moreover, extremely shy and wary, a
near approach is not often possible. The nomad Arabs, however,
who are nearly all sportsmen, kill a good many, and every year
some 500 to 600 pairs of horns of this species are brought by
the caravans coming from the interior to Gabes, where they find
a ready sale among the French soldiery.
“Herr Spatz confirms what Sir Edmund Loder says of this species
never drinking, and, as to its food, says it subsists on the
leaves and berries of the few desert plants to be found in the
sand wastes. The female of G. loderi, according to Spatz,
often has two young ones at a birth, differing in this
respect from G. dorcas, which seems to have but one.
“So good a description of G. loderi has been given by Mr.
Thomas (P. Z. S. 1894, p. 470), that I can add nothing thereto,
except it be merely to say that the coat of this Gazelle is
extremely fine and short-haired, and that in the specimens which
I have the knee-brushes are so slightly developed as to be
scarcely noticeable or worthy of the name.”
In the spring of 1895 Sclater was in Egypt, and convinced himself
that besides G. dorcas, of which there were many specimens in
the Zoological Gardens at Gizeh, there were examples of both sexes of
another species belonging to the group of G. leptoceros and
G. cuvieri, stated to have been obtained from the Arabs of the
Western Desert (cf. P. Z. S. 1895, p. 400). On receipt in London
of a skin and skull of this Gazelle subsequently sent to him by Mr.
Jennings-Bramley, Sclater, after comparing it with typical specimens of
Gazella loderi in the British Museum, pronounced them to be of
the same species. Mr. Jennings-Bramley also supplied Sclater with some
excellent notes on the mode of capture of this Gazelle by the Arabs
of the Western Desert of Egypt, from which we extract the following
passages:—
“On the 27th of June, 1895, I started from the Pyramids in
order, if possible, to catch some living specimens of Loder’s
Gazelle (Gazella loderi), known to the Arabs as ‘Rasal
Abiad’ (the White Gazelle), which the shikaries whom I took with
me reported to be found in the desert at some thirty or forty
miles distant from Cairo.
“Leaving at 4 P.M. on the 27th, we started, taking a
south-easterly direction. We travelled till 12 that night, and
at 4 next morning resumed our march. Soon after the sun had
risen, one of the shikaries, pointing to the ground, showed
what he made out to be the spoor, evidently but lately made, of
a fine male Loder’s Gazelle. This, being larger than that of
the Dorcas Gazelle, is very easily recognizable; the bluntness
of the hoofs in the case of Loder’s Gazelle shows a marked
difference. About 12 o’clock one of the camel-men called out
that a Gazelle could be seen ahead, but the many heaps of white
stones, scattered all over the desert, are so deceiving at a
little distance that both shikaries shook their heads.
“The camel-man, however, in this case proved to be correct,
as we soon noticed the Gazelle walking leisurely away. It
disappeared behind a mound of sand, where it must have remained,
for, on reaching the place about half an hour later, we were
surprised to come suddenly on the Gazelle, now only some 200
yards off. It was a fine female, very white in colour. Not
wishing to disturb any others that might be near, I did not
fire. We found, however, that it was alone. At 12 o’clock or
thereabouts we came upon the skirt of the plateau, from which
the Fayoum can be seen, and here the shikaries decided to turn
back, as they said we had passed the ‘White Gazelle ground’; so,
after returning about two miles, we set up the tents and waited
for the evening, the sun being so hot that it was impossible to
continue our search.
“During the afternoon the two shikaries constructed traps, which
we set in the evening.
“The Gazelle trap, except the small hemp-platted rope, is
made entirely from the date-palm. Taking the long leaves, the
shikarie first constructs by platting them together a deep ring,
about 3 inches in diameter and about 4 inches deep: it should,
in fact, fit well into a golf-hole and make its walls secure. He
now takes an old stalk from which the dates have been picked,
and separating about twenty of the fibres which compose it,
and run its whole length, he twists them into a rude bracelet
about three inches in diameter. Then taking three more fibres,
in place of twine, he binds the ring securely; the ring or
bracelet has then a form much resembling a diminutive ‘Ringold’
ring. The shikarie now breaks off the points of the date-thorns
until he has about twenty-five of them 2 inches in length;
these he pushes through the fibrous sides of the ring until all
the points meet in the centre, so that when finished this ring
has much the appearance of a small sieve. All the thorn-points
overlap slightly in the centre of the ring. This ring, holding
all the thorns, the deep ring of platted leaves, and a soft
thick hemp rope, made by the Arab himself, by the ordinary
three-plat from raw hemp (this rope, being soft, not only binds
itself more securely to the Gazelle, but does not cut the skin
when drawn tight), attached to a date-stick about a yard in
length, are all the implements that an Arab requires to catch a
Gazelle.
“Starting in the evening for the lower ground, which is studded
with small bushes (for when pitching the tents we purposely
kept at a good distance from the feeding-ground), we soon found
spoor, but none very promising; a buck and two does had been
there two nights before. A small desert plant, much resembling
our English Red Cranesbill (Geranium sanguineum), was
pointed out to me by the Arabs as a favourite food of the
Gazelles. Finding a spot where the spoor led to one of these
plants, and the plant evidently having been nibbled at, we
decided to put a trap near it. The Arab sat down and made a
hole, using his deep ring to keep its sandy walls intact, so
that he now had a hole resembling exactly in size and depth a
golf-hole with basket-work sides, within four or five inches of
the plant.
“Taking now the thorny ring he places it on the hole, which it
should exactly cap. He now powders up some camel-dung and drops
it carefully over the thorns in the ring, which being close
together hold it up, so that soon nothing can be seen of the
thorns. The use of the dried dung is, to hold up the sand which
hides the trap. The hemp rope, now made into a slip-noose, is
put round the top ring, and the stick to which it is attached
buried in the sand. The whole is now carefully covered with
sand. One of the shikaries laid his traps so successfully that
it was almost impossible to find one again unless a Gazelle was
caught in it. The marks like those of a Gazelle made by the
fingers over the trap add to the deception. It is curious to
remark that a Gazelle will rarely walk over an impression left
by either beast or man in the sand.
“When the Gazelle comes in the evening to feed, its foot slips
through the top ring in the centre where the thorns meet, and so
to the bottom of the hole. The top ring is now fixed round the
Gazelle’s leg, at the height of the depth of the hole, the spiky
thorns entering the skin. This ring also holds up the hemp rope,
which the Gazelle, in endeavouring to kick off the thorny ring
that pricks it, draws tight, generally over the knee.
“The Gazelle starts off, dragging after it the date-stick,
attached to the rope. The swinging stick makes it impossible for
the animal to get away at any pace, as, twisting round one leg
or the other, it throws the Gazelle to the ground continually.
“The spoor of the trapped Gazelle with the marks of the swinging
stick are easily found, and the animal tracked down until in
sight, when a trained greyhound will soon catch and hold it
until his master comes up.
“During November and December the Gazelles are caught when fawns
by trained hounds, and this is the simplest method; but it can
only be practised during two months, as it takes a very good dog
to catch a Gazelle when more than this age.
“During the eight days I was in the desert, though unsuccessful
in trapping any, I saw several very fine specimens of Loder’s
Gazelle.”
In August 1896 a fine adult living female of this Gazelle was received
by the Society as a present from Mr. A. R. Birdwood, of Cairo—no
doubt obtained in the same locality as that explored by Mr. Bramley.
Mr. Birdwood wrote subsequently to Sclater concerning this Gazelle as
follows:—
“I am pleased that you have found the Gazelle a real acquisition
to your Gardens. I succeeded in securing you a very fine male
the other day, but it died almost at once from the effects of
the trap used by the Bedouins!
“With regard to the statement that this Gazelle does not drink
water, my theory is that it may be true that water is not always
obtainable where it is, and that in that case it makes shift
with the succulent desert plants that are to be found even
in the most arid, seemingly waterless, and barren plains! Of
these desert plants, I have collected more than sixty varieties
from the limestone hills of Mariout, in the arid stretches
running from Wady Natron to Wady Siwa, and in the still more
unfavourable ground of the dunes that intersect the road running
from Fayoum to the oases of Farafseh and Dakleh. All have the
same characteristic succulence, and one, known to the Bedouins
as ‘broth of the Gazelle’ (which looks more like a bundle of dry
thorns than anything else), is most delightfully aromatic (when
snapped off) as well as succulent! These seeming deserts after a
rain are plains of verdure, but in a few months return to their
primitive wildness.”
So far as we know, besides the original specimens of G.
leptoceros received at Paris in 1884, the female presented to the
Zoological Society by Mr. Birdwood is the only example of this Gazelle
that has reached the Menageries of Europe alive. By the kindness of
the Zoological Society we are able to give a copy of Mr. Smit’s drawing
of the head of this animal.
Fig. 67.
Front view of head of a female Loder’s Gazelle.
(P.Z.S. 1896, p. 781.)
But the identity of the Egyptian Gazella leptoceros with the
Algerian G. loderi is perhaps not yet exactly certain, although
we have combined the English name of the latter with the scientific
name of the former.
On comparing specimens from Tunis and Algeria with others from Egypt,
the size of the former is slightly greater, the markings are even less
defined than in Egyptian examples, the horns are less closely ringed,
the nasal bones are markedly longer, the nasal opening is both longer
and broader, and the premaxillæ articulate less broadly with the sides
of the nasal bones.
An old male is 26 inches in height at the withers, and the
skull-measurements of the type are:—Basal length 6·75 inches, greatest
breadth 3·35, muzzle to orbit 4.
These differences seem to be quite constant, so far as we have
materials for comparison, and we therefore think that as the Algerian
form has had a name given to it, it may be provisionally retained as a
subspecies, at least until these characters are shown to be variable.
The accompanying figure, for the use of which we are indebted to the
kindness of the Zoological Society, gives a side view of the skull and
horns of the Algerian form.
Fig. 68.
Skull of Gazella leptoceros loderi, ♂.
(P.Z.S. 1894, p. 471.)
Our representations of this Gazelle (Plate LXIII.) have been prepared
by Mr. Smit—that of the male (front figure) from a mounted specimen in
the British Museum obtained by Mr. J. I. S. Whitaker in the Tunisian
Sahara, and presented by him in 1894; that of the female from the
example from Egypt living in the Zoological Society’s Gardens.
In the British Museum are likewise the typical skin and horns of
Gazella loderi obtained by Sir Edmund Loder in the desert
about a hundred miles south of Biskra, some frontlets and horns from
Biskra, presented by Mr. Rowland Ward, and a skin and skull of a female
from Tunis, presented by Mr. J. I. S. Whitaker along with the male
now mounted. The example of Gazella leptoceros typica sent to
Sclater by Mr. Birdwood is also now in the National Collection. We have
also to thank Dr. J. Anderson, F.Z.S., for the loan of a skin and skull
of an old male of the Egyptian form of this Gazelle obtained near the
Natron Lakes in Egypt.
May, 1898.
THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LXIV.
Wolf del J Smit lith
Hanhart imp.
The Isabella Gazelle.
GAZELLA ISABELLA.
Published by R.H. Porter.
Antilope dorcas, Licht. Darst. Säug. pl. v. (1827)?
Gazella dorcas, Blanf. Zool. Abyss, p. 261, pl. i.
fig. 1 (1870).
Gazella isabella, Gray, Ann. Mag. N. H. (1) xviii.
pp. 214 & 231 (1846); id. Knowsl. Men. p. 4 (1850);
id. P. Z. S. 1850, p. 113; id. Cat. Ung. B. M. p.
57 (1852); Gerr. Cat. Bones Mamm. B. M. p. 233 (1862);
Fitz. & Heugl. SB. Wien, liv. pt. 1, p. 591 (1866);
Fitz. SB. Wien, lix. pt. 1, p. 158 (1869); Gray,
Cat. Rum. B. M. p. 38 (1872); id. Hand-l. Rum. B. M. p.
107 (1873); Brooke, P. Z. S. 1873, p. 539; Huet,
Bull. Soc. Acclim. 1887, p. 65; W. Scl. Cat. Mamm. Calc.
Mus. ii. p. 157 (1891); Ward, Horn Meas. (1) p. 116
(1892), (2) p. 158 (1896).
Antilope isidis, Sund. Pecora, K. Vet.-Ak. Handl.
1845, p. 267 (1847); id. Hornschuch’s Transl., Arch. Skand.
Beitr. ii. p. 263; Reprint, p. 83 (1848).
Height at withers about 25 inches. General colour pale fawn, rather
variable in tone, sometimes tending towards brownish. Light lateral
band very indistinct; dark band generally fawn like the back,
occasionally darker, almost smoky brown. Central dark facial band deep
rufous, a darker nasal patch often developing in old individuals. Light
facial streak well defined, white. Pygal band almost obsolete, little
or not darker than the back.
Skull rather variable in the shapes of the nasal bones and premaxillæ.
That of a male measures 6·55 inches in basal length, greatest breadth
3·1, muzzle to orbit 3·65.
Horns of male, as well figured by Blanford under the name of G.
dorcas, evenly diverging and curving backwards for four-fifths
their length, their tips strongly bent inwards and upwards nearly or
quite to a right angle.
Female. Similar to the male, but the horns slender, scarcely
ridged, their tips curved inwards rather than upwards; in length nearly
equal to those of the male.
Hab. Coast-lands of the Red Sea from Suakin to Massoua,
and over the interior to Bogos, Barca, and Taka.
It is possible that the Gazelles described and figured by Lichtenstein
in the first part of his ‘Darstellung der Thiere’ as “Antilope
dorcas,” which were stated to have been procured by Hemprich
and Ehrenberg in Sennaar, may have belonged to the present species.
Sundevall certainly considered them to be referable to a species
distinct from the true Gazella dorcas, and proposed to call them
“isidis,” from Lichtenstein’s vernacular name “Isis Antelope.”
But this identification is by no means certain, and, at all events, the
name “isabella,” under which this Gazelle was shortly diagnosed
by the late Dr. Gray in 1846, will take precedence of Sundevall’s
appellation. Gray’s description is very short, and does not allude
to the shape of the horns, which are one of the most characteristic
features of this species. His type specimen is still in the British
Museum. It is an immature male, mounted, and stated to have been
received from “Abyssinia,” though Gray in later papers gives “Egypt”
and “Cordofan” as the localities for his G. isabella.
Heuglin, in his various memoirs on the Antelopes of N.E. Africa, did
not keep G. isabella separate from G. dorcas, and united
their localities. Sir Victor Brooke, in his monograph of the Gazelles,
though he divides them and says that “amongst the smaller Gazelles no
two species could produce two more dissimilar animals than typical
specimens of G. dorcas and G. isabella,” states his
conviction that “every intermediate degree between them will be found
represented in intermediate localities.” It is indeed true that G.
isabella is a very inconstant species and requires further careful
study.
There can be no doubt that Dr. Blanford’s Gazella dorcas, in his
volume on the ‘Geology and Zoology of the Abyssinian Expedition,’ is
what we here call G. isabella. The figure of its horns (op.
cit. plate i. fig. 1) shows the characteristic twist inwards at the
upper end. Moreover, a skull of a male (from Zoulla) and a skull and
skin of a female (from Amba), obtained by him during the expedition,
and now in the British Museum, are evidently referable here. Mr. W. L.
Sclater has also catalogued four heads in the Calcutta Museum, obtained
by Mr. Blanford on the same occasion, as G. Isabella. Mr.
Blanford gives us the following field-notes on the present species:—
“So far as my observation extends, neither this nor Bennett’s
Gazelle are ever seen in large flocks, like the animals of the
Springbok group. Usually both are seen solitary or in parties
of from two to five together, inhabiting thin bushes, generally
on broken ground. They feed much upon the leaves of bushes.
The male has a peculiar habit when surprised of standing still
and uttering a short sharp cry. Like most Antelopes, they keep
much to the neighbourhood of some particular spot. After long
observation, I am convinced that Bennett’s Gazelle never drinks,
and all that I could ascertain of the present Gazelle leads to
the same conclusion in its case.”
In our efforts to obtain further information about the Isabella
Gazelle, we did not fail to apply to the officers of the Anglo-Egyptian
garrison at Suakin for a set of specimens of it for the National
Collection. In reply to our requests Major Sparkes, Surgeon-Capt.
Fleming, and Lieut. Carleton were kind enough to send to the British
Museum five examples of it; but we cannot say that the examination
of these specimens has enabled us altogether to understand this very
difficult species. Of the five examples from that locality, three have
and two have not a black nasal patch, while the dark lateral band in
some is fairly distinct and in others almost obsolete. It is thus
evident that these characters, of systematic importance elsewhere, are
not, in G. isabella, even of local constancy.
Among the Gazelles registered in the Zoological Society’s ‘List of
Animals’ (1896) as received during the past twelve years there have
been several which, doubtless, should have been referred to the present
species, but have been entered under Gazella dorcas. Amongst
these may be specified an example presented by Commander W. Crofton,
R.N., in July 1890 (specimen e), a female presented by Col.
Holled Smith, C.B., in July 1892 (specimen g), and a pair
(h, i) received on deposit in May 1894.
After the arrival of these specimens from Suakin, Mr. A. Thomson, the
Head-Keeper, called Sclater’s attention to their differences from the
ordinary G. dorcas. They were of a more reddish colour, and had
a broad and somewhat distinct side-stripe and a blackish nasal spot, in
addition to other smaller differences.
Besides the specimens of this Gazelle in the British Museum which we
have already referred to, there is a mounted male from the Anseba
River, formerly in Sir Victor Brooke’s collection, and presented to
the Museum by Sir Douglas Brooke. We believe that our coloured figure
(Plate LXIV.), which was prepared by Mr. Smit under Sir Victor’s
superintendence, was taken from this specimen.
May, 1898.
Fig. 69. Fig. 69a.
Heads of Isabella Gazelle, ♂ & ♀.
(From specimens in B. M.)
THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LXV
Wolf del. J. Smit lith.
Hanhart imp
The Muscat Gazelle.
GAZELLA MUSCATENSIS.
Published by R. H. Porter.
Gazella muscatensis, Brooke, P. Z. S. 1874, p.
141, pl. xxii.; Scl. List An. Z. S. (8) p. 141 (1883);
id. (9) p. 155 (1896); Lyd. Horns and Hoofs, p.
179 (1893); Thos. P. Z. S. 1894, p. 451.
Size small, height at withers 21–22 inches. General colour dark rufous
fawn, darker than in any other species except G. arabica,
which it much resembles in colour. Light lateral band scarcely or not
perceptible; dark lateral band blackish, its upper edge little defined.
Central facial band dark rufous, a distinct blackish patch over the
nasals; light facial streak narrow, well defined, dark band below it
not defined from the general colour of the cheeks. Knee-tufts present,
brownish. Limbs darker in colour than usual, being only white on the
inner sides of the forearms and thighs.
Skull very similar to that of G. isabella. Premaxillæ scarcely
touching nasals. Basal length in an old female 5·7 inches, greatest
breadth 2·9, muzzle to orbit 3·6.
Horns of males curved like those of G. isabella, but decidedly
shorter, not or little longer than the skull.
Female. Similar to the male, but the horns slender, scarcely
ringed, nearly as long as those of the other sex.
Hab. Oman, Eastern Arabia.
On the 15th of August, 1873, the Zoological Society of London received
as a present from Major C. B. Euan Smith (now Col. Sir Charles B.
Euan Smith, K.C.B.) a male Gazelle which he had brought with him
from Muscat. On September 20th of the same year a female, obviously
of the same species and obtained at the same place, was received by
the Society on deposit from Mrs. Harris, then of Limefield, Kirkby
Lonsdale. Sir Victor Brooke having then lately published his well-known
monograph of the Gazelles in the Zoological Society’s ‘Proceedings,’
and being specially interested in the group, Sclater lost no time in
calling Sir Victor’s attention to these animals, with which he was much
delighted. Sir Victor described them as belonging to a new species at
the meeting of the Zoological Society on Feb. 27, 1874, under the name
Gazella muscatensis, and pointed out the clear differences which
separated them from G. arabica, which up to that time he had
believed to be the only Gazelle met with in any part of Arabia.
Fig. 70. Fig. 70 a.
Heads of Muscat Gazelle, ♂ & ♀.
(From specimens in B. M.)
Instead of the massive, nearly straight, non-lyrate horns of G.
arabica, Sir Victor showed that the new species had rather slender
horns, compressed from side to side and distinctly lyrate, with their
points turned boldly forwards and inwards. In general appearance also
the Muscat Gazelles differed from G. arabica in their long and
soft coats of a silvery-grey colour, instead of the short close-set
pelage of a rich grizzled bay. From G. dorcas, to which they
bore more resemblance, the Muscat species was recognizable by its
smaller size, its different colour, and by the intensity of the facial
and lateral markings.
Sir Victor’s paper on this new Gazelle was illustrated in the
‘Proceedings’ by a good coloured plate drawn by Keulemans, in which,
however, the general colour is made rather too dark.
In 1874 a second male specimen of this well-marked species was
presented to the Zoological Society’s Menagerie by Mr. J. H.
Bainbridge, and in October 1881 a pair of the same Gazelle were
presented by the late Lord Lilford. These last bred a young one, which
was born in the Society’s Gardens on the 6th of March, 1882.
No more examples of the Muscat Gazelle reached the Regent’s Park after
this date until 1894, when a female of this species was obtained
“in exchange,” and a pair were received “on deposit” from the Hon.
Walter Rothschild, F.Z.S. The male of this pair is still living in the
Society’s Menagerie.
The only other specimens of the Muscat Gazelle ever received in Europe,
so far as we know, are five examples in the British Museum, presented
to that Institution by Dr. A. S. G. Jayakar, of whose many and valuable
contributions to science we have already spoken[14]. Among the several
consignments of the Mammals of Oman sent home by Dr. Jayakar, of which
Thomas has given an account in the Zoological Society’s ‘Proceedings’
for 1894, were five examples of this Gazelle collected in 1892 and
1893 in several localities in Oman—Khode and Barkah-al-moze, and in
Sharkeeyeh, the eastern part of that country. These specimens agree
very closely with the type of the species as described by Sir Victor
Brooke, which is also in the National Collection.
Our figures of both sexes of this Gazelle (Plate LXV.) have been
prepared by Mr. Smit from the specimens in the British Museum.
May, 1898.
THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LXVI.
Wolf del. J. Smit lith.
Hanhart imp.
Heuglin’s Gazelle.
GAZELLA TILONURA.
Published by R.H.Porter.
Antilope melanura, Heugl. Ant. u. Büff. N.O.-Afr.
(N. Act. Leop. xxx. pt. 2) p. 6 (1863) (nec Bechstein,
1799).
Gazella melanura, Fitz, SB. Wien, lix. pt. 1, p.
159 (1869).
Antilope tilonura, Heugl. Reise Weiss. Nil, p. 315
(1869); id. Reise N.O.-Afr. ii. p. 101 (1877).
Gazella tilonura, Ward, Horn Meas. (1) p. 126
(1892), (2) p. 170 (1896); Lyd. Horns and Hoofs, p. 233
(1893).
Gazella lævipes, Brooke, P. Z. S. 1873, p. 541
(nec Sund.).
Vernacular Name:—Tel-badu in Tigré
(Heuglin).
Height at withers about 27 inches. General colour deep sandy. Central
facial band but little more rufous than the back; no black patch on
muzzle. Light facial streak scarcely or not perceptible on sides of
muzzle; the area round the eye dull whitish, not sharply defined. Back
of ears scarcely lighter than nape. Light lateral band present, not
strongly defined. Dark lateral band black, strongly marked, though
narrower than in G. thomsoni; a sandy line present between it
and the white of the belly. No dark pygal band. Tail sandy at base, the
remainder black. Knee-brushes present, dark sandy.
Horns not, or little, longer than the head, lyrate, parallel at base,
curving outwards above and then abruptly twisted inwards towards each
other at the tip, the ends each forming a sharp hook, similar to that
found in G. soemmerringi, but even more strongly bent inwards.
Hab. Bogosland, North-east Africa.
Fig. 71. Fig. 72.
Heads of Heuglin’s Gazelle, ♂ & ♀.
(From specimens in B. M.)
What little we know of this Gazelle is chiefly due to the researches
of the late Baron Theodor von Heuglin, an energetic collector and
observer of the Mammals and Birds of North-eastern Africa, whose name
we have already had frequent occasion to mention in the pages of this
work. In the absence of any better designation, we have selected
“Heuglin’s Gazelle” as its English name, which is so far applicable
that, besides being its first describer, Heuglin is the only naturalist
that has recorded observations on it as met with in its native wilds.
Heuglin passed several months in the fertile territory of Bogos, north
of Abyssinia (now, we believe, included in the Italian colony of
“Eritrea”), when attached to the German expedition sent out in search
of the much-lamented traveller Dr. Eduard Vogel. He thoroughly explored
this country, which is traversed by the River Anseba, and discovered
many new birds and mammals, which were subsequently described in his
various works. Amongst the mammals was the present species of Gazelle,
which he met with only “on the bushy plains round Ain-Saba from 3000
to 5000 feet above the sea-level, in small families of from three to
six individuals.” In his original description Heuglin called this
Gazelle Antilope melanura, but subsequently altered its specific
name to “tilonura,” there having been already an Antilope
melanura of Bechstein, which term is, however, a useless synonym of
the Oribi (Ourebia scoparia). We have not been able to discover
what the term “tilonura” means, but follow the change, which has
been adopted by Sir Victor Brooke and other authors.
Little more, we regret to say, can be told of this beautiful species,
which is readily distinguishable amongst its congeners by its broad
black lateral stripe and lyre-shaped horns with incurved points. Sir
Victor Brooke gave a figure of it from a stuffed specimen in his own
collection to illustrate his article on the Gazelles in the Zoological
Society’s ‘Proceedings’ for 1873. Our figure (Plate LXVI.), which was
prepared by Smit under the direction of Sir Victor Brooke, was probably
taken from the same specimen, now in the British Museum, to which it
has been presented by Sir Douglas Brooke. It was obtained in Bogosland
by Essler about 1872. Four other examples of this Gazelle procured
at the same time by the same collector are also in the National
Collection. From two of these the accompanying illustrations of the
head and horns (figs. 71 & 72, p. 160) have been prepared by Mr. Smit.
May, 1898.
THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LXVII.
Wolf del. J. Smit lith.
Hanhart imp.
The Red-fronted Gazelle.
GAZELLA RUFIFRONS.
Published by R. H Porter
Le Kevel, F. Cuv. H. N. Mamm. (fol.) i. livr. 1,
pl. 368 (1818); Corine, ii. livr. 36, pl. 369 (1822), and
Corine jeune, iv. livr. 72, pl. 370 (1842).
Gazella rufifrons, Gray, Ann. Mag. N. H. (1)
xviii. pp. 214 & 231 (1846); id. Knowsl. Men. p. 5,
pl. iv. (1850); id. P. Z. S. 1850, p. 115; id.
Cat. Ung. B. M. p. 60 (1852); id. Cat. Rum. B. M.
p. 39 (1872); id. Hand-l. Rum. B. M. p. 108 (1873);
Brooke, P. Z. S. 1873, p. 540; Scl. List An. Z. S.
(8) p. 140 (1883); Lyd. Horns and Hoofs, p. 232 (1893);
Ward, Horn Meas. (2) p. 159 (1896).
Antilope lævipes, Sund. Pecora, K. Vet.-Ak. Handl.
1845, p. 266 (1847); id. Hornschuch’s Transl., Arch.
Skand. Beitr. ii. p. 262; Reprint, p. 82 (1848) (ex Kevel
and Corine, F. Cuv., nec Buff.); Wagn.
Schr. Säug. Suppl. v. p. 404 (1855).
Gazella lævipes senegalensis, Fitz. SB. Wien, lix.
p. 159 (1869).
Vernacular Name:—Seni, on the Gambia
(Whitfield fide Gray).
Size medium, form comparatively rather stout. General colour deep
sandy rufous, brightening into rich rufous on the forehead and
muzzle. Nose-spot blackish. White facial streaks well defined, dark
cheek-stripes rufous. Light lateral band broad, sandy buff, about the
colour of the shoulders, sharply defined from the colour of the back;
dark lateral band narrow, black, sharply defined, very prominent,
succeeded below by a narrow edging of sandy. Knee-tufts absent. Tail
blackish, except just at the base above, where it is sandy.
Skull of medium build; nasals rather broad and short, broadened behind;
nasal opening long and narrow, the upper line of the premaxillæ
straighter and less concave than usual. Dimensions of a slightly
immature male:—Basal length 7 inches, greatest breadth 3, muzzle to
orbit 3·95.
Horns rather short in proportion to the size of the animal, evenly
divergent, slightly curved backwards below and forwards above, heavily
ringed except for the terminal two or three inches.
Female. Similar to the male, but the horns straight, slender,
and less ringed; those of an adult rather less than six inches in
length.
The existence of a Gazelle of the group allied to Gazella dorcas
in West Africa was first made known to us by the authors of the great
folio work called ‘Histoire Naturelle des Mammifères,’ issued at Paris,
in which the figures were taken mostly from living specimens. In one
of the early livraisons of this publication, in which French names
only are primarily used, this species was referred to the “Kevel” of
Buffon, and under this name a young male was figured, stated to have
been brought to France from Senegal. In a later livraison two young
specimens of the same species, also from Senegal, were figured as
the “Corine” of Buffon, which was declared to be identical with the
“Kevel.” We have, however, already shown (under the head of Gazella
dorcas) that both these terms of Buffon are referable to the
last-named species, and that neither these terms nor the scientific
names founded upon them can be properly used for any other species.
Hence it follows that the first scientific name that can be employed
for this Gazelle is Gazella rufifrons of Gray, under which term
it was curtly described by that author in the ‘Annals and Magazine of
Natural History’ for 1846. Shortly after that period the same species
was figured in ‘Gleanings from the Knowsley Menagerie’ by Waterhouse
Hawkins, whose well-drawn plate contains portraits of two males, a
female, and a young one of the present species.
As the drawings in the ‘Gleanings’ were not in all cases taken from
animals living in Lord Derby’s Menagerie, some of them having been
prepared from specimens in the British Museum, it is nearly certain
that this was the case in the present instance. It will be observed
that Gray in his description mentions almost exactly such a series
as being in the Museum as is drawn in the ‘Gleanings,’ and it is not
probable that a similar set should also have been living at Knowsley at
the same time.
All the specimens mentioned by Gray, with one exception, are still
in the National Collection, and, as “co-types” of the species, show
clearly to what animal the name “rufifrons” should be applied.
In 1847, in his excellent essay on the “Pecora,” the late Professor
Carl J. Sundevall established an “Antilope lævipes” basing it
primarily on the figures of Geoffrey St.-Hilaire and Fr. Cuvier in the
‘Histoire Naturelle des Mammifères,’ of which we have already spoken.
It is obvious, therefore, that Sundevall’s term “lævipes” is
an absolute synonym of “rufifrons,” though he gives as his
principal example a specimen from Sennaar in the Stockholm Museum.
But, nevertheless, there would appear to be a closely allied species
living in East Africa, which Heuglin, in his first work (‘Antilopen
und Büffel’), referred to Antilope leptoceros, but which he
subsequently in 1877 (‘Reise in Nordost-Afrika’) treated of under
Sundevall’s name “Antilope lævipes.” Heuglin states that this
Gazelle, of which the native name is “Abu-el-Harabat,” is found in
Nubia, Kordofan, Sennaar, and Taka, as also near Suakin and on the
plains of the Beni Amer, ascending to a height of about 1500 feet above
the sea-level. Heuglin specially alludes to the want of knee-tufts
in his Antilope lævipes, which is the case also in Gazella
rufifrons. What this East-African Antelope of Sundevall and Heuglin
may be we are quite unable to decide, not having been able to examine
East-African specimens. It is possible, however, that it may be
Gazella rufina, which we shall presently speak of.
Of the examples of this Gazelle formerly in the Knowsley Menagerie
we have already written. The Zoological Society of London have also,
on several occasions, received living examples of this species from
the West Coast of Africa. The first of these recorded of late years
was purchased in August 1865, and the second, a female, in 1869.
In June 1895 a female Gazella rufifrons was placed under
the Society’s care by the Hon. W. Rothschild, F.Z.S., and is still
living in the Gardens. In May of last year a fine living pair of
this species were received by the Zoological Society from a London
dealer and subsequently purchased. It is from this pair that the
accompanying figures of both sexes of this beautiful Gazelle (Plate
LXVII.) have been prepared by Mr. Smit. These animals are still living
in the Society’s Gardens. They stand about 24 inches in height at the
shoulder, the male being slightly the taller of the two. Both male and
female have a slight blackish nose-spot, as shown in our figures. The
knee-brushes are quite imperceptible in these three specimens, and the
knees are perfectly smooth.
May, 1898.
Gazella rufina, Thos. P. Z. S. 1894, p. 467 (fig.,
skull).
Antilope lævipes, Sund. K. Vet.-Ak. Handl. 1845,
p. 266 (1847), form α, ex Sennaar; id. Hornschuch’s
Transl., Arch. Skand. Beitr. ii. p. 262; Reprint, p. 82 (1848);
Heuglin, Ant. u. Büff. N.O.-Afr. (N. Act. Leop. xxx. pt.
2) p. 6; id. Reise N.O.-Afr. ii. p. 100 (1877).
Antilope leptoceros, Heugl. Ant. u. Büff. p. 7
(err.).
Closely similar in all respects to G. rufifrons, but decidedly
larger, the colour throughout particularly rich and brilliant. Light
facial streaks not white but sandy, and little different to the general
colour of the cheeks. In the single specimen known (a tanned skin), the
hairs along the centre of the back and on the sides of the rump are
peculiarly waved, but how far this may be due to the preparation of the
skin we are unable to say. Knee-brushes dull rufous.
Skull conspicuously larger and heavier than that of G.
rufifrons. Anteorbital fossæ larger and deeper. Nasal opening
shorter and broader in proportion to the general size, and the upper
line of the premaxillæ more curved. Basal length of the type, an old
male, (circa) 8·05 inches, greatest breadth 3·86, muzzle to orbit 4·9.
Horns of male short and heavy, their curvature and proportional length
about as in G. rufifrons; those of the type are 11·6 inches in
length on their anterior curve.
Hab. Interior of Algeria (?).
After his return from Algeria in 1894, Sir Edmund Loder, as we have
already stated, placed the whole of his series of specimens of Gazelles
from that country in Thomas’s hands for examination. Besides examples
of the two previously known Algerian species—Gazella dorcas
and G. cuvieri—Thomas found that two other species, hitherto
apparently unrecognized, were represented in the collection. Of one of
these, which Thomas named G. loderi, we have treated under the
head of G. leptoceros. Of the other, to which we now propose to
refer, only a single specimen, consisting of a skin and a skull, was
in the series. This, however, was of so entirely a different character
from the three others above-mentioned that Thomas found it necessary to
refer it to a new species, which he proposed to call G. rufina,
from its generally bright, rich rufous colour. The specimen not having
been obtained in the field, but having been purchased at a shop in
Algiers (in the spring of 1877), cannot have any certain locality
assigned to it; but in all probability it was brought from somewhere
in the interior, as it is hardly likely that such an object would have
been imported into Algiers from a distant country.
Fig. 73.
Skull of Rufous Gazelle.
(P. Z. S. 1894, p. 468.)
There can be no doubt that, as stated above, Gazella rufina
is most nearly allied to G. rufifrons of Senegal, from which,
however, we have already stated its points of difference. Sir Edmund
Loder has had a water-colour drawing of the typical specimen prepared
by Smit, which has much assisted us in our study of it. It is obviously
a larger and more richly coloured animal than G. rufifrons,
and its skull, of which, by the kindness of the Zoological Society,
we are enabled to give the figure that originally appeared in their
‘Proceedings’ (fig. 73, p. 168), is remarkable for its stout and
heavy build and short nasal opening. The only conjecture we can make
respecting this somewhat problematical species is that it may possibly
be the same as Gazella lævipes of Sundevall and Heuglin from
North-east Africa, of which we have spoken in our article on Gazella
rufifrons. It may be remarked that Sundevall, in his account of
Antilope lævipes (K. Vet.-Akad. Handl. 1845), has noted the
existence, in the Paris Museum, of specimens from Algeria of a Gazelle
which he considers identical with his species, form α (from Sennaar),
and which he separates from form β (from Senegal) on account of the
want of the blackish nose-spot. But even if such shall turn out
eventually to be the case, the present species will still retain the
name “rufina,”—“lævipes,” as we have already pointed
out, being correctly treated of as a synonym of G. rufifrons.
Sir Edmund Loder has most liberally presented the typical specimen of
Gazella rufina to the British Museum.
May, 1898.
THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LXVIII
J. Smit lith.
Hanhart imp.
Thomson’s Gazelle.
GAZELLA THOMSONI.
Published by R. H. Porter.
Gazella thomsoni, Günth. Ann. Mag. N. H. (5) xiv.
p. 427 (1884) (fig., horns); Thomson, Masai-land, p. 536
(1885) (fig., horns); Hunter in Willoughby, E. Africa,
p. 289 (1889); Ward, Horn Meas. (1) p. 133 (1892), (2)
p. 171 (1896); True, P. U.S. Nat. Mus. xv. p. 473, pl.
lxxvii. (1892) (Taveta); Lyd. Horns and Hoofs, pp.
236, 239 (1893) (fig., horns); Lugard, E. Africa, i.
p. 534 (1893); Jackson, in Badm. Big Game Shooting,
i. pp. 285 & 298 (1894); Scott Elliot, P. Z. S. 1895,
p. 340; Matsch. Säug. Deutsch-O.-Afr. p. 130 (1895);
Rhoads, P. Ac. Philad. 1896, p. 519; Jackson, P.
Z. S. 1897, p. 434.
Height at shoulders about 25 inches. General colour deep sandy rufous,
all the markings well developed and sharply defined. Central facial
band deeper rufous, a black patch present on the top of the muzzle.
Light facial streaks pure white, extending quite to the muzzle and
surrounding the eye; darker cheek-streaks blackish. Light lateral band
present, though not very much paler than the back. Dark lateral band
deep black, greatly developed, very broad, sharply defined above and
below, extending on to the outer side of the elbow; no sandy streak
between it and the white of the belly. Pygal band small, blackish.
Ears rather short. Tail sandy at its base above, the remainder black.
Knee-brushes present, sandy or whitish.
Skull with short, broad, and quadrangular nasals, nearly as broad as
long; premaxillæ straight, scarcely concave above, broadly articulating
with nasals. Basal length of skull of a male 7·7 inches, greatest
breadth 3·6, muzzle to orbit 4·25.
Horns rather like those of G. bennetti on a large scale, little
divergent, sometimes even quite parallel, evenly but very slightly
curved backwards for seven-eighths of their length, their tips gently
recurved upwards and forwards. In length, over the front curve, they
attain to about 14 or 15 inches, the record being 15½.
Female. Similar to the male, but with the horns rudimentary,
much smaller than in other African Gazelles; only from 3 to 6 inches in
length, of about the thickness of a cedar pencil, smooth and unridged,
and in direction crooked and irregular.
Hab. Interior of British and German East Africa, from
Lake Rudolph south to Irangi.
Fig. 74.
Horns of Thomson’s Gazelle, ♂.
(Ann. Mag. N. H. (5) xiv. p. 427.)
The name of Joseph Thomson, the African traveller, will always rank
among the foremost of those who in the second half of this century have
striven to open the Dark Continent to civilized man, and have lost
their lives at an early age by violence or disease in consequence.
Thomson was, moreover, one of the very few amongst African explorers
who had never shed the blood of a native, nor even, we believe, during
his many journeys, fired a shot in self-defence. Thomson’s name has
been worthily associated with the present Gazelle, of which he was the
discoverer during his expedition through Masai-land to Lake Victoria in
1883 and 1884, and of which he first brought back specimens to Europe.
Thomson, as we are informed by Dr. Günther, who described this Gazelle
as Gazella thomsoni in June 1884 from two frontlets presented by
Thomson to the British Museum, met with it on his way up the country
from the plains near Kilimanjaro to Lake Baringo, at various elevations
under 6000 feet. Dr. Günther, we may remark, in his description and
figure of these horns fell into a not unnatural error in treating the
more slender pair (fig. 74a, p. 172) as those of a female. But,
as we have already stated, the horns are always abnormally small in the
doe of this Gazelle, and sometimes, it is said, altogether wanting. The
slenderer pair of horns shown in Dr. Günther’s figures, which we have
been kindly allowed to reproduce in this work, are, like the stouter
pair, doubtless those of a male.
In his volume ‘Through Masai-land,’ Thomson does not appear to have
made any reference to this Gazelle, except by repeating the figures
of the horns (p. 536) already published by Dr. Günther. Thomson had
intended, we believe, to put his notes on the animals and plants
collected and observed during this expedition into an Appendix, which,
however, from pressure of other matters, was never written.
After Thomson himself, the next earliest information obtained
concerning this Gazelle appears to be that collected by Sir John
Willoughby’s hunting-party in 1886–87. In the Appendix to ‘East-Africa
and its Big Game,’ Mr. Hunter writes of it as follows:—
“This Gazelle, discovered by Mr. J. Thomson during his trip
through Masai-land in 1883, was found in large numbers in the
plains in the Masai country to the south-west of Kilimanjaro,
and we also came across it on the borders of the Masai country
at the south end of Kyulu mountain, but it is not met with on
the south side of the mountain between these two points. I
have seen these Gazelles mixing with Gazella granti,
the female of which, at long range, though larger, is easily
mistaken for a male G. thomsoni, both having the broad
black stripe on the side. They are generally seen in small herds
of one male to about ten females.”
In the first volume of ‘Big Game Shooting,’ of the Badminton Library,
Mr. F. J. Jackson, than whom no one can be better qualified to speak
of East-African Antelopes, gives us his experiences with the present
species in the following words:—
Fig. 75.
Front view of head of Thomson’s Gazelle, ♀.
(Neumann’s ‘Elephant-Hunting,’ p. 11.)
“In habits G. thomsoni is very like G. granti,
but, as a rule, is found in rather larger herds. Single bucks
of this species are, however, more often seen than single bucks
of G. granti. At Lake Naivasha, in July 1890, I saw a
large herd of some sixty head, composed entirely of does, and in
the same place, in September of the previous year, I saw a herd
of some thirty or forty beasts, every one of which was a buck;
but I do not think that this can be taken as evidence that the
bucks and does separate at certain seasons of the year, as on
the same days on which I saw these two herds I also saw others
in which the bucks and does were together. Thomson’s Gazelle
is a confiding little beast, and, except in places close to a
well-beaten caravan-route, where it has been constantly shot at,
can be easily approached within 120 yards with ordinary care
and perseverance, even in the most open and covertless spots.
These beasts appear to be confined almost entirely to the Masai
country, as I have not heard of their having been seen east of
the Sigarari plains to the south of Kilimanjaro, or south of
the Useri river and the headwaters of the Tsavo. I saw none at
Njemps near Lake Baringo, or in Turkwel and Ngaboto in the Suk
country, though G. granti was plentiful in all these
places.”
Writing subsequently in the Zoological Society’s ‘Proceedings’ on the
Antelopes of the Mau District of British East Africa, Mr. Jackson says
that this Gazelle does not, as he believes, extend beyond a few miles
north of Lake Nakuru. He adds that “the females are horned,
whatever may be said to the contrary.” With this view Mr. Arthur H.
Neumann, one of our most recent explorers in British East Africa,
quite agrees. In his lately published volume on ‘Elephant-Hunting’ in
that Protectorate, Mr. Neumann gives a figure of the head of a female
Thomson’s Gazelle, which, by his kindness and that of his publishers,
Messrs. Rowland Ward & Co., we are enabled to reproduce (fig. 75,
p. 174): this shows that the horns are present in that sex of G.
thomsoni, though in a much more dwarfed condition than in most of
its allies. Mr. Neumann also claims to have met with this Gazelle much
further north than its range is usually held to extend. This was in the
district of Kisima, south of the Lorogi Mountains and north of Lake
Naivasha.
Col. Lugard, who has had great experience in East-African
game-shooting, has stated[15] that he had never met with a horned
female of Thomson’s Gazelle. A letter lately received from our
much-valued correspondent, Mr. S. L. Hinde of the B.E.A. Medical
Service, in response to enquiries on this point, endeavours to explain
this diversity of opinion as follows:—
“With reference to the statement that the female Thomson’s
Gazelle has no horns, I can, perhaps, give some explanation. The
horns of the female of this species (see the skulls given by me
to the British Museum) are very frail, crooked, and generally
malformed. A good pair would be about five inches long; but
a very slight blow will break or knock off these horns. Four
or five females of this Gazelle that I have shot have knocked
off one or both horns when falling to the shot or in their
subsequent struggles.
“A doe of this species born in the fort at Kikuyu developed
horns; but in play with the rest of the herd of five, knocked
them off when they were not more than two inches long, and
when I last saw her there were two warty scars where the horns
had been. I should think that a similar accident is probably a
very common occurrence among the wild herds; so much so, that I
should not be surprised to see a herd of does ‘without horns.’
The yearling fawns running with their mothers would have horns
not more than half an inch long, and therefore invisible. If a
man, for any reason, were to shoot a doe out of such a herd he
would probably choose the largest animal. Afterwards, if the
question were raised, he would say that he saw a herd of does of
Thomson’s Gazelle absolutely hornless, and on shooting one found
there were only little marks on the head where the horns would
have been if the animal had had any.
“I have myself seen hundreds of these Gazelles in Ukambaui, some
without horns, some with one, and some with both horns. Of those
I have shot or seen shot myself, two were without horns, one
had one horn about three inches long, and four had both horns
averaging three and a half inches in length, while two had horns
about three-quarters of an inch long.”
Passing on to German East Africa we find, from Dr. Matschie’s volume
on the Mammals of that country, that Thomson’s Gazelle was met with by
Herr Oscar Neumann at various points on his journey north from Tanga
to the Victoria Lake. Mount Gurui, Lake Manyara, Ndalalani on the
Natron Lake, and the district between Guasso Nyiro and Ngare Dobasch
are specially mentioned, but north and west of the latter locality Herr
Neumann did not find it. It was also obtained near Mount Meru by Herr
v. Höhnel, and in Northern Irambi by Herr Stuhlmann.
We are not aware that examples of Thomson’s Gazelle have ever been
brought to Europe alive; but it would appear that young individuals
of this species are often captured and kept in confinement in British
East Africa. The late Capt. B. L. Sclater, R.E., who made the road from
Kibwesi to Port Victoria in 1895–97, in his letters written home refers
to several such cases, and Lieut. G. E. Smith, R.E., who was second in
command of Capt. Sclater’s party, kindly sends us the following notes
about them:—“Early in January 1896 Capt. Sclater obtained from the
Masai two young Thomson’s Gazelles, which were fed by hand and throve
well. They became quite tame and used to run about the camp and play
with a puppy. One of them subsequently ran away, but the other remained
with the camping-party for nearly a year.” At Kikuyu, Lieut. G. E.
Smith saw a pair of Thomson’s Gazelles then fully grown, having been in
possession of Mr. Hall, the Resident, for more than two years. The buck
was rather fierce and apt to attack natives with his horns. Major Eric
Smith, we are told, also generally had two or three of these Gazelles
scampering about his station at Naivasha very tame.
Our figure of the male of this Antelope (Plate LXVIII.) has been
prepared by Mr. Smit from a mounted specimen in the British Museum
presented by Mr. F. J. Jackson. There are also in the Museum a second
mounted specimen of a male presented by Mr. H. C. V. Hunter and the
skull of a male from Lake Naivasha presented by Col. Lugard. Besides
these the Museum contains two frontlets with horns, being the typical
specimens obtained by Thomson, and some skins and skulls of both sexes
from Machakos, presented by Mr. S. L. Hinde, as already mentioned in
his letter.
May, 1898.
THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL LXIX
Wolf del J Smit lith
Hanhart imp
Grant’s Gazelle.
GAZELLA GRANTI.
Published by R. H. Porter
New Antelope, Ugogo, Speke, Journ. of Disc. p. 61
(1863).
Antilope soemmerringii?, Speke, P. Z. S. 1863, p.
3 (Ugogo).
Gazella granti, Brooke, P. Z. S. 1872, p. 601, pl.
xli.; id. P. Z. S. 1873, p. 550; Scl. P. Z. S.
1875, p. 527, pl. lix. (Viv. Soc. Zool.); Brooke, P. Z.
S. 1878, p. 723 (figs., head); Scl. List An. Z. S. (8)
p. 142 (1883); Pagenst. JB. Mus. Hamb. ii. p. 38 (1884);
Johnston, Kilimanjaro Exp. p. 394 (1886); Hunter,
in Willoughby, E. Africa, p. 289 (1889); Flow. & Lyd.
Mamm. p. 342, fig. 2 (head) (1891); Ward, Horn Meas. (1)
p. 104 (1892), (2) p. 148 (1896); True, P. U. S. Nat.
Mus. xv. p. 473 (1892); Lyd. Horns and Hoofs, p. 236
(1893); Lugard, E. Afr. i. p. 534 (1893); Jackson,
in Badm. Big Game Shooting, i. p. 298 (1894); id. P. Z.
S. 1897, p. 453; Matsch. Säug. Deutsch-Ost-Afr. p. 131
(1895); Donaldson Smith, P. Z. S. 1895, p. 868; A.
Neumann, Elephant-Hunting in E. Africa, pp. 9, 10 (figs.,
horns, ♂ ♀) (1898).
Vernacular Names:—Swara (Jackson) and
Njéra (Stuhlmann) in Swahili.
Size large; height at withers about 34 inches. Fur close and short.
General colour fawn, rather variable in tone. Lateral bands, both
light and dark, usually very indistinct, often scarcely perceptible;
but, on the other hand, occasionally well developed, especially in
young animals. Central facial band richer fawn, approaching rufous;
a brownish spot present on the muzzle. Light facial streaks white,
sharply defined, running up over the eyes to the horns. Below these
the dark facial bands are almost imperceptible, scarcely or not at
all darker than the fawn-coloured cheeks and neck. Rump with the
white of the hams very broad, extended upwards, and uniting across
the base of the tail, so that the latter is quite separated from the
dark body-colour; laterally the white penetrates angularly into the
body-colour, overhanging the top of the pygal band, which is generally
well-defined. Outer sides of limbs fawn, without blacker markings.
Knee-brushes present, dark fawn. Tail above white for its basal half;
black and crested terminally.
Skull stout and heavy, nasal opening broad. In that of an adult male
the basal length is 9·75 inches, greatest breadth 4·4, muzzle to orbit
5·3.
Horns very long, longer and more powerful than in any other Gazelle;
evenly but slightly curved backwards below, and gently recurved
forwards terminally; sometimes but slightly divergent, but more often,
especially in specimens from Kilimanjaro, they spread widely above,
approaching each other again at their tips. Their section at base is
a long oval, very different from the nearly circular section found in
G. soemmerringi.
Female. Similar to the male, but the horns slender, nearly
circular in section, more strongly ridged than in the females of most
Gazelles; about two-thirds in length of those of the male.
Hab. Eastern Africa, from the district of Lake Rudolph,
southwards to Ugogo.
Grant’s Gazelle, which has been appropriately named after one of its
discoverers, is pre-eminent, even in this ornamental genus, for its
size and elegance, and is, in fact, generally allowed to be one of the
most beautiful species of the whole group of Antelopes. Speke and Grant
left Zanzibar on the well-known expedition during which the efflux of
the Nile from Lake Victoria was discovered, in September 1860. Starting
from Bagamoyo on the opposite coast, and passing through Usagara,
they arrived about two months later in Ugogo, then under the rule of
a native chief called Magomba. It was in December 1860 during their
stay at this place, where they were long detained by the drunken chief
and his wazir, that Speke first met with the present Antelope. In the
‘Journal’ of his travels Speke tells us that while kept waiting to
arrange the amount of his “hongo” he took the time out in the jungles
very profitably, “killing a fine buck and doe Antelope of an unknown
species.” “These animals,” he continues, “are of much about the same
size and shape as the common Indian Antelope, and like them roam about
in large herds, the most marked difference between the two being in
the shape of their horns, and in their colour, in which in both sexes
the Ugogo Antelopes rather resemble the Gazella picticaudata of
Tibet, except that the former have dark markings on the face.”
Fig. 76.
Grant’s Gazelle, Ugogo.
(From Speke’s ‘Journal of Discovery,’ p. 61.)
The original woodcut of Speke’s ‘Journal,’ drawn by Wolf, as shown
by his initials, we have now the pleasure of reproducing by the kind
favour of the publishers of that work. It was no doubt executed under
Speke’s direction, and, although not quite satisfactory according to
our present knowledge of the animal, gives several views of the shape
and size of the horns of Grant’s Gazelle.
Although Speke in his ‘Journal’ writes of the Ugogo Antelope as being
undoubtedly new, he was at first evidently by no means certain about
this point, as in a letter addressed to Sclater from Kazeh, in February
1861, he referred it doubtfully to Gazella soemmerringi. But in
a footnote to this letter (which was published in the ‘Proceedings’ of
the Zoological Society for January 1863) Sclater stated his conviction
that, so far as could be determined from the rough sketch of the horns
which accompanied the letter, the Ugogo Antelope was certainly new, and
he added that the late Dr. Gray was of the same opinion.
Fig. 77. Fig. 78.
Heads of Grant’s Gazelle, ♂ & ♀.
(From Mr. Jackson’s specimens.)
The box containing the specimens of the new Gazelle from Ugogo
having been unfortunately lost on its journey to the coast, Sclater
was unable to give any account of this animal in his paper on the
Mammals collected and observed during the East-African Expedition,
in the ‘Proceedings’ of the Zoological Society for 1864. The subject
therefore was delayed until 1872, when Sir Victor Brooke, who was at
that time busy upon the Antelopes, obtained from Col. Grant and Capt.
Speke the careful sketches of the heads and skins of this animal which
the travellers had made in their note-books. The examination of these
sketches confirmed Brooke in the opinion that the Antelope represented
by them was undoubtedly new to science; and consequently on April 16th
of that year Sir Victor read a communication to the Zoological Society
in which he proposed to name the new Gazelle after Grant, Speke’s
name in this group of animals having been already commemorated by the
Gazella spekei of Blyth and the Tragelaphus spekei of
Sclater. Sir Victor gave as good a description of the new Antelope
as he could from the notes before him, especially alluding to the
extraordinary development of its horns, which attained dimensions
nearly double those of any other Gazelle known to him. Brooke’s
paper, which is accompanied by a beautiful coloured figure of the new
Antelope, prepared by Wolf from Speke’s sketches, states that Col.
Grant, who had supplied him with copious extracts from his note-books,
informed him that this species was only met with during their
expedition in Western Kinyenye, in Ugogo. The country inhabited by it
he described as low-lying sandy plains, dotted over in some places with
euphorbias, dwarf acacias, and stunted baobabs. The chief peculiarity
of this district, owing doubtless to its comparatively low level, was
the great accumulation of salt, which had of course a marked effect
on the vegetation. Water at all times of the year was very scarce
there, and often entirely absent, the little found being brackish and
undrinkable.
In 1875 the Zoological Society received as a present from Sir John
Kirk, then British Consul-General at Zanzibar, a living female Grant’s
Gazelle, which, however, was unfortunately in very poor condition
and died shortly after its arrival in London. The acquisition of
this animal was announced by Sclater in a report on the additions to
the Society’s Menagerie read on November 2nd of that year, and was
accompanied by a figure of it drawn from the stuffed specimen by Mr.
Smit. So far as we know, this is the only individual of Grant’s Gazelle
that has ever reached Europe alive.
It will be observed that the original place of discovery of Grant’s
Gazelle was in what is now German East Africa. In this country,
according to Herr Matschie, it has an extensive range over the whole
western portion of the colony, extending up to Mpapwa, in which
district several sportsmen have met with it, and through Irangi on to
Lake Victoria on the borders of British territory. Over this country it
has been found in many localities by Fischer, Neumann, and Stuhlmann.
Throughout these districts it appears to resort principally, as stated
by Grant, to the more open sandy plains, which are thinly covered with
euphorbias and other trees, especially where a saline vegetation is
prevalent.
In the eastern districts of British East Africa, Grant’s Gazelle
appears to be not less prevalent in similar spots. Mr. Hunter, in
his Appendix to Willoughby’s ‘East Africa,’ tells us that during his
expedition in 1888 it was found to be common everywhere in the open
plains near Kilimanjaro, one male being generally accompanied by from
10 to 15 females. It was at that time most common in the direction
of Useri. The longest pair of horns obtained by the party measured
30 inches in length, but 27 inches were considered to constitute a
big head. The best female’s head obtained measured 17 inches along
the inside curve. Dr. Abbott, during his expedition to Kilimanjaro,
as recorded by Mr. True, obtained a good series of specimens of this
Antelope, which are now in the United States National Museum. Capt. F.
D. Lugard, in his volumes on ‘The Rise of our East-African Empire,’
writes of Grant’s Gazelle as being “a model of symmetry,” while “its
large and massive horns are most beautiful in their curve and are
carried most gracefully.” He continues as follows:—
“Grant’s Gazelle is always found on the open plains and in
rocky ground far from water, and never near forest. Both sexes
are horned; the female carries thin but long horns (up to 17
inches in length), the points, as is the case in all horned
female Antelopes, turning inwards, the curve being more or
less lyre-shaped. I have weighed a male and found it weigh 115
lbs. without the stomach; female 65 lbs. The horns of the male
measure up to 30 inches and are about 7 inches in circumference
at the base. They are annulated, black in colour, and bend
backwards and then forwards at the tip. Anything above 25 inches
would be a ‘good head.’”
Another excellent authority on the Antelopes of British East Africa,
Mr. F. J. Jackson, in a recent article on the subject, writes as
follows:—
“Grant’s Gazelle ranges north into Turkwel and the Sak country,
but is not found on the Mau plateau. At Njemps and Baringo, and
in Turkwel, this Gazelle is considerably smaller than those
found further south at Naivasha and on the Athi plains. At
Njemps I shot the largest buck out of a herd of thirty, in which
there were three or four other bucks. It was an old beast, in
good condition, but only weighed 135 lbs. with horns 20 inches.
To show the differences in size I append some measurements for
comparison:—
|
G. granti, ♂.
Njemps
(21.9.96). |
G. granti, ♂ (two).
Gil-Gil River,
Lake Naivasha
(2.1.96). |
G. granti, ♂.
Gil-Gil River,
Lake Naivasha
(4.4.96). |
|
ft. |
in. |
ft. |
in. |
ft. |
in. |
ft. |
in. |
| Total length |
5 |
3 |
5 |
8 |
5 |
7 |
5 |
7 |
| Height at shoulder |
2 |
11 |
3 |
1½ |
3 |
2½ |
3 |
0½ |
| Depth of chest |
1 |
1½ |
1 |
3 |
1 |
4 |
1 |
3 |
| Circumference of chest |
2 |
9 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
| „ haunch |
3 |
0 |
— |
— |
3 |
5 |
| „ loins |
2 |
3 |
2 |
9 |
2 |
10 |
2 |
7½ |
| „ throat |
1 |
6 |
1 |
8 |
1 |
8 |
1 |
6 |
| „ neck |
1 |
8 |
2 |
0½ |
2 |
1 |
1 |
10½ |
| Tail |
|
10½ |
|
11 |
|
10 |
|
10 |
| Horns |
|
20 |
|
28¼ |
|
27 |
|
24 |
| Weight |
135 lbs. |
158 lbs. |
167 lbs. |
166 lbs.” |
Dr. Donaldson Smith has recorded the existence of this Gazelle “in
great numbers” all along his route homewards from Lake Rudolph on the
northern bank of the Tana. But these animals may possibly have belonged
to the next species Gazella petersi. Dr. Donaldson Smith also
met with Grant’s Gazelle in the Boran country “a little west of 39°
W.L.,” and found it “extending as far north as 6° N.L.” Mr. Cavendish
likewise obtained examples of this Gazelle during his recent expedition
to Rudolphia.
There is a good mounted specimen of an adult male of this Antelope in
the Gallery of the British Museum, obtained by Mr. F. J. Jackson in the
Kilimanjaro district of British East Africa and presented by him. Mr.
Jackson has also given the Museum a fine skull of an adult male from
the same locality, and has placed at the service of the Museum three
other mounted heads of this Antelope. The National Collection also
contains skulls of an adult pair of Grant’s Gazelle from Kilimanjaro
presented by Mr. W. Carlisle Fraser, and several skulls and skins
of different ages from Machakos, collected and presented by Mr. S.
L. Hinde. Besides these some skulls and skins obtained during the
Cavendish expedition to Lake Rudolph, and presented by Mr. H. S. H.
Cavendish and Mr. H. Andrew, have lately been added to the series.
Our illustration of this beautiful Antelope (Plate LXIX.), which shows
the horns of the male in various attitudes, was prepared by Mr. Wolf
under Sir Victor Brooke’s directions and drawn upon the stone by Mr.
Smit. We are not sure as to the specimens from which it was taken.
September, 1898.
Gazella granti, Peters, MB. Ak. Berl. 1879, p.
832, pl. v. (skull).
Gazella petersi, Günth. Ann. Mag. N. H. (5) xiv.
p. 428 (1884); Lyd. Horns and Hoofs, p. 238 (1893);
Jackson, in Badm. Big Game Shooting, i. p. 299 (1894);
A. Neumann, Elephant-Hunting in E. Africa, pp. 9, 10
(figs., horns, ♂ ♀) (1898).
Gazella grantii var. gelidjiensis, Noack,
Zool. Gart. xxviii. p. 277 (1887).
Vernacular Name:—Sala (Swahili)
(Fischer).
Size large; height at withers about 33 inches. General colour and
markings practically identical with those of the last species,
Gazella granti, with the exception that the white rump-patch
is of much less extent. This patch, which in G. granti is very
broad, and projects prominently forward on each side, overhanging the
dark pygal band, and passes across above the tail, separating that
organ entirely from the dark dorsal colour, is in G. petersi
divided above into two portions by an extension of the body-colour
which runs down on to and along the top of the tail. Laterally the
white is much narrower, and encroaches much less on the body-colour
above, scarcely or not at all overhanging the pygal band.
Skull rather smaller than in G. granti, and the nasal opening
rather narrower. Basal length in a male 9·3 inches, greatest breadth
4·2, muzzle to orbit 5·4.
Horns similar to those of G. granti, but smaller and more
uniformly parallel, never widely divergent above. Horns of female about
two-thirds the length of those of the male, slender and comparatively
straight.
Hab. Coast-districts of British East Africa, from Mombasa
northwards to beyond the Tana.
In a communication made to the Royal Academy of Sciences of Berlin
in October 1879 the former Director of the Berlin Museum, the late
Dr. Wilhelm Peters, gave an account of the specimens of Mammals
collected in East Africa in 1878 by the well-known traveller Dr. G. A.
Fischer. Amongst these were the skull and skin of a young male Gazelle
obtained at Gelidja, near the mouth of the Osi and Tana Rivers, on
June 27th, and stated to be called there by the Swahilis and Wapakomos
“Sala.” Peters added to his paper on this subject an excellent
lithographic plate of the skull and horns in question, which he
referred, without much doubt, to Gazella granti, remarking,
however, that the nose-spot was not well defined, and that the horns
were straight at the base and not curved.
Fig. 79.
Skull and horns of Peters’s Gazelle, ♂.
(From one of Mr. Jackson’s specimens in the British Museum.)
In 1884 Dr. Günther, commenting on Peters’s figure of this supposed
Gazella granti, stated that in his opinion it “clearly belonged
to a distinct species. It resembled somewhat Gazella thomsoni
in the slight degree in which the horns diverge from each other; but
their annulated portion was almost straight, and the annuli themselves
were much further apart, much fewer in number (about twelve), and lower
towards the hinder part of the horn. The base of the bony core showed a
bossy swelling, which was different from that of Gazella granti,
and entirely absent in Gazella thomsoni.” This species Dr.
Günther proposed to call Gazella petersi.
There has, however, been much doubt raised by subsequent authorities
as to the validity of this species, and although we have given a
separate heading to Gazella petersi we have had considerable
hesitation as to whether it ought not to be regarded rather as a local
subspecies of G. granti, to which it is closely allied in all
essential characters. But since we have as yet seen no specimens
absolutely intermediate between the two, so far as the rump-markings
are concerned, we have thought it advisable to keep them provisionally
separate. At the same time we shall be in no way surprised if such
specimens should occur, in which case the two forms will have to be
united. As regards the skulls, no constant or tangible difference
can be made out, although those of G. petersi can usually be
distinguished by their smaller size, narrower nasal opening, and
shorter and less divergent horns.
Mr. F. G. Jackson, in ‘Big Game Shooting,’ gives us the following
account of this Gazelle and his experiences with it:—
“Gazella petersi (known to the Swahilis also as ‘Sala’) may be
a local variety of G. granti rather than a distinct species. It
used to be plentiful at Merereni on the British East African coast, and
is still found further inland in the Galla country. It is certainly a
smaller beast than Gazella granti from Kilimanjaro and Machakos,
but in other respects is almost identical, excepting in the shape and
size of the horns, which I have never known to exceed 22 inches in
length measured along the curve. The horns are also straighter, and
have not nearly such a pronounced backward curve as those of G.
granti, neither do they diverge towards the points so much, being
rarely more than seven or eight inches apart at the widest parts.
Gazella petersi is found in the small open plains and open
scrub.”
In the gallery of the British Museum there is a good mounted specimen
of the adult male of this species, also another younger specimen from
the “Mainland opposite Zanzibar,” and a third from “Mombasa,” besides
two skulls (♂ and ♀) from “South Somaliland,” all presented by Sir
John Kirk. These were formerly labelled G. granti, but must be
referred to G. petersi if the species are kept separate. There
is also in the Museum a fine skin and skull of a male G. petersi
from near Mount Pika-pika, about 40 miles from Mombasa, presented by
Mr. L. E. Caine. It would appear, therefore, that the range of G.
petersi until lately extended all along the coast of British East
Africa, though it has now perhaps been nearly shot out in the southern
parts.
The British Museum has likewise three skulls of this Gazelle from the
Tana River presented by Mr. F. J. Jackson, to whom we are also much
indebted for the loan of two other representative heads of this species
from Merereni, south of Formosa Bay.
September, 1898.
Gazella grantii notata, Thos. Ann. Mag. N. H. (6)
xx. p. 479 (1897); A. Neumann, Elephant-Hunting in E.
Africa, p. 238 (1898).
Only known from a single flat skin, without the head. Fur unusually
long and shaggy. Size about as in G. granti, and general
body-markings as in that species, but all much intensified. Dark and
light lateral bands much longer and broader, the former nearly black
and reaching forwards on to the shoulder, and backwards nearly to the
white rump-mark; the latter pale buff, and succeeded above by a second
dark band, lighter than the main lateral band, but distinctly darker
than the centre of the back. This second dark band united with the
other behind the posterior end of the light band. Pygal band black and
very strongly defined.
Horns said by the discoverer to have been like those of G.
granti.
Hab. Western slope of the Loroghi Mountains, British East
Africa.
In Mr. Arthur H. Neumann’s recently published volume on
‘Elephant-Hunting in East Equatorial Africa’ there will be found an
account of his adventurous journey to Lake Rudolph, during which, on
more than one occasion, he made his camp for some months at El Bogoi,
a place situated east of the Loroghi Mountains, in rather higher
than 1° N. lat., which was a favourite station for elephants. While
at this place in October 1895 Mr. Neumann, accompanied by his native
attendants, made an excursion over the Loroghi range, and encamped
close to the edge of the open country on their western slope, at an
elevation reckoned to be about 5500 feet above the sea-level, at a
place called in the map attached to his narrative Kisima. Here, on
taking a stroll into the open, he “shot a brace” of what he at first
supposed to be Grant’s Gazelles; but on examination he found that they
differed from the Grant’s Gazelles of the other side of the range, and
of everywhere else that he had been, “in having longer hair, and dark
bands on the sides,” while the “shade on the back” was also deeper than
in the common kind. On one of the skins thus obtained and presented
to the British Museum (see fig. 80), Thomas has based his subspecies
“Gazella grantii notata.”
For much the same reasons as in the case of G. petersi, that
is because no intermediate examples were yet known, we decided, when
drawing up our Synopsis of Gazelles (above, p. 69), to give a separate
heading to this form.
Fig. 80.
Skin of the Banded Gazelle.
But since our Synopsis was prepared, Lord Delamere has sent home
some skins which are, to a certain extent, intermediate between
G. granti and G. notata in the development of the dark
markings, and which, therefore, support Thomas’s original view that the
latter should be looked upon as a subspecies of the former. Yet, on the
whole, Lord Delamere’s skins are more like G. granti than G.
notata, especially in the character of their fur, so that they may
be provisionally assigned to the older known form, leaving the exact
status of G. notata to be settled when further materials are
available.
Thomas stated, in his original description of G. notata, that
this Gazelle had also been obtained by Mr. H. S. H. Cavendish, that
traveller having supposed that he recognized in the typical skin of
G. notata a Gazelle which he had met with during his journey
to Lake Rudolph. This supposition, however, has been proved to be
mistaken, as the Gazelle in question when brought home turned out
to belong to G. thomsoni—an animal up to that date unknown
to Mr. Cavendish. Mr. Neumann, the donor of the typical skin of
G. notata to the British Museum, remains, therefore, the only
sportsman who has yet met with this handsome form, concerning which we
hope to receive further information before long.
September, 1898.
THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LXX.
Wolf del. J. Smit lith.
Hanhart imp.
Soemmerring’s Gazelle.
GAZELLA SOEMMERRINGI.
Published by R. H. Porter.
Antilope soemmerringii, Cretzschmar, Atl. Rüpp.
Reise, p. 49, pl. xix. (♂) (1826); J. B. Fisch. Syn.
Mamm. p. 462 (1829); Rüpp. N. Wirb. Abyss. p. 25 (1835);
Less. Compl. Buff. x. p. 287 (1836); Waterh. Cat.
Mamm. Mus. Z. S. (2) p. 40 (1838); Laurill. Dict. Univ.
d’H. N. i. p. 616 (1839); Gerv. Dict. Sci. Nat. Suppl. i.
p. 261 (1840); Less. N. Tabl. R. A. Mamm. p. 176 (1842);
Rüpp. Verz. Senck. Mus. p. 38 (1842); Sund. K.
Vet.-Ak. Handl. 1842, p. 201 (1843); Wagn. Schr. Säug.
Suppl. iv. p. 415 (1844), v. p. 405 (1855); Reichenb.
Säug. iii. p. 114, pl. xxxiv. fig. 205 (1845); Schinz,
Syn. Mamm. ii. p. 403 (1845); Sund. Pecora, K. Vet.-Ak.
Handl. 1845, p. 266 (1847); id. Hornschuch’s Transl.,
Arch. Skand. Beitr. ii. p. 262; id. Reprint, p. 82 (1848);
Schinz, Mon. Antil. p. 7, pl. v. (1848); Gieb.
Säug. p. 308 (1853); Heugl. Faun. roth. Meer, Peterm.
Mitth. 1861, p. 16; id. Ant. u. Buff. N.O.-Afr. (N. Act.
Leop. xxx. pt. 2) p. 7 (1863); id. N.O.-Afr. ii. p. 102
(1877); Hartm. Z. Ges. Erdk. Berl. iii. p. 254 (1868).
Gazella soemmerringii, Jard. Nat. Libr. (1) vii.
p. 215, pl. xxviii. (1842); Gray, List Mamm. B. M. p. 161
(1843); id. Ann. Mag. N. H. (1) xviii. p. 231 (1846);
id. Knowsl. Men. p. 5 (1850); id. P. Z. S. 1850, p. 114;
id. Cat. Ung. B. M. p. 59 (1852); Temm. Esq.
Zool. Guin. p. 193 (1853); Scl. P. Z. S. 1867, p. 817,
pl. xxxvii. (yg.); Fitz. SB. Wien, lix. pt. 1, p. 158
(1869); Blanf. Zool. Abyss. p. 260 (1870); Scl.
P. Z. S. 1871, p. 701 (Suez?); Gray, Cat. Rum. B. M.
p. 39 (1872); id. Hand-l. Rum. B. M. p. 107 (1873);
Brooke, P. Z. S. 1873, p. 549; Scl. List An. Z. S.
(8) p. 142 (1883); Lort Phillips, P. Z. S. 1885, p. 932;
Jent. Cat. Ost. Leyd. Mus. (Mus. Pays-Bas, ix.) p. 137
(1887); id. Cat. Mamm. Leyd. Mus. (op. cit. xi.) p. 169 (1892);
Thos. P. Z. S. 1891, p. 210; W. Scl. Cat. Mamm.
Calc. Mus. ii. p. 161 (1891); Scl. P. Z. S. 1892, p. 100;
Swayne, P. Z. S. 1892, p. 305; Jent. Cat. Mamm.
Leyd. Mus. (Mus. Pays-Bas, xi.) p. 169 (1892); Ward,
Horn Meas. (1) p. 108, (2) p. 150 (1896); Lyd. Horns
and Hoofs, p. 236 (fig., head) (1893); Swayne, P. Z.
S. 1895, p. 305 (habits); id. Seventeen Trips to Somaliland,
p. 314 (1895); Donaldson Smith, P. Z. S. 1895, p. 868
(Juba R.); Hoyos, Zu den Aulihan, p. 179, pl. x. fig. 6
(1895); Thos. Ann. Mus. Genov. (2) xvii. p. 107 (1896);
Elliot, Publ. Chicago Mus., Zool. i. p. 122 (1897).
Antilope soemmerringii berberana, Matsch. SB. nat.
Freund. 1893, p. 65; Rhoads, P. Ac. Philad. 1896, p. 519.
Vernacular Names:—Arab or Harab at
Massowa, Bus-Adu in Danakil, Om-Sabah in Arabic
(Heuglin); Aoul of Somalis (Swayne).
Size large, height at withers 35½ inches in an old male of the Somali
subspecies. General colour very pale fawn, and very uniform everywhere,
as there are neither light nor dark lateral bands nor any pygal bands.
Central facial band black or blackish fulvous, contrasting markedly
with the white lateral facial streaks. Dark facial streaks also
black, but very narrow. Sides of muzzle black, continuous with the
central facial band. Back of ears whitish, margined and tipped with
black. White of rump very broad and extended, projecting far into the
body-colour, which it broadly shuts off from the tail. The latter is
white basally, black tufted terminally. Knee-brushes present, whitish
or fawn.
Basal length of skull 8·85 inches, greatest breadth 4·2, muzzle to
orbit 5·4.
Horns long, nearly circular in section, heavily ringed. In the typical
subspecies they are but little divergent for their basal half, but then
curve widely outwards above, their tips being again abruptly hooked
inwards so as to point almost directly towards each other. In the
Somali subspecies their length is greater and their divergence is quite
even, not increasing above, so that their upper portions are not nearly
so widely separated; their tips also hook rather forwards, and not so
directly inwards.
Female similar to the male, but the horns much thinner and less
rough, though almost as long as those of the male. In both of the
subspecies their curvature is closely similar to that found in their
respective males.
Hab. Coastland of Red Sea from Suakin south to Tajurah
(subspecies typica); Northern Somaliland (subspecies
berberana).
This fine Gazelle was one of the many discoveries made in North-east
Africa by the great traveller and naturalist Edouard Rüppell, and
was first described and figured by Cretzschmar in the ‘Atlas’ which
illustrated the zoological portion of Rüppell’s ‘Reise.’ The species
was dedicated to Ritter Samuel Thomas von Soemmerring, on the occasion
of that savant attaining the fiftieth year of his Doctorate—an event
which was celebrated by the Senckenbergian Naturalists’ Society of
Frankfort-on-the-Main on the 7th of April, 1828. The original specimens
were procured by Rüppell on the eastern slope of the Abyssinian
coast-range, and were deposited along with all his other collections
in the Senckenbergian Museum. In a résumé of his knowledge
of the East-African Antelopes contained in a subsequent work on the
Vertebrates of Abyssinia, Rüppell tells us that he only met with this
species in the bush-clad valleys of the Abyssinian coast, but that it
was said to occur also on the large island of Dahalak off Massowah. It
was generally observed in small families, which, however, sometimes
congregated into larger herds.
Fig. 81.
Skull and horns of Gazella soemmerringi typica (male).
(From a specimen in the British Museum.)
Heuglin, another good authority on the animals of North-east Africa,
informs us that this Antelope extends along the coast of the Red Sea
from 20° N. latitude southwards to the Danakil country, and that it is
also found in valleys of the Baraka and Atbara in the interior, and
extends up to the neighbourhood of Berber, but is not so plentiful here
as in the coast-districts.
Dr. W. T. Blanford, who accompanied the British Abyssinian Expedition
of 1867–68 as naturalist, found this Antelope abundant on the coast of
the Red Sea near Annesley Bay and Massowah, but states that it never
ascends the hills. It was met with principally in the low bush and
acacia-scrub in herds varying in size from a few individuals up to
one hundred or more. A very large number, he adds, were shot by the
sportsmen of the Expedition, who found the flesh excellent eating.
Fig. 82a. Fig. 82b.
Horns of Gazella soemmerringi berberana, ♂ & ♀.
(From specimens in the British Museum.)
Examples of Gazella soemmerringi are recorded by Sundevall as
being contained in the extensive collections received by the Stockholm
Museum which were made by the Swedish traveller Hedenborg in Sennaar,
but the exact localities are not specified.
So much is all we have to say about the smaller and typical form
of this species originally discovered by Rüppell. But about the
larger subspecies of Northern Somaliland, which has been named
berberana by Herr Matschie, we are able to give greater details
from information supplied by the many naturalists and sportsmen who
have of late years visited the country which it inhabits. Although it
does not appear that there is any discontinuity between the ranges of
these two forms, and it is quite likely that intermediate specimens may
occur where the two forms meet, we cannot but allow that Herr Matschie
was justified in assigning a subspecific name to the Southern form. Not
only is the latter a larger and finer animal with longer horns, but the
curvature of its horns is, as we have already pointed out, so different
that, so far as our experience goes, there can be no difficulty in
distinguishing the two forms by this character alone.
Capt H. G. C. Swayne, R.E., in his ‘Seventeen Expeditions to
Somaliland,’ writes thus of Gazella soemmerringi:—
“Five years ago, when I was staying in the quarters at Bulhár,
the Aoul could be seen from the bungalow grazing out on
the plain. The Bulhár Maritime Plain used to be full of them,
but they have been so persecuted by sportsmen that they have now
retired to some distance.
“The Aoul weighs about the same as the Gerenúk, but has a
shorter neck and a more clumsy-looking head, and is altogether
a coarser animal. It is a grass-feeder, and lives in the open
plains or in scattered bush, and never in thick jungle, and
prefers tolerably flat ground. The white hind-quarters can be
seen from a great distance, making a herd of Aoul look
like a flock of sheep in the haze of the plains. I have never
seen them in the cedar-forests on the top of Gólis, but in the
hartebeest-ground to the south they are common. They are often
met with in large herds along with the hartebeests, and are very
common all over the Haud and Ogádén and near the Webbe.
“They are, I think, the most stupid and easy to shoot of all
the Somáli Antelopes, and their habits are identical with
those of the Indian Blackbuck, but they are not equal to it
in beauty and grace of movement. Aoul often make long
and high jumps when going away, presumably to look over the
backs of the others; they look something like specimens of the
Cape Springbuck which I have seen in England. I have never
observed them spring vertically to a great height, as the Indian
Blackbuck does. They are inquisitive like the Hartebeests, and
will follow a caravan in the open, and if fired at they make off
across the front, stretching themselves out at racing speed, and
drawing up in a troop now and then to gaze.”
Captain R. H. Light, of the Indian Staff Corps, who visited Somaliland
in 1891, and has kindly furnished us with some field-notes on its
Antelopes, writes that this Gazelle is found there in couples, and
also in herds of fifty or more, and generally frequents plains with
slight coverts. They are not usually difficult of approach, and out of
a large herd he has shot four, one after the other, within a mile of
ground, the herd moving off at every shot, but allowing him to approach
again. At 150 yards distance or so Capt. Light says it is very hard
to distinguish a buck from a doe of this Antelope, the size of the
body being the same, and the slight differences in the thickness of
the horns and neck being hardly perceptible. Their gait is longer and
slower than that of Pelzeln’s Gazelle, but still not awkward like that
of the “Gerenuk” (Lithocranius walleri).
Mr. F. Gillett, F.Z.S., who accompanied Dr. Donaldson Smith during
the first portion of his journey to Lake Rudolph, and made other
expeditions in Somaliland, has favoured us with the following notes on
this species:—
“Gazella soemmerringi is the common Gazelle of the
interior of Somaliland, supplanting the two Gazelles G.
spekei and G. pelzelni, which inhabit the country
lying to the south of the Golis Mountains and the barren ground
along the coast respectively. Its native name is ‘Aoul,’ and it
is found in the open plains, as a rule in herds of from four
to sixty beasts, although occasionally I have come across an
old buck by himself. On July 14th, 1894, I saw a small herd of
these Gazelles about long. 44° 30´ E. and lat. 9° 48´ N., which
is the most northerly point at which I have found them, whilst
to the east they are not met with till even farther south.
Herds of Speke’s Gazelle are seen in company with Soemmerring’s
Gazelle as far south as lat. 9° 6´ N., after which Gazella
soemmerringi is alone found.
“Whilst in the Haud in 1894 I saw Oryx, and Waller’s, Speke’s,
and Soemmerring’s Gazelles all together at the same time. The
Soemmerring’s Gazelles prefer the open plains, although they are
also found in bushy park like country, but never in the Khansa
forests like Gazella walleri. When sighting anything
strange they bunch together and stare; they are the least timid
besides being the most plentiful of the Somali Antelopes, but in
the open plains they will often allow you to walk past them at
200 yards distance, whilst any Oryx that are with them decamp
long before. The horns of the female are much more slender than
those of the male, they are also shorter and more irregular.
“The flesh of this Gazelle is preferred by the Somalis to any
other, and on several occasions I have been asked by sick men
to shoot one for them, especially in cases of fever, when it is
considered to be very strengthening. When in the Arusa Galla
country in 1894–5 I did not come across this Gazelle between
the Webbe Shabeyli and long. 40° 30´ E., lat. 7° N.; in fact
once across the Webbe I did not meet it again till my return to
Somaliland, the country beyond being absolutely unsuited to it.
In the Aulihan district opposite Bari, however, I met with it on
the farther side of the Webbe.
“In February 1897, whilst camping in the Haud along with Mr.
Percy V. Aylmer, we met with examples of this Gazelle at least
35 miles from the nearest water as the crow flies. As it was the
dry season these animals could have obtained no moisture except
dew unless they travelled that distance. Although at present the
most plentiful, this, I fear, will be one of the first of the
Antelopes of Somaliland to disappear, and the Reservation, as
now laid down, will be of little or no use in protecting it.”
To Mr. Alfred E. Pease, M.P., F.Z.S., we are greatly indebted for the
following notes on his experiences with this Antelope.—
“Soemmerring’s Antelope is widely distributed throughout
Somaliland. In the following notes my remarks are confined
to my own personal observations of this species during two
expeditions. The first was in the north-western corner of
the British Somali Protectorate, the second across the Haud
into Ogaden and the country south of Harrar frequented by the
Rer Mellingowr Ogaden. The average height of an adult male
Soemmerring’s Gazelle is about 35 inches at the shoulder, with
a girth behind the elbow of 32 inches. Unfortunately I never
weighed any specimen. In colour they are amongst the most
beautiful of the African Antelopes, and to see large herds of
them moving about as the first bright gleams of the sun in the
early morning touch them is one of the prettiest of the many
charming sights that meets the traveller’s eye in this part of
Africa. Their colour is an extremely rich clear pale orange on
the body, spread evenly over the back, flanks, and running in
narrowing bands down the four legs; this colour is set off by a
wide margin of snowy white, which not only covers the whole of
the belly and inner side of the legs, but which cuts back into
the rump, so that when the Gazelle is standing with its tail
towards you, you see little else but the snowy stern. Their
heads are beautifully marked, the pervading tint forming the
groundwork being of a slightly browner and fainter hue than the
body, relieved by an almost black band running down from between
the horns to the nostrils, and covering both sides of the nose
and facial ridge; a short band, also very distinct, of the same
colour runs down the tear-mark below the eye. In old bucks these
dark stripes are often very nearly jet-black; in younger males
and females the colouring varies from pale to dark brown. The
throat is sometimes white, and when not altogether so, generally
wears a more or less distinct crescent of white about two-thirds
down the lower part of the underside of the neck. Both males
and females carry heavy horns for animals of their size. The
female’s horns are quite as long as, and perhaps slightly longer
in proportion to their age than, the male’s, but they are weaker
and less regular, though almost as deeply notched and annulated
as in the buck. In general form they may be described as lyrate
in a front view; the tips often point exactly towards each
other, being separated sometimes two inches, sometimes even more
than six. Sometimes the tips point backwards, and sometimes
distinctly forwards.
“The ‘Aoul,’ as the Somalis call this Antelope, is almost
ubiquitous in Somaliland. I have seen it within a few hours
of Bulhar and Berbera on the maritime plain, whilst in 1896
we observed herds of it on the prairies to the south of the
Elmas Mountains. Once in the mountains, whether in the ranges
of the Gadabürsi country or of the Golis, you lose it and do
not find it again, unless it be in some interlying plain, till
you reach the region of the Haud. On the great prairies of the
Haud I have seen an astonishing number of great herds from a
single point of view. When travelling with Mr. E. N. Buxton and
Mr. A. E. Leatham we first came on to the great Marar Prairie
these Gazelles were seen in incredible quantities, and not
having been hunted by even the Midgans (who devoted their time
to pursuing the Oryx with their dogs and poisoned arrows) I
found them astonishingly tame, so much so that after securing
two or three specimens I never had the heart to betray their
confidence, and have often walked past them in the thin bush
that lines the northern edge of the plain within 20 paces, and
on some occasions so near that I could almost have touched them
with a long stick. At such times they have just lifted their
heads till I had passed, and on looking back they had resumed
feeding within a minute. I mention this as it is so very much
in contrast with my experience when crossing the Toyoo Plain to
the east in December 1896, when, though there were vast numbers
of them, they were most extraordinarily wild and went off full
gallop if you came within 400 yards of them. This was no doubt
the result of having been shot at by English shikaris, who often
take this route into Ogaden. On the Ogaden side of the Haud we
found them frequently both in the long dhur grass, the home of
the Dibatag (Ammodorcas clarkei), and also in open glades
in the regular bush. When we were west of Milmil we came across
these Gazelles occasionally till we reached the neighbourhood
of the Tug Sulul; but I do not remember seeing them again in
the more broken country that lies west of this Tug, and which
continues practically hilly right up to the mountains of Bourka.
From what I have been able to observe of the habits of this
Antelope, I should think the traveller might expect to find
it in any part of this corner of Africa where there are grass
plains or where the bush is level and not too thick. It seems to
thrive as well at sea-level as on the Haud at an elevation of
5000 feet.
“In the larger herds (say from 40 to 150 or more) the sexes are
generally mixed, with a large preponderance of females. Some
large herds are all females. Small herds may be either mixed,
or all females, or all bucks. I do not call to mind having seen
more than 14 old bucks alone together. The solitaires are, as
a rule, old bucks, though you do not often see one quite alone
at any distance from a herd. I have seen Speke’s Gazelle on the
Toyoo Plain feeding in the same herd as the Aoul, and the latter
are frequently in the company of the Hartebeest. The ‘Aoul’ is,
in my opinion, identical with the Ariel, which is common in
Abyssinia and the neighbourhood of Suakin, but it appears to
diminish in size somewhat to the north.”
Of the typical form of this Antelope the British Museum possesses an
adult male specimen (mounted, but not exhibited), obtained by Esler in
the Bogos country, and purchased in 1873, also a female from Sennaar
received from the Stockholm Museum, in exchange, in 1846—probably one
of those collected by Hedenborg. It has likewise a young male from
Abyssinia procured by Rüppell, the original discoverer of the species,
and received in exchange from the Frankfort Museum; a skull of a
male obtained by Mr. W. Jesse during the Abyssinian Expedition; and
several heads and skins from Suakin collected and presented by Major W.
Sparkes, of the Welsh Regiment, now attached to the Egyptian army.
Of the southern subspecies, Gazella soemmerringi berberana, the
National Collection possesses a stuffed adult male specimen obtained
on the Shebeyli River, Somaliland, and presented by Col. Arthur Paget,
who has also given to the Museum two heads (male and female) from the
Bourdap Mountains in the same country. In the British Museum there
are likewise a mounted head and skins of both sexes of this Antelope
collected by Capt. Swayne in Somaliland and presented by Sclater.
The first living examples of Soemmerring’s Gazelle received by the
Zoological Society were purchased of a dealer in August 1867. The
announcement of their arrival, which appeared in the ‘Proceedings’ for
November 14th of that year, was accompanied by a beautiful lithographic
plate of the young pair drawn by Mr. Wolf. In 1871 a fine young male
example of this Antelope was presented by Mr. Charles McIver, Jun.,
with the information that the specimen had been obtained in the desert
on the Red Sea coast about 100 miles south of Suez. If this was
correct, the range of this Antelope would appear to extend considerably
further north than we know of upon any other authority. Other specimens
of this Antelope were obtained in 1877, 1879, 1892, and 1895, including
a fine pair from Suakin presented by Col. Holled Smith, C.B., in
July 1892. At the present moment, also, there is a fine male of this
Antelope in the Society’s Gardens, obtained by purchase in 1897.
Our representation of this Antelope (Plate LXX.) was drawn by Mr. Wolf
under Sir Victor Brooke’s directions, and put upon the stone by Smit.
It is that of an adult male example, but we unfortunately do not know
from what specimen it was taken.
September, 1898.
THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LXXI
J. Smit del. et lith.
Hanhart imp.
The Red-necked Gazelle.
GAZELLA RUFICOLLIS.
Published by R. H. Porter.
Antilope dama, Licht. Abh. Ak. Berl. 1824, p. 226
(1826) (nec Pall.); id. Darst. Säug. pls. iii.
(ad. & jr. ♂), iv. (♀ & jr.) (1827); Cretzschm. Atl.
Rüpp. Reis. pp. 39 & 43, pls. xiv.-xvi. (1826) (Abyssinia);
H. Sm. Griff. An. K. v. p. 331 (1827) (partim);
Hempr. & Ehr. Symb. Phys., Mamm. pl. vi. (1828), text
(1833) (Dongola); Rüpp. N. Wirb. Abyss. p. 25 (1835);
Waterh. Cat. Mamm. Mus. Z. S. (2) p. 41 (1838);
Rüpp. Verz. Senck. Mus. p. 38 (1842); Sund. K.
Vet.-Ak. Handl. 1842, p. 201 (1843); Wagn. Schr. Säug.,
Suppl. iv. p. 408 (1844), v. p. 404 (1855); Schinz, Syn.
Mamm. ii. p. 424 (1845); id. Mon. Antil. p. 25, pi.
xxvi. (1848); Gieb. Säug. p. 308 (1853); Heugl.
Ant. u. Büff. N.O.-Afr. (N. Act. Leop. xxx. pt. 2) p. 6
(1863); Hartm. Z. Ges. Erdk. Berl. iii. p. 253 (1868);
Heugl. N.O.-Afr. ii. p. 103 (1877).
Gazella dama, Fitz. SB. Wien, lix. pt. 1, p. 158
(1869); Brooke, P. Z. S. 1873, p. 547; Jent. Cat.
Ost. Leyd. Mus. (Mus. Pays-Bas, ix.) p. 137 (1887); id.
Cat. Mamm. Leyd. Mus. (op. cit. xi.) p. 169 (1892);
Lyd. Horns and Hoofs, p. 235 (1893).
Antilope ruficollis, H. Sm. Griff. An. K. iv. p.
205 (1827).
Gazella ruficollis, Gray, Ann. Mag. N. H. (1)
xviii. p. 231 (1846); id. Knowsl. Men. p. 5 (1850);
id. P. Z. S. 1850, p. 114; id. Cat. Ung. B. M.
p. 60 (1862); Temm. Esq. Zool. Guin. p. 193 (1853);
Gray, Cat. Rum. B. M. p. 39 (1872); id. Hand-l.
Rum. B. M. p. 108 (1873); Ward, Horn Meas. (1) p. 117
(1892), (2) p. 159 (1896).
Antilope (Dama) addra, Benn. P. Z. S. 1833, p. 2;
id. Tr. Z. S. i. p. 7 (1833); Less. Compl. Buff.
x. p. 288 (1836); Gerv. Dict. Sci. Nat., Suppl. i. p. 261
(1840); Reichenb. Säug. iii. p. 116, pi. xxxv. fig. 207
(1845).
Antilope dama, var. orientalis, Sund.
Pecora, K. Vet.-Ak. Handl. 1845, p. 266 (1847); id.
Hornschuch’s Transl., Arch. Skand. Beitr. p. 262; id.
Reprint, p. 82 (1848).
Vernacular Names:—Addra in Dongola (Hemprich
& Ehrenberg); Ariel or Rīl in Arabic
(Heuglin).
Size large, form graceful. Colour nearly all over white, the only parts
which are of the usual rufous shade being the neck and anterior back,
the sides and rump gradually shading off into white. Head and ears
white, a faint rufous tinge on the centre line of the face. Neck deep
rufous all round, except for a white spot on its anterior surface.
Lower part of fore legs faintly rufous, rest of limbs and whole of tail
white. Knee-brushes present.
Skull, basal length in an immature male 8·85 inches, greatest breadth
4·15, muzzle to orbit 5·3.
Horns of male thick, curved strongly backwards below, then hooked
inwards and forwards above. Horns of female almost equally long, but
comparatively thin, slightly curved, and not hooked terminally.
Hab. Dongola and Sennaar.
In concluding our account of the true Gazelles we come, at the end
of the list, to a small but attractive group of three species which
are closely related to one another, and take each other’s places as
representatives in the different countries where they have been found.
These three Antelopes are certainly nearly allied, and it is by no
means improbable that, although all the accessible specimens known
to us are distinguishable, intermediate forms will ultimately be
found to link them together. It is especially likely that this will
prove to be the case with the two western species, G. dama and
G. mhorr. All the three species of this group are exceedingly
rare in collections, and we have been able to obtain but very little
information about them, and very little material for comparison, the
British Museum being badly off for specimens of all of them. It is
to be hoped, however, that the prospective opening of the Soudan, by
France on one side and England on the other, will lead to an increase
of our knowledge of this group of Antelopes, and of the many other
interesting forms of the great North-African desert.
We will commence our account of these three Gazelles with the one which
inhabits the eastern part of the Soudan, where our own countrymen may
soon be expected to meet with it.
The first notice of the existence of a species of this form in
North-eastern Africa appears to have been given by Lichtenstein,
who read a paper on the Antelopes of Northern Africa before the
Academy of Sciences of Berlin on March 11th, 1824. Amongst the four
Antelopes discussed in this learned treatise, which was mainly based
upon the specimens sent to the Royal Collections by the well-known
travellers Hemprich and Ehrenberg from Dongola and Sennaar, were
several representatives of the present species which Lichtenstein not
unnaturally referred to the Antilope dama of Pallas. The same
course was pursued by Hemprich and Ehrenberg themselves, who shortly
afterwards published full descriptions and figures of it in their
‘Symbolæ Physicæ.’ They inform us that they met with specimens of this
Antelope in Southern Dongola in the month of July 1822, and hunted it
along with the Addax and Leucoryx, which occurred in the same district.
They found it plentiful in herds and easy of access, even without the
use of horses. Like the other species mentioned, it feeds principally
on the acacias. They did not meet with this Antelope until they arrived
at 20° N. lat. going south, after which they found it abundant. The
Arabs, who much esteem the flesh and sell it when dried, call it
“Addra.” It did not appear to approach the banks of the Nile,
but kept entirely to the desert and to the valleys which traverse it,
especially to the Chor-el-Lebben.
Not far from the same date another distinguished German traveller
and naturalist, Rüppell, whose name we have already had frequent
occasion to mention, also met with this Antelope. Rüppell sent his
specimens to Frankfort-on-the-Main, where they were described and
figured by Cretzschmar on the part of the Senckenbergian Society of
Naturalists in 1826. Cretzschmar also referred these specimens to
Antilope dama; but Hamilton Smith, after examining them in
the Senckenbergian Museum, came to the correct conclusion that they
belonged to a different species, on which he proposed to bestow the
name Antilope ruficollis. We must therefore use Gazella
ruficollis as the correct scientific designation of this animal.
A third German naturalist, Heuglin, who has recorded his experiences
of this species, tells us that he met with it, generally in pairs or
small families, and often mixed up with herds of other Gazelles, in
the desert districts of Dongola and Kordofan, where it is known to the
Arabs as the “Adra” or “Ledra.” From this native name, Bennett, in his
memoir on Gazella mhorr, to which we shall presently refer,
proposed to call the present species Antilope addra, but, as has
been already stated, Hamilton Smith’s name has precedence.
Gazella ruficollis is, we regret to say, represented in the
British Museum by two specimens only, neither of which is suitable
for exhibition in the Gallery. One of these is a stuffed female from
Sennaar, received from the Stockholm Museum, in exchange, in 1846, and
the other an imperfect skin of a male from Kordofan, purchased of a
dealer in 1848.
We are not aware that this Gazelle has ever been brought to Europe
alive.
Our figure (Plate LXXI.) has been drawn from the stuffed female in the
British Museum.
September, 1898.
Le Nanguer, Buff. Hist. Nat. xii. p. 213, pl.
xxxiv. (1764), whence
Antilope dama, Pall. Misc. Zool. p. 5 (1766);
id. Spic. Zool. fasc. i. p. 8 (1767), fasc. xii. p.
13 (1777); Müll. Natursyst. Suppl. p. 53 (1776);
Erxl. Syst. R. A. p. 280 (1777); Zimm. Spec.
Zool. Geogr. p. 541 (1777); id. Geogr. Gesch. ii.
p. 114 (1780); Gatt. Brev. Zool. i. p. 81 (1780);
Herm. Tabl. Affin. Anim. p. 108 (1783); Schreb.
Säug. pl. cclxiv. (1785); Bodd. Elench. Anim. p. 141
(1785); Gmel. Linn. S. N. i. p. 183 (1788); Kerr,
Linn. An. K. p. 308 (1792); Donnd. Zool. Beytr. i.
p. 623 (1792); Link, Beytr. Nat. ii. p. 98 (1795);
Bechst. Syst. Uebers. vierf. Th. ii. p. 643 (1800);
Shaw, Gen. Zool. ii. pt. 2, p. 359 (1801); Turt.
Linn. S. N. i. p. 112 (1802); G. Cuv. Dict. Sci. Nat.
ii. p. 243 (1804); Desm. N. Dict. d’H. N. (1) xv. p.
334, xxiv. Tabl. p. 32 (1804); Tiedem. Zool. i. p. 408
(1808); Licht. Mag. nat. Freund. vi. p. 170 (1814); G.
Fisch. Zoogn. iii. p. 409 (1814); Afz. N. Act. Ups.
vii. p. 220 (1815); Desm. N. Dict. d’H. N. (2) ii. p. 189
(1816); G. Cuv. R. A. i. p. 263 (1817); Goldf.
Schr. Säug. v. p. 1199 (1818); Schinz, Cuv. Thierr. i. p.
394 (1821); Desm. Mamm. ii. p. 458 (1822); H. Sm.
Griff. An. K. iv. p. 206, v. p. 330 (1827); Less. Man.
Mamm. p. 375 (1827); J. B. Fisch. Syn. Mamm. p. 463
(1829); Less. Compl. Buff. x. p. 288 (1836); Oken,
Allg. Nat. vii. p. 1375 (1838); Laurill. Dict. Univ. d’H.
N. i. p. 616 (1839); Less. N. Tabl. R. A., Mamm. p. 177
(1842); Reichenb. Säug. iii. p. 115 (1845).
Cerophorus (Cervicapra) dama, Blainv. Bull. Soc.
Philom. 1816, p. 75.
Cemas dama, Oken, Lehrb. Nat. iii. pt. 2, p. 741
(1816).
Gazella dama, Gray, Ann. Mag. N. H. (1) xviii.
p. 231 (1846); id. Knowsl. Men. p. 5 (1850); id.
P. Z. S. 1850, p. 114; Scl. List An. Z. S. (8) p. 142
(1883); Kohl, Ann. Mus. Wien, i. p. 79, pl. v. fig. 2
(skull) (1886) (partim); Ward, Horn Meas. (1) p. 116
(1892), (2) p. 158 (1896).
Antilope (Dama) nanguer, Benn. P. Z. S. 1833, p.
2; id. Trans. Z. S. i. p. 7 (1833); Gerv. Dict.
Sci. Nat. Suppl. i. p. 261 (1840); Less. N. Tabl. R. A.,
Mamm. p. 177 (1842).
Gazella nanguer, Fitz. SB. Wien, lix. pt. 1, p.
158 (1869).
Antilope mhorr, var. β, Wagn. Schr. Säug. Suppl.
iv. p. 410 (1844), v. p. 404 (1855).
Gazella mohr, Gray, Cat. Rum. B. M. p. 39 (1872)
(partim); Brooke, P. Z. S. 1873, p. 648 (partim).
Antilope dama, var. occidentalis, Sund.
Pecora, K. Vet.-Ak. Handl. 1845, p. 266 (1847); id.
Hornschuch’s Transl., Arch. Skand. Beitr. ii. p. 262; Reprint,
p. 82 (1848).
Vernacular Name:—Nanguer in Senegal
(Buffon).
Size about as in G. ruficollis and G. mhorr. Markings
throughout very much as in the next species, Gazella mhorr,
but the white of the rump-patch, although less than in G.
ruficollis, where it spreads all over the body, is considerably
more extended, uniting on the thighs with the white of the sides of the
belly, and therefore cutting off the dark colour of the outer sides of
the hind limbs from that of the back. Other characters very much as in
G. mhorr.
Passing now to the western end of Northern Africa we find this group
of Antelopes represented by the “Dama” Gazelle, a species which has
been known to naturalists ever since the time of Buffon. By him it
was described and figured in the twelfth volume of his ‘Histoire
Naturelle,’ under the name of “Le Nanguer” the appellation
stated by Adanson to be given to it in Senegal. Upon the “Nanguer” of
Buffon, Pallas in 1766 established his Antilope dama, so that
there can be no question as to Gazella dama being the correct
name of the representative species of this group in Senegal. But
whether Pallas was right in assigning the term “dama” of Pliny
to the present animal is a matter open to much question. The late Mr.
E. T. Bennett has discussed this subject in his article on the Mhorr
Antelope published in the first volume of the Zoological Society’s
‘Transactions,’ to which we may refer our readers. But there can be
little doubt that the ordinary “Dama” of the Romans was not the
present animal, but the well-known Fallow-Deer, Cervus dama.
For many years the naturalists following Buffon and Pallas gave us
no further information concerning this Antelope, and merely copied
what their predecessors had said of it. Sundevall, in his well-known
treatise on the “Pecora,” united the three members of this group
together under “Antilope dama,” designating the forms of
Morocco and Senegal as “var. occidentalis,” and stating that
he had examined a specimen of it in the Frankfort Museum. If the
locality and the references given by Rüppell in his catalogue of the
Senckenbergian Collection are correct, the specimen in that collection
must be the “Mhorr” of Morocco, and not the “Nanguer” of Senegal. We
are told by Gray (‘Gleanings from the Knowsley Menagerie,’ p. 5) that
the Frankfort specimen was originally received from the Zoological
Society of London.
Among the numerous Antelopes procured from the Gambia for the Derby
Menagerie by Lord Derby’s agent Whitfield were several examples of
this species. Dr. Gray, in the letterpress to the ‘Gleanings,’ tells
us that at the time of his writing (April 1850) there was a fine male
of Gazella dama living at Knowsley, and that a female, procured
by the same collector, which died on its passage home, was preserved
in the British Museum. This specimen, a skin of an immature animal, is
still in the Museum, to which it was presented by the Earl of Derby,
and, strange to say, is still the only example of this Antelope in the
National Collection.
In 1865 a pair of this Gazelle (as recorded in the Society’s
‘Proceedings,’ 1865, p. 675) were acquired by the Zoological Society
of London, from the Zoological Gardens, Antwerp. About the same period
Sclater recollects having seen other examples of this Antelope in the
Antwerp Gardens, but does not remember to have noticed them in any
other of the continental Gardens which he has visited from time to time
for many years.
In some MS. notes on the Antelopes of the Gambia which Sir Robert
Llewelyn, K.C.M.G., the Governor of the Colony, has kindly sent to
Sclater, “the Springbuck,” or “Kongko-tong” of the Mandingos, is stated
to be “common all over the south bank of the river.” This “Springbuck”
can be hardly any other Antelope than the present species. If such is
the case, it is remarkable that a beautiful animal, so abundant in a
British Colony a few days’ steam from our shores, should be still so
little known in our Museums and Menageries.
September, 1898.
THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LXXII.
Wolf del. J. Smit lith.
Hanhart imp.
The Mhorr Gazelle.
GAZELLA MHORR.
Published by R. H. Porter.
Nanguer, F. Cuv. H. N. Mamm. (fol.) iv. livr. 67
(1833) (nec Buff.).
Antilope (Dama) mhorr, Benn. P. Z. S. 1833, p.
1 (Mogador); id. Tr. Z. S. i. p. 7, pl. i. (1833);
Gerv. Dict. Sci. Nat. Supp. i. p. 261 (1840).
Antilope mhorr, Waterh. Cat. Mamm. Mus. Z. S.
(2) p. 41 (1838); Rüpp. Verz. Senck. Mus. p. 38 (1842);
Wagn. Schr. Säug. Supp. iv. p. 410 (1844) (partim);
Reichenb. Säug. iii. p. 116, pl. xxxv. fig. 212 (1845);
Schinz, Syn. Mamm. ii. p. 426 (1845); id. Mon.
Antil. p. 25, pl. xxvi. (1848).
Nanger mhorr, Lataste, Mamm. Barb. (Act. Soc.
Linn. Bord. xxxix.) sep. cop. p. 173 (1885).
Antilope mhoks, Less. Compl. Buff. x. p. 288
(1836).
Gazella mohr, Gray, Ann. Mag. N. H. (1) xviii. p.
231 (1846); id. Knowsl. Men. p. 5 (1850); id. P.
Z. S. 1850, p. 114; id. Cat. Ung. B. M. p. 59 (1852);
Gerr. Cat. Bones Mamm. B. M. p. 233 (1862); Fitz.
SB. Wien, lix. pt. 1, p. 158 (1869); Gray, Cat. Rum. B.
M. p. 39 (1872); id. Hand-l. Rum. B. M. p. 108 (1873);
Brooke, P. Z. S. 1873, p. 548 (in part.); Kohl,
Ann. Mus. Wien, i. p. 78 (1886); Flow. & Lyd. Mamm. p.
342 (1891); Jent. Cat. Mamm. Leyd. Mus. (Mus. Pays-Bas,
xi.) p. 168 (1892); Lyd. Horns and Hoofs, p. 235 (1893).
Gazella mohrr, Temm. Esq. Zool. Guin. p. 193
(1853).
Vernacular Name:—Mhorr, in Morocco
(Bennett).
Size large, height of a male not fully adult 35½ inches. General
colour dull rufous or rufous-fawn, becoming a deeper and richer
rufous anteriorly. Face, cheeks, and chin whitish or whitish-fawn,
the forehead beneath the horns and an inconspicuous dark cheek-streak
blackish. Neck deep rufous, a conspicuous white spot on its front
surface. No dark or light lateral bands present, nor pygal bands.
White of belly extending rather high up on the sides, the line of white
passing across the outer sides of the forearms on to the chest, where
it contrasts conspicuously with the dark red of the neck. White of rump
much as in G. soemmerringi, including the tail, and extending
angularly forwards on each side into the body-colour, but not uniting
with the belly-colour across the outer sides of the thighs. All the
boundary-lines between the rufous and white well defined. Knee-brushes
small. Tail white, a small brownish or fawn-coloured tuft at its
extremity.
Horns of male thick, strongly bent backwards below, recurved upwards
and forwards above.
Female. Similar to the male, but horns shorter and thinner.
Hab. South-western Morocco.
The last species of the group, and also of the genus Gazella, is
the Mhorr, the Moroccan representative of the Dama Gazelle, to which,
as we have already stated, it is very closely allied. Indeed, we have
not inconsiderable doubts as to their real specific distinctness.
Southern Morocco and Senegal approach so nearly together that it is not
likely prima facie that the Gazelles of their deserts would be
specifically different.
The well-known zoologist, Mr. E. T. Bennett, who was Secretary to the
Zoological Society of London in its early days, was the first describer
of the “M’horr” as distinct from Gazella dama, and brought
his account of it before a Meeting of that Society on January 8th,
1833. His full memoir on this subject was afterwards published in the
Society’s ‘Transactions,’ where it occupies the first pages of the
first volume of that standard work.
Bennett’s observations were made on two specimens of this Gazelle which
were presented, while living, to the Zoological Society by Mr. E. W.
A. Drummond-Hay, C.M.Z.S., then British Consul-General at Tangier, for
whom they had been procured by Mr. E. W. Willshire, C.M.Z.S., British
Vice-Consul at Mogador. Bennett also had before him a third specimen
in the shape of an imperfect skin of this Antelope, also presented
to the Society by Mr. Drummond-Hay. All these specimens are stated
to have been brought “from the territories of the Sheik of Wednoon,
twelve days’ journey inland from the latter place”; but, in spite of
the expression “inland,” we suppose “Ouednoon,” as it should be more
correctly written, to be the valley of the River Noon in the extreme
southern coast district of Morocco, opposite the Canary Islands.
In the article in question, which is accompanied by an excellent
coloured figure of the “M’hoor,” Bennett informs us that this Antelope
“is regarded in the kingdom of Morocco as an exceedingly rare animal,”
and continues as follows:—
“Mr. Willshire states that the one earliest obtained by him was
the first individual of the race which had been seen in Mogador.
It is highly esteemed, according to Mr. Drummond-Hay, on account
of its producing the bezoars, so precious in Oriental medicine,
which are known in Morocco as the Baid-al-Mhorr, or eggs of the
M’horr. Mr. Hay conjectures that Baid-Mhorr may possibly be the
source whence, rather than from the Persian Pazahar, the name of
Bezoar has sprung. It is pretended that two of these calculous
concretions are met with in the intestines of every individual
of the race, but none were found in that which died in the
Society’s collection, and which, as is stated by Mr. Spooner
and Mr. Langstaff, who examined it after death, agreed in its
visceral anatomy with the Antelopes in general.”
About the same time as the Zoological Society’s specimens arrived in
England it would appear that living examples of the same Antelope
reached the Jardin des Plantes at Paris. One of these, an immature
female, was figured by Geoffrey St.-Hilaire and F. Cuvier on the 375th
plate of their ‘Histoire Naturelle des Mammifères.’ In the letterpress
accompanying this plate we are informed that two young living examples
(male and female) had been received there, and that the female had
lived in good health for two years without changing her colour, only
varying in the size of her body and in the shape of her horns. The
authors inform us that when the “Nanguers” arrived at Paris they had
only very short horns, about 4 or 5 inches in length, which were at
that period strongly and uniformly curved towards the front. The male
having died when young did not change the character of his horns, but
those of the female having had time to develop became recurved behind
and divergent one from the other. These Gazelles had neither tear-bags
nor knee-brushes. When the figure was drawn the female stood about 2
feet 10 inches in height, but seemed to be not fully grown.
The authors of the ‘Histoire Naturelle des Mammifères’ refer these
specimens to the “Nanguer” of Buffon, and do not say from what country
they were received, but from their figure and description there can be
no doubt that they belonged to the Gazella mhorr of Morocco and
not to the true G. dama of Senegal, if these two species are
held to be distinct.
The only example of Gazella mhorr in the British Museum is the
mounted adult male from Morocco presented to the Zoological Society by
Mr. Willshire in 1833, and formerly in that Society’s collection. It is
no doubt the specimen from which Bennett’s figure in the ‘Transactions’
was taken, and is also, we believe, the original of our illustration
(Plate LXXII.), which was put upon the stone by Mr. Smit under the
direction of the late Sir Victor Brooke. Further information concerning
this and other animals of Southern Morocco is much required, but until
the present political conditions of that country are altered we are
hardly likely to obtain it.
September, 1898.