THE

                          BOOK OF ANTELOPES.

                                  BY

              PHILIP LUTLEY SCLATER, M.A., PH.D., F.R.S.,
            SECRETARY TO THE ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF LONDON,

                                  AND

                  OLDFIELD THOMAS, F.Z.S., F.R.G.S.,
     ASSISTANT IN THE ZOOLOGICAL DEPARTMENT OF THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

    [Illustration]

                     IN FOUR VOLUMES (1894–1900).

                               VOL. III.

                                LONDON:
         R. H. PORTER, 7 PRINCES STREET, CAVENDISH SQUARE, W.
                              1897–1898.




  [Illustration: ALERE FLAMMAM.]

                    PRINTED BY TAYLOR AND FRANCIS,
                     RED LION COURT, FLEET STREET.




                               CONTENTS.

                               VOL. III.


                                                                Page

    Subfamily V. ANTILOPINÆ                                        1

    Genus I. ANTILOPE                                              3

    76. THE BLACK-BUCK. _Antilope cervicapra_ (Linn.).
          [Plate XLVII.]                                           5

    Genus II. ÆPYCEROS                                            15

    77. THE PALLAH. _Æpyceros melampus_ (Licht.).
          [Plate XLVIII.]                                         17

    78. THE ANGOLAN PALLAH. _Æ. petersi_, Bocage                  25

    Genus III. SAIGA                                              29

    79. THE SAIGA. _Saiga tatarica_ (Linn.). [Plate XLIX.]        31

    Genus IV. PANTHOLOPS                                          43

    80. THE CHIRU. _Pantholops hodgsoni_ (Abel). [Plate L.]       45

    Genus V. ANTIDORCAS                                           53

    81. THE SPRINGBUCK. _Antidorcas euchore_ (Zimm.).
          [Plate LI.]                                             55

    Genus VI. GAZELLA                                             65

    82. THE TIBETAN GAZELLE. _Gazella picticaudata_ (Hodgs.).
          [Plate LII.]                                            71

    83. PRZEWALSKI’S GAZELLE. _G. przewalskii_, Büchn.
          [Plate LIII.]                                           79

    84. THE MONGOLIAN GAZELLE. _G. gutturosa_ (Pall.).
          [Plate LIV.]                                            83

    85. THE PERSIAN GAZELLE. _G. subgutturosa_ (Güld.).
          [Plate LV.]                                             89

    86. THE MARICA GAZELLE. _G. marica_, Thos. [Plate LVI.]       95

    87. THE DORCAS GAZELLE. _G. dorcas_ (Linn.). [Plate LVII.]    99

    88. THE EDMI GAZELLE. _G. cuvieri_ (Ogilby). [Plate LVIII.]  109

    89. THE ARABIAN GAZELLE. _G. arabica_ (Licht.). [Plate LIX.] 115

    90. THE INDIAN GAZELLE. _G. bennetti_ (Sykes). [Plate LX.]   119

    91. SPEKE’S GAZELLE. _G. spekei_, Blyth. [Plate LXI.]        125

    92. PELZELN’S GAZELLE. _G. pelzelni_, Kohl. [Plate LXII.]    133

    93. LODER’S GAZELLE. _G. leptoceros_ (F. Cuv.).
          [Plate LXIII.]                                         137

    94. THE ISABELLA GAZELLE. _G. isabella_, Gray. [Plate LXIV.] 151

    95. THE MUSCAT GAZELLE. _G. muscatensis_, Brooke.
          [Plate LXV.]                                           155

    96. HEUGLIN’S GAZELLE. _G. tilonura_ (Heugl.). [Plate LXVI.] 159

    97. THE RED-FRONTED GAZELLE. _G. rufifrons_, Gray.
          [Plate LXVII.]                                         163

    98. THE RUFOUS GAZELLE. _G. rufina_, Thos.                   167

    99. THOMSON’S GAZELLE. _G. thomsoni_, Günth. [Plate LXVIII.] 171

    100. GRANT’S GAZELLE. _Gazella granti_, Brooke.
           [Plate LXIX.]                                         179

    101. PETERS’S GAZELLE. _G. petersi_, Günth.                  187

    102. THE BANDED GAZELLE. _G. notata_, Thos.                  191

    103. SOEMMERING’S GAZELLE. _G. soemmerringi_ (Cretzschm.).
           [Plate LXX.]                                          195

    104. THE RED-NECKED GAZELLE. _G. ruficollis_ (Ham. Smith).
           [Plate LXXI.]                                         205

    105. THE DAMA GAZELLE. _G. dama_ (Pall.)                     209

    106. THE MHORR GAZELLE. _G. mhorr_ (Benn.). [Plate LXXII.]   213

    Genus VII. AMMODORCAS                                        217

    107. THE DIBATAG. _Ammodorcas clarkei_ (Thos.).
           [Plate LXXIII.]                                       219

    Genus VIII. LITHOCRANIUS                                     227

    108. THE GERENUK. _Lithocranius walleri_ (Brooke).
           [Plate LXXIV.]                                        229

    Genus IX. DORCOTRAGUS                                        239

    109. THE BEIRA. _Dorcotragus megalotis_ (Menges).
           [Plate LXXV.]                                         241




                         LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

                             IN THE TEXT.

                               VOL. III.


    Fig.                                                        Page

    45. Horns of Black-buck, ♂                                    13

    46. Abnormal horns of female Indian Antelope                  14

    47. Head of Pallah, ♂, front view                             23

    48. Front view of head of Angolan Pallah                      26

    49. Group of Saigas                                           35

    50. Frontlet and horns of Saiga (fossil), ♂                   39

    51. Head of male Saiga in its winter dress                    40

    52. Horns of Chiru                                            48

    53. Horns of Springbuck, ♂ & ♀                                61

    54. Skull and horns of the Tibetan Gazelle                    73

    55. Goa Antelopes on the Donkia Pass                          74

    56. Skull and horns of Mongolian Gazelle                      87

    57. Head of Dorcas Gazelle, ♂                                108

    58. Head of Edmi Gazelle, ♂                                  113

    59. Front view of head of Edmi Gazelle, ♀                    114

    60. Head of Arabian Gazelle                                  117

    61. Head of _Gazella fuscifrons_, ♀                          123

    62. Head of adult male Speke’s Gazelle                       128

    63. Head of adult female Speke’s Gazelle                     129

    64. Head of young male Speke’s Gazelle                       131

    65. Head of Pelzeln’s Gazelle, ♂                             135

    65_a_. Skull of Pelzeln’s Gazelle, ♀                         135

    66. Diagram of horns of Rhime (_a_) and Admi (_b_)           143

    67. Front view of head of a female Loder’s Gazelle           147

    68. Skull of _Gazella leptoceros loderi_, ♂                  148

    69, 69_a_. Heads of Isabella Gazelle, ♂ & ♀                  154

    70, 70_a_. Heads of Muscat Gazelle, ♂ & ♀                    156

    71, 72. Heads of Heuglin’s Gazelle, ♂ & ♀                    160

    73. Skull of Rufous Gazelle                                  168

    74. Horns of Thomson’s Gazelle, ♂                            172

    75. Front view of head of Thomson’s Gazelle, ♀               174

    76. Grant’s Gazelle, Ugogo                                   181

    77, 78. Heads of Grant’s Gazelle, ♂ & ♀                      182

    79. Skull and horns of Peters’s Gazelle, ♂                   188

    80. Skin of the Banded Gazelle                               192

    81. Skull and horns of _Gazella soemmerringi typica_ (male)  197

    82_a_, 82_b_. Skull and horns of _Gazella soemmerringi
          berberana_, ♂ & ♀                                      198

    83. Head of the Dibatag, ♂                                   222

    84. Map of Somaliland (showing the localities of the
          Dibatag)                                               225

    85. Skull of the Gerenuk                                     231

    86. Sketch of Gerenuk, ♂ & ♀, in characteristic attitudes    232

    87. Front view of the head of the Beira                      245




                        THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES.

                               VOL. III.




                      SUBFAMILY V. _ANTILOPINÆ._


_General Characters._--Size medium or small. Muzzle hairy.
Anteorbital glands variable, large in some genera, absent in others.
Tail generally short. Mammæ 2 (4 in _Saiga_).

Skull usually with supraorbital pits, lachrymal vacuities, and
anteorbital fossæ. Molars tall and narrow.

Horns present in the male only, except in _Antidorcas_ and in most
of the species of _Gazella_.

   _Range of Subfamily._ South-eastern Europe, Western and
   Central Asia, Peninsula of India, and the whole of Africa.

The greater part of this subfamily consists of the Gazelles and their
allies, the Saiga, Chiru, Springbuck, Gerenuk, and Dibatag; and with
these, by common consent, are included the Black-buck, the typical
form of the whole group of Antelopes, and the Pallahs. We have also
thought that the anomalous little Antelope known as the Beira would
best be placed in this subfamily, near the Gazelles, in spite of the
superficial resemblance it bears to certain members of the subfamily
_Neotraginæ_.

The present subfamily consists therefore of nine genera, which may be
arranged as follows:--

    A. Horns spirally twisted                          1. ANTILOPE.
    B. Horns curved or straight, not twisted.
      _a._ False hoofs absent                          2. ÆPYCEROS.
      _b._ False hoofs present.
        _a^1._ Horns medium or long, curved.
          _a^2._ Muzzle swollen or elongated.
            _a^3._ Horns medium, lyrate, whitish       3. SAIGA.
            _b^3._ Horns long, slightly curved, black  4. PANTHOLOPS.
          _b^2._ Muzzle slender, normal.
            _a^3._ Neck normal.
              _a^4._ Horns convex forwards for three-fourths
                       their length.
                 _a^5._ Back with a central white streak. Lower
                          premolars 2.
                                                       5. ANTIDORCAS.
                 _b^5._ Back normal. Lower premolars 3 6. GAZELLA.
              _b^4._ Horns concave forwards, except just at their base.
                                                       7. AMMODORCAS.
            _b^3._ Neck much elongated. Horns as
                     in _Gazella_.                     8. LITHOCRANIUS.
        _b^1._ Horns short, quite straight             9. DORCOTRAGUS.




                          GENUS I. ANTILOPE.

                                                         Type.
    _Antilope_, =Pall.= Misc. Zool. p. 1 (1766)     A. CERVICAPRA[1].


Size medium. Muzzle hairy. A large anteorbital gland present. Tail
short, compressed. Mammæ 2. Accessory hoofs present. Glands in all the
feet and in the groin.

Skull with deep pits between the orbits, very small or no lachrymal
vacuities, and large anteorbital fossæ. Molars tall and narrow.

Horns long, placed close together, widely divergent, cylindrical,
spirally twisted, closely ringed throughout. Female normally hornless.

   _Range of the Genus._ Peninsula of India.

One species only is known.

  [Illustration:

    THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. XLVII.

    _J. Smit, del. & lith._          _Hanhart imp._

  The Black-buck

  ANTILOPE CERVICAPRA.

  _Published by R. H. Porter._]


                          76. THE BLACK-BUCK.

                     ANTILOPE CERVICAPRA (LINN.).

                            [PLATE XLVII.]

   _Gazella africana_--_The Antelope_, =Ray=, Quadr. p. 79 (1693).

   _Capra cervicapra_, =Linn.= Syst. Nat. (10) i. p. 69 (1758),
   (12) i. p. 96 (1766).

   _Antilope cervicapra_, =Pall.= Misc. Zool. p. 9 (1766); =id.=
   Spic. Zool. i. p. 18 (1767), xii. p. 19 (1777); =Erxl.= Syst. R.
   A. p. 283 (1777); =Zimm.= Spec. Zool. Geog. p. 542 (1779); =id.=
   Geogr. Gesch. ii. p. 116 (1780); =Gatt.= Brev. Zool. i. p. 81
   (1780); =Schreb.= Säug. pl. cclxviii. (1785); =Bodd.= Elench.
   Anim. p. 142 (1785); =Gmel.= Linn. S. N. i. p. 192 (1788);
   =Kerr=, Linn. An. K. p. 319 (1792); =Donnd.= Zool. Beitr. i. p.
   644 (1792); =Lath. & Dav.= Faunula Indica, p. 4 (1795); =Link=,
   Beytr. Nat. ii. p. 90 (1795); =G. Cuv.= Tabl. Élém. p. 164
   (1798); =Bechst.= Syst. Uebers. vierf. Th. ii. p. 644 (1800);
   =Shaw=, Gen. Zool. ii. pt. 2, p. 336 (1801); =Turt.= Linn. Syst.
   Nat. i. p. 116 (1802); =Desm.= N. Diet. d’H. N. (1) xxiv. Tabl.
   p. 33 (1804); =G. Cuv.= Dict. Sci. Nat. ii. p. 235 (1804);
   =Tied.= Zool. i. p. 410 (1808); =Licht.= Mag. nat. Freund. vi.
   p. 172 (1814); =G. Fisch.= Zoogn. iii. p. 437 (1814); =Afz.=
   N. Act. Ups. vii. p. 220 (1815); =Desm.= N. Dict. d’H. N. (2)
   ii. p. 180 (1816); =G. Cuv.= R. A. i. p. 261 (1817); =Goldf.=
   Schr. Säug. v. p. 1214 (1818); =Schinz=, Cuv. Thierr. i. p.
   389 (1821); =Desm.= Mamm. ii. p. 451 (1822); =Desmoul.= Dict.
   Class. d’H. N. i. p. 443 (1822); =H. Sm.= Griff. An. K. iv. p.
   231, v. p. 337 (1827); =Less.= Man. Mamm. p. 370 (1827); =J.
   B. Fisch.= Syn. Mamm. p. 457 (1829); =Gray & Hardw.= Ill. Ind.
   Zool. i. pls. xii. & xiii. (1832); =Benn.= P. Z. S. 1836, p.
   34; =Og.= P.Z. S. 1836, p. 137; =Less.= Compl. Buff. x. p. 289
   (1836); =Oken=, Allg. Nat. vii. p. 1377 (1838); =Elliot=, Madr.
   Journ. x. p. 222 (1839); =Laurill.= Dict. Univ. d’H. N. i. p.
   620 (1839); =Gerv.= Dict. Sci. Nat. i. p. 260 (1840); =Hodgs.=
   J. A. S. B. x. p. 913 (1841); =Less.= N. Tabl. R. A., Mamm. p.
   175 (1842); =Forst.= Descr. Anim. p. 379 (1844); =Wagn.= Schr.
   Säug. Suppl. iv. p. 416 (1844), v. p. 409 (1855); =Schinz=,
   Syn. Mamm. ii. p. 408 (1845); =Hutton=, J. A. S. B. xv. p. 150
   (1846); =Sund.= Pecora, K. Vet.-Ak. Handl. 1845, p. 270 (1847);
   =id.= Hornsch. Transl. Arch. Skand. Beitr. ii. p. 266; Reprint,
   p. 86 (1848); =Schinz=, Mon. Ant. p. 10, pl. ix. (1848); =Temm.=
   Esq. Zool. Guin. p. 190 (1853); =Gieb.= Säug. p. 312 (1853);
   =Kinloch=, Large Game Shooting in Tibet, p. 59 (1869) (pl.,
   head); =Blanf.= J. A. S. B. xliv. pt. 2, p. 19 (1875); =Ball=,
   P. A. S. B. 1877, p. 171; =Brehm=, Thierl. iii. p. 198 (1880);
   =Scl.= List Anim. Z. S. (8) p. 144 (1883), (9) p. 158 (1896);
   =Flow. & Gars.= Cat. Coll. Surg. ii. p. 266 (1884); =Kinloch=,
   Large Game Shooting, 1885, p. 112, 1892, p. 153, pl. (head);
   =Jent.= Cat. Ost. Leyd. Mus. (M. P.-B. ix.) p. 137 (1889); =W.
   Scl.= Cat. Mamm. Calc. Mus. ii. p. 162 (1891); =Blanf.= Mamm.
   Brit. Ind. p. 521 (1891); =Flow. & Lyd.= Mamm. p. 340 (1891);
   =Ward=, Horn Meas. (1) p. 95 (1892), (2) p. 139 (1896); =Jent.=
   Cat. Mamm. Leyd. Mus. (M. P.-B. xi.) p. 169 (1892); =Lyd.= Horns
   and Hoofs, p. 152 (1893).

   _Cerophorus_ (_Antilope_) _cervicapra_, =Blainv.= Bull. Soc.
   Philom. 1816, p. 75.

   _Strepsiceros cervicapra_, =Rüpp.= Verz. Senck. Mus. p. 39
   (1842).

   _Antilope rupicapra_, =Müll.= Natursyst. Supp. p. 56 (1776)
   (ex _l’Antilope_, =Buff.= Hist. Nat. xii. p. 273, pls. xxxv. &
   xxxvi. 1764).

   _Cemas strepsiceros_, =Oken=, Lehrb. Nat. p. 732 (1816).

   _Antilope_, =F. Cuv.= H. N. Mamm. (fol.) iii. livr. xliii. (♂) &
   xliv. (♀) (1824).

   “_Antilope bilineata_, Linn. MS.,” =Gray & Hardw.= Ill. Ind.
   Zool., lettering to pl. xii. (1832) (juv.).

   _Cervicapra bezoartica_, =Gray=, List Mamm. B. M. p. 159 (1843);
   =id.= Ann. Mag. N. H. (1) xviii. p. 231 (1846); =id.= Cat. Mamm.
   Nepal, Hodgson Coll. (1) p. 26 (1846), (2) p. 13 (1863); =id.=
   List Ost. B. M. p. 56 (1847); =id.= Knowsl. Men. p. 6 (1850);
   =Horsf.= Cat. Mamm. E. I. C. p. 167 (1851); =Gerr.= Cat. Bones
   Mamm. B. M. p. 234 (1862); =Fitz.= SB. Wien, lix. 1, p. 162
   (1869).

   _Antilope bezoartica_, =Gray=, P. Z. S. 1850, p. 117; =id.= Cat.
   Ung. B. M. p. 66 (1852); =Blyth=, Cat. Mamm. As. Soc. p. 171
   (1863); =Jerdon=, Mamm. Ind. p. 275 (1867); =Blanf.= J. A. S. B.
   xxxvi. pt. 2, p. 196 (1867); =Macmaster=, Notes on Jerdon, pp.
   134 & 258 (1870); =Stol.= J. A. S. B. xli. pt. 2, p. 229 (1872);
   =Gray=, Cat. Rum. B. M. p. 40 (1872); =id.= Hand-l. Rum. B. M.
   p. 109 (1873); =Pollok=, Sport in Brit. Burmah, p. 50 (1879);
   =Sterndale=, Mamm. Ind. p. 472 (1884); =Percy=, Badminton Big
   Game Shooting, ii. p. 345 (1894).

   VERNACULAR NAMES:--_Ena_ ♂, _Harina_ and _Mirga_, in
   Sanscrit; _Haran_, _Harna_ ♂, _Harni_ ♀, _Kalwit_ ♀, _Mrig_,
   in Hindostani; _Kala_ ♂, _Goria_ ♀, in Tirhoot; _Kalsar_ ♂,
   _Baoti_ ♀, in Behar; _Bureta_ in Bhagalpur; _Barant_ or _Sasin_
   in Nepal; _Alali_ ♂, _Gandoli_ ♀, in Baori; _Badu_ in Ho Kol;
   _Bamani-haran_ in Uria and Mahratta; _Phandayat_ in Mahratta;
   _Kutsar_ in Korku; _Veli-man_ in Tamil; _Irri_ ♂, _Ledi_
   and _Jinka_ in Telugu; _Chigri_ and _Húlé-kara_ in Canarese
   (_Blanford_).

Height of male at withers about 30 inches. General colour in the same
sex brown, gradually darkening with age to deep shining black. Muzzle
and chin, an area round the eyes, and the whole of ears white. Back of
neck, especially in the black individuals, yellowish. Upper part of
flanks with an indistinct narrow whitish line running along them, most
conspicuous in the young. Chest, belly, and inner sides of limbs pure
white; outer sides of the latter brown. Tail short, its upperside fawn
or brown, beneath white; its end with an indistinct blackish tuft.

Female brownish fawn wherever the male is black, and with the
colour-contrasts nowhere so conspicuous. Back of ears and nape of neck
also fawn. Horns absent, except in abnormal cases (see p. 14).

Skull as described above. The dimensions of a skull of a male
are:--Basal length 8·3 inches, greatest breadth 4·0, muzzle to orbit
4·9.

   _Hab._ India, from the base of the Himalayas to Cape
   Comorin, and from the Punjab to Lower Assam; but not found in
   Ceylon or to the east of the Bay of Bengal.

The Indian Antelope or Black-buck, as the male is universally called by
sportsmen, is usually associated with the Gazelles, and we retain it
in this position, although it deviates from all the other members of
the subfamily in having its horns spirally twisted somewhat after the
manner of the _Tragelaphinæ_. It likewise differs from the rest of
the group as regards the strong contrast of colour between the sexes,
although this is of course a comparatively trifling character.

This Antelope, although strictly confined to India south of the
Himalayas, has been more or less known in Europe for a long period,
probably since the invasion of India by Alexander the Great. It has
been even conjectured that the twisted horn of the fabled Unicorn of
mediæval writers may have been originally based upon single horns of
the present animal, though other authorities are inclined to refer the
Unicorn’s horn to the Narwhal. This, however, is rather an antiquarian
than a zoological question.

In the two last and most complete editions of the ‘Systema Naturæ’
Linnæus based his _Capra cervicapra_ upon the descriptions of several
of his predecessors (Gesner, Aldrovandus, Ray, and Brisson), which
certainly refer to the present species, and we may therefore safely
adopt _cervicapra_ for it as its specific term. The name _bezoartica_
of Linnæus, which has been employed in its place by some authorities,
refers to quite a different animal, probably to one of the wild goats,
but certainly not to the Indian Antelope.

As regards the generic appellation of the present animal, we have
already explained our reasons for following the general practice of the
best modern authors in considering the _Capra cervicapra_ of Linnæus to
be the type of the genus _Antilope_, although Pallas, who founded the
genus, did not give it precedence in his list of species. But the fact
is that Pallas in his day never realized the importance attached in
modern times to the exact designation of the types of genera, and had
probably no intentions in the matter. The correct scientific name of
the Black-buck is therefore, in our opinion, _Antilope cervicapra_.

The authors immediately subsequent to Linnæus, whose numerous
references we quote in our synonymy, added little or nothing to our
knowledge of the Indian Antelope. Shaw and other writers of the same
date continued the story (which originally arose from its being
confounded with the Addax) of its being met with in Africa as well
as India--a fallacy which appears to have been first exposed by
Lichtenstein in his excellent article on the genus _Antilope_,
published in 1814. But accurate information on this Antelope and its
exact range and habits was only obtained when the fauna of the Indian
Peninsula came to be investigated by those whom the increase of English
influence caused to be resident in that country.

After General Hardwicke, the late Sir Walter Elliot was among the first
of the British residents in India who turned his special attention to
the zoology of British India. In 1839 he published an excellent article
upon the mammals of the Southern Mahratta country. Here, he tells us,
the Indian Antelope “frequents the plains in herds of from twenty to
thirty, each of which contains only one buck of mature age, the others
being young ones.” In some cases the herds are so large that one buck
has fifty or sixty does in its company, while the younger bucks, driven
away by the old ones, wander about in separate herds, which sometimes
contain as many as thirty individuals of different ages.

Jerdon, in his ‘Mammals of India,’ published in 1867, following Gray,
calls the Indian Antelope _Antilope bezoartica_, but gives us a good
account of it. It is found, he says, throughout India in suitable
localities, but is not met with elsewhere. “It is rare in Bengal, a few
only extending into Purneah and Dinagepore, north of the Ganges; and it
does not occur in the richly wooded Malabar coast. It is abundant in
the Deccan, in parts of the Doab between the Jumna and Ganges, also in
Hurriana, Rajpootana, and the neighbouring districts. It is found in
the Punjab, but does not cross the Indus.”

McMaster, in his ‘Notes on Jerdon’s Mammals,’ and Sterndale, in his
‘Natural History of the Mammalia of India and Ceylon,’ besides numerous
other writers in the ‘Bengal Sporting Magazine’ and other periodicals,
have published good field-notes upon the Black-buck, which is perhaps
the most favourite object of pursuit of the sportsman in the plains of
India. But one of the best summaries of all these observations is that
put together by General Kinloch in his excellent work on ‘Large Game
Shooting in Thibet, the Himalayas, Northern and Central India,’ from
the third edition of which, published in 1892, we venture to quote the
following extracts:--

   “The Indian Antelope, the male of which is universally known
   among sportsmen as the ‘Black Buck,’ is generally distributed
   throughout India, being found from the foot of the Himalayas to
   the extreme south of the mainland, and from Eastern Bengal to
   the River Jhílam. There are, however, large tracts of country
   where it is not found, and it is essentially an inhabitant of
   the open cultivated plains, avoiding equally hills and dense
   jungles. The localities in which I know it to be most abundant
   are the desert near Ferózpúr, in the Hissár District, and in the
   neighbourhood of Álígarh. The male is one of the most graceful
   and beautiful animals in creation, combining symmetry of form
   and brilliancy of coloring with marvellous speed and elasticity
   of movement. He stands about thirty-two inches at the shoulder,
   and when arrived at maturity the upper parts are of a deep
   glossy black, with the exception of a light chestnut-colored
   patch at the back of the neck, and some markings of the same
   color about the face. The lower parts and the inside of the
   limbs are snowy white, and the line between the black and
   white is most clearly defined. The hair is short and glossy,
   and the skin makes a very pretty mat. The horns are remarkably
   handsome, being spiral and annulated nearly to their tips.
   They vary considerably in length, in degree of spirality, in
   the number and prominence of rings, and in the angle at which
   they diverge. In Southern India they are said rarely to attain
   a greater length than twenty inches, but in the Panjáb they
   have been found very much longer. I have _seen_ two pairs
   of twenty-seven inches, and have _heard_ of horns over
   twenty-eight in length. Young bucks are of a light fawn color,
   their coats gradually becoming darker with age, although I have
   seen full-grown buck with long horns which had hardly a black
   hair. The doe is of a light fawn above and white beneath, with
   a light-colored line along the side; she is not furnished with
   horns, except in very rare instances. When horns do appear
   they are slender and much curved, bearing no resemblance to
   those of the buck. Antelopes delight in extensive open plains
   where there are alternate wide tracts of cultivation and
   waste land, repairing as a rule to the fields for food, and
   resting when they can on bare and sandy soil. During the rainy
   season, however, they are fond of concealing themselves among
   high-standing crops, and only come out in the mornings and
   evenings. Black Buck are very pugnacious, and sometimes fight
   so desperately that they will allow a person to walk close up
   to them without observing him. Many have their horns broken in
   their combats, and I have seen one both of whose horns were
   broken off within three inches of the head. Antelopes are
   usually found in considerable herds, varying in numbers from ten
   or a dozen to a couple of hundred. A buck and one doe, or a buck
   and a couple of does, may, however, be frequently met with; and
   vast herds of many thousands have occasionally been seen. When
   in large numbers they of course do much damage to the crops, and
   it is with difficulty that the natives drive them away. It is
   a beautiful sight when a herd of Antelopes are first alarmed;
   as soon as they have made up their minds that safety is only
   to be found in flight, first one, then another bounds into the
   air to a surprising height, just touching the earth, and again
   springing upwards, until the whole herd are in motion. So light
   are their movements that they seem as if they were suspended
   on wires. These bounds are only continued for a few strides,
   after which the Antelopes generally settle down into a regular
   gallop. The speed of the Black Buck is wonderful, and it is
   seldom that greyhounds can pull down an unwounded one; but I
   knew one dog that caught several, both bucks and does, on fair
   ground. Antelopes will go away when very hard hit, and a wounded
   one will often give a capital run, if ridden after with spear
   or knife; the latter is nearly as good as the former, for the
   buck runs so game, that he will not, as a rule, give a chance of
   spearing him until he is so completely exhausted that he drops
   with fatigue, when one may dismount and cut his throat. The
   sportsman can choose between riding down or coursing his wounded
   Antelope; but either a good horse or a brace of greyhounds
   should always be in readiness, or the best shot will have the
   mortification of seeing maimed animals escape to die a lingering
   death.”

The chase of the Black-buck by the Cheetah (_Cynælurus jubatus_)
is a favourite sport of the native Princes and Nobles of India. General
Kinloch, in the work we have just quoted, describes one of these
chases, in which he took part, as follows:--

   “Early one morning at the beginning of June, M. (a brother
   Officer) and I rode out with the Chítá cart, and had not
   proceeded very far across the fields, which were then almost
   destitute of vegetation, when some Black Buck were discovered
   in the distance. M. then took his seat beside the keeper of
   the cart, while I rode alongside, taking care to keep the cart
   between me and the Antelope. The herd had evidently been hunted
   before, and in spite of careful manœuvring would never allow us
   to approach within a hundred and fifty yards, which the keeper
   considered too great a distance for a successful slip. Several
   other antelope were followed with a similar result, but at
   last a herd that were grazing in a very rough field permitted
   the bullocks to trot up to within a hundred yards. The Chítá
   was now unhooded, and on catching sight of the game he sprang
   lightly from the cart, but instead of at once giving chase, he
   walked quietly towards the Antelope, which, being now alarmed,
   were rapidly increasing their distance. I began to think that
   he had no intention of pursuing, and the Antelope were nearly
   two hundred yards off, when he gradually increased his speed,
   and after a few strides bounded after them with such amazing
   velocity that in a few seconds he was in the middle of the now
   flying herd. Passing several small ones, he singled out one of
   the finest buck, and in less time than it takes to describe it
   buck and Chítá rolled over in a cloud of dust. The chase had not
   extended much over three hundred yards. Galloping to the spot,
   I found the buck lying on his back, while the Chítá crouched
   quietly by him with his fangs buried in the throat. The keeper
   quickly came up, terminated the buck’s existence with his knife,
   and catching the blood in a wooden ladle, presented it to the
   Chítá, who lapped it up with relish. A haunch was then cut off,
   and the Chítá seizing it bounded back into his cart, where he
   proceeded to devour it at his leisure. The buck was a fine one,
   with twenty-three inch horns.”

Excellent accounts of the distribution and habits of the Indian
Antelope have also been lately published in Dr. Stanford’s ‘Mammals
of British India,’ and in the second volume of ‘Big Game Shooting’ in
the Badminton Library. In the latter we find described the following
curious method of getting within close range of the Black-buck as
practised in Central India:--

   “A trained Black-buck and doe are taken out, each having a light
   cord about ten yards long attached to it, and the pair are led
   by an attendant, a light screen about three feet square made of
   grass and leaves with a small hole in the centre being carried
   by the shikari. The whole party moves under cover of a third
   man on horseback to within about three hundred yards of a herd
   of antelopes. The screen is then planted on a spot commanding a
   good view; the men on foot crouch behind it, and the horseman
   rides slowly off on the flank. The two tame Antelopes are then
   let out to the full extent of their lines on one side of the
   screen, and begin playing round one another. The master buck of
   the herd, seeing an impertinent intruder on his ground, trots
   out at once to do battle for the doe, but the screen puzzles
   him, so before coming close he generally circles round to try
   and see behind it. As he moves, the screen is shifted round,
   the men scrambling round on hands and knees behind it, and if
   there are two Englishmen bursting with suppressed laughter in
   addition to the two natives, all scuffling round as the screen
   moves and trying to keep their legs out of sight, the business
   is most comical. Directly the wild buck stops, the screen and
   the men behind it must remain motionless. Having failed to
   discover what is behind the screen, the buck, though he is still
   suspicious, feels that he must try to capture that enticing doe,
   but decides on having a look on the other side of the screen
   first, so back he gallops to the other flank, and the scrambling
   process is repeated. Gradually he comes within range, the rifle
   is poked through the hole in the screen and he gets his quietus.
   After this the tame Antelopes are given a handful of corn, and
   the party sets out to look for another herd. The tame buck
   employed in this manœuvre should be a brown one, as if an old
   powerful-looking black one is used the wild buck will often
   decline the contest.”

The Indian Antelope bears captivity easily, and specimens of it are
to be seen in all the Zoological Gardens of Europe, in some of which
it has bred and multiplied very successfully. In other places it has
not done so well, apparently requiring a light soil and a considerable
amount of protection from the inclemencies of a northern climate.

In the celebrated Menagerie at Knowsley fifty years ago this Antelope
is stated by Gray to have bred but once at the time he was writing
of it (1846). But shortly afterwards the herd of this animal in Lord
Derby’s possession appears to have increased very rapidly. When the
Menagerie was dispersed by auction after the Earl’s death in 1851 we
find that four males and four females of this Antelope were entered in
the sale-list, all described as having been bred at Knowsley. These
passed into the possession of the late Viscount Hill, of Hawkstone, who
at that epoch shared Lord Derby’s tastes in his love for keeping living
animals.

So far as we can tell from an inspection of the Zoological Society’s
records, the first specimens of the Black-buck received by the Society
were brought home by Col. Sykes (a well-known authority on Indian
zoology) from Bombay in 1831. In the ‘Proceedings’ of the Society
for 1836 Mr. E. T. Bennett, then Secretary of the Society, published
some interesting remarks on this herd, especially referring to the
vexed question of the use of the lachrymal sinus in Antelopes,
which, from consideration of the relative development of it in the
several specimens then in the Society’s Gardens, he showed was in all
probability subservient to sexual purposes.

As will be seen by reference to the nine published editions of the
‘Lists of Animals in the Society’s Collection,’ numerous specimens of
the Black-buck have been acquired by the Society since that date, but,
probably on account of the small free space assigned to them, little
or no success has been met with in breeding this beautiful species in
the Regent’s Park. On the other hand, at the Jardin d’Acclimatation at
Paris and in other places under a climate more genial than our own,
where large paddocks can be assigned to it, the Black-buck frequently
reproduces in captivity and flourishes exceedingly.

No figures of the Black-buck having been drawn under the late Sir
Victor Brooke’s directions, our illustrations of this beautiful
Antelope (Plate XLVII.) have been taken by Mr. Smit from two mounted
specimens in the British Museum of Natural History, the male of which,
from Gwalior, was presented by Mr. C. Maries, of the Gwalior Museum.

  [Illustration: Fig. 45.

  Horns of Black-buck, ♂. (In the Collection of Mr. A. O. Hume.)]

  [Illustration: Fig. 46.

  Abnormal horns of female Indian Antelope. (In the collection of
    Mr. A. O. Hume.)]

The National Collection possesses other examples of this Antelope,
besides a fine series of heads and horns, mostly from Rajpootana and
the Punjáb, belonging to the splendid collection of these objects
presented to the British Museum by Mr. A. O. Hume, C.B. In order
to show the large dimensions to which the horns of the adult male
Black-buck attain in Rajpootana and Hurriana we give a drawing (fig.
45) of a beautiful pair still in the possession of Mr. Hume, which
attained a length of no less than 28¼ inches measured in a straight
line. On referring to the long list of the dimensions of the horns of
this Antelope published in Mr. Rowland Ward’s ‘Records of Big Game,’ it
will be found that only one pair of greater length than the horns which
we now figure have been hitherto recorded. We also give (fig. 46) a
figure of the skull and abnormal horns of a female of this Antelope in
Mr. Hume’s Collection.

    _August_, 1897.




                          GENUS II. ÆPYCEROS.

                                                           Type.
    _Æpyceros_, =Sund.= Pecora, K. Vet.-Ak. Handl.
       1845, p. 271 (1847)                              Æ. MELAMPUS.


Size large. No anteorbital glands. Tail fairly long. False hoofs
absent. Hind feet with glandular tufts of hair placed shortly above the
hoofs.

Skull without supraorbital pits or anteorbital fossæ; lachrymal
vacuities small.

Horns of male medium or rather long, broadly lyrate, half-ringed,
slightly compressed. Female hornless.

   _Range of the Genus._ Southern Africa, northwards to Angola
   on the west, and to the Southern Soudan on the east.

Of this genus we are at present prepared to recognize only two
species--the Common Pallah of Southern and Eastern Africa (_Æ.
melampus_) and that of Angola (_Æ. petersi_). The latter may be readily
distinguished from the ordinary form by having a prominent blackish
mark running down the upper surface of the muzzle.

  [Illustration:

    THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. XLVIII

    _Wolf del, J. Smit lith_      _Hanhart imp._

  The Pallah

  ÆPYCEROS MELAMPUS.

  _Published by R. H. Porter._]


                            77. THE PALLAH.

                      ÆPYCEROS MELAMPUS (LICHT.).

                            [PLATE XLVIII.]

   _Pallah_, =Daniell=, African Scenery, no. 9 (1812).

   _Antilope melampus_, =Licht.= Reise, ii. p. 544, pl. iv. (1812);
   =id.= Mag. nat. Freund. vi. p. 167 (1814); =Goldf.= Schr. Säug.
   v. p. 1224, pl. cclxxiv. (1818); =Schinz=, Cuv. Thierr. i. p.
   388 (1821); =Desm.= Mamm. ii. p. 456 (1822); =Burch.= Trav.
   ii. p. 301 (1824); =id.= List Mamm. pres. to B. M. p. 5 (1825)
   (Latakoo); =H. Sm.= Griff. An. K. iv. p. 219, v. p. 334 (1827);
   =Less.= Man. Mamm. p. 374 (1827); =J. B. Fisch.= Syn. Mamm. p.
   462 (1829); =Smuts=, En. Mamm. Cap. p. 74 (1832); =A. Sm.= S.
   Afr. Quart. J. ii. p. 209 (1834); =Laurill.= Dict. Univ. d’H.
   N. i. p. 616 (1839); =Harr.= Wild Anim. S. Afr. p. 78, pl. xv.
   (1840); =Gerv.= Dict. Sci. Nat. i. p. 261 (1840); =Jard.= Nat.
   Misc. vi. p. 217, pl. xxix. (1842); =Less.= N. Tabl. R. A.,
   Mamm. p. 176 (1842); =Gray=, List Mamm. B. M. p. 162 (1843);
   =Wagn.= Schr. Säug. Suppl. iv. p. 417 (1844), v. p. 409 (1855);
   =Schinz=, Syn. Mamm. ii. p. 405 (1845); =Gray=, Ann. Mag. N. H.
   (1) xviii. p. 231 (1846); =id.= List Ost. B. M. p. 56 (1847);
   =Schinz=, Mon. Antil. p. 7, pl. vi. (1848); =Gray=, Knowsl. Men.
   p. 6 (1850); =Peters=, Säug. Mossamb. p. 190 (1852) (Zambezi);
   =Temm.= Esq. Zool. Guin. p. 190 (1853); =Gieb.= Säug. p. 313
   (1853); =Drumm.= Large Game S. Afr. p. 426 (1875); =Brehm=,
   Thierl. iii. p. 203 (1880); =Huet=, Bull. Soc. Acclim. (4) iv.
   p. 477 (1887).

   _Æpyceros melampus_, =Sund.= Pecora, K. Vet.-Ak. Handl. 1845,
   p. 271 (1847); =id.= Hornschuch’s Transl., Arch. Skand. Beitr.
   ii. p. 267; Reprint, p. 87 (1848); =Gray=, P. Z. S. 1850, p.
   116; =id.= Cat. Ung. B. M. p. 65 (1852); =Gerr.= Cat. Bones
   Mamm. B. M. p. 234 (1862); =Blyth=, Cat. Mamm. Mus. As. Soc. p.
   171 (1863); =Scl.= P. Z. S. 1864, p. 101 (Uzaramo); =Kirk=, P.
   Z. S. 1864, p. 656 (Zambesia); =Hengl. & Fitz.= SB. Ak. Wien,
   liv. pt. 1, p. 590 (1866); =Fitz.= SB. Ak. Wien, lix. pt. 1,
   p. 157 (1869); =Gray=, Cat. Rum. B. M. p. 42 (1872); =id.=
   Hand-l. Rum. B. M. p. 112 (1873); =Buckl.= P. Z. S. 1876, pp.
   283 & 291; =id.= op. cit. 1877, p. 454; =Heugl.= N.O.-Afr. ii.
   p. 103 (1877) (S. Kordofan); =Selous=, P. Z. S. 1881, p. 757;
   =id.= Hunter’s Wanderings S. Afr. p. 216 (1881); =Pagenst.= JB.
   Mus. Hamb. ii. p. 40 (1884); =Flow. & Gars.= Cat. Coll. Surg.
   ii. p. 272 (1884); =Johnston=, Kilimanjaro, pp. 218 & 394, fig.
   47 (1886); =Noack=, Zool. JB. ii. p. 206 (1887); =Jent.= Notes
   Leyd. Mus. ix. p. 173 (1887); =id.= Cat. Ost. Leyd. Mus. (Mus.
   Pays-Bas, ix.) p. 138 (1889); =id.= Cat. Mamm. Leyd. Mus. (op.
   cit. xi.) p. 170 (1892); =Hunter=, in Willoughby’s E. Afr. p.
   288 (1889); =Crawshay=, P. Z. S. 1890, p. 654 (Nyasa); =W. Scl.=
   Cat. Mamm. Calc. Mus. ii. p. 169 (1891); =Flow. & Lyd.= Mamm.
   p. 341 (1891); =Ward=, Horn. Meas. (1) p. 99 (1892), (2) p. 142
   (1896); =Nicolls & Egl.= Sportsm. S. Afr. p. 41, pl. i. fig. 3
   (1892); =True=, Pr. U. S. Nat. Mus. xv. p. 472 (1892); =Lyd.=
   Horns and Hoofs, p. 229 (1893); =Lugard=, E. Afr. i. p. 537
   (1893); =Scl.= P. Z. S. 1893, p. 728 (L. Mweru); =Barkley=, P.
   Z. S. 1894, p. 132 (Pungwue Valley); =Thos.= P. Z. S. 1894, p.
   145 (Nyasa); =Jackson=, in Badm. Big Game Shooting, i. pp. 285 &
   306 (1894); =Lorenz=, Ann. Mus. Wien, ix., Notizen, p. 61 (1894)
   (Upper Limpopo); =Rendall=, P. Z. S. 1895, p. 359 (Transvaal).

   “_Antilope pallah_, =Cuv.=,” =Gerv.= Dict. Sci. Nat. i. p. 261
   (1840).

   _Strepsiceros suara_, =Matsch.= SB. Ges. nat. Freund. 1892, p.
   135 (skin, not horns).

   _Æpyceros suara_, =Matsch.= Thierw. O.-Afr., Säug. p. 129 (1895).

   _Æpyceros melampus johnstoni_, =Thos.= P. Z. S. 1892, p. 553
   (Nyasa).

   _Æpyceros melampus typicus_, =Thos.= l. c.

   _Æpyceros melampus holubi_, =Lorenz=, Ann. Mus. Wien, ix.,
   Notizen, p. 62 (1894) (“N. of Zambezi”).

   VERNACULAR NAMES:--_Pallah_ of English; _Roodebok_ or _Roibok_
   of Dutch; _Pala_ of Bechuanas; _Napala_ of Matabili; _Ee-pala_
   of Makalakas; _Inzero_ of Masubias; _Umpara_ of Makubas;
   _Lubondwee_ of Batongas; _Kug-ar_ of Masaras (_Selous_);
   _Impaya_ of Transvaal Shangaans (_Rendall_); _Suare_ in Tette
   (_Peters_); _Nswala_ of Nyasa tribes (_Crawshay_) and of
   East-African _Swahilis_ (_Jackson_); _Kulungu_ and _Nosi_ near
   Kilimanjaro (_Johnston_); _Om-gaba_ in Arabic (_Heuglin_).

Size comparatively large; height at the withers about 36 inches.
General colour bright reddish brown, paler along the lower part of the
sides. In southern specimens the colour is rather duller and browner
than in northern ones, but the difference is very slight. Head dark
fawn; a mark over the anterior half of the eye, chin, interramia,
and upper part of throat white. Belly pure white. In front of the
eye, on the side of the face, there is generally, though not always,
in southern specimens an indistinct darker patch, but this is never
present in northern ones. A black patch occasionally present on the
crown. Ears of medium length, their outer sides fawn, with the terminal
third black. Limbs like the back, a lighter ring round the pasterns
just above the hoofs; a pair of prominent black tufts of longer hairs
on the distal extremity of the hind cannon-bones (whence the name of
the species). Tail fairly long, its upperside with a narrow black
line along it, extending more or less on to the back, its sides fawn
basally, white terminally.

Skull as above described. The dimensions of a male skull are:--Basal
length 10·3 inches, greatest breadth 4·4, muzzle to orbit 6·1.

The horns are particularly graceful, lyrate, convex forwards below,
concave above, evenly spreading. In length, in the south, good
specimens may attain about 18 or 20 inches in a direct line, and in the
north more, up to about 21 or 22 inches, the largest recorded being
23. But in the intermediate districts, Nyasa, Zambesia, and Gazaland,
they are much shorter, fully adult horns being often only 14 inches in
length.

_Female_ similar to the male, but without horns.

   _Hab._ Southern and Eastern Africa, from Bechuanaland to
   Southern Kordofan.

The first account of the Pallah seems to have appeared in one of the
early numbers of a work called Daniell’s ‘Illustrations of African
Animated Nature and Scenery,’ published in London in 1812. The author
of the letterpress, however, did not give it a scientific name,
believing that it might be the “Kob” of Buffon, or an allied species.
At about the same date Prof. Lichtenstein, who had met with this
animal during his journeyings in Southern Africa from 1803 to 1806,
published a description and figure of it in his ‘Reise nach südlichen
Afrika’ under the name _Antilope melampus_. This description, with
additional particulars, was repeated in the same author’s classical
monograph of the genus _Antilope_, published in 1814, and his
name, taken from the black tufts of short hair at the back of the hind
legs just above the foot (which are clearly shown in our figures),
has been employed, almost universally, for this species by subsequent
writers. Lichtenstein met with his specimens near Klip Fontein in
Namaqualand, where it was found to occur in small herds of five or six
individuals. In 1812 the celebrated African traveller Burchell likewise
met with the Pallah in Bechuanaland, and secured the first specimens
which arrived at the British Museum.

Little more was added to our knowledge of this beautiful Antelope
until the publication of Harris’s ‘Portraits of the Game and Wild
Animals of Southern Africa’ in 1840. Harris devotes his fifteenth plate
mainly to the illustration of the “rare and graceful Pallah,” which he
states “first gladdens the sight of the traveller in Southern Africa
upon the elevated districts north of Latakoo.” Here in the wooded
slopes and valleys that environ the mountain-ranges of Kurrichane and
Cashan it was met with in families of from twelve to twenty individuals
of both sexes.

Harris, with all his experience, could recall to his memory “few
objects more picturesque than the graceful figures of a wandering herd
of these Antelopes dancing and bounding through the thousand stems
of the acacia-groves in all the poetry of motion.” To these wooded
districts Harris considered the Pallah to be restricted, not a single
specimen having been observed in the open country. The flesh of the
Pallah he characterizes as “tender and palatable,” although “rather
dry,” like that of most Antelopes.

In these days, however, as we are informed by Messrs. Nicolls and
Eglington, it is only on rare occasions that the Pallah is met with
in the Bechuanaland Protectorate, and its present distribution is
described by them as follows:--“A few herds still linger in the
Transvaal along the Crocodile River. Almost exterminated in the regions
through which the north-west tributaries of that river flow, it is only
when the Zambesi is reached that the Palla is again to be frequently
met with in any number. On the Chobe River it is still fairly common,
being unknown on the Botletle, but it is only after passing the shores
of Lake ’Ngami, and reaching the densely wooded banks of the Tonke,
that the species again makes its appearance in a westerly direction. In
those parts of Mashonaland and Matabeleland where it is not subject to
continual persecution it is still fairly numerous. The Palla is highly
gregarious, and frequents the thick, forest-clad banks of rivers, from
which it never strays, except after periods of heavy rains, and then
only when the pans and vleys (which are always dry during the greater
portion of the year) are for a time filled with water. In remote parts,
not very much frequented by man, the herds often exceed a hundred in
number. Where not continually disturbed, this Antelope, so elegant and
graceful of motion, is not by any means shy when approached, generally
running but a short distance, and then standing and looking back again,
a habit which easily permits of its being stalked.”

In the Transvaal, Mr. Barber kindly informs us, the Pallah was
plentiful in the Waterburg and Lydenburg districts up to 1880. Now,
however, it has been driven away many miles east, into the valleys that
intersect the Lebombo range.

On the north-west of the Cape Colony the Pallah, as we shall see
presently, is represented by a nearly allied, though probably distinct,
form. But on the eastern side of Africa the Pallah has a wide range,
and extends north certainly into British East Africa, and probably
still farther into Kordofan. We will endeavour to trace its range
throughout this wide area.

Mr. Selous found the Pallah on the tributaries of the Limpopo, and
thence northwards on the banks of every river and stream which he has
explored in Matabeleland and Mashonaland. The Impalas of the Limpopo he
considers to be larger than those of the Chobe.

Peters records the Pallah as met with in the mountainous parts of the
Portuguese province of Mozambique, near Tette, Chidima, and Sena,
and gives its native names as here ‘Psuara’ or ‘Suara.’ Passing into
British Central Africa we find this Antelope recorded by Mr. Crawshay
as not common anywhere in Nyasaland, but where met with, as a rule,
found in even larger numbers than the Waterbuck. Mr. Crawshay has
seen it in companies of one hundred or more, and gives a number of
localities around Lake Nyasa in which he has come across herds of it.
No Antelope, Mr. Crawshay tells us, can compare with the Pallah in
fleetness of foot, and certainly “no other can display such wonderful
leaping powers. They go off like the proverbial arrow from the bow, and
with most beautiful gliding bounds, cover the ground without apparently
the least effort.” In Northern Nyasaland, Mr. J. B. Yule tells us,
the Pallah is found only along the stony ridges between Deep Bay and
Karonga.

In the highlands of Zomba and the adjacent districts of Nyasaland
a local race of the Common Pallah is found, distinguished by its
slenderer skull and much shorter horns; but as regards the colour of
its fur it is precisely similar to the South-African form. Thomas was
at one time of opinion that this highland form should constitute a
separate subspecies, and proposed to name it after its discoverer, Sir
Harry Johnston, who has done so much in investigating the fauna of
British Central Africa, _Æpyceros melampus johnstoni_. Thomas,
however, since the examination of further specimens is not disposed to
insist upon the necessity of recognizing this subspecies as distinct.

In the low, dry, thicket-covered hills to the north of Lake Mweru both
Mr. Crawshay and Mr. Sharpe have obtained specimens of this Antelope,
which, according to the latter, is often confounded by the natives with
the Lechee and Vardon’s Antelope under the common name “_msala_.”

In German East Africa, according to Dr. Matschie’s excellent Handbook,
the Pallah occurs in many localities all over the country. At first
misled by the association of the horns of a Lesser Koodoo and a skin
of a Pallah, Dr. Matschie proposed to found a new species of Koodoo
upon this animal, and to call it _Strepsiceros suara_. Afterwards
recognizing his mistake he proposed to retain the term _suara_
for the East-African Pallah, and to separate it specifically from the
South-African animal as _Æpyceros suara_, on the ground of certain
small discrepancies in colour. But after examining many specimens of
the Pallah from East Africa we have come to the conclusion that the
differences pointed out by Dr. Matschie are not confined to individuals
from the same locality, and we cannot therefore regard _Æ. suara_
as a distinct species.

The late Mr. F. Holmwood, formerly H.B.M. Consul-General at Zanzibar,
wrote to us, “I have met with the Pallah in the countries of Usagara
and Uzeguha, about 150 miles straight inland from Zanzibar, where they
were very plentiful. The country has an elevation of 500 feet and is
well watered. The Pallah go in troops of from 15 to 120. I once saw a
pack of wild dogs hunt and run down one of these Antelopes which they
first separated from a large herd.”

In British East Africa the Pallah is well known, and has been obtained
by all the great sportsmen that have visited that territory. Mr. H.
C. V. Hunter, in his appendix to Sir John Willoughby’s ‘East Africa,’
speaks of this Antelope as “common everywhere in thin bush and on
the plains.” Dr. Abbott, as recorded by Mr. True, sent to Washington
a good series of specimens obtained in 1889 from Taveta and Mount
Kilimanjaro, where it had likewise been met with by Sir Harry Johnston
during the Kilimanjaro Expedition of 1884. Mr. F. J. Jackson, in his
notes on Antelopes published in the first volume of ‘Big Game Shooting’
of the Badminton Library, tells us that the Pallah is not met with in
the coast-district of British East Africa. “But it occurs in small
herds about 60 miles inland, and is plentiful at Adda and in the Teita
country, and is found as far north as Turkwel in suitable localities,
that is, in park-like open bush and thinly-wooded country, not far from
water.” “The best heads,” Mr. Jackson says, “are obtained between
Lakes Navaisha and Baringo, particularly in the vicinity of the small
salt-lake Elmatita, where these beautiful beasts inhabit the open woods
of juniper-trees.” In his paper on the Antelopes of the Mau district,
recently read before the Zoological Society, Mr. Jackson likewise
speaks of this Antelope, and again mentions the large size of the horns
of the bucks in that part of British East Africa, which he gives as 22
and 23 inches from base to tip.

  [Illustration: Fig. 47.

  Head of Pallah, ♂, front view.]

Whether the Pallah ranges further north than British East Africa and
the neighbouring district of Turkwel is perhaps not quite certain,
though it may possibly be the case. Our only authority on the subject
is Heuglin, who states that the Pallah occurs on the White Nile at
Scherk-el-Akaba, and is “very common” on the Djur River, where it is
known by the Arabic name of ‘Om-gàba,’ or ‘Om-sàba.’ But Heuglin’s
observations on this point, so far as we know, have not been
confirmed, and we have never seen specimens from this locality.

On the whole, therefore, we consider _Æpyceros melampus_ to be a
wide-ranging species, extending from Bechuanaland in the south
throughout the eastern side of Africa to British East Africa on the
north, and perhaps reaching even to the White Nile. But over all these
districts there is a certain amount of variety amongst the specimens,
and we are not, therefore, at present inclined to recognize, even
as subspecies, what have been designated as _suara_, _johnstoni_,
and _holubi_, although future researches may lead us to a different
conclusion.

So far as we know, the Pallah has been brought to Europe alive on two
occasions only, and in both instances the animals were imported by Mr.
C. Reiche, of Alfeld, from the northern part of the Transvaal. The
first specimen (in 1890) went to the Zoological Garden of Berlin and
the second (in 1890) to the Zoological Garden of Vienna. Both were
young males, and generally of a reddish colour, with the horns slightly
developed. They did not live long after their arrival in the Gardens.

The Pallah is represented in our National Collection by a mounted
male from Kilimanjaro shot by Mr. F. J. Jackson and by a mounted
head from Lake Elmetaita presented by Captain Lugard, the horns of
which are amongst the longest of known specimens. There is likewise
a mounted head from the Zomba highlands presented by Sir Harry
Johnston and representing the short-horned race which inhabits the
mountain-districts south of Lake Nyasa. Besides these there are skulls,
skins, and horns from various districts in South and East Africa.

Our illustration of the Pallah (Plate XLVIII.) has been put upon the
stone by Mr. Smit from a water-colour drawing by Wolf prepared for the
late Sir Victor Brooke and now belonging to Sir Douglas Brooke. The
drawing is noted on the back as having been taken from a head belonging
to Mr. Selous and a loose skin. It represents an adult male in two
positions. The female, as already stated, is absolutely hornless.

The woodcut (fig. 47, p. 23), which gives a front view of a good
head of the Pallah, was drawn by Mr. Smit under Sir Victor Brooke’s
directions.

    _August_, 1897.


                        78. THE ANGOLAN PALLAH.

                       ÆPYCEROS PETERSI, BOCAGE.

   _Æpyceros petersi_, =Boc.= P. Z. S. 1878, p. 741; =Huet=, Bull.
   Soc. Acclim. (4) iv. p. 479 (1887); =Scl.= P. Z. S. 1890, p. 460
   (woodcut of head); =Flow. & Lyd.= Mamm. p. 341 (1891); =Lyd.=
   Horns and Hoofs, p. 231 (1893).

   _Æpyceros melampus_, =Jent.= Notes Leyd. Mus. ix. p. 173 (1887)
   (?) (Mossamedes).

Similar, so far as is yet known, to _Æ. melampus_ in all respects
except that on the face, as is shown in our woodcut (p. 26), there
is a prominent brown patch running along the top of the muzzle. This
character is said to be perfectly constant, and we therefore admit for
the present the validity of the Angolan form as a distinct species.

The Angolan Pallah was first recognized as a distinct species by Prof.
J. V. Barboza du Bocage, a distinguished naturalist of Portugal, in
a list of Angolan Antelopes published in the Zoological Society’s
‘Proceedings’ for 1878. M. du Bocage based his description upon two
specimens forwarded to the Lisbon Museum by the well-known explorer
d’Anchieta. Of these the male was stated to have come from Capangombe,
the female from Humbe--two places both in the province of Mossamedes
north of the Cunene River. M. Bocage distinguished the new species from
_Æ. melampus_ principally by its black face, and dedicated it to
the late Professor Peters, of Berlin, whose opinion agreed with his
that it was distinct. It is probable that the skull from the Cunene
River, obtained by Heer Van der Kellen in October 1885, and referred
by Dr. Jentink, in his paper on Mammals from Mossamedes, to _Æ.
melampus_, may belong properly to _Æ. petersi_.

  [Illustration: Fig. 48.

  Front view of head of Angolan Pallah.

  (P. Z. S. 1890, p. 460.)]

In 1889 Capt. F. Cookson, during a sporting excursion into Hasholand
or Kaokoland, in the neighbourhood of the Cunene River met with some
twenty or more specimens of this Antelope, and brought back a single
head to England. This head, mounted by Mr. Rowland Ward, was exhibited
by Sclater at a meeting of the Zoological Society on June 17th, 1890,
as an example of _Æpyceros petersi_. The notice of Sclater’s
exhibition published in the Zoological Society’s ‘Proceedings’ was
accompanied by an illustration, which, by the kindness of the Council
of the Zoological Society, we are enabled to reproduce (fig. 48).
The dimensions of these horns are given by Mr. Rowland Ward, in his
‘Records of Big Game’ (1896), as 18¾ inches in a straight line and 22¾
on front curve, and the distance between the tips as 12¼ inches.

So far as we know, this is all the evidence to be offered as to the
existence of this species, concerning which further particulars would
be very desirable. There is no example of it in the British Museum.

    _August_, 1897.




                           GENUS III. SAIGA.

                                                            Type.
    _Saiga_, =Gray=, List Mamm. B. M. p. xxvi (1843)    S. TATARICA.
    _Colus_, =Wagner=, Schreber’s Säugeth. Suppl.
       iv. p. 419 (1844)                                S. TATARICA.


Size medium. Nose large, elongate, bent downwards, and inflated; the
nostrils opening downwards. Tail short. Mammæ 4. Accessory hoofs
present.

Skull with short nasals and premaxillaries, and an exceedingly
large and high nasal opening; small supraorbital pits; no lachrymal
vacuities; anteorbital fossæ shallow. Lower premolars two, at least in
the recent species.

Horns of medium length, cylindrical, rather irregularly lyrate,
strongly ringed, pale whitish or amber-coloured. Female hornless.

   _Range of the Genus._ Steppes of S.E. Europe and Western
   Asia.

One species only.

  [Illustration:

    THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. XLIX.

    _Wolf del. J. Smit lith.      Hanhart imp._

  The Saiga

  SAIGA TATARICA.

  _Published by R. H. Porter._]


                            79. THE SAIGA.

                        SAIGA TATARICA (LINN.).

                             [PLATE XLIX.]

   _Ibex imberbis_, =Gmel.= N. Comm. Ac. Petrop. v. p. 345 (1760) &
   vii. p. 39, pl. xix. (♂ ♀) (1761). (Not binomial.)

   _Le Saiga_, =Buff.= Hist. Nat. xii. p. 198, pl. xxii. fig. 2
   (horn) (1764).

   _Capra tatarica_, =Linn.= Syst. Nat. (12) i. p. 97 (1766) (ex
   Gmel.); =Müll.= Natursyst. i. p. 417 (1773).

   _Saiga tatarica_, =Gray=, List Mamm. B. M. p. 160 (1843); =id.=
   List Ost. B. M. p. 55 (1847); =id.= Knowsl. Men. p. 3 (1850);
   =id.= P. Z. S. 1850, p. 112; =id.= Cat. Ung. B. M. p. 51, pl.
   vi. figs. 1 & 2 (skull) (1852); =Temm.= Esq. Zool. Guin. p. 189
   (1853); =Gerr.= Cat. Bones Mamm. B. M. p. 231 (1862); =Glitsch=,
   Bull. Soc. Moscow, 1865, p. 207; =Sclat.= P. Z. S. 1867, p. 240,
   pl. xvii.; =Murie=, P. Z. S. 1870, p. 451 (anatomy & position);
   =Gray=, Cat. Rum. B. M. p. 33 (1872); =id.= Hand-l. Rum. B. M.
   p. 102 (1873); =Scl.= List An. Z. S. (8) p. 143 (1883), (9) p.
   157 (1896); =Flow. & Gars.= Cat. Coll. Surg. ii. p. 265 (1884);
   =Sterndale=, Mamm. Ind. p. 468 (1884); =Flow. & Lyd.= Mamm. p.
   341 (1891); =Ward=, Horn Meas. (1) p. 101 (1892), (2) p. 145
   (1896); =Lyd.= Horns and Hoofs, p. 163 (1893).

   _Antilope tatarica_, =Forst.= Descr. Anim. p. 390 (1844);
   =Sund.= Pecora, K. Vet.-Ak. Handl. 1845, p. 270 (1847); =id.=
   Hornschuch’s Transl., Arch. Skand. Beitr. ii. p. 266; Reprint,
   p. 86 (1848).

   _Colus tataricus_, =Brehm=, Thierl. iii. p. 283 (1880).

   _Antilope saiga_, =Pall.= Misc. Zool. p. 6 (1766); =id.= Spic.
   Zool. xii. pp. 14 & 21 (1777); =Zimm.= Geogr. Gesch. ii. p. 121
   (1780); =Bodd.= Elench. Anim. p. 143 (1785); =Schr.= Säug. pl.
   cclxxvi. (1787); =Gmel.= Linn. S. N. i. p. 185 (1788); =Kerr=,
   Linn. An. K. p. 309 (1792); =Donnd.= Zool. Beytr. i. p. 626
   (1792); =Link=, Beytr. Nat. ii. p. 99 (1795); =G. Cuv.= Tabl.
   Élém. p. 163 (1798); =Bechst.= Syst. Uebers. vierf. Thierr. ii.
   p. 645 (1800); =Shaw=, Gen. Zool. ii. pt. 2, p. 339 (1801);
   =Turt.= Linn. Syst. Nat. i. p. 112 (1802); =G. Cuv.= Dict. Sci.
   Nat. ii. p. 229 (1804); =Desm.= N. Dict. d’H. N. (1) xxiv.
   Tabl. p. 33 (1804); =Tiedem.= Zool. i. p. 409 (1808); =Pall.=
   Zoogr. Ross.-As. i. p. 252 (1811); =G. Fisch.= Zoogn. iii. p.
   428 (1814); =Afz.= N. Act. Ups. vii. p. 220 (1815); =Desm.=
   N. Dict. d’H. N. (2) ii. p. 181 (1816); =G. Cuv.= R. A. i. p.
   261 (1817); =Goldf.= Schr. Säug. v. p. 1216 (1818); =Schinz=,
   Cuv. Thierr. i. p. 389 (1821); =Desmoul.= Dict. Class. d’H. N.
   i. p. 44–2. (1822); =Desm.= Mamm. ii. p. 452 (1822); =Less.=
   Man. Mamm. p. 391 (1827); =J. B. Fisch.= Syn. Mamm. p. 458
   (1829); =Less.= Compl. Buff. x. p. 289 (1836); =Laurill.= Dict.
   Univ. d’H. N. i. p. 616 (1839); =Gerv.= Dict. Sci. Nat. i.
   p. 260 (1840); =Less.= N. Tabl. R. A., Mamm. p. 176 (1842);
   =Wagn.= Schr. Säug. Suppl. iv. p. 420 (1844), v. p. 402 (1855);
   =Schinz=, Syn. Mamm. ii. p. 408 (1845); =id.= Mon. Antil. p. 12
   (1848); =Gieb.= Säug. p. 313 (1853); =Nehring=, Z. Ges. Erdkunde
   Berl. xxvi. pp. 327 & 338 (1891) (distribution); =id.= Zool.
   Gart. 1891, p. 328.

   _Capra sayga_, =Forst.= Phil. Trans. lvii. p. 344 (1767).

   _Antilope (Gazella) saiga_, =Licht.= Mag. nat. Freund. vi. p.
   171 (1814).

   _Cerophorus (Antilope) saiga_, =Blainv.= Bull. Soc. Philom.
   1816, p. 75.

   _Colus saiga_, =Fitz.= SB. Wien, lix. pt. 1, p. 161 (1809).

   _Saiga saiga_, =Jent.= Cat. Ost. Leyd. Mus. (Mus. Pays-Bas, ix.)
   p. 134 (1887); =id.= Cat. Mamm. Leyd. Mus. (op. cit. xi.) p. 165
   (1892).

   _Antilope scythica_, =Pall.= Spic. Zool. fasc. i. p. 9 (1767);
   =Müll.= Natursyst. Suppl. p. 53 (1776); =Erxl.= Syst. R. A. p.
   289 (1777); =Zimm.= Spec. Zool. Geog. p. 541 (1777); =Gatt.=
   Brev. Zool. i. p. 83 (1780); =Oken=, Allg. Naturg. vii. p. 1365
   (1838).

   _Cemas colus_, =Oken=, Lehrb. Nat. p. 736 (1816).

   _Antilope colus_, =H. Sm.= Griff. An. K. iv. p. 226, v. p. 335
   (1827); =Less.= N. Tabl. R. A., Mamm. p. 176 (1812).

   _Saiga colus_, =Gray=, Ann. Mag. N. H. (1) xviii. p. 231 (1846).

   _Gazella colus_, =Turner=, P. Z. S. 1850, p. 168.

   VERNACULAR NAMES:--_Saigàk_ in Russian; _Suhak_ or _Baran
   polnii_ in Polish; _Ak-kirk_ of the Tartars; _Sogak_ of
   the Caucasians; _Gorossuun_, the male _Ohna_, the female
   _Scharcholdsi_, of the Calmucks; _Jaban-choin_ of the Turks;
   _Beschen-Chusch_ of Circassians; _Linjodsha_ of Chinese.--PALLAS.

Height at withers about 30 inches. General colour in summer dull
yellowish, with a whitish throat and indistinct facial markings; in
winter nearly uniform whitish all over, without markings anywhere. Ears
very short, thickly haired. Tail short, uniform in colour with the body.

Skull and horns of male as above described (p. 29). The dimensions of
an old male skull are:--Basal length 9·5 inches, greatest breadth 5·1,
muzzle to orbit 6·3.

The horns attain a length of about 13 or 14 inches, and are of a
peculiar waxy or pale amber-colour.

Female similar, but without horns.

   _Hab._ Steppes of Southern Russia, and South-eastern
   Siberia.

The Saiga, although closely allied to the Gazelles in structure,
is, as will be seen from our figure, very different in external
appearance, especially as regards the bloated form of the nose in the
adult male, which gives it a most ungainly look and renders it easily
distinguishable from all its allies of this group.

The Saiga was known to many of the ancient writers, and is described
and figured by Gesner, in his ‘History of Quadrupeds,’ as an inhabitant
of Scythia and Sarmatia, under the name “Colus,” which is said to have
been formed by transposition from the native name “Sulac.” The earliest
good account of it, however, is that of the well-known naturalist
J. G. Gmelin, who met with it during his travels in Siberia between
1733 and 1743, and described it at full length, in an article on new
quadrupeds published at St. Petersburg in 1760, under the name of
“_Ibex imberbis_.” Upon Gmelin’s _Ibex imberbis_ Linnæus,
in his ‘Systema Naturæ,’ based his _Capra tatarica_. Of the two
generic names proposed for this Antelope, _Saiga_ by Gray in 1843,
and _Colus_ by Wagner in the following year, we naturally prefer
the oldest, and adopt as the proper name of this Antelope, which is the
sole representative of its genus, _Saiga tatarica_.

Buffon, in his ‘Histoire Naturelle,’ also employed Saiga as the name
of this animal and based his account of it mainly upon Gmelin’s
description, stating, however, that there were specimens of its horns
in the Royal Cabinet at Paris. Following the prior authorities, he
describes the Saiga as a kind of wild goat found at that epoch in
Hungary, Poland, Tartary, and Southern Siberia in herds on the plains,
very fleet and active, and difficult of capture. We shall see, however,
that the range of this animal in Europe has become very much more
restricted in recent times.

The best modern account of the Saiga is that given in 1865, in the
Bulletin of the Imperial Society of Naturalists of Moscow, by Herr
Constantin Glitsch, of Sarepta on the Lower Volga, who was employed for
two years by the Imperial Russian Society of Acclimatisation to obtain
living examples of this Antelope for the Zoological Garden of Moscow.

In the days of Pallas, Herr Glitsch tells us, the Saiga had a wide
distribution in Europe, extending from the borders of Poland, all
across the Dnieper and the great flat southern portion of Russia to the
Caucasus and the Caspian. The European herds of this animal were also
often reinforced by large accessions from the steppes of Western Asia,
which, driven by stress of famine from their native haunts, crossed the
Ural and the Volga by the ice in winter. A hundred years later we find
a great change in the range of the Saiga, caused by the increase of
cultivation and population in the European portion of its range, which
has driven this animal back into the East. On the Dnieper, Herr Glitsch
tells us, the Saiga has altogether disappeared, in the Ukraine it is
no longer to be found, and even on the Don, where it was formerly so
plentiful, it is quite a scarce animal. Nowadays, in fact, in Europe
the Saiga is confined to the Kalmuk Steppes between the Don and the
Volga, and is found only within the triangle lying between these two
rivers, of which Tzaritzyn on the Volga forms the northern point.

On the flat and treeless plains which lie within these limits the Saiga
still exists in tolerable abundance, though diminishing in numbers
yearly as population increases. In the summer months it is distributed
over the whole of this area; in winter, beginning from November, it
is driven by the snow and cold from its northern resorts towards the
south, where it finds shelter in the rich grassy valleys of the Sal
and the Manitsch. Here the Saiga passes the winter on ground generally
free from snow. Here it breeds in the spring, and as soon as the snow
is melted in the more northern plains it begins its migration to the
North. At this season the Saigas go northwards in considerable herds,
the bucks first, followed by the does, and by the end of May they have
all reached the most northern boundaries of their range. But there
are many circumstances which interfere with the regularity of this
migration, and at Sarepta, near the north end of their area, there are
remarkable variations in their numbers. In some summers only a few
scattered individuals are to be met with, in other years large herds
are to be found in this district throughout the summer. But in very
severe winters, when even the most southern districts inhabited by this
Antelope are invaded by excessive cold and deep snow, the hungry beasts
are driven all over the country in search of food, and stray even as
far north as the vicinity of Sarepta. On these occasions whole herds
are often entombed in the snow-drifts and fall an easy prey to the
natives, who follow them on horseback and slaughter them by hundreds.
Under these circumstances it can easily be understood that the Saiga is
a gradually vanishing animal in Europe. One thing, however, is in their
favour, that the males, whose presence is betrayed by their horns, fall
more easy victims to the hunter than the hornless females, which are
more readily concealed in the herbage and thus escape notice.

  [Illustration: Fig. 49.

  Group of Saigas (1/12 nat. size).

  (From the ‘Royal Natural History,’ vol. ii. p. 298.)]

Herr Glitsch gives us detailed and excellent descriptions of the form
and colouring of the Saiga, and of the other peculiarities of the
animal of both sexes and in all ages. In the winter coat the hairs on
the upper part of the body are from two to three inches long, rather
shorter on the underparts, and a long beard extends from the chin down
the middle line of the neck to the breast. The older the animal is the
brighter is its winter dress.

The voice of the Saiga is stated by Glitsch to be a deep loud
bleat, which is frequently uttered by the young animals, but by the
older animals only in the pairing-season and when they are wounded.
The hearing, the sight, and the smell of the Saiga are all highly
developed, and combine to render it a very difficult animal for the
hunter to approach.

The Saigas are said to begin breeding about the middle of December
(new style), and at this season commonly assemble in large herds in
the warm side-valleys of the Sal and Manitsch, which are mostly free
from snow. At this time the young are said to be driven away from the
parents in flocks into the thickets, while the males fight fiercely one
with another for the possession of the females. The female is stated to
go five months with young, and to bring forth about the middle of May
amongst the higher vegetation of the steppe. As a rule, she produces
two young ones, seldom only one. The mother is sometimes seen followed
by three young ones, but in such a case the third is, probably, an
adopted animal. In the morning, after suckling her young ones, the
mother leaves them concealed in the herbage, and goes far off to feed,
returning to them only in the evening and staying with them all night.
In about four weeks’ time the young Saigas learn to feed themselves,
and the young horns begin to appear in the bucks. They suck, however,
till the end of October, and follow after the mother up to the winter.
The food of the Saiga consists not so much of the true grasses as of
the leafy shrubs of the steppes, such as _Artemisia_, _Atriplex_, and
_Glycirhiza_, as well as _Inula dysenterica_ and other saline plants.

Besides mankind, Herr Glitsch tells us, the Saiga Antelope in the Volga
district has no special enemy. The wolves and foxes, the only large
beasts of prey of these steppes, can only attack quite young animals,
the older ones easily making their escape. They have one great plague
in the steppes, however, in the insects, especially a species of
_Œstrus_, by which at times they seem to be driven nearly crazy,
and with the eggs and larvæ of which their skins seem to be almost
always infested.

The flesh of the Saiga is said to be particularly tender and
well-flavoured, and more like good mutton than anything else.

The favourite mode of chase of the Saiga is to drive out on to the
steppes at early dawn with a cart containing provisions, and, after
hiding the cart in some ravine, to stalk them with a rifle in the same
manner as other large game-animals. But they are also occasionally
taken in steel traps which are set upon their favourite runs. The
Kalmuks use leather slings for the same purpose.

Beyond the Ural River the Saiga extends widely over the Kirghiz Steppes
of Central Asia north of the Aral. Mr. William Bateson, F.R.S., has
kindly favoured us with the following notes of what he heard and saw of
the Saiga when in this district in 1896–7:--

   “The Saiga is fairly common in the Kirghiz Steppes, inhabiting
   the dry tracts covered with various species of _Artemisia_
   (Kirghiz, _Jusun_), upon which no doubt it feeds. It is not
   found in the sandy regions of the Kara-kum. I believe also that
   it does not live in the moister steppes, which bear a meadow
   vegetation. Its northern distribution in West Central Asia
   must therefore be bounded by the valley of the Irtish and its
   tributaries, which is all meadow-land. I met with Saigas first
   at the end of July 1896, in the neighbourhood of Lake Tschalkar,
   in the Turgai district. In this region we came upon their tracks
   constantly, and occasionally saw herds of various sizes from ten
   or a dozen to about a hundred. When we appeared they made off.
   In doing so I noticed that they generally travelled at right
   angles to our line of approach, though this may have been due to
   some accident in the lie of the ground. The Kirghiz catch them
   in traps set in their runs. A young one so caught was brought to
   me on July 27, 1896. Its horns and horn-cores were only slightly
   developed.

   “In the following year I travelled from Kozalinsk, on the
   Aral Sea, to Lake Balkhash, following the Shu River. In this
   journey we saw Saigas from time to time on the edge of the Bek
   Pak Dala, or Hungry Steppe, in April, but no large herds were
   seen. The Kirghiz spoke of them as common in the Bek Pak. Both
   this district and the Tschalkar Steppes, except for wells on
   the caravan-roads, are almost waterless after the snow has
   disappeared, so probably the Saiga can subsist without more
   water than the dew and its food-plants provide.

   “The Kirghiz name of the Saiga is ‘_Kiik_’ and the word
   Saiga is only known to them as Russian, in which language,
   however, the word is not really ‘Saiga,’ but ‘Säigak.’”

As regards the range of the Saiga at the present time, Herr E.
Büchner, Director of the Zoological Museum of the Imperial Academy of
Sciences of St. Petersburg, has kindly favoured us with the following
particulars:--

The Saiga is still met with, although very unfrequently, in the country
of the Ural Cossacks between the Wolga and the Ural, and extends
occasionally into the Government of Samara. East of the river Ural its
range extends over the Kirghiz Steppes and the steppe district of all
West Siberia--Turgai, Akmolinsk, and Semipalatinsk. South of this the
Saiga is also found in the steppes of Russian Turkestan and in the
Dsungarian steppes of Western Mongolia, but not in Transcaspia.

Such is the range of the Saiga at present. As already shown, it was
much wider than now even within the period of history. But when we go
back into the Pleistocene times we have good evidence that the Saiga
had a very much more extensive range, its fossil remains having been
obtained from the caverns and superficial deposits of Hungary, Belgium,
and Southern France. In the last-named country the researches of
French palæontologists have proved that its bones and teeth occur in
considerable numbers in certain of the cave deposits in the Departments
of Vienne, Dordogne, Tarn-et-Garonne, and Haute-Garonne. Moreover, as
shown by Mons. Gervais, at least one recognizable sketch of the head
of the Saiga has been found on an artificially incised bone of the
character so often met with in caverns where relics of human handiwork
occur. It appears, therefore, that the Saiga inhabited Western Europe
as late as the era of Palæolithic man, and was, moreover, in all
probability one of the objects of his chase.

Still more interesting, however, is it to find that, as shown by
Mr. A. Smith Woodward in a paper read before the Zoological Society
in 1890, the Saiga was also found in former days in Great Britain.
During excavations made in that year in the Pleistocene deposits
near Twickenham, a fine example of the frontlet and horn-cores of an
adult male _Saiga tatarica_ was discovered. By the kindness of
the Zoological Society we are enabled to reproduce the figure of this
interesting specimen (fig. 50, p. 39), which was exhibited by Mr. A.
Smith Woodward on the occasion in question, and is now in the gallery
of the British Museum.

Finally we may mention that, as has been recorded by Prof. Nehring,
there have been discovered in Moravia remains of a Saiga differing
from the living species in having three, in place of two, lower
premolars[2]. From the occurrence of these remains, and those of other
mammals now characteristic of the steppes in Western Europe, it has
been argued by geologists that steppe-like conditions and climate
must formerly have prevailed over large districts that have now quite
changed their character.

  [Illustration: Fig. 50.

  Frontlet and horns of Saiga (fossil), ♂. ½ nat. size.

  (P. Z. S. 1890, p. 614.)]

The Saiga has occasionally, but not often, been brought alive to the
menageries of Western Europe. In 1864 and 1865 young male specimens of
this Antelope were first received from Moscow by the Zoological Society
of London. In November 1866 a pair of Saigas was deposited in the
Zoological Society’s Gardens, and subsequently purchased, after living
for several months in the Regent’s Park Gardens. An excellent coloured
figure of these strange animals was made by Mr. J. Wolf in 1867, and
published in the Society’s ‘Proceedings,’ and after their death Dr.
Murie, then Prosector to the Society, based upon them an elaborate
account of their structure and anatomy, which will be found in the
volume of the same publication for the year 1870. By the kindness of
the Zoological Society we are enabled to reproduce here an excellent
figure of the head of the adult male Saiga in its winter coat, taken
from a drawing made by Mr. Berjeau under Dr. Murie’s supervision. We
cannot do better than refer those who are interested in the structure
and anatomy of the Saiga to Dr. Murie’s excellent article, from which,
however, we venture to borrow his account of the cutaneous glands of
this curious form, which appear to be not less than ten in number.

  [Illustration: Fig. 51.

  Head of male Saiga in its winter dress.

  (P. Z. S. 1870, p. 495.)]

   “In the Saiga there are two small suborbital glandular sacs, the
   so-called crumen, lachrymal sinus, or tearpit of some authors,
   which yield a thick whitish or pale yellow exudation. These are
   situated in front of the orbit, and slightly below the median
   transverse line of the eye. In the younger female the small
   external openings of these were placed ¾ of an inch, and in the
   male 1½ inch, in advance of the orbital ring; but the sinuses
   or sacs themselves lay in the broadish and moderately excavated
   infraorbital fossæ.

   “Each foot, as in the sheep, possesses an interdigital sac about
   1½ inch in depth, and opening by a narrow constricted aperture
   at its front and upper part. The orifice is hidden by very short
   closely placed yellowish hairs, whilst below these the sac is
   superficially covered by a tuft of much stronger and longer
   hairs. The secretion derived from these interdigital bags is
   yellow and of a hardish ceruminous character.

   “On the anterior aspect, but slightly to the inner side, of
   each fore knee is a small dermal gland, or a thickening of the
   cutaneous tissues, covered by a brownish patch of firm hairs.

   “In the inguinal regions of both sexes bare oblong or
   lozenge-shaped spaces exist; each of these is 5 inches or more
   in extreme long diameter. Upon these inner edges in the female
   the imperfectly developed udders and four teats are situated.”
   (P. Z. S. 1870, p. 500.)

The Saiga is represented in the British Museum by a mounted pair from
Sarepta on the Volga, and by other skins and skeletons from the same
locality. There are also some horns obtained by Dr. O. Finsch on the
steppe near Saisan, on the Russo-Chinese frontier, in 1876 (see Finsch,
‘Reise nach West-Sibirien im Jahre 1876,’ p. 193).

Our figure of the Saiga (Plate XLIX.) has been put upon the stone by
Mr. Smit from a black-and-white sketch prepared by Mr. Wolf for the
late Sir Victor Brooke. The original sketch, which belongs to Sir
Douglas Brooke, has been kindly lent to us for examination. We regret
to say, however, that we have no particulars as to the individual from
which Mr. Wolf’s drawing was taken.

    _August,_ 1897.




                         GENUS IV. PANTHOLOPS.

                                                           Type.
    _Pantholops_, =Hodgs.= P. Z. S. 1834, p. 81         P. HODGSONI.
    _Kemas_, =Gray=, List Mamm. B. M. p. 157 (1843)     P. HODGSONI.


Size medium. Nose less bent downwards than in _Saiga_, but more
swollen laterally, at least in the male. No suborbital glands. Tail
short. Mammæ 2. Large glands in feet and groin.

Skull without distinct pits between the eyes, or lachrymal vacuities,
or anteorbital fossæ. Nasal opening ample, but not so large as that of
_Saiga_.

Horns long, erect, compressed, slightly diverging, nearly straight
below, evenly curving forwards above; ringed in front. Female hornless.

   _Range of Genus._ Plateau of Tibet.

One species only.

  [Illustration:

    THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. L.

    _Wolf del, J. Smit lith._      _Hanhart imp._

  The Chiru.

  PANTHOLOPS HODGSONI.

  _Published by R. H Porter_]


                            80. THE CHIRU.

                      PANTHOLOPS HODGSONI (ABEL).

                              [PLATE L.]

   _Antilope hodgsoni_, =Abel=, Calc. Gov. Gazette, _cf._ Phil.
   Mag. lxviii. p. 234 (1826); Edin. Journ. Sc. vii. p. 164 (1827);
   ‘=Editor=,’ Glean, in Sc. i. p. 144 (1829); =J. B. Fisch.= Syn.
   Mamm. p. 462 (1829); =Hodgs.= Gleanings in Sci. ii. p. 348, pls.
   iii., v. (1830); =id.= P. Z. S. 1831, p. 52, 1832, p. 14, 1833,
   p. 110; =Laurill.= Dict. Univ. d’H. N. i. p. 617 (1839); =Gerv.=
   Dict. Sci. Nat. i. p. 264 (1840); =Wagn.= Schr. Säug. Supp. iv.
   p. 420 (1844), v. p. 402 (1855); =Schinz=, Syn. Mamm. ii. p. 415
   (1845); =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. 314 (1853); =Hooker=,
   Himalayan Journal, ii. pp. 132 & 158 (1854); =Przewalski=,
   Mongolia (Russian ed.), ii. pl. iii. ♂, pl. iv. fig. 2 ♀;
   Morgan’s Transl. ii. pp. 204 & 223 (1876).

   _Pantholops hodgsoni_, =Hodgs.= P. Z. S. 1834, p. 80; =id.=
   J. A. S. B. xi. p. 282 (1842); =id.= Calc. Journ. iv. p. 291
   (1844); =Gray=, Cat. Ung. B. M. p. 53, pl. vi. figs. 3, 4
   (skull) (1852); =Adams=, P. Z. S. 1858, p. 521; =Gerr.= Cat.
   Bones Mamm. B. M. p. 232 (1862); =Fitz.= SB. Wien, lix. 1, p.
   162 (1869); =Gray=, Cat. Rum. B. M. p. 33 (1872); =id.= Hand-l.
   Rum. B. M. p. 102 (1873); =Blanf.= Yark. Miss., Mamm. p. 89, pl.
   xvi. (1879); =Sterndale=, Mamm. Ind. p. 469 (1884); =Kinloch=,
   Large Game Shooting, p. 106, plate of head (1885); =Jent.= Cat.
   Ost. Leyd. Mus. (Mus. Pays-Bas, ix.) p. 134 (1889); =id.= Cat.
   Mamm. Leyd. Mus. (op. cit. xi.) p. 166 (1892); =W. Scl.= Cat.
   Mamm. Calc. Mus. ii. p. 163 (1891); =Blanf.= Mamm. Brit. Ind.
   p. 524 (1891); =Flow. & Lyd.= Mamm. p. 341 (1891); =Ward=, Horn
   Meas. (1) p. 102 (1892), (2) p. 146 (1896); =Lyd.= Horns and
   Hoofs, p. 157 (1892); =Percy=, Badm. Big Game Shooting, ii. p.
   335 (1894).

   _Kemas hodgsoni_, =Gray=, List Mamm. B. M. p. 157 (1843); =id.=
   Ann. Mag. N. H. (1) xviii. p. 231 (1846); =id.= Cat. Mamm. Nepal
   (Hodgson Coll.) (1) p. 26 (1846), (2) p. 13 (1863); =id.= List
   Ost. B. M. p. 55 (1874); =id.= Knowsl. Men. p. 3 (1850); =id.=
   P. Z. S. 1850, p. 112; =Horsf.= Cat. Mamm. Mus. E.I. Co. p. 166
   (1851); =Temm.= Esq. Zool. Guin. p. 189 (1853); =Blanf.= J. A.
   S. B. xli. pt. 2, p. 39 (1872).

   _Antilope kemas_, =H. Sm.= Griff. An. K. iv. p. 196, v. p. 328
   (1827); =Less.= Compl. Buff. x. p. 285 (1836).

   “_The Chíru_,” Quart. Orient. Mag. ii. p. 160 (1824), _undè_

   _Antilope chiru_, =Less.= Man. Mamm. p. 371 (1827) (_ex_ Quart.
   Orient. Mag. 1824, p. 260); =Oken=, Allg. Naturg. vii. p. 1369
   (1838); =Less.= N. Tabl. R. A., Mamm. p. 179 (1842).

   VERNACULAR NAMES:--_Chíru_ of Southern Tibetans and of sportsmen
   generally; _Tsus_ ♂, _Chus_ ♀, Chiru and Chuhu (_Blanford_);
   _Orongo_ of Northern Tibetans (_Przewalski_).

Height at withers about 31 or 32 inches. Hair very close, thick, and
crisp. Colour pale fawn, with a peculiar fulvous or pinkish suffusion,
especially on the flanks. Belly whitish, not sharply separated from the
colour of the sides. Face of male black, crown and neck whitish. Sides
of muzzle in male markedly swollen. Ears short, but pointed, whitish.
Limbs pale greyish white, a black line running down their anterior
faces in the male; female without blacker markings. Tail short,
coloured like the rump.

Skull dimensions of a male:--Basal length 10·2 inches, greatest breadth
5, muzzle to orbit 6·4.

Horns long, very graceful, nearly straight, only slightly curved
backwards below and forwards above, remarkably uniform in length and
curvature, generally from 23 to 26 inches in length, the largest
recorded being just under 28 inches.

_Female_ similar to male, but without horns.

   _Hab._ Plateau of Tibet.

The Chiru, or Tibetan Antelope as it is often called, although known
by the vague reports of the natives as long ago, perhaps, as 1816,
was first introduced to science by Abel in 1826, from information
and specimens furnished to him by the great naturalist and collector
Hodgson, whose name it worthily bears. As we learn from Hodgson’s
article published in ‘Gleanings in Science’ for 1830, it was in 1824 or
1825 that a live Chiru was sent to him in Nepal, where he was British
Resident at the Court of Catmandu. Hodgson, as was his custom, drew
up an elaborate description of the animal, and, after its death, sent
the notes along with the skin to Dr. C. Abel, who was at that time
one of the Secretaries of the Asiatic Society at Calcutta. Dr. Abel,
after making a few additions to the description, and proposing to name
the animal _Antilope hodgsoni_, read his paper at one of the
Meetings of the Asiatic Society, and, as it appears from notices in the
‘Philosophical Magazine’ of 1826 and ‘Brewster’s Journal of Science’ of
1827, had it published in the Calcutta Government Gazette or Journal.

But Hodgson, probably owing to the death of Dr. Abel shortly
afterwards, was unaware of this fact, and believing that Dr. Abel had
lost or neglected his communication, redescribed the species in 1830
under the name _Antilope hodgsoni_, which he was told that Dr.
Abel had applied to it. At that date (1830) Hodgson states that the
living specimen already referred to was the only example he had ever
seen of this animal, and that up to that time he had never been able
to get another example of it alive or dead. It is clear, however, that
Hodgson shortly after this date was enabled to obtain further specimens
of this Antelope. In one of his letters published in the ‘Proceedings
of the Zoological Society’ for 1832 it is stated that three individuals
had been examined, and in a subsequent communication (dated from Nepal
in February 1834) skins of the Chiru of both sexes are referred to as
being amongst other skins of mammals and birds which had been recently
despatched to the Society. In the latter communication also Mr. Hodgson
suggests the propriety of regarding the Chiru as representing “a new
subgenus to be termed _Pantholops_, the vulgar old name for the
Unicorn.” Naturalists have generally acquiesced in Hodgson’s suggestion
on this point, and we follow the usual practice in denominating the
present species _Pantholops hodgsoni_.

Other names, however, have been proposed. In 1827 Lesson, in his
‘Manuel de Mammalogie,’ called this Antelope _Antilope chiru_, quoting
as his reference an article in the ‘Quarterly Oriental Magazine’ for
1824 (p. 260), which is, however, merely another version of Abel’s
paper.

About the same date also Hamilton Smith, in one of the volumes of
Griffith’s edition of Cuvier’s ‘Animal Kingdom,’ proposed, with a note
of interrogation, to give the name _Antilope kemas_ to the Chiru,
quoting its description from one of the above-mentioned reports of
Abel’s original paper.

We are quite satisfied, however, that it is best to employ the specific
name _hodgsoni_ for this species as that which was first applied to it.

Since the days when Hodgson was Resident in Nepal many British
travellers and sportsmen have penetrated into the snowy ranges of the
Himalaya, and have met with the Tibetan Antelope. Sir Joseph Hooker,
in the second volume of his ‘Himalayan Journal,’ tells us that he
saw Chirus on the Cholamoo lakes near the Donkia Pass in Sikim in
October 1849. They were feeding in company with “Gaurs” (_Gazella
picticaudata_) upon the short grass about the lake, which lies at an
elevation of some 17,000 feet above the sea-level. Sir Joseph Hooker
gives an excellent figure of the remarkable horns of this Antelope,
which by his kindness we are enabled to reproduce, and alludes to the
ideas of Hodgson (which were shared in by Hue and Gabet) of the profile
view of these horns having given rise to the belief of the existence
of a Unicorn in Tibet. We should mention that Blanford when he visited
Sikim in 1871 was told by the Tibetans that the Chiru is not now found
within a long distance of the frontier, but only beyond it in Tibet
proper. He admits, however, that it is not probable that there could
have been any mistake about so fine and conspicuous an animal.

  [Illustration: Fig. 52.

  Horns of Chiru.

  (From Hooker’s ‘Himalayan Journal,’ vol. ii. p. 158.)]

But by far the most complete account of the Chiru yet published is that
given by General Kinloch in his excellent volume on the ‘Large Game of
Tibet and Northern India,’ from the second edition of which, published
in 1885, we venture to extract the following particulars:--

   “So far as we know, Thibetan Antelopes are never found near
   the habitations of man, but frequent the plains and elevated
   valleys far above the limits of cultivation, where few human
   beings, save occasional wandering shepherds, ever disturb them.
   The most accessible country to sportsmen where the Thibetan
   Antelope is to be found is Chung Chenmo, a desolate valley to
   the north of the Pangong lakes. In this valley, and in those of
   the streams which flow down to it from the spurs of the Kárá
   Koram mountains, Antelope are usually plentiful; and they are
   also to be met with all over the lofty plateau which has to be
   crossed on the road to Yarkand. A few have been shot in the
   neighbourhood of the Mánsarovárá lake near the north-western
   frontier of Nepál, but there are great difficulties in the
   way of getting there, the Thibetans jealously excluding all
   foreigners.

   “The Thibetan Antelope is considerably larger than the Indian
   Antelope, and somewhat more heavily made; its remarkable thick
   coat of closely set brittle hairs also tending to increase its
   apparent bulk. The color is a light fawn, varying in shade on
   different parts of the body, and tending almost to white in old
   buck. The legs are dark-colored, and the faces of very old males
   are nearly black. The muzzle is very curious; instead of being
   fine and compressed, as is the case with most deer and antelope,
   it is considerably enlarged and puffy-looking; so much so,
   that properly stuffed heads are generally supposed by persons
   unacquainted with the animal to be failures of the taxidermist.

   “The horns are, perhaps, the most graceful of those of any
   antelope: set close together at the base, they diverge in
   an easy curve for about two-thirds of their length, and
   then converging more abruptly, approach each other, in some
   specimens, within three or four inches at the tips. Out of
   twenty-five that I have shot I have never seen a pair above
   twenty-four and a half inches, but considerably longer specimens
   are to be obtained, and I have recently heard of a pair
   twenty-eight and a half inches. The horns are jet-black, of very
   fine grain, with a small central core, and being deeply notched
   on their anterior surface, they form perfect knife-handles and
   sword-hilts. When seen in profile, the forward inclination of
   the horns has a curious effect, the two appearing like a single
   horn; which has given rise to the belief that the Thibetan
   Antelope is the Tchirou or Unicorn Antelope mentioned by the
   Abbé Hue.

   “Although living in such remote and sequestered regions, the
   Thibetan Antelope is wary in its habits. In the mornings and
   evenings it frequents the grassy margins of glacial streams,
   which frequently flow between steep banks gradually scarped out
   by the floods of centuries and now remote from the ordinary
   water’s edge. The ravines have, for the most part, been cut
   through gently sloping valleys; and on ascending their steep
   sides, slightly undulating plains will be found to stretch away,
   until they merge in the easy slopes of the rounded hills which
   bound the valley. To these plains the Antelope betake themselves
   during the day, and there they excavate hollows deep enough
   to conceal their bodies, from which, themselves unperceived,
   they can detect any threatening danger at a great distance. In
   addition to the concealment afforded by their ‘shelter pits,’
   they have an additional safeguard against surprise in the
   constant _mirage_ which prevails on these stony wastes
   during the bright hours of the day. This _mirage_ not
   only distorts all visible objects in an extraordinary manner,
   but, like rippling water, refracts the rays of light to such a
   degree as to render objects altogether invisible at very short
   distances. It is, of course, worst near the surface of the
   ground, but on very hot days it attains a level of several feet;
   and I well remember, on one occasion, observing the slender
   horns of an Antelope gliding past me within three hundred yards,
   apparently borne on the surface of a glassy stream, in which
   the wearer of the horns was submerged and completely hidden
   from view! When Antelope are feeding on the grassy flats by the
   streams is the time when they may be easily approached; and then
   a knowledge of the ground, and of the habits of the animal,
   renders success in stalking them tolerably certain.”

How far the Chiru extends into the high plateau of Northern Asia
beyond the Himalayas it is yet a little uncertain. Dr. Blanford, in
his account of the mammals collected by Stoliczka during the Second
Yarkand Mission (where excellent coloured figures of both sexes of this
Antelope are given), tells us that it has been found in the Kuen-lun
range, but has not been met with further north-west or west. It is
also, as we are told by the great Russian traveller and naturalist
Przewalski, a characteristic animal of the highlands of Northern Tibet.
The “Orongo,” as it is here called by the Monguls and Tanguts, was
first met with by the great traveller after crossing the Burkhan Buddha
range, beyond which it was found distributed to the south as far as the
Tang-la mountains. In Mr. Delmar Morgan’s translation of Przewalski’s
travels will be found the following passages relating to the habits of
this animal, of which, in the original Russian edition of the work,
both sexes are figured:--

   “The Orongo is found in small herds from five to twenty or forty
   head, rarely collecting in large troops of several hundred, and
   this only where the pasturage is good and plentiful. Though
   a few of the old bucks, usually accompanying every herd, are
   more cautious and experienced, the Orongos generally are not
   so wary in their habits. In their flight the males follow the
   herd as though to prevent straggling; whilst with the Dzerens
   and Kara-sultas this order is reversed. When in motion, either
   leisurely or at full speed, the Orongo holds its horns erect,
   which adds greatly to its appearance. When trotting--its usual
   pace--the legs move so quickly that at a distance they are
   invisible, and dogs or wolves are soon left behind. We arrived
   in Tibet during the breeding-season of these animals, which
   begins late in November and lasts a month.

   “At this time the full-grown males are in a most exited state,
   taking little food and soon losing the fat which they had
   gained during summer. The buck soon forms his harem of ten to
   twenty wives, and these he jealously guards lest any of them
   should fall into the power of a rival. No sooner does he see
   an adversary approaching than he, the lawful lord of the herd,
   rushes to the encounter with head lowered, uttering short deep
   bleats. The combat is fierce, and the long sharp horns inflict
   terrible wounds, often causing the death of both antagonists.
   Should one feel his strength ebbing, he takes to flight pursued
   by his enemy, then suddenly wheeling round receives the latter
   on his horns. As a proof of the fury with which they fight, I
   remember shooting one of the combatants, who, to my surprise,
   continued the fight for several minutes after he had received
   his death-wound, and then suddenly expired. If a doe chance to
   stray from the herd, the buck immediately gives chase, and,
   bleating as he goes, tries to drive her back again. While his
   attention is thus engaged the others give him the slip, and
   pursuing first one, then another, he often loses his whole
   harem. At last, deserted by all, he gives vent to his fury and
   disgust by striking the ground with his hoofs, curving his tail,
   lowering his horns, and bleating defiance at his compeers. From
   morning until evening these scenes are constantly occurring, and
   there appears to be no bond of union between the male antelope
   and his does; to-day they consort with one buck, to-morrow with
   another.

   “The rutting-season over, the Orongos again live peaceably with
   one another, the males and females often collecting in separate
   herds. We saw a troop of about 300 does in February in the
   valley of the Shuga; the young are dropped in July. The Orongo
   is fearless and will let the hunter openly approach within 300
   yards, or even nearer. The report of firearms or the whistle of
   a bullet does not alarm it; it only shows surprise by walking
   quietly away, frequently stopping to look at the hunter. Like
   other antelopes it is extremely tenacious of life and will run
   a long way although wounded. They are not difficult to shoot,
   for besides showing no fear, they haunt rocky defiles in the
   mountains, where they may be easily stalked. I have fired as
   many as from one to two hundred shots at them in the course of
   the day, my bag, of course, varying a good deal with my luck in
   the long shots. The Orongo is held sacred by the Mongols and
   Tangutans, and lamas will not touch the meat, which, by the way,
   is excellent, particularly in autumn when the animal is fat. The
   blood is said to possess medicinal virtues, and the horns are
   used in charlatanism: Mongols tell fortunes and predict future
   events by the rings on these, and they also serve to mark out
   the burial-places, or more commonly the circles within which the
   bodies of deceased lamas are exposed; these horns are carried
   away in large numbers by pilgrims returning from Tibet, and are
   sold at high prices. Mongols tell you that a whip-handle made
   from one will in the hands of the rider prevent his steed from
   tiring.”

It is almost unnecessary to say that living specimens of the Chiru have
never, as yet, been brought to Europe.

The British Museum contains a mounted specimen of an adult male of
the Chiru, obtained by Mr. Mandelli in Sikim and presented by Dr. W.
T. Blanford; also some specimens presented by Hodgson, and a number
of very fine skulls and horns from Ladakh and Kumaon from the Hume
Collection.

Our illustration (Plate L.), which represents a male of this animal in
a snowstorm, has been put upon the stone by Mr. Smit from a coloured
drawing prepared by Mr. Wolf under the directions of the late Sir
Victor Brooke.

    _August,_ 1897.




                         GENUS V. ANTIDORCAS.

                                                           Type.
    _Antidorcas_, =Sund.= Pecora, K. Vet.-Ak. Handl.
       1845, p. 271 (1847)                               A. EUCHORE.


General characters as in _Gazella_, but, as in _Saiga tatarica_ alone
of Ruminants, with only two lower premolars, and the upper anterior
premolar reduced to half the size of the second. Back with a peculiar
elongate evertible fold in the skin.

Skull with small but particularly deep anteorbital fossæ, no
anteorbital vacuities, and very broad and open posterior nares.

Horns medium, lyrate, twisted inwards, with a double serpentine
curvature, convex inwards and in front below, outwards and behind
above. The points turned inwards or backwards.

   _Range of Genus._ Africa south of the Zambesi.

  [Illustration:

    THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LI

    _Wolf del J Smit lith_      _Hanhart imp_

  The Springbuck

  ANTIDORCAS EUCHORE.

  _Published by R H Porter_]


                          81. THE SPRINGBUCK.

                      ANTIDORCAS EUCHORE (ZIMM.).

                              [PLATE LI.]

   _La Gazelle à bourse sur le dos_, =Allamand=, in Schneider’s ed.
   of Buffon’s Hist. Nat., Suppl. iv. p. 142, pl. lx. (1778); =id.=
   Buff. H. N., Suppl. vi. p. 180 (Paris, 1782).

   _Antilope marsupialis_, =Zimm.= Geogr. Gesch. ii. p. 427 (1780);
   =Bechst.= Syst. Uebers. vierf. Thiere, ii. p. 645 (1800).

   _Cemas marsupialis_, =Oken=, Lehrb. Nat. iii. pt. 2, p. 738
   (1816).

   _Springbok_, =Sparrm.= K. Vet.-Ak. Handl. 1780, p. 275; =id.=
   Reise, p. 396, pl. viii. (1784); =id.= Engl. transl. ii. p. 83
   (1786); =Daniell=, Afr. Scenery, no. 18 (1812).

   _Antilope euchore_, “Forst.,” =Zimm.= Geogr. Gesch. iii. p. 269
   (1783); =Schr.= Säug. pl. cclxxii. (1787); =Shaw=, Gen. Zool.
   ii. pt. 2, p. 314 (1801); =G. Cuv.= Dict. Sci. Nat. ii. p.
   232 (1804); =Licht.= Mag. nat. Freund. vi. p. 169 (1814); =G.
   Fisch.= Zoogn. iii. p. 423 (1814); =Afz.= N. Act. Ups. vii. p.
   220 (1815); =Desm.= N. Dict. d’H. N. (2) ii. p. 185 (1816); =G.
   Cuv.= R. A. i. p. 260 (1817); =Goldf.= Schr. Säug. v. p. 1189
   (1818); =Schinz=, Cuv. Thierr. i. p. 387 (1821); =Desmoul.=
   Dict. Class. d’H. N. i. p. 441 (1822); =Desm.= Mamm. ii. p.
   455 (1822); =Burch.= Trav. i. p. 290 (1822); =id.= List Quadr.
   pres. to B. M. p. 5 (1825) (Nugariep R.); =H. Sm.= Griff. An.
   K. iv. p. 208, v. p. 331 (1827); =Less.= Man. Mamm. p. 373
   (1827); =Licht.= Darst. Säug. pl. vii. (♂♀) (1827); =J. B.
   Fisch.= Syn. Mamm. p. 461 (1829); =Smuts=, En. Mamm. Cap. p.
   72 (1832); =Less.= Compl. Buff. x. p. 286 (1836); =Laurill.=
   Dict. Univ. d’H. N. i. p. 615 (1839); =Gerv.= Dict. Sci. Nat. i.
   p. 261 (1840); =Jard.= Nat. Misc. (1) vii. p. 213, pl. xxvii.
   (1842); =Less.= N. Tabl. R. A., Mamm. p. 176 (1812); =Forst.=
   Descr. Anim. p. 388 (1844); =Wagn.= Schr. Säug. Suppl. iv. p.
   414 (1844), v. p. 407 (1855); =Schinz=, Syn. Mamm. ii. p. 400
   (1845); =id.= Mon. Antil. p. 5, pl. iii. (1848); =Temm.= Esq.
   Zool. Guin. p. 193 (1853); =Gieb.= Säug. p. 309 (1853); =Brehm=,
   Thierl. iii. p. 212 (1880); =Huet=, Bull. Soc. Acclim. (4) iv.
   p. 485 (1887).

   _Cerophorus (Gazella) euchore_, =Blainv.= Bull. Soc. Philom. p.
   75 (1816).

   _Gazella euchore_, =A. Sm.= S. Afr. Quart. J. ii. p. 191 (1834);
   =Harr.= Wild Anim. S. Afr. pl. iii. (♂ ♀) (1840); =Sund.= K.
   Vet.-Ak. Handl. 1842, pp. 201 & 243 (1843); =Gray=, List Mamm.
   B. M. p. 160 (1843); =id.= Cat. Ost. B. M. pp. 56 & 145 (1847);
   =id.= Knowsl. Men. p. 6 (1850); =Turner=, P. Z. S. 1850, p. 168;
   =Brooke=, P. Z. S. 1873, p. 550; =Drumm.= Large Game S. Afr. p.
   426 (1875); =Buckley=, P. Z. S. 1876, pp. 282 & 291; =Bocage=,
   P. Z. S. 1878, p. 741 (Huilla, Angola); =Selous=, P. Z. S. 1881,
   p. 757; =Scl.= List Anim. Z. S. (8) p. 142 (1883), (9) p. 156
   (1896); =Flow. & Gars.= Cat. Coll. Surg. ii. p. 264 (1884);
   =Bryden=, Kloof and Karroo, p. 220, figs. ♀ (1889); =W. Scl.=
   Cat. Mamm. Calc. Mus. ii. p. 162 (1891); =Flow. & Lyd.= Mamm.
   p. 342 (1891); =Ward=, Horn Meas. (1) p. 122 (1892), (2) p. 163
   (1896); =Nicolls & Egl.= Sportsm. S. Afr. p. 29, pl. vi. fig. 20
   (1892); =Lyd.= Horns and Hoofs, p. 238 (1893).

   _Antidorcas euchore_, =Sund.= Pecora, K. Vet.-Ak. Handl. 1845,
   p. 271 (1847); =id.= Hornschuch’s Transl., Arch. Skand. Beitr.
   ii. p. 267; Reprint, p. 87 (1848); =Gray=, P. Z. S. 1850, p.
   116; =id.= Cat. Ung. B. M. p. 63 (1852); =Gerr.= Cat. Bones
   Mamm. B. M. p. 233 (1862); =Blyth=, Cat. Mamm. Mus. As. Soc. p.
   171 (1863); =Fitz.= SB. Wien, lix. pt. 1, p. 158 (1869); =Gray=,
   Cat. Rum. B. M. p. 40 (1872); =id.= Hand-l. Rum. B. M. p. 109
   (1873); =Jent.= Cat. Ost. Leyd. Mus. (Mus. Pays-Bas, ix.) p. 169
   (1887); =id.= Cat. Mamm. Leyd. Mus. (op. cit. xi.) p. 137 (1892).

   _Antilope saccata_, =Bodd.= Elench. Anim. p. 142 (1785).

   _Capra pygargus_, =Thunb.= Resa, ii. p. 28 (1789), Engl. Transl.
   ii. p. 24 (1793).

   _Antilope pygarga_, =Thunb.= Mém. Ac. Pétersb. iii. p. 315
   (1811) (and no doubt of many other earlier authors; _nec_ Pall.).

   _Antilope saltans_, =Kerr=, Linn. An. K. p. 312 (1792).

   _Antilope saltatrix_, =Link=, Beytr. p. 79 (1795) (_nec_ Bodd.).

   _Antilope saliens_ and _A. dorsata_, “Lac.,” =Desm.= N. Dict.
   d’H. N. (1) xxiv. Tabl. p. 33 (1804).

   VERNACULAR NAMES:--_Springbuck_ of English; _Springbok_
   or _Prongbok_ of Dutch; _Tsebe_ (_A. Smith_) or _Umegi_
   (_Drummond_) of Kaffirs. _Insaypee_ of Bechuanas; _Eetsaypee_ of
   Makalakas (_Selous_).

Height at withers 31 or 32 inches. General colour bright rufous fawn; a
strongly marked, dark, lateral band present, as in many Gazelles. Face
pure white, a narrow fawn-coloured line running forwards to the muzzle
from the openings of the anteorbital glands on each side. Crown and
centre of forehead fawn-coloured like the neck and back. Ears long and
pointed, their backs white or pale fawn. Posterior back with a strongly
contrasted pure white line, the white hairs of which are placed in a
fold of the skin, which fold is everted when the animal is excited, and
then forms a prominent white crest; rump white, in continuation with
the dorsal line; tail also white basally, black and crested terminally.
Belly pure white. Limbs fawn-coloured externally, white on their inner
sides and behind.

Skull-dimensions of a male:--Basal length 7·8 inches, greatest breadth
3·7, muzzle to orbit 4·7.

Horns attaining a length of about 14 or 15 inches round the curves, one
specimen being recorded as long as 19 inches.

_Female_ similar to male, but horns smaller and not so strongly
ringed at the base.

   _Hab._ South Africa, south of the Zambesi, extending northwards
   on the west to Mossamedes.

The Springbuck is, no doubt, very closely allied to the Gazelles; but
in view of its peculiar dentition, which, as we have pointed out above
(p. 53), is unique in the bovine family, and of the remarkable dorsal
fold of skin, which is not found in any of its allies, we have thought
it advisable to adopt for it the generic term _Antidorcas_, first
provisionally suggested for it by Sundevall in 1847, and subsequently
employed by many naturalists. The locality of the Springbuck is also
quite distinct from that of the typical Gazelles, which are essentially
a northern group, no true _Gazellæ_ being met with until we
advance as far north as German East Africa.

This Antelope, with its bright colour and lively movements, as may
be easily imagined, quickly attracted the notice of the early Dutch
settlers at the Cape and received from them the appropriate name of
“Springbok,” from the extraordinary springs and leaps which it makes
in running. The first scientific account of it published appears to
be that given by Allamand in Schneider’s edition of the ‘Histoire
Naturelle’ of Buffon, published at Amsterdam about 1778. In the fourth
volume of the ‘Supplement’ of this rather rare work, for the privilege
of consulting which we are much indebted to Sir Edmund Loder, will be
found (under the head of an addition to the article on Gazelles issued
in the twelfth volume of the original work) described and figured
“La Gazelle à bourse sur le dos,” as Allamand named the Springbuck.
Allamand informs us that his figure and description (which unmistakably
relate to this animal) were taken from a specimen then living in the
menagerie of the Prince of Orange, which had been brought from the
Cape by Capt. Gordon, and was the only survivor of twelve examples of
this animal with which Captain Gordon had started for Europe.

Upon Allamand’s “Gazelle à bourse” Zimmermann, in the second volume
of his ‘Geographische Geschichte,’ issued in 1780, established his
_Antilope marsupialis_, adding a Latin diagnosis and a shortened
translation of Allamand’s description. In the meantime, however,
another name seems to have been proposed for the same animal by
Forster, who, as we are informed by Zimmermann in the third volume of
his ‘Geographische Geschichte,’ had called the Springbuck _Antilope
euchore_. This no doubt was done in the famous ‘Descriptiones
Animalium,’ which, although generally accessible in manuscript to
the naturalists of the day, and frequently quoted by them, was not
published until 1844. However, as Forster’s name for the Springbuck has
been accepted nearly universally by subsequent naturalists, we do not
now propose to change the name by which this animal has been known for
so many years.

The immediately succeeding writers added little or nothing to our
knowledge of this Antelope until about 1829, when Lichtenstein, in the
second number of his ‘Darstellung der Thiere,’ gave coloured figures of
both its sexes under the name “_Antilope euchore_, Forster,” from
specimens in the Berlin Museum procured by him or his assistants in
Cafferland.

A few years later Cornwallis Harris visited South Africa. In his
great work on the results of his journey subsequently published, this
celebrated sportsman and naturalist devotes his third plate to the
illustration of a group of Springbucks, which he describes at the
period of his writing (1840) as then still abundant in the Colony
and “distributed over the arid plains beyond it in unlimited herds.”
“Amongst the many striking novelties,” Cornwallis Harris writes, “which
present themselves to the eye of the traveller in Southern Africa there
are, perhaps, few objects more conspicuous or more beautiful than the
dancing herds of graceful Springbucks which speckle the broad plains of
the interior.”

   “Matchless in the symmetry of its form, the Springbok is
   measurelessly the most elegant and remarkable species of the
   comprehensive group to which it pertains. The dazzling contrast
   betwixt the lively cinnamon of its back and the snowy whiteness
   of the lower parts is agreeably heightened by the intensely
   rich chestnut bands which traverse the flanks--its dark beaming
   eye, with its innocent and lamb-like expression of face, and
   the showy folds of gossamer on the haunches--displayed or
   concealed at the animal’s volition--combining to render it one
   of the most beautiful objects in the animal creation. As the
   traveller advances over the trackless expanse, hundreds of this
   delicately formed antelope bound away on either side of his path
   with meteor-like and sportive velocity, winging their bird-like
   flight by a quick succession of those singularly elastic leaps
   which have given rise to its colonial appellation, and which
   enable it to surpass, as well in swiftness as in grace, almost
   every other mammiferous quadruped.

   “But although frequently found herding by itself, the Springbok
   is usually detected in the society of Gnoos, Quaggas, Ostriches,
   or Blesboks. Fleet as the wind, and thoroughly conscious of
   its own speed, it mingles with their motley herds, sauntering
   about with an easy careless gait, occasionally with outstretched
   neck approaching some coquettish doe, and spreading its own
   glittering white folds so as to effect a sudden and complete
   metamorphosis of exterior from fawn-colour to white. Wariest of
   the wary, however, the Springboks are ever the first to take
   the alarm, and to lead the retreating column. Pricking their
   taper ears, and elevating their graceful little heads upon the
   first appearance of any strange object, a dozen or more trot
   nimbly off to a distance, and having gazed impatiently for an
   instant to satisfy themselves of the actual presence of an
   enemy,--putting their white noses to the ground, they begin,
   in colonial phraseology, to ‘_pronken_’ or make ‘a brave
   show.’ Unfurling the snowy folds on their haunches so as to
   display around the elevated scut, a broad white gossamer disk,
   shaped like the spread tail of a peacock, away they all go
   with a succession of strange perpendicular bounds, rising with
   curved loins into the air, as if they had been struck with
   battledores--rebounding to the height of ten or twelve feet with
   the elasticity of corks thrown against a hard floor; vaulting
   over each other’s backs with depressed heads and stiffened
   limbs, as if engaged in a game of leap-frog; and after appearing
   for a second as if suspended in the air,--clearing at a single
   spring from ten to fifteen feet of ground without the smallest
   perceptible exertion. Down come all four feet together with a
   single thump, and nimbly spurning the earth beneath, away they
   soar again, as if about to take flight--invariably clearing a
   road or beaten track by a still higher leap than all--as if
   their natural disposition to regard man as an enemy indicated
   them to mistrust even the ground upon which he had trodden.

   “The ‘_trek bokken_’--as the Colonists are wont to term
   the immense migratory swarms of these antelopes which, to
   the destruction of every green herb, occasionally inundate
   the abodes of civilization--not only form one of the most
   remarkable features in the Zoology of Southern Africa, but may
   also be reckoned amongst the most extraordinary examples of the
   fecundity of animal life. To form any estimate of their numbers
   on such occasions would be perfectly impossible--the havoc
   committed in their onward progress falling nothing short of the
   ravages of a wasting swarm of locusts.

   “Pouring down, like the devastating curse of Egypt, from their
   native plains in the interior whence they have been driven,
   after protracted drought and by the failure of the stagnant
   pools on which they have relied, whole legions of Springboks
   abandon the parched soil and throng with one accord to deluge
   and lay waste the cultivated regions around the Cape. So
   effectually does the van of the vast column destroy every
   vestige of verdure, that the rear is often reduced to positive
   starvation.

   “Ere the morning’s dawn cultivated fields, which the evening
   before appeared proud of their promising verdure, despite of
   every precaution that can be taken, are reaped level with the
   ground; and the grazier, despoiled of his lands, is driven to
   seek pasture for his flocks elsewhere, until the bountiful
   thunder-clouds re-animating nature restore vegetation to the
   burnt-up country. Then these unwelcome visitors whose ranks,
   during their short but destructive sojourn, have been thinned
   both by man and beast, retire instinctively to their secluded
   abodes, to renew their depredations when necessity shall again
   compel them.”

Although not still met with in the countless thousands described by
Cornwallis Harris, the Springbuck, we are pleased to be able to say,
is even now abundant in many parts of the Cape Colony, and Springbuck
shooting is still one of the recognized sports of its inhabitants and
of visitors to Southern Africa who go in search of game. Mr. H. A.
Bryden, in his well-known volume ‘Kloof and Karroo,’ devotes a whole
chapter to the delights of Springbuck shooting, and tells us that of
late years large tracts of waste land in the Colony have been fenced in
in order to preserve these Antelopes. For example, as the ‘Graaf Reinet
Advertiser,’ of November 1886, informs us, Shirlands, the property of
Mr. John Priest, of that district, was, twelve to thirteen years ago, a
piece of waste land abandoned to squatters. Now there are 16,000 morgen
(more than 32,000 acres) fenced in with wire. Within this fence there
are fully a thousand Springboks where formerly only a few remained
“harassed and hunted to death by impoverished lazy squatters.”

In the Cape Colony Mr. W. L. Sclater, the Director of the South African
Museum, Cape Town, kindly informs us that in the west of the Colony
the Springbuck is met with in Namaqualand, Clanwilliam, Beaufort West,
Prince Albert, and the adjoining districts. In the middle of the
Colony it is found in Uitenhaag, Graaff Reinet, Colesberg, Albert,
and Queenstown, but is rare in East Albany. On the north it occurs in
Great Namaqualand and Damaraland, also in Kimberley, Barkly West, and
Herbert. But it must be understood that it is mostly confined in all
these districts to those farms of the Dutch and English settlers where
it is preserved, and that permission to shoot it must on all occasions
be obtained. The same is the case in the Orange Free State and
Transvaal. In Bechuanaland, being wholly unprotected, the Springbuck
has in recent years been much shot down, except on the open arid flats
north and south of the Botletle and the neighbourhood of the great
Makari-kari Salt-pan, where Messrs. Nicolls and Eglington say it still
roams in large herds.

As regards the northern limit of the Springbuck, it certainly does not
cross the Zambesi in any place so far as we have been able to ascertain.

  [Illustration: Fig. 53.

  Horns of Springbuck, ♂ and ♀.]

Mr. F. C. Selous (P. Z. S. 1881, p. 757) says that its northern range
is bounded on the east by the thick forests which run east and west
south of the Mababe River. Westwards, as already stated, it occurs
in the district of Lake Ngami and throughout Damaraland up to the
Portuguese province of Mossamedes, whence specimens have been forwarded
to the Lisbon Museum by their energetic collector M. d’Anchieta.

Writing quite recently to Sclater, Mr. J. ffolliott Darling gives the
following notes:--

   “The Springbuck does not range up so far north as Mashonaland;
   but I have shot them in Griqualand West, the Transvaal, and
   the Orange Free State, also in Bechuanaland, where the most
   northerly point I found them in 1890 was south of the Macloutsie
   River in the British Protectorate. I was for several years in
   various parts of Griqualand East, but never saw a Springbuck,
   though there are large flats suitable for them, on which Oribis
   abound.

   “When protected they become very numerous, so much so as to
   scarcely leave any grass for the sheep in some places; one
   farmer told me that he reckoned that the Springbok cost him £200
   a year.

   “One curious thing, well known to hunters, but I do not
   recollect ever seeing it in print, is that the white patch of
   hair on the back smells like honey.

   “I have several times coursed Springbuck with good greyhounds,
   but never caught one; they weary out the dogs playing before
   starting to run. If one buck be found by himself greyhounds can
   catch him; but some people say that if you find one alone it
   means that he is sick, and that is the reason that he can be
   caught. I know some prominent coursing men do not like their
   dogs to run after Springbuck, as too frequent failures to kill
   discourage the dogs, and often when run into they will turn and
   fight the greyhound, which, if timid, may be spoiled thereby and
   become afraid to attack other antelopes.

   “However, one friend, in whom I have every reliance, told me
   that a large and very strong greyhound of his on one occasion
   separated a fine Springbuck ram from a small herd and killed him
   single-handed.

   “Of course the jumping powers of this buck are well known
   and how they will skip across a road 50 ft. wide without any
   trouble. The habit of spreading out the hair on the back, so as
   to expose the white patch more prominently when frightened, is
   very curious, as in the case of being hunted by dogs it makes
   the animal more easily perceived and followed in long grass or
   scrub.”

White and Albino varieties are not so frequently met with amongst the
_Bovidæ_ as in some other groups of mammals. But the ‘Johannesburg
Times’ of January 22nd, 1897, informs us that a perfectly white
Springbuck, caught in the Orange Free State, and supposed to be about
eleven months old, was at that time being exhibited in Johannesburg
by Messrs. Colquhoun and Hill, of Jeppe Street. Such a novelty as
a white Springbuck was previously quite unknown in the Transvaal.
This communication was sent to us accompanied by a photograph of the
animal taken from life, from which it would appear that its colour was
absolutely of a spotless white.

The Springbuck, although not unfrequently seen in the Zoological
Gardens of Europe, is, as might be supposed, from its free and active
habits, somewhat impatient of captivity and does not thrive in
confinement except in occasional instances. The Zoological Society
acquired their first specimen (by purchase) on July 9th, 1852, and, as
will be seen by reference to their published Lists of Animals, others
have been subsequently received at short intervals since that date. At
the time we are writing there is a fine pair in the Society’s Gardens,
deposited by H.R.H. the Prince of Wales in March, 1893, which are
still doing well. Dr. Wünderlich, Director of the Zoological Garden
of Cologne, has kindly furnished us with notes upon a pair of this
Antelope which he bought on the 13th May, 1896, from Herr Reiche, of
Alfeld. They bred on the 24th May last year, and after a period of
171 days a young one of the female sex was born on the 12th November
last. The young one at birth was 45 cm. (about 17¾ English inches) in
height, and generally of a yellowish-grey colouring. The side stripe
was rather darker, but by no means so clearly defined as it is in the
adult animal. The under surface and inner sides of the limbs were
white, as in the adult. On the face a dark stripe from the eye to the
corner of the mouth was visible, but the cheeks and chin generally were
yellowish grey like the sides of the body. The little animal did well
in company with its mother at first, and after 15 days began to eat
corn. Unfortunately, however, it did not continue to thrive, and died
on December 21st, when about 40 days old.

The flesh of the Springbuck is much esteemed by the epicures of
the Cape Colony, and has been occasionally brought to London in a
refrigerator for consumption here. In the ‘Field’ for 1892 (vol. lxxx.
p. 390) will be found an account of its successful importation by
Messrs. Brooks, of Leadenhall Market, and of the high appreciation it
met with by those who tried the “venison,” which was pronounced to be
“in good condition, not the least high, and tasting not unlike Chamois.”

Our figure of the adult male Springbuck, with a herd of these animals
in the distance, has been prepared by Mr. Smit from an original sketch
by Wolf, which is now in the possession of Sir Douglas Brooke, and has
been kindly lent to us for examination.

There is a good stuffed specimen of an adult male Springbuck in the
Gallery of the British Museum. It was obtained by Mr. F. C. Selous at
Mahemfontein, in the Orange Free State, in 1896, and was presented to
the collection by that gentleman. From a pencil-note on the back of
Mr. Wolf’s sketch it would appear to have been taken from a specimen
of the head of this species formerly exhibited in the same Museum.
The National Collection has also some skins, skulls, and horns of the
Springbuck from various parts of South Africa; but good skulls of this
Antelope are still desiderata to the National Collection, and a series
of them, with dates and localities, would be much appreciated.

    _August,_ 1897.




                          GENUS VI. GAZELLA.

                                                       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.
          _a^1._ Horns not hooked at tip. (Tibet.)
                                                 82. _G. picticaudata._
          _b^1._ 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.

        _a^1._ No horns in female: size larger. (Central and Western
                 Asia.)                          85. _G. subgutturosa._
        _b^1._ Horns present in female: size smaller. (Arabia.)
                                                 86. _G. marica._

      _b._ Central dark facial band uninterrupted by white above. Horns
             present in the female.
        _a^1._ Dark colour of back not invaded by white of rump.
          _a^2._ Dark lateral band indistinctly marked, not strong and
                   blackish.
            _a^3._ Tip of horns slightly curved inwards or upwards, not
                     bent in to a right angle.
              _a^4._ Horns of medium length.
                _a^5._ Horns truly lyrate, the middle portion twisted
                         outwards, the tips reapproaching each other.
                         (Algeria, Egypt, Palestine.)
                                                 87. _G. dorcas._
                _b^5._ Horns not truly lyrate, more or less evenly
                         diverging upwards.
                  _a^6._ Top of muzzle ordinarily with a black spot on
                           it.
                    _a^7._ Nose simple.
                      _a^8._ Larger: hair rough. (Algeria.)
                                                 88. _G. cuvieri._
                      _b^8._ Smaller: hair smooth: darker. (Arabia.)
                                                 89. _G. arabica._
                      _c^8._ Smaller: hair smooth: lighter. (India and
                               S. Persia.)       90. _G. bennetti._
                    _b^7._ Nose with a flabby corrugated elevation
                             on it. (Somaliland.)
                                                 91. _G. spekei._
                  _b^6._ Top of muzzle without a black spot.
                           (Somaliland.)         92. _G. pelzelni._
             _b^4._ Horns long and very slender. Colours very pale.
                      (Algeria and Egypt.)       93. _G. leptoceros._
        _b^3._ Tip of horns hooked inwards or upwards, nearly or quite
                 to a right angle.
          _a^4._ General colour pale fawn, the lateral band and other
                   markings also fawn. (Nubia.)  94. _G. Isabella._
          _b^4._ General colour brownish fawn, the lateral band
                   blackish. (Muscat.)           95. _G. muscatensis._
      _b^2._ Dark lateral band black and strongly marked.
        _a^3._ Horns abruptly hooked inwards at the ends. (Abyssinia.)
                                                 96. _G. tilonura._
        _b^3._ Horns not abruptly hooked at end.
          _a^4._ No nose-spot; face uniform rufous.
            _a^5._ Size smaller. (Senegambia.)   97. _G. rufifrons._
            _b^5._ Size larger. (Algeria.)       98. _G. rufina._
          _b^4._ Nose-spot black. (Masai-land.)  99. _G. thomsoni._

    _b^1._ Dark colour of back more or less invaded by white of rump.
      _a^2._ A dark pygal band present.
        _a^3._ Dark colour of back continued in middle line on to the
                 top of the tail. Size smaller. (E. African Coast.)
                                                100. _G. petersi._
        _b^3._ Dark colour of back shut off from tail, which is
                 enclosed in the white anal disk. Size larger.
          _a^4._ Dark lateral bands obsolete, or, in youth, present
                   below the light lateral band only. (Interior of East
                   Africa.)                     101. _G. granti._
          _b^4._ Dark bands present both above and below the light
                   lateral band, uniting with each other behind.
                   (Northern British E. Africa.)102. _G. notata._
      _b^2._ No dark pygal band.
        _a^3._ Tail black-tipped. Horns hooked inwards. (Abyssinian
                 Coast and Somaliland.)         103. _G. soemmerringi._
        _b^3._ Tail all white, or merely tipped with fawn. Horns hooked
                upwards and forwards.
          _a^4._ Neck and anterior back alone rufous; lines of
                 demarcation indistinct. (Kordofan.)
                                                104. _G. ruficollis.
    b^4._ Rufous extending over body and flanks, well defined from the
            white.
      _a^5._ Sides of thighs white, the rufous of body not joining that
              of hind legs. (Senegal.)          105. _G. dama._
      _b^5._ Sides of thighs and legs rufous, continuous with that of
              body. (Morocco.)                  106. _G. mhorr._

  [Illustration:

    THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL LII

    _Wolf del Smit lith_      _Hanhart imp_

  The Tibetan Gazelle.

  GAZELLA PICTICAUDATA.

  _Published by R. H. Porter_]


                       82. THE TIBETAN GAZELLE.

                    GAZELLA PICTICAUDATA (HODGS.).

                             [PLATE LII.]

   _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.

  [Illustration: 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.

  [Illustration: 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.

  [Illustration:

    THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES PL. LIII.

    _J Smit del, et lith._      _Hanhart imp._

  Przewalski’s Gazelle.

  GAZELLA PRZEWALSKII.

  _Published by R H Porter_]


                       83. PRZEWALSKI’S GAZELLE.

                      GAZELLA PRZEWALSKII, BÜCHN.

                             [PLATE LIII.]

   _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.

  [Illustration:

    THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LIV

    _Wolf del J Smit lith._      _Hanhart imp._

  The Mongolian Gazelle

  GAZELLA GUTTUROSA

  _Published by R H Porter_]


                      84. THE MONGOLIAN GAZELLE.

                      GAZELLA GUTTUROSA (PALL.).

                             [PLATE LIV.]

   _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.”

  [Illustration: 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.

  [Illustration:

    THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LV.

    _J. Smit del. et lith._      _Hanhart imp._

  The Persian Gazelle.

  GAZELLA SUBGUTTUROSA.

  _Published by R. H. Porter._]


                       85. THE PERSIAN GAZELLE.

                     GAZELLA SUBGUTTUROSA (GÜLD.).

                              [PLATE LV.]

   _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.

  [Illustration:

    THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LVI.

    _J. Smit del. et lith_.   _Hanhart imp_.

  The Marica Gazelle.

  GAZELLA MARICA.

  _Published by R. H. Porter._]


                        86. THE MARICA GAZELLE.

                         GAZELLA MARICA, THOS.

                             [PLATE LVI.]

   _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.

  [Illustration:

    THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES PL. LVII.

    _Wolf del J Smit lith_      _Hanhart imp._

  The Dorcas Gazelle.

  GAZELLA DORCAS.

  _Published by R. H. Porter_]


                        87. THE DORCAS GAZELLE.

                        GAZELLA DORCAS (LINN.).

                             [PLATE LVII.]

   _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.

  [Illustration: Fig. 57.

  Head of the Dorcas Gazelle, ♂.

  (From specimens in the British Museum.)]



  [Illustration:

    THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LVIII.

    _J. Smit del. et lith._  _Hanhart imp._

  The Edmi Gazelle.

  GAZELLA CUVIERI.

  _Published by R H Porter._]


                         88. THE EDMI GAZELLE.

                       GAZELLA CUVIERI (OGILBY).

                            [PLATE LVIII.]

   _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.

  [Illustration: 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.

  [Illustration: 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.

  [Illustration:

    THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LIX.

    _J. Smit del. et lith._      _Hanhart imp._

  The Arabian Gazelle.

  GAZELLA ARABICA.

  _Published by R. H Porter._]


                       89. THE ARABIAN GAZELLE.

                       GAZELLA ARABICA (LICHT.).

                             [PLATE LIX.]

   _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.

   _Hab._ Western Arabia.

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.

  [Illustration: 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.

  [Illustration: THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LX.

    _J. Smit del. et lith._  _Hanhart imp._

  The Indian Gazelle.

  GAZELLA BENNETTI.

  _Published by R. H. Porter._ ]


                        90. THE INDIAN GAZELLE.

                       GAZELLA BENNETTI (SYKES).

                              [PLATE LX.]


   _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_.

  [Illustration: 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.

  [Illustration: THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LXI.

    _J. Smit lith._      _Hanhart imp._

  Speke’s Gazelle.

  GAZELLA SPEKEI.

  _Published by R. H. Porter._ ]


                         91. SPEKE’S GAZELLE.

                        GAZELLA SPEKEI, BLYTH.

                             [PLATE LXI.]


   _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_.”

  [Illustration: 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.”

  [Illustration: 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.

  [Illustration: 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.

  [Illustration:

    THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LXII.

    _J. Smit lith._    _Hanhart imp._

  Pelzeln’s Gazelle.

  GAZELLA PELZELNI.

  _Published by R. H. Porter._]


                        92. PELZELN’S GAZELLE.

                        GAZELLA PELZELNI, KOHL.

                             [PLATE LXII.]

   _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.”

  [Illustration: Fig. 65.

  Head of Pelzeln’s Gazelle, ♂.]

  [Illustration: Fig. 65_a_.

  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.

  [Illustration:

    THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LXIII.

    _J. Smit lith._      _Hanhart imp._

  Loder’s Gazelle.

  GAZELLA LEPTOCEROS.

  _Published by R. H. Porter._]


                         93. LODER’S GAZELLE.

                     GAZELLA LEPTOCEROS (F. CUV.).

                            [PLATE LXIII.]

   _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.”

  [Illustration: 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.

  [Illustration: 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.

  [Illustration: 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.

  [Illustration:

    THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LXIV.

    _Wolf del J Smit lith_      _Hanhart imp._

  The Isabella Gazelle.

  GAZELLA ISABELLA.

  _Published by R.H. Porter._]


                       94. THE ISABELLA GAZELLE.

                        GAZELLA ISABELLA, GRAY.

                             [PLATE LXIV.]

   _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.

  [Illustration: Fig. 69.

  Fig. 69_a_.

  Heads of Isabella Gazelle, ♂ & ♀.

  (From specimens in B. M.)]

  [Illustration:

    THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LXV

    _Wolf del. J. Smit lith._      _Hanhart imp_

  The Muscat Gazelle.

  GAZELLA MUSCATENSIS.

  _Published by R. H. Porter._]


                        95. THE MUSCAT GAZELLE.

                     GAZELLA MUSCATENSIS, BROOKE.

                             [PLATE LXV.]

   _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.

  [Illustration:

    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.

  [Illustration:

    THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LXVI.

    _Wolf del. J. Smit lith._    _Hanhart imp._

  Heuglin’s Gazelle.

  GAZELLA TILONURA.

  _Published by R.H.Porter._]


                        96. HEUGLIN’S GAZELLE.

                      GAZELLA TILONURA (HEUGL.).

                             [PLATE LXVI.]

   _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.

  [Illustration:

    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.

  [Illustration:

    THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LXVII.

    _Wolf del. J. Smit lith._      _Hanhart imp._

  The Red-fronted Gazelle.

  GAZELLA RUFIFRONS.

  _Published by R. H Porter_]


                     97. THE RED-FRONTED GAZELLE.

                       GAZELLA RUFIFRONS, GRAY.

                            [PLATE LXVII.]

   _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.

   _Hab._ Senegal and Gambia.

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.


                        98. THE RUFOUS GAZELLE.

                         GAZELLA RUFINA, THOS.

   _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.

  [Illustration: 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.

  [Illustration:

    THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LXVIII

    _J. Smit lith._      _Hanhart imp._

  Thomson’s Gazelle.

  GAZELLA THOMSONI.

  _Published by R. H. Porter._]


                        99. THOMSON’S GAZELLE.

                       GAZELLA THOMSONI, GÜNTH.

                            [PLATE LXVIII.]

   _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.

  [Illustration: 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. 74_a_, 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:--

  [Illustration: 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.

  [Illustration:

    THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL LXIX

    _Wolf del J Smit lith_      _Hanhart imp_

  Grant’s Gazelle.

  GAZELLA GRANTI.

  _Published by R. H. Porter_]


                         100. GRANT’S GAZELLE.

                        GAZELLA GRANTI, BROOKE.

                             [PLATE LXIX.]

   _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.”

  [Illustration: 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.

  [Illustration: Fig. 77.]

  [Illustration: 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_, ♂.|
 |                       |_G. granti_, ♂.|_G. granti_, ♂ (two). |Gil-Gil River, |
 |                       |    Njemps     |  Gil-Gil River, Lake | Lake Naivasha |
 |                       |  (21.9.96).   |   Naivasha (2.1.96). |   (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.


                        101. PETERS’S GAZELLE.

                        GAZELLA PETERSI, GÜNTH.

   _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.

  [Illustration: 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.


                       102. THE BANDED GAZELLE.

                         GAZELLA NOTATA, THOS.

   _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.

  [Illustration: 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.

  [Illustration:

    THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LXX.

  _Wolf del. J. Smit lith._    _Hanhart imp._

  Soemmerring’s Gazelle.

  GAZELLA SOEMMERRINGI.

  _Published by R. H. Porter._]


                      103. SOEMMERRING’S GAZELLE.

                  GAZELLA SOEMMERRINGI (CRETZSCHM.).

                             [PLATE LXX.]

   _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.

  [Illustration: 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.

  [Illustration: Fig. 82_a_.

  Fig. 82_b_.

  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.

  [Illustration:

    THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LXXI

    _J. Smit del. et lith._      _Hanhart imp._

  The Red-necked Gazelle.

  GAZELLA RUFICOLLIS.

  _Published by R. H. Porter._]


                     104. THE RED-NECKED GAZELLE.

                   Gazella Ruficollis (HAM. SMITH).

                             [Plate LXXI.]

   _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.


                        105. THE DAMA GAZELLE.

                         GAZELLA DAMA (PALL.).

   _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_.

   _Hab._ Senegal and Gambia.

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.

  [Illustration:

    THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LXXII.

    _Wolf del. J. Smit lith._    _Hanhart imp._

  The Mhorr Gazelle.

  GAZELLA MHORR.

  _Published by R. H. Porter._]


                        106. THE MHORR GAZELLE.

                        GAZELLA MHORR (BENN.).

                            [PLATE LXXII.]

   _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.




                        GENUS VII. AMMODORCAS.

                                                           Type.
    _Ammodorcas_, =Thos.= P. Z. S. 1891, p. 207          A. CLARKEI.

Size medium, about as in middle-sized Gazelles. Neck slender and rather
elongated, but not so much as that of _Lithocranius_. Tail long,
reaching nearly to the hocks. No Gazelline body-markings present, but
the head with typically Gazelline streaks and bands. False hoofs small.

Skull long and low, approaching in shape that of _Lithocranius_,
but less modified. Shallow anteorbital fossæ present. Premaxillæ
reaching nasals. Premolars 3/3, the anterior in each jaw unusually
small.

Horns of medium length, evenly divergent, curved upwards and forwards
throughout their length, except just at their bases. Female hornless.

   _Range of the Genus._ Restricted to Somaliland.

One species only.

  [Illustration:

    THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LXXIII.

    _J Smit del et lith_      _Hanhart imp._

  The Dibatag.

  AMMODORCAS CLARKEI.

  _Published by R. H Porter_]


                           107. THE DIBATAG.

                      AMMODORCAS CLARKEI (THOS.).

                            [PLATE LXXIII.]

   _Cervicapra clarkei_, =Thos.= Ann. Mag. N. H. (6) vii. p. 304
   (1891).

   Gazelle from Somaliland allied to _Lithocranius_, =Scl.= P. Z.
   S. 1891, p. 197.

   _Ammodorcas clarkei_, =Thos.= P. Z. S. 1891, p. 207, pls. xxi.
   & xxii. (head and skull); =Scl.= P. Z. S. 1892, p. 101; =Ward=,
   Horn Meas. (1) p. 128 (1892), (2) p. 173 (1896); =Lyd.= Horns
   and Hoofs, p. 240 (1893); =Scl.= P. Z. S. 1892, pp. 101 & 118;
   =Swayne=, P. Z. S. 1895, p. 318 (habits); =id.= Seventeen Trips
   to Somaliland, p. 310 (1895); =Hoyos=, Zu den Aulihan, p. 181
   (1895); =Elliot=, Publ. Chicago Mus., Zool. i. p. 124 (1897).

   VERNACULAR NAME:--_Dibatag_ of Somalis (_Clarke_, _Swayne_, _and
   others_).

Height at withers about 31 inches. General colour of body dark purplish
rufous, no dark or light lateral or pygal bands present. Head with
handsome sharply-defined Gazelline markings; the central facial band
rich fulvous rufous, no darker spot on muzzle; light facial streaks
long, sharply defined, and extending to the sides of the muzzle, pure
white; areas round eyes and ears also whitish, though not sharply
defined, connected with each other and continuous with the white facial
streaks. Dark facial streaks present but not prominent. Back of ears
dull whitish. Chin and interramia white. Cheeks below white markings,
throat, and whole of neck dark purplish rufous, continuous with the
back. Belly pure sharply-defined white, but on the chest this colour is
broken by two projections running down from the dark throat-colour on
each side of the middle line to between the elbows. Limbs, except their
inner sides above, coloured like the back, but gradually passing lower
down into fulvous instead of rufous. Knee-brushes present but small.
Back of hams white, the white not projecting into the dark body-colour.
Tail long, well-haired, but not crested, blackish above and below,
except just at its base.

Skull-dimensions in an adult male:--Basal length 7·5 inches, greatest
breadth 3·7, muzzle to orbit 4·2.

Horns attaining about 11 or 12 inches in length; their basal halves
broadly ringed, their long forwardly-directed terminal halves smooth
and evidently corresponding to the short smooth recurved tips of
ordinary Gazelline horns.

_Female._ Similar to the male, but without horns.

   _Hab._ Eastern parts of Central Somaliland, restricted to
   the Dolbahanta and Marehán countries S.E. of Berbera.

We now conclude the long series of Gazelles with three abnormal forms,
each constituting a genus of itself, which, curiously enough, are all
restricted to N.E. Africa. As regards the first two of them there can
be no question, we believe, of their close alliance to the Gazelles,
_Ammodorcas_ being, in several respects, intermediate between
_Gazellla_ and _Lithocranius_, and leading on to that most
specialized form of the group. About the correct position of the Beira,
however, there is considerable doubt, and it is quite possible that a
more natural place for it in the Antelopine series may be hereafter
discovered.

The Dibatag, or Clarke’s Gazelle, was first met with by the sportsman
and naturalist whose name it bears in 1890, during his exploring trip
into the Dolbahanta and Marehán country south-east of Berbera. Writing
to Thomas about his discovery, Mr. T. W. H. Clarke (of Secheron,
Battery Point, Hobart, Tasmania) says (see P. Z. S. 1891, p. 209):--

   “I saw this Gazelle for the first time on December 17th, 1890,
   about three hours from ‘Bairwell,’ or about one day from ‘Buroa
   Well, Habergerhagi’s country,’ and afterwards on the road all
   the way into the Marehan district, 8° N., 47° E. I killed a
   male, and found one of the horns broken off close to the skull,
   which had apparently been done a year or so ago.

   “They are very graceful animals, with a long neck and
   well-proportioned head and horns; the body is rather slender,
   but considerably larger than in _Gazella spekei_, about the size
   of a female _G. walleri_. The legs are long and slender; the
   hoofs are not so triangular as those of _G. spekei_, and small
   for the size of the animal. They have small ears and a long
   upper lip, just like those of _G. walleri_ or a Giraffe. The
   horns are of the shape of a sickle, and less than 12 inches in
   length, the longest, out of the eleven males killed, measuring
   11 inches. The tail, from what I remember, is about 12 or 13
   inches in length, very thin, and thinly covered with black hair
   about 1 inch long.

   “The colour of the body in this Antelope is like that of the
   neck, of a kind of pink-fawn, but the belly is whitish and the
   tail black. The face resembles that of _G. walleri_, only
   _G. walleri_ has no white in front of the eye.

   “When running, or rather jumping, these Gazelles look very
   peculiar; their long neck and head being thrown back and the
   tail thrown forward, so that there appears to be only a foot
   between head and tail. The country they are mostly found in is
   of low thorn-bush and sandy; they do not seem to like the big
   bushes, though at times they are found there. In this respect
   they differ from _G. walleri_, this species liking many bushes
   to go and rest in.

   “The new Gazelle is to be found one day’s journey from Buroa
   Wells, at an elevation of 3100 feet, to the Marehan country
   (800 feet) (general course about S. by E.), and is there
   more numerous than any other kind of game, excepting _G.
   soemmerringi_; but the latter is found only in the open
   country.

   “Several times I observed the new Gazelle and G. walleri feeding
   together, but I never saw more than eight in a bunch, and on
   that occasion there was a male _G. soemmerringi_ with them.”

Mr. Clarke’s skulls of this Antelope, which were at the time without
head-skins, having been submitted to Thomas for examination by Messrs.
Rowland Ward and Co. (to whom Mr. Clarke had sent for preservation
his specimens of Antelopes obtained during this expedition), were, on
account of the shape of the horns, not unnaturally supposed to belong
to a new species of Reedbuck, and named “_Cervicapra clarkei_”--a
mistake which Thomas corrected in his later paper. Very shortly after
Mr. Clarke’s specimens had been sent to Europe Capt. Swayne purchased
of an Arab in the market at Berbera two pairs of horns of this Antelope
with the head-skins attached, and, seeing that they belonged to a new
species, sent them to Sclater. Sclater exhibited these specimens at a
meeting of the Zoological Society on March 17th, 1891, and pointed out
their Gazelline affinities, but finding that they belonged to the same
species as that just named by Thomas handed them over to the latter for
further examination.

In his paper upon this subject, which was read at the same meeting of
the Zoological Society, Thomas took the opportunity of describing the
whole series of Mr. Clarke’s Antelopes, which were eight in number.
For Clarke’s Gazelle, of which, with the aid of the head-skins and
the cleaned skulls, he had no difficulty in recognizing the true
affinities, he established the new generic term “_Ammodorcas_,”
and added a full description of this remarkable form, illustrated by
two plates, one of which, by the kind permission of the Zoological
Society, we are enabled to copy in the present work.

  [Illustration: Fig. 83.

  Head of the Dibatag, ♂.

  (From P. Z. S. 1891, pl. xxi.)]

As already pointed out, it is evident that in its skull-characters
_Ammodorcas_ is intermediate between _Gazella_ and _Lithocranius_,
while in the shape of its horns it is absolutely different from all
other Gazelline genera.

Capt. Swayne, who has had the unequalled experience of seventeen visits
to Somaliland, writing in 1894, says:--

   “I have been singularly unfortunate with this Antelope, never
   having been in the country where it is found till I went to the
   Nogal Valley some three years ago. At that time the Jilal, or
   dry season, was at its height, and all the game was scarce and
   shy, so I never got a _Dibatag_ till June 1893, when on my
   return journey from Ogádén, across the waterless plateau, I made
   a détour of several days to the east on purpose to shoot one for
   my collection.

   “I searched for _Dibatag_ at Tur, a jungle due south of the
   Toyo grass plains, the distance being some eighty miles from
   Berbera, and was lucky in getting one good buck and picking up
   two pairs of horns. Although I saw a good many, all were wild
   and shy. This is their extreme western limit, and they never by
   any chance, I believe, come so far south as the Gólis Range.
   Farther east, towards Buró, they are more plentiful and less shy.

   “_Dibatag_ are very difficult to see, their purplish-grey
   colour matching with the high durr grass in the glades where
   they are found. The glossy coat, shining, reflects the
   surrounding colours, making it sometimes almost invisible; and
   at the best of times its slender body is hard to make out. I
   have often mistaken female Waller’s Gazelles for _Dibatag_,
   and once shot one of the former in mistake for the latter. The
   habits and gait are much the same, save that the _Dibatag_
   trots off with head held up, and the long tail held erect over
   the back nearly meeting the head, while Waller’s Gazelle trots
   away with its head down and its short tail screwed round. Like
   Waller’s Gazelle the _Dibatag_ goes singly or in pairs, or
   small families up to half a dozen.

   “As in the case of Waller’s Gazelle, the _Dibatag_ is enabled by
   its long neck and rather long upper lip to reach down branches
   of the mimósa bushes from a considerable height. The shape of
   head and way of feeding of both Antelopes are Giraffe-like,
   and I have seen both standing on the hind legs, fore-feet
   planted against the trunk of a tree, when feeding. I have seen
   _Dibatag_ feeding both on thorn bushes and on the durr grass.
   Both Waller’s and Clarke’s Antelopes can live far from water.
   The country most suitable for _Dibatag_ is jungle of the khansa
   or umbrella mimósa, alternating with glades of durr grass
   which grows about six feet high. The females are hornless. The
   _Dibatag_ is a very graceful Antelope, standing higher than an
   Indian Blackbuck, but weighing probably a good deal less.”

Another well-known explorer of Somaliland, Mr. G. Percy V. Aylmer,
kindly sends us the following field-notes on this species:--

   “_Ammodorcas clarkei_, the Debbertag of the Somali, one
   of the most beautiful and interesting of the rare Antelopes
   of that country, is, I believe, exceedingly local. From the
   reports of Messrs. Gillett, Pease, and other travellers, and my
   own experience, I should roughly describe the range of these
   Antelopes as contained within North latitude 8° to 9° 30´, and
   East longitude 44°, to an unknown distance towards the east.
   Morning and evening (within the above limits) they may be found
   feeding in the open grass-covered plains which are dotted with
   small scrubby bushes, patches of tall durr-grass, and immensely
   tall white-ant hills. During the heat of the day they retire to
   the shade of some solitary tree, where the dark mouse-colour
   of their backs makes them particularly hard to pick out. Here
   they stand motionless throughout the hot hours, apparently
   drowsy, but in reality alert, and watching the landscape with
   the keenest eyes for signs of danger from man, or the deadliest
   of all their enemies--the leopard. In the opinion of the Midgan
   (the Somāli hunting tribe) these are the wariest of Antelope,
   and I have always had great difficulty in getting within shot,
   partly because of the open nature of their feeding-ground, but
   principally on account of their watchfulness and keenness of
   vision at unusually great distances. On one occasion, being
   lucky enough to get within 100 yards of two, and finding them to
   be a female and calf, I contented myself with watching; and for
   upwards of half an hour, whilst they fed, not two consecutive
   mouthfuls were taken without the head being sharply raised and a
   suspicious glance taken all round. In preference they feed upon
   the small bushes, their long necks enabling them to reach up to
   the young shoots, like Waller’s Gazelle, although they appear to
   choose a less thorny variety. I have met with them occasionally
   singly, generally in twos or threes, and once only as many as
   five together. When disturbed they stand rigid, head upraised,
   ears erect, tail stiffening, and the instant they begin to run
   the tail (which is unusually long) stands up perpendicularly,
   presenting, as they gallop away with their springy bounding
   action, rather the appearance of a yawl’s mizzen-mast in a
   sea-way. Thus they make a particularly difficult mark for the
   disgusted stalker, who, exhausted by a long and arduous crawl
   through the scanty cover, probably gets nothing but the flukiest
   of snap-shots at the coveted specimen.”

Through the kind intervention of Mr. Pease we have also received some
interesting particulars as to a wider range of the “Dibatag” from
Lieut. R. Ward Jackson, of the 11th Hussars, who, accompanied by Capt.
M. S. Wellby, has recently penetrated far into the eastern interior of
the Somaliland peninsula. Mr. Jackson writes as follows:--

   “In my journey I first saw _Dibatag_ between Bair and Kirrit.
   They appear to be scattered all over the country between Bair
   and Hodayu, and I found them most plentiful about 25 miles from
   Kirrit. There Wellby shot three and wounded a fourth in one day,
   but, as a rule, I saw two or three each day in a march of about
   20 miles.

   “Travelling eastward from Hodayu they gradually appeared to
   grow less plentiful, and the last record I have of having seen
   one was about 150 miles from Hodayu. After this I saw no more
   until between Dagha Dalola and Mudug, about 130 miles from the
   former, in the Mijourten country. Here I was surprised to find
   them again very plentiful for three days, and I saw a few on
   the following three days, after which they again ceased. A week
   afterwards I found them again plentiful in the Marehan country,
   gradually diminishing in numbers as we travelled south; the last
   I saw was about 40 miles before we struck the Webbe Shebeyli.
   On the homeward journey I came across an odd pair now and
   then in the south of the Ogaden country. I have marked very
   roughly (see map, fig. 84) the belts within which I found them
   most plentiful. I do not remember having seen more than eight
   together. In the Mijourten and Marehan country I have found
   them quite close to Barao, and most plentiful in country where
   there was very good grazing of ‘gillop,’ ‘jalaalo,’ and a fine
   feathery grass. The country between Bair and Hodayu resembled
   the Haud. As regards the description of the _Dibatag_, I
   can add nothing to that contained in Swayne’s ‘Seventeen Trips
   in Somaliland.’”

  [Illustration: Fig. 84.

  Map of Somaliland (showing the localities of the Dibatag).]

The specimens of _Ammodorcas clarkei_ in the British Museum
consist of a head-skin with its skull from Burao Wells, presented by
Mr. T. W. H. Clarke (the type of the species), and a stuffed male,
the skins of a male and two females and their skulls from the same
district, obtained in his second expedition, and presented by the same
donor. There are also a skin and skeleton of a female from Darror
Wells, on the Haud, presented by Mr. Ford G. Barclay, and the skull of
a male from near the Bur Dap Mountain, Central Somaliland, presented by
Col. A. Paget.

Our illustration of the male of this Gazelle, with the female in the
distance (Plate LXXIII.), has been drawn and put on the stone from the
specimens in the British Museum.

[Since this was written we have received from Dr. Matschie, through
Herr Oscar Neumann, the interesting information that the Dibatag occurs
in the Kilimanjaro district of German East Africa, a considerable
extension of its previously known range.]

    _September,_ 1898.




                       GENUS VIII. LITHOCRANIUS.

                                                            Type.
    _Lithocranius_[16], =Kohl=, Ann. Mus. Wien,
       i. p. 79 (1886)                                   L. WALLERI.


Size about as in the larger Gazelles. Form very peculiar, owing to
the great elongation of the neck, which gives almost a Giraffe-like
appearance to the animal. Limbs also very long; false hoofs quite
minute. Colouring of the head less typically Gazelline than in
_Ammodorcas_, but a modification of the light lateral body-line
present.

Skull (see fig. 85, p. 231) excessively long and low, the cranial part
behind the horns particularly lengthened; the bones of this part very
solid and stony. Bullæ low and opaque. A shallow anteorbital fossa
present. Premaxillæ not reaching the nasals. Lower jaw slender and
delicate. Premolars 3/3, the anterior one above almost as large as the
second.

Horns thick, oval in section, very closely ringed, curved backwards as
in many species of _Gazella_ for the greater part of their length,
their middle portion more or less lyrate, as in _Gazella dorcas_,
their tips recurved upwards or forwards. Female hornless.

   _Range of the Genus._ Somaliland and British East Africa.

One species only.

  [Illustration:

    THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LXXIV.

    _J Smit del et lith._      _Hanhart imp._

  The Gerenuk.

  LITHOCRANIUS WALLERI.

  _Published by R H Porter._]


                           108. THE GERENUK.

                    LITHOCRANIUS WALLERI (BROOKE).

                            [PLATE LXXIV.]

   _Gazella walleri_, =Brooke=, P. Z. S. 1878, p. 929, pl. lvi.
   (skull); =Scl.= P. Z. S. 1884, p. 538, pl. xlix. (head and
   skin); =Phillips=, P. Z. S. 1885, p. 931; =Scl.= in James’s
   Unknown Horn of Africa, p. 262, pl. i. (1888); =Hunter=, in
   Willoughby’s E. Afr. p. 289 (1889); =Flow. & Lyd.= Mamm. p. 342
   (1891); =Inverarity=, Journ. Bombay N. H. Soc. vi. p. 459 (1891).

   _Lit(h)ocranius (Gazella) walleri_, =Kohl=, Ann. Mus. Wien,
   i. p. 79, pl. v. fig. 3, and pl. vi. fig. 1 (skull) (1886)
   (Somaliland).

   _Lithocranius walleri_, =Thos.= P. Z. S. 1891, p. 207; =Scl.=
   P. Z. S. 1892, p. 101; =Swayne=, P. Z. S. 1892, p. 305; =Ward=,
   Horn Meas. (1) p. 134 (1892), (2) p. 175 (1896); =Lyd.= Horns
   and Hoofs, p. 241 (1893); =Jackson=, in Badminton Big Game
   Shooting, i. p. 307 (head) (1894); =Scl.= P. Z. S. 1893, pp.
   101 & 118; =Swayne=, P. Z. S. 1895, p. 305 (habits); =id.=
   Seventeen Trips to Somaliland, p. 312 (1895); =Matsch.= Säug.
   Deutsch-O.-Afr. p. 132 (1895); =Hoyos=, Zu den Aulihan, p. 180,
   pl. x. fig. 4 (1895); =Thos.= Ann. Mus. Genov. (2) xvii. p. 107
   (1896); =Rhoads=, P. Ac. Philad. 1896, p. 519; =Elliot=, Publ.
   Chicago Mus. Zool. i. p. 226 (1897).

   VERNACULAR NAME:--_Gerenuk_ of Somalis (_Swayne and others_).

Height at withers 39 inches in an old male. General colour of back rich
chestnut rufous, sharply bounded on the upperside of each flank by the
very distinct light lateral line, which passes below imperceptibly into
fawn-colour, much paler than the dorsal colour, no trace of a dark
lateral line being present. The fawn-colour also extends on to the
crown, all round the neck, on the shoulders, hips, and down the limbs.
Central line of face deep rufous; area round eye whitish, sometimes
extended forwards as a light final streak towards the muzzle, but more
often stopping just anterior to the openings of the lacrymal glands.
Backs of ears pale fawn-colour; area round their bases but little
lighter than rest of head. Fawn-colour of throat projecting down on to
chest, as in _Ammodorcas clarkei_. Outer sides of limbs pale fawn
throughout. Tail about 10 inches in length, rufous-fawn like the body
basally above, whitish below, the tip tufted with black; on each side
of its base the white of the hams, which is very narrow, runs up as a
pointed projection into the dark body-colour.

The skull of an old male measures 8·75 inches in basal length, the
greatest breadth being 3·8, and the muzzle to orbit 4·7.

The horns of good specimens attain 15 or 16 inches in length round the
curves, but southern specimens, those from East Africa, have not, as a
rule, such fine horns as those from Somaliland.

_Female._ Similar to the male, but without horns.

   _Hab._ Somaliland, and thence southwards to the Tana
   Valley, and the Kilimanjaro district of British East Africa.

This Antelope was first made known to science by the late Sir Victor
Brooke in 1878 in the last of the many excellent articles which he
published in the Zoological Society’s ‘Proceedings.’ His description
was based on two skulls with horns attached to them which were lent to
him for examination by Mr. Gerald Waller, F.Z.S., at whose request they
were named by Brooke after Mr. Waller’s brother, “who lost his life in
Africa.”

Although it is not so stated by Brooke (who was presumably ignorant of
the fact), Mr. Waller’s specimens of this Antelope are now known to
have been given to him by Sir John Kirk, at that time H.B.M. Consul at
Zanzibar. In reply to enquiries Sir John kindly informs us that these
skulls were procured by hunters in his employment on the coast near the
River Juba in Southern Somaliland. Sir John subsequently shot specimens
of it himself in the same district (where at that period it was very
common), and also brought living examples of it away to Zanzibar.

In his description Brooke pointed out that, as is well shown in the
accompanying figure (p. 231), which has been copied from the plate that
illustrates his paper, the skull of this Gazelle, besides its general
depression, stands widely apart from those of all other species of
the group in the enormous backward prolongation of the occiput--“an
extension gained principally by the great size of the occipital bone
and the prominence of the occipital crest.” This divergence was
so remarkable that Brooke doubted “whether the species should not
constitute the type of a new subgenus.” As we shall see later, Brooke’s
views have been fully justified by what has taken place since a close
acquaintance with the structure of this singular Antelope has been
acquired.

  [Illustration: Fig. 85.

  Skull of the Gerenuk.

  (From Brooke, P. Z. S. 1878, pl. lvi.)]

It was six years after the publication of Brooke’s paper before any
additional information concerning this strange Antelope was obtained.
In November 1884 Sclater brought before the notice of the Zoological
Society a series of flat skins of Mammals, prepared by the natives
of Somaliland, which had been lent to him for examination by Mr. C.
Hagenbeck, of Hamburg. Amongst these were two skins, at first believed
to belong to a new Gazelle, but which, after much research and mainly
by the aid of a mounted head obtained in Somaliland by the late Mr. F.
L. James, he was enabled to prove must belong to the same Antelope on
the skull of which _Gazella walleri_ had been founded. The skins
were at once distinguishable by the well-defined dark brown dorsal
stripe which, as we now know, forms such a noticeable feature in the
present species. Further evidence of the identity of the Somaliland
Antelope with _Gazella walleri_ was obtained by the comparison of
Mr. James’s specimen with one of the typical skulls of the last-named
species. They differed little, except in the slightly larger size of
the northern specimen and in some other minor characters. It was thus
first shown that the range of Waller’s Gazelle extends to Northern
Somaliland, but we now know that the “Gerenuk,” as the Somalis call it,
is one of the most abundant game-animals of that favoured land.

  [Illustration: Fig. 86.

  Sketch of Gerenuk, ♂ and ♀, in characteristic attitudes.

  (From Neumann’s ‘Elephant-Hunting,’ p. 81. Lent by Messrs. Rowland Ward
  & Co.)]

Capt. Swayne sums up his long acquaintance with this Antelope as
follows:--

   “The _Gerenúk_ is the commonest and most widely distributed
   of the Somáli Antelopes except the little _Sakáro_, which
   springs up like a hare from every thicket.

   “The long neck of the _Gerenúk_, the large giraffe-like
   eyes, and long muzzle are peculiar to it and the _Dibatag_
   (_Ammodorcas clarkei_). The _Gerenúk_ is more of a browser of
   bushes than a grass-feeder, and I have twice shot it in the act
   of standing on the hind legs, neck extended, and fore feet
   against the trunk of a tree, reaching down the tender shoots,
   which could not be got in any other way. Thus not only the
   appearance, but the habits of the _Gerenúk_ are giraffe-like.
   The skull extends far back behind the ears, like that of a camel.

   “It is found all over the Somali country in small families,
   never in large herds, and generally in scattered bush, ravines,
   and rocky ground. I think it subsists almost entirely on bushes,
   as it is constantly found in places deserted by Oryx and all
   other Antelopes because there is no grass. Perhaps the Gadabursi
   country is the best ground for it, but the _Gerenúk_ is almost
   ubiquitous and need not be specially looked for. I have never
   seen it in the cedar-forests which crown Gólis, nor in the
   treeless plains which occur in the Haud. It is not necessarily
   found near water,--in fact, it is generally met with on stony
   ground, where there is a sprinkling of thorn-jungle.

   “The gait of this Antelope is peculiar, and when first seen
   a buck will generally be standing motionless, head well up,
   looking at the intruder, and trusting to its invisibility. Then
   the head dives under the bushes, and the animal goes off at a
   long crouching trot, stopping now and again behind some bush to
   gaze. It seldom gallops, and its pace is never very fast. In the
   whole shape of the head and neck, with its extended muzzle and
   slender lower jaw, there is a marked resemblance between the
   _Gerenúk_ and the _Dibatag_. The texture of the coat is much
   alike in both. The horns of immature buck _Gerenúk_ have almost
   exactly the same shape as those of the _Dibatag_. Their average
   length when fully grown is about 13 inches. The females are
   hornless; they sometimes lose or desert their young ones, as I
   have now and then come on fawns living alone in the jungle. The
   _Gerenúk_ stands a good deal higher than an Indian Blackbuck,
   but would be of about the same weight.”

Mr. Frederick Gillett, F.Z.S., who accompanied Dr. Donaldson Smith
during the first part of his expedition to Lake Rudolph, has kindly
drawn up for us the following notes on Waller’s Gazelle:--

   “This Gazelle is more like Clarke’s Gazelle than any other in
   Somaliland, not only on account of its long neck, but because
   of its habits. Never is it found out on the open plains, so
   much frequented by Soemmerring’s Gazelle, but it prefers the
   dense Khansa jungles, or, like Clarke’s Gazelle, the high
   durr-grass of parts of the Haud. Sometimes it is found in
   company with, or rather in the same neighbourhood as, _Gazella
   soemmerringi_, in more or less open country amongst the
   Khansa-bush and big aloes. It is usually seen in small families
   of not more than a dozen, but never in herds. It relies on its
   sharp eyesight and long neck for its safety, standing motionless
   amongst the bush or grass watching for an enemy. Most of the
   Somalis dislike its flesh, not so, however, the Lion and
   Leopard, and many a Waller’s Gazelle is stalked and killed by
   them. Its native name in Somaliland is ‘Gerenook,’ and in the
   Arusa Galla country ‘Googoofto.’ In the latter country it is
   very common, inhabiting the jungles frequented by Elephants and
   Lesser Koodoos. It is the most ubiquitous of all the Antelopes
   of this part of Africa, and it is a very common sight to see
   a buck with its fore legs, like a goat, high up the trunk of
   a Galol-tree nibbling the small green leaves. The female is
   hornless, whilst the horns of a good male measure from 14 to 15
   inches. Its legs are extremely slender. When disturbed it runs
   with its long neck stretched out as near the ground as possible,
   so that it can never be mistaken for a Clarke’s Gazelle, as
   the latter always holds its head erect and its tail well over
   its back, and springs instead of runs. The young are born, I
   believe, early in the year; but I have never seen a really young
   one, although I have been in the country every month in the year
   except May and June. On December 8th, 1894, I was stalking an
   Oryx when a female Waller’s Gazelle ran almost on to me pursued
   by a male; they did not see me, but turned and ran back, and
   then again came towards where I was lying, still without seeing
   me. After they had gone I crawled on, when for the third time
   they returned and this time saw me. I remained motionless on one
   knee; the female retired to a bush, and the male with its neck
   stretched at its full length came cautiously towards me till
   within 25 yards, and then gave three or four snorts. As it was
   the Oryx I was after I now moved and they at once trotted off.”

We copy an account of the native mode of capture of this Gazelle from
Messrs. Parkinson and Dunbar’s narrative of their journey in Northern
Somaliland in 1896 (Geogr. Journ. xi. p. 25):--

   “We found here (on the Bur Dab range) an old man living entirely
   alone, subsisting on gum and snared game. He was very clever
   at catching ‘Gerenok,’ or Waller’s Gazelle, by means of a cord
   made of the fibre of the ‘hig’ aloe. At one end of the cord a
   running noose, 6 inches in diameter, was laid round the rim of a
   cup-shaped hole scooped in the ground, and supported by a series
   of small pegs. Near the noose was attached a fine but strong
   thread, the other end of which was fastened to a springy branch
   of a tree bent down for the purpose. The noose was prevented
   from being dragged out of the hole by two pieces of wood laid
   crosswise. The loose end of the cord was either tied to an
   adjacent tree or pegged firmly to the ground, and all traces of
   the trap neatly covered with leaves and sand. The Gazelle is, of
   course, caught by the leg, and once the noose is drawn tightly
   round above the hoof there is no escape; but it must need large
   experience of the haunts of the game to know where to set these
   gins. The old man had thirty or forty constantly set, and said
   he got a Gazelle once every four or five days.”

Mr. Alfred Pease has kindly summarized his field-notes on the Gerenuk
in the following paragraphs:--

   “The Gerenuk is the commonest and most evenly distributed of all
   the Somali Antelopes, if we exclude the little Dik-diks, but it
   is by no means the least interesting. It is as peculiar as it
   is beautiful. At rest it is graceful, when running grotesque,
   and when feeding most curious in its pose. But its colouring
   of red and purple-grey, its reach of view, and its motions all
   wonderfully facilitate its power of escaping observation. At
   300 yards I have often had my eye on them feeding, unable almost
   to distinguish them from their likeness to stems of trees and
   dead thorn. They are tree-feeders, and their length of leg,
   body, and giraffe-like necks enable them to crop the leaves
   from bush-trees at a great height from the ground. When thus
   occupied in browsing they are often absolutely vertical, and for
   minutes together motionless, save for the lips and head, which
   are buried in the foliage. The male alone carries horns, varying
   in length and circumference, which reach, in fine specimens,
   15½ inches measured along the curve. The female is smaller and
   slighter than the male. On being disturbed they often remain so
   motionless that it is difficult to detect them in the bush, and
   when they make off they do so very quickly, and are immediately
   transformed from tall elegant animals with heads proudly carried
   to clumsy crouching fugitives with outstretched heads and necks.
   I have noticed when in flight they generally take a line more
   or less parallel to the hunter, as if they did not consider it
   safe to lose all knowledge of their pursuer’s whereabouts in
   the bush. With this object apparently they will usually keep
   the crest of a ridge or rise till they have put a considerable
   distance between themselves and their enemy. They go singly
   or in bands, but most commonly there are two, three, or more
   together. I have never seen more than fifteen in one band, and
   in that case twelve out of the fifteen were females. There is
   no part of Somaliland that I have visited where they are not
   common. In 1897 I saw some within five miles of Berbera, in 1896
   and 1897 in the maritime plains, in the Golis, on the Haud,
   in distant Ogaden, and far Bourha, but nowhere more numerous
   than in the Godabürsi country. They are easily killed by
   anyone who can shoot standing up, as the long-line shot at the
   perpendicular, even when as narrow as that of a Gerenuk’s chest
   and neck, is a comparatively easy one, and no very nice judgment
   of range is necessary. Their meat is generally despised by the
   Somalis, but eaten by the Midgans; but to my own taste it is
   not very much less nice or more nasty than most other Antelope
   flesh. The Somalis have an expression ‘_Gerenuk_,’ which is
   derived from their opinion as to the merits of its flesh, as it
   is generally considered nasty meat, yet not actually forbidden,
   and occasionally even relished by individual Somalis. The word
   is used constantly as an interjection to express dissent, either
   in chaff or contempt, in the sense: ‘That may do for you, but it
   won’t do for me!’”

We subjoin Mr. E. N. Buxton’s lively account of his experiences with
this Antelope, extracted from the second series of ‘Short Stalks’:--

   “The long-necked ‘Gerenook’ is a bush-feeder, like the Giraffe,
   and is built on the same lines, except that the males carry
   curved horns. The body is on the scale of a small Fallow-deer,
   but such is its length of leg and neck that the head, when the
   animal is on guard, is held over six feet from the ground.
   They are generally found in small families of three or four.
   The bright chestnut back makes it fairly easy to see them even
   among the bushes. On the other hand, its sharp sight and length
   of neck give it a conspicuous advantage against pursuers. At
   the first sign of danger the Gerenook slinks behind the bushes,
   and peeps over the tops as from a small watch-tower. Imagine
   the strategical advantage you would have in guerilla-warfare
   if you could screw your head on to your umbrella and gently
   elevate it till it looked over the parapet, especially if your
   eyes were placed quite at the top. If they think themselves
   followed, down go their heads nearly to the ground and they
   retreat at a slouching trot, keeping completely out of sight.
   If you can manage to catch sight of one of these animals before
   he sees you, and that is seldom, do not shoot him, but watch
   him feeding. You will not have such a chance at the Zoo, for
   this species has never been brought alive to Europe. When he has
   consumed what he can reach in a normal attitude he rears up and
   stands on his hind legs, assuming a perfectly erect position.
   With the fore feet, which are carried level with the cheeks, he
   holds the boughs down, and assists his balance. If he happens to
   be facing you, so as to show his white belly, the appearance is
   particularly odd, being that of a tall brown man clad in a white
   apron.”

It will be recollected that _Lithocranius walleri_, although actually
better known to us from Somaliland, was originally discovered in the
southern part of its range, in British East Africa. Here, according
to Mr. Hunter, it is “very rare in the Kilimanjaro district, though
numerous up the Tana River.” Lieut v. Höhnel, who accompanied Count
Teleki’s expedition to Lake Rudolph, informs us that it is common also
on the Upper Tana, between Hameye and the mouth of the Mackenzie River,
but that none were found on the Guaso Nyiro. Mr. Jackson, in the first
volume of ‘Big Game Shooting,’ writes as follows concerning the habits
of this species in British East Africa:--

   “The East-African Waller’s Gazelle is very much smaller than
   that found in the Somali country. There is no mistaking this
   Antelope for any other, on account of its extraordinarily long
   and thin neck, which in the case of a fully adult buck, killed
   by myself at Merereni, was only 10 inches in circumference.
   Two females measured only 7 inches each round the neck. When
   walking and seen at a distance these animals look not unlike
   pigmy Giraffes, as they carry their long necks stretched out at
   an angle. They frequent the open bush fringing the outskirts
   of dense thickets, into which they at once retreat on being
   disturbed. Their note of alarm is a low short ‘buzz’! This
   Gazelle is essentially a bush-feeder. At Merereni I once watched
   a doe feeding on a small-leaved bush not unlike the privet in
   appearance, and several times I saw her rear up on her hind
   legs, bend down a branch with her fore legs, and feed on the
   leaves in this upright position like a goat. This quaint-looking
   little Antelope, like the Bushbuck, is apt to haunt one
   particular spot, and may be seen in or quite near to it for
   weeks together. They are very shy and not easy to stalk, and,
   as they have a happy knack of hiding behind bushes in the most
   effective manner, they are not easy to see.”

The Gerenuk was well represented in the collection of Mammals obtained
by Mr. D. G. Elliot in the course of his recent expedition to
Somaliland, and a series of specimens of this Antelope obtained on that
occasion has been mounted in characteristic attitudes in one of the
large show-cases of the Field-Columbian Museum at Chicago. Mr. Elliot
has kindly sent us some photographs of this interesting group, which
show the male, female, and young, and their peculiar manner of feeding.

The Gerenuk is represented in the British Museum by a fine mounted
pair obtained by Herr Menges in the neighbourhood of Berbera, from
which our illustration of both sexes (Plate LXXIV.) has been prepared
by Mr. Smit. There are also four other skins of both sexes, purchased
of Herr Menges, and the skin figured by Sclater (P. Z. S. 1884, pl.
xlix.), which was presented to him by Herr Hagenbeck, but was likewise
originally procured by Herr Menges. In the National Collection there
are also a skin and skull of a male of this Antelope from Burao Wells,
Somaliland, presented by Mr. T. W. H. Clarke, another skin and skull
from the hills south of Berbera, presented by Capt. J. R. Harkness,
R.A., and a mounted skeleton from Somaliland, obtained by purchase.

From the southern part of its range the British Museum has one of the
original skulls from the River Juba district upon which the species
was founded, and three skulls and some separate horns from the extreme
south of the Somali coast, obtained by Sir John Kirk.

    _September,_ 1898.




                        GENUS IX. DORCOTRAGUS.

                                                           Type
    _Dorcatragus_, Noack, Zool. Auz. xvii.
       p. 202 (1894)                                   D. MEGALOTIS.


Size very small, smaller than in any Gazelle. Ears large. Tail short.
False hoofs minute; horny part of main hoofs short, but the internal
pad to the hoof broad and thick; position of limbs in standing almost
as in _Oreotragus_. No Gazelline head-markings, but a dark lateral
band present on the sides of the body.

Skull broad and short. Nasals short and premaxillæ long, the structure
in this region recalling that in _Madoqua_. Anteorbital region
with a very small and shallow lacrymal fossa. Bullæ large and inflated.
Premolars 3/3, the anterior very large.

Horns short, straight or faintly curved forwards, not unlike those of
_Raphiceros_, and quite different from those of any true Gazelle.
Female hornless.

   _Range of the Genus._ Restricted to Somaliland.

One species only.

  [Illustration:

    THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LXXV.

   _Smit del. et lith._

  The Beira.

  DORCOTRAGUS MEGALOTIS.

    _Hanhart imp._

  _Published by R. H. Porter._]


                            109. THE BEIRA.

                    DORCOTRAGUS MEGALOTIS (MENGES).

                             [PLATE LXXV.]

   _Behra_, =Menges=, Peterm. Mitth. xxxi. p. 454 (1885) (Hekebo
   plateau).

   _Beira_, Scl. P. Z. S. 1892, pp. 102, 118; =Swayne=, P. Z. S.
   1892, p. 308.

   _Oreotragus megalotis_, =Menges=, Zool. Anz. xvii. p. 131
   (1894); =Swayne=, Seventeen Trips to Somaliland, p. 321 (1895).

   _Dorcotragus megalotis_, =Noack=, Zool. Anz. xvii. p. 202
   (1894); =Hoyos=, Zu den Aulihan, p. 186 (1895); =Elliot=, Publ.
   Chicago Mus. Zool. i. p. 135 (1897) (Hargeisa).

   VERNACULAR NAME:--_Beira_ of Somalis (_Swayne_).

Size about as in the Steinbok or Grysbok; height at withers 20 inches
in an adult male. General colour of neck and back a peculiar purplish
grey, very finely grizzled with white, the extreme tips of the hairs
being this latter colour. Scarcely a trace of a light lateral band,
but a distinct dark one present, brownish, passing quite across the
shoulder, and extending behind on to the sides of the rump. Belly
not, as is usual, pure white throughout, but only white on the axillæ
and groins, the remainder pale yellowish fawn, or even orange-fawn,
this colour also extending on to the outer sides of the forearms and
thighs; rest of limbs becoming darker fulvous to the hoofs. Head bright
fulvous, quite different to the neck; area round eyes white, but no
Gazelline facial streaks present. Tail short and rather bushy, coloured
like the back, without darker tip.

Measurements of an old male skull:--Basal length 5·35 inches, greatest
breadth 3·15, muzzle to orbit 3·2.

Horns ordinarily from 4 to 5 inches in length, the longest in the
British Museum collection, one of Capt. Swayne’s, attaining 5½ inches.

   _Hab._ Northern Somaliland; hills along the northern edge
   of the Haud.

On several occasions during the many years in which Sclater’s excellent
correspondent Captain H. G. C. Swayne, R.E., was engaged on his
various explorations and expeditions in Somaliland, he wrote about a
“small red Antelope” found in the mountains which had the habits of
a “Klipspringer,” but, according to native testimony, was of quite
a different species. The existence of the same animal had also been
recorded as long ago as 1885 under the name “_Behra_,” by Herr
Josef Menges, in an account of his fourth journey in Somaliland,
published in Petermann’s ‘Mittheilungen.’ Herr Menges met with the
“_Behra_” on the Hekebo plateau (about 10° S. lat. and 44° 40´
E. long.), and had at one time a young living specimen of it in his
possession.

After Herr Menges the “_Behra_” or “_Beira_,” as it is now usually
called, after its Somali name, seems to have been first actually seen
by Lieut. E. J. Swayne, of the Indian Staff Corps, Capt. Swayne’s
brother, when he was in the Gadabursi country in the autumn of 1891.
He observed two of them among very rugged hills, but failed to get
a shot at them. He described them to Capt. Swayne as being “reddish
Antelopes, rather larger than the Klipspringer, with small straight
horns, which bounded away among the rocks in exactly the same manner as
the Klipspringer.”

Capt. Swayne was much excited about this discovery, and promised
Sclater to do all he could to procure specimens of the animal. On his
last trip to Somaliland he was assured by his Somalis that he would
find the “Beira” on Waggar Mountain, near the south-eastern extremity
of the Golis range, but he had not time to go there. On leaving
Berbera, however, Capt. Swayne exhorted his men to proceed to the
mountains themselves and to endeavour to procure some specimens of the
Beira, offering them a handsome reward for good heads and skulls of a
male and female, and leaving instructions to his agents there to pay
the men and to forward the specimens.

Early in 1894 the much-wished-for skins were obtained by the faithful
Somalis and forwarded to Sclater by Captain Swayne. We were proceeding
to describe and figure them in the Zoological Society’s ‘Proceedings,’
when we found that we had been anticipated by Herr Menges, who had
just described the species in the ‘Zoologischer Anzeiger,’ and given
it the name “_Oreotragus megalotis_.” It has, however, certainly
but a very remote connection, except as regards its habits, with the
Klipspringer (_Oreotragus_), and Dr. Noack was quite justified
in proposing for it the new and appropriate term _Dorcatragus_
(δορκας, an Antelope, and τραγος, a Goat), which he did in the same
periodical shortly afterwards. Dr. Noack based his article upon two
specimens, male and female, which he had then lately received from Herr
Menges for examination.

The next traveller in Somaliland to encounter this rare Antelope was,
we believe, Capt. P. Z. Cox, who, writing to Dr. Günther from Berbera
in April 1895, gave an account of the circumstances under which he
obtained a female example of the Beira for the British Museum:--

   “I was returning from a short trip in the interior, upon duty
   and pleasure combined--I was about 50 miles from Berbera;
   the country I was travelling through was level plain, with
   occasional flat-topped tablelands, with steep sides rising sheer
   out of the general level of the surrounding country. I was
   passing the foot of one of these large plateaux on 29th March,
   with my Somali Shikari, in search of game, and remarked to him
   that there was a rare Klipspringer said to be found on these
   plateaux, and that I thought I would scale the steep side and
   just see what there was at the top.

   “Accordingly we toiled up the face of the tableland and reached
   the top. It was simply a large stretch of perfectly flat ground
   covered with large, loose, black, burnt-up stones, with an
   occasional green bush to vary the monotony. The extent of the
   plateau was about a mile in length by half a mile broad. We had
   a very tiring tramp over this course, shingle from end to end
   of it, and just as we reached the further end, where there was
   a little fringe of green bushes, we espied several Antelope
   browsing about 300 yards from us. I could not quite make out
   what they were, and expected them to be some young animals of
   the Greater Koodoo; but directly my Shikari saw them he said,
   ‘Do you know what those are, Sir? they are “Bahra”; I have only
   seen them once before, and no sportsman has ever shot them.’

   “There was no cover between us and them, and it was impossible
   to stalk them from where we were, so we made a long detour below
   the crest of the plateau expecting that we could come up within
   shot on the other side of the animals; but it was impossible to
   move without displacing stones and making a noise, and when we
   emerged above the crest again it was only to see five Antelopes
   streaming over the plateau in the direction we had just come
   from. Under such circumstances Klipspringer would have separated
   and taken to the rocks on the steep sides of the plateau,
   whereas these animals kept in a herd together and galloped away
   over the flat just as a herd of Gazelle would do.

   “I was much disappointed at not getting a shot, but I was sure
   they would not leave the plateau, and determined to leave no
   stone unturned to come up with them. We tramped on in the
   direction they had gone, and after going about half a mile
   caught sight of them again; but they had seen us first, and
   were going hard at about 250 yards when we saw them. It would
   have been a very fluky shot, and I held my hand. I could now
   distinguish four females and one buck, which appeared to have
   horns exactly like a Gazelle, between 8 and 10 inches long.

   “When they were fairly under weigh we got a bush between us and
   them, and hurried after them as quick as we could. After a few
   moments, as luck would have it, they all stopped in a bunch and
   turned round with their heads towards us at about 300 yards.
   I could not distinguish the buck at the moment, as they were
   standing among bushes and were not distinct, but I aimed at one
   which turned partially broadside and fired. The animal fell
   dead, and the other four streamed away out of sight. On running
   up I found that it was a female that I had killed, and I am
   sorry to say that on grallocking her we found an almost mature
   embryo inside her. I was unable to preserve this as I had no
   spirit with me, but the fact shows that the animal killed was an
   adult.

   “I took careful measurements on the spot, and found the height
   at shoulder 23 inches; distance from the nose to the root of the
   tail 33; the tail including 2-inch hair 5½; the length of ears
   in front 6¼, and their breadth 2¾.”

Sir Edmund Loder has kindly favoured us with the following field-notes
on the Beira:--

   “Mr. Percy Aylmer heard of this Antelope on the stony foot-hills
   in Gubau (N. of Hargaisa), and saw it on one of the isolated
   foot-hills to the south of Gau Libah. Mr. A. E. Pease and
   I found it on another detached hill about 20 miles west of
   this. This particular hill was extremely rough and rugged,
   covered with loose boulders, making walking and silent stalking
   extremely difficult. This hill was also frequented by Gumbouri
   (Wild Asses, _Equus somalicus_), which, from their large
   size, were easily seen. The case was, however, very different
   with the ‘Baira,’ which, at a comparative short distance, seemed
   to melt out of sight immediately they stopped moving, and indeed
   when they were in motion it was rather the moving black shadow
   cast by a tropical sun that caught the eye than the animal
   itself. They were observed by us in bands of seven, three, and
   three. In the two lots of three which I saw there was what I
   take to be one adult male with each. The only record of height
   that I can lay my hand on at this moment is that of an adult
   female, which measured at the shoulder 2 feet 2 inches; probably
   the male would be an inch higher.

   “The whole colour of this Gazelle is very beautiful in its tints
   of buff, purple, fawn, and grey and white; but what struck us
   most was their ears and hoofs. The ears, besides being very
   large and ornamental, are remarkable for the distinct rayed
   marking on the inside. The hoofs are well worth a special
   drawing, as they differ from those of any other Antelope with
   which I am acquainted. They are very much hollowed out, as is
   very noticeable in the track which they leave. The foot of the
   stuffed specimen in the Natural History Museum is filled up with
   some black substance which does not seem to me to be natural.”

The accompanying view of the head is enlarged from a photograph of this
Antelope kindly sent to us by Sir Edmund Loder.

  [Illustration: Fig. 87.

  Front view of the head of the Beira.]

During Mr. D. G. Elliot’s East-African expedition of 1896, Mr. Akeley,
one of his party, obtained two examples of this Antelope on Nasr
Hablod Mountain, near Hargeisa, in nearly the same district as that
just described by Sir Edmund Loder. These specimens are now in the
Field-Columbian Museum at Chicago.

The British Museum contains a mounted specimen of an adult male of the
Beira (from which our figure, Plate LXXV., has been prepared by Mr.
Smit) and a skin of a female of the same species purchased of Herr
Menges, besides the two skins obtained by the Somalis for Capt. Swayne,
as above mentioned, which have been presented to the Museum by Sclater.
It contains also a skin and complete skeleton of a female of this
Antelope presented by Capt. P. Z. Cox, as described above.

    _September,_ 1898.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] This species, although mentioned last in Pallas’s List, may be
taken as the type of the genus, because the term “_Antilope_”
is clearly based on Ray’s and Buffon’s name for the Black-buck (The
Antelope; _l’Antilope_), quoted and identified by Pallas, and
only used up to this date for this particular species. The ordinary
justification for the same course, based on de Blainville’s revision
of 1816, is, as in so many other cases, invalidated by the earlier
work of Lichtenstein, by whom the Black-buck was placed among the
“_Gazellæ_,” and not among the “_Antilopæ genuinæ_.”

[2] _Saiga prisca_, Nehring, N. Jahrb. f. Min., Geol. u. Pal. ii.
p. 131 (1891).

[3] This species may be taken as the type of _Gazella_, as being
the only one which is common to Lichtenstein’s original genus and to
Blainville’s “_Gazella_” of 1816. The latter author is ordinarily
quoted as the original founder of the name, and his list includes the
best known species--_G. dorcas_. But Lichtenstein’s genus, two
years earlier in date, does not contain _G. dorcas_ at all, and
the only way in which the name _Gazella_ can be properly retained
for this group is by regarding _G. subgutturosa_ as its type.

[4] Przewalski’s ‘Mongolia,’ Morgan’s Translation, ii. pp. 208 _et
seqq._

[5] Owing to the Plate having been drawn from winter skins, in which
the ears are thickly covered with hair, this character is not properly
shown in the figures.

[6] See List Vert. An. Z. S. 1883, p. 141.

[7] See P. Z. S. 1892, p. 711.

[8] See P. Z. S. 1895, p. 400.

[9] See P. Z. S. 1874, p. 494.

[10] See Burton’s “Narrative of a Trip to Harar,” Journ. R. G. S. xxv.
p. 136 (1855).

[11] See Cat. of Mamm. in the Indian Museum, Calcutta. Part II., by W.
L. Sclater (1891), p. 158.

[12] See Mr. F. L. James’s “Journey through the Somali to the Webbe
Shebeyly,” Proc. R. G. S. vii. p. 625 (1885).

[13] ‘Seventeen Trips through Somaliland.’ London, Rowland Ward, 1895.

[14] See under _Gazella marica_, above, p. 95.

[15] ‘The Rise of our East-African Empire,’ i. p. 535.

[16] Misprinted _Litocranius_ in the original description. The
name is based on the solid stony character of the cranium (λιθος =
_lapis_).


Transcriber’s Notes:

1. Obvious printers’, punctuation and spelling errors have been
corrected silently.

2. Some hyphenated and non-hyphenated versions of the same words have
been retained as in the original.

3. Where hyphenation is in doubt, it has been retained as in the
original.

4. Superscripts are represented using the caret character, e.g. D^r. or
X^{xx}.

5. Italics are shown as _xxx_.

6. Bold print is shown as =xxx=.