NATIVE CARRIER BOY
NATIVE CARRIER BOY
I have no doubt that the gorilla beats upon his breast: he has been seen to do so in captivity, but the sounds described above were not so made. Since the gorilla makes these sounds only at night, it is not probable that any man ever saw him in the act. It does not require a delicate sense of hearing to distinguish a sound made by beating the breast from that of dead wood or other similar substance.
I have attributed the above sound to the gorilla, because I have been assured by many white men and scores of natives that it was made by him; but since my return from Africa I have had time to consider and digest certain facts tabulated on that trip, and as a result I am led to doubt whether this sound is made by the gorilla or not. There are good reasons to believe that it is made by the chimpanzee instead, and I shall state them.
I observed that my own chimpanzees made this sound exactly the same as that I heard in the forest, except that it was less in volume, which was due to their age. I could induce them at any time to make the sound, and frequently did so in order to study it. On my arrival in New York I found that Chico, the big chimpanzee belonging to Mr. Bailey,frequently made the same sound at night. It was said to be so loud and piercing that it fairly shook the stately walls of Madison Square Garden. From reading the description given by the late Professor Romanes of the sound made by "Sally" in the London Gardens, it appears to be the same sound.
It is well known to the natives that the chimpanzees beat on some sonorous body, which they call a drum. Four years ago I called attention to the habit of the two chimpanzees in the Cincinnati Gardens. They frequently indulged in beating upon the floor of their cage with their knuckles. This was done chiefly by the male. The late E. J. Glave described to me the same thing, as being done by the chimpanzees in the Middle Congo basin.
It is not probable that two animals of different genera utter the same exact sound, and this is more especially true of a sound that is complex or prolonged. Neither is it likely that the two would have a common habit, such as beating on any sonorous body. Since it is certain that one of these apes does make the sound described, it is more than probable that the other does not. The same logic applies to the beating.
Many things that are known of the chimpanzee are taken for granted in the gorilla, but it is erroneous to suppose that in such habits as these they would be identical. In some cases I have been able to prove quite conclusively that the chimpanzee alonedid certain things which were ascribed to the gorilla.
In view of these facts alone, I am inclined to believe that after all, the sound described is made by the chimpanzee and not by the gorilla.
Another case in which the gorilla is portrayed is wrong. The female gorilla is represented as carrying her young clinging to her waist. I have seen the mother in the forest with her young mounted upon her back, with its arms around her neck and its feet hooked in her armpits. I have never seen the male carry the young, but in a number of specimens of advanced age I have seen a mark upon the back and sides which indicates that he does so. It is in the same place that the young rest upon the back of the mother. In form it is like an invertedY, with the base resting on the neck and the prongs reaching under the arms. This mark is not one of nature, but appears to be the imprint of something carried there. In a few specimens the hair is worn off until the skin is almost bare. The prongs are more worn than the stem of the figure, which is due to the fact that more weight is borne upon those parts than elsewhere. I do not assert that such is the cause, but it is worthy of note that such is the fact.
The gorilla is averse to human society. He is morose and sullen in captivity. He frets and pines for his liberty. His face appears to be incapable of expressing anything like a smile, but when in repose it is not repugnant. In anger his visage depicts the savage instincts of his nature. The one which livedwith me for a time in the forest was a sober, solemn, stoical creature, and nothing could arouse in him a spirit of mirth. The only pastime he indulged in was turning somersaults. Almost every day, at intervals of an hour or so, he would stand up for a moment, then put his head upon the ground, turn over like a boy, rise to his feet again, and look at me as if expecting my applause. He would frequently repeat this act a dozen times or more, but never smiled or evinced any sign of pleasure. He was selfish, cruel, vindictive, and retiring.
One peculiar habit of the gorilla, both wild and in captivity, is that of relaxing the lower lip when in repose. They drop the lid until a small red line appears across the mouth from side to side. It is not done when in a sullen mood, but when perplexed or in a deep study.
Another constant habit is to protrude the end of the tongue between the lips, until it is about even with the outer edge of them. The end of the tongue is somewhat more blunted than that of the human. This habit is so frequent with the young gorilla that it would appear to have some meaning, but I cannot suggest what it is.
The habit of the gorilla, in sleeping, is to lie upon the back or side, with one or both arms placed under the head as a pillow. He cannot sleep on a perch, as we have already noted, but lies upon the ground at night. I had once pointed out to me the place at the base of a large tree where a school of them had slept the night before. One imprint was quite distinct.The stories told about the king gorilla placing his family in a tree while he sits on watch at the base, is another case of supposition.
A YOUNG GORILLA ASLEEP
A YOUNG GORILLA ASLEEP
The food of the gorilla is not confined to plants and fruits. They are fond of meat, and eat it either raw or cooked. They secure a small supply by catching rodents of various kinds, lizards and toads; they are also known to rob the nests of birds of the eggs, and of the young. A native once pointed out to me the quills and bones of a porcupine which he said had been left by a gorilla who had eaten the carcass, and he said that it was not at all rare for them to do so. The fruits and plants they live upon chiefly are acidulous in taste, and some of them are bitter. Theyoften eat the fruit of the plantain, but prefer the stalk, which they twist and break open and eat the succulent heart of the plant. They do the same with thebatuna, which grows all through the forest. The fruit of this plant is a red pod filled with seeds imbedded in a soft pulp, it is slightly acidulate and astringent. The wild mangrove which forms a staple article of food for the chimpanzee is rarely, if ever, touched by the gorilla, and the same is true of many other plants and fruits. I once saw a gorilla try to seize a dog, but whether it was for the purpose of eating the flesh or not I cannot say. One, however, did catch and devour a small dog on board the steamership, while on a voyage home from Africa. Both belonged to Captain Button, who assured me of the fact. They have no fixed hours for eating, but usually do so in the early morning or late afternoon. I have, in a few instances, seen them refuse meat. They are perhaps less devoted to eating flesh than the chimpanzee.
In the act of drinking, the gorilla will take a cup, place the rim in his mouth and drink like a human being. He does this without being taught, while the chimpanzee prefers to put both lips in the vessel. I have never known one that would drink beer, spirits, coffee or soup, but their drink is limited to milk or water, while the chimpanzee drinks beer and other things as well.
NATIVE WOMEN OF THE INTERIOR
NATIVE WOMEN OF THE INTERIOR
While I was living in my cage in the jungle I secured a young gorilla, to whom I gave the name "Othello." He was about one year old, strong, hardy and robust. I found him to be a fine subject for study, and made the best use of him for that purpose. I have elsewhere described his character, but his illness and death are matters of profound interest.
At noon on the day of his decease he was quite well and in fine humour. He was turning somersaults and playing like a child with my native boy. In his play he evinced a certain interest, and his actions indicated that it gave him pleasure, but his face never once betrayed the fact. It was amusing to see him with the actions of a romping child and the face of a cynic.
He was supplied with plenty of native food, had a good appetite, and ate with a relish. Just after noon I sent the boy on an errand, and he was expected to return about night. Near the middle of the afternoon I observed that Othello was ill; he declined to eat or drink, and lay on his back on the ground,with his arms under his head as a pillow. I tried to induce him to walk with me, to play, or to sit up, but he refused to do so. By four o'clock he was very ill. He rolled from side to side, and groaned as if in pain. He kept one hand upon his stomach, where the pain appeared to be located. He displayed all the symptoms of gastric poisoning, and I have reason to believe now that the boy had given him poison. I should regret to foster this suspicion against an innocent person, but it is based upon certain facts that I have learned since that time.
While I sat in my cage watching Othello, who lay on the ground a short distance away, I discovered a native approaching him from the jungle. The man had an uplifted spear in his hand, as if in the act of hurling it at something. He had not seen me, but it did not for the moment occur to me that he had designs upon my pet. I spoke to him in the native language, when he explained that he had seen the young gorilla, and from that fact suspected there was an old one close at hand, for whose attack he was prepared: that he was not afraid of the little one, but desired to capture it. I informed him that my gorilla was ill. He examined it, and assured me that it would die. The man departed, and Othello continued to grow worse. His sighing and groaning were really touching. I gave him an emetic, which took effect with good results. I also used some vaperoles to resuscitate him, but my skill was not sufficient to meet the demands of his case.
His conduct was so like that of a human beingthat it deeply impressed me, and being alone with him in the silence of the dreary forest at the time of his demise, gave the scene a touch of sadness that impressed me with a deeper sense of its reality; and Moses watched the dying ape as if he knew what it meant. He showed no signs of regret, but his manner was such as to suggest that he knew it was a trying hour.
Othello died just before sunset, but for a long time prior to this he was unconscious. The only movements made by him were spasmodic actions of the muscles caused by pain. The fixed and vacant stare of his eyes in this last hour was so like those of man in the hour of dissolution, that no one could look upon the scene and fail to realise the solemn fact that this was death. The next day I dissected him, and prepared the skin and skeleton to bring home with me. They are now, with Moses and others, in the Museum of the University of Toronto; and if the taxidermist who mounts the skin of Othello poses him like most of the craft do—in the attitude of dancing a fandango and the corners of his mouth forming obtuse angles—I will have that man executed if I have to bribe the court.
When I first secured this ape and brought him to my home in the bush, he was placed on the ground a few feet from my cage, and near him was laid some bananas and sugar-cane for Moses, who had not yet seen the stranger. The gorilla was in a box with one side open, so that he could easily be seen. My purpose was to see how each one wouldact on discovering the other. When Moses observed the food he proceeded to help himself. On seeing the gorilla he paused a moment and gave me an alarm, but he was not himself deterred from taking a banana, which he seized and retreated. While he was eating the banana, I took the gorilla from the cage and set him on the ground by it. I petted him, and gave him some food. Moses looked on, but did not interfere. I returned to my cage, and Moses proceeded to investigate the new ape. He approached slowly and cautiously within about three feet of it. He walked around it a couple of times, keeping his face towards it, and gradually getting a little nearer. At length he stopped by one side of the gorilla, and came up within a few inches of it. He appeared to stand almost on tiptoe, with only the ends of his fingers touching the ground. The gorilla continued to eat his food without so much as giving him a look. Moses placed his mouth near the ear of the gorilla and gave one terrific yell. But the gorilla did not flinch or even turn his eyes. Moses stood for a moment looking at him as if in surprise that he had made no impression. After this time he made many overtures to make friends with the gorilla, but the latter did not entertain them with favour beyond maintaining terms of peace. They never quarrelled, but Othello always treated him as an inferior. I do not know if he entertained a real feeling of contempt, but his manner was such.
There were but few articles of food that he andMoses liked in common, and therefore they had no occasion to quarrel; but they never played together or cultivated any friendly terms as the chimpanzees did among themselves. This may have been due to the gorilla, who was so exclusive in his demeanour towards the chimpanzee as to forbid all attempts of the latter to become intimate. The chimpanzee by nature is more sociable and is fond of human society. He imitates the actions of man in many things, and quickly adapts himself to new conditions, while the gorilla is selfish and retiring. He can seldom, if ever, be reconciled to human society; he does not imitate man nor yield to the influences of civilised life.
One special trait of the gorilla which I wish to emphasise is that he is one of the most taciturn, if not quite the most, of any member of the simian family. This fact does not appear to confirm my theory as to their high type of speech, but it is a fact so far as I observed, although the natives say that they are as loquacious as the chimpanzee. Among the specimens that I have studied, both wild and in captivity, I have never heard but four sounds that differed from each other, and of these only two could properly be defined as speech. I do not include the screaming sound described in another chapter. I have not been able so far to translate the sounds that I have heard, and they cannot be spelled with letters. There is one sound which Othello often used. It was not a speech sound, but a kind of whine, always coupled with a deep sigh. When left alone for a time he became oppressed with solitude.At such times he would heave a deep sigh and utter this strange sound. The tone and manner strongly appealed to the feelings of others, and while he did not appear to address it to any one or have any design in making it, it always touched a sympathetic chord, and I was sometimes tempted to release him. Another sound which was not within the pale of speech was a kind of grumbling sound. This frequently occurred when he was eating. It was not a growl in the proper sense, but was in a way a kind of complaint. Twice I heard this same sound made by wild ones in the forest near my cage. The only thing that I can compare it to in its use is that habit of a cat while eating, to make a peculiar growling sound, which appears to be done only when something else is near. It is possibly intended to deter others from trying to take the food.
During my life in the cage I saw a number of gorillas, but I shall only describe a few of them, as their actions were similar in most instances.
The first one that I had the pleasure of seeing in the jungle came within a few yards of the cage before it was yet in order to receive. He was not half grown. He must have been attracted by the noise made in putting it together. He advanced with caution, and when I discovered him he was peering through the bushes as if to ascertain the cause of the sounds. When he saw me, he only tarried a few seconds and hurried off into the jungle. I did not disturb or shoot at him, because I desired him to return.
On the third day after I went to live in the cage a family of ten gorillas was seen to cross an open space along the back of a patch of plantains near one of the villages. A small native boy was within about twenty yards of them when they crossed the path in front of him. A few minutes later I was notified of it, took my rifle, and followed them into the jungle until I lost the trail. A few hours after this they were again seen by some natives not far away from my cage, but they did not come near enough to be seen or heard. The next day there was a family came within some thirty yards of the cage. The bush was so dense that I could not see them, but I could distinguish four or five voices. They seemed to be engaged in a broil of some kind. I suppose it was the same family that had been seen the day before. The second night after this time I heard the screams of one in the forest some distance from me, but I do not know whether it was the king of this family or another.
One day, as I sat alone, a young gorilla, perhaps five years old, came within six or seven yards of the cage and took a peep. I do not know whether he was aware of its being there or not until he was so near. He stood for a time, almost erect, with one hand holding on to a bough; his lower lip was relaxed, showing the red line mentioned above, and the end of his tongue could be seen between his parted lips. He did not evince either fear or anger, but rather appeared to be amazed. I heard him creeping through the bush a few seconds before Isaw him, but as a rule they move so stealthily as not to be heard. I know of no other animal of equal weight that makes so little noise in going through the forest. During the short time he stood gazing at me I sat still as a statue, and I think he was in doubt as to whether I was alive or not. He did not turn and run away, but after a brief pause turned off at an angle and departed. He lost no time, but made no great haste. The only sound he made was a low grunt, and this he did not repeat.
At another time I heard two making a noise among the plantains near me. I could only obtain a glimpse of them, but as well as I could see they were of good size, being almost grown. They were making a low sound from time to time, something like I have described, but I could not see them well enough to frame any opinion as to what it meant. They were certainly not quarrelling, and I am not sure that they were eating, for I afterwards went and looked to see if I could find where they had broken any of the stalks. Their trail was visible through the grass and weeds, but I could find no stalk broken. They were moving at a very leisurely gait, and must have been within hearing ten or twelve minutes. They were quite alike in colour, and appeared to be so in size, although it is well known that the adult male attains a much greater size than the female.
On one occasion when I was standing outside of the cage some twenty yards away, Moses was sitting on a dead log near by. I turned to him, andwas just in the act of sitting down by him when he gave an alarm. I looked around, and discovered a gorilla standing not more than twenty yards away. He had just that moment discovered us. He gazed for a few moments and started on, moving obliquely towards the cage. I turned to retreat. At this instant Moses gave one of his piercing screams, which frightened the gorilla and he fled. He changed his course almost at right angles. He was going at a good rate before Moses screamed, but he mended it at once.
One day I heard three sounds which my boy assured me were gorillas; they were in different directions from the cage. It was not a scream nor a howl, but somewhat resembled the human voice calling out with a sound like "he-oo!" This sound was repeated at intervals, but did not appear to be in the relation of call and answer, and the animals making them did not approach each other while doing so. The sounds were the same except in volume, and one of them appeared to be made by a much larger animal than the other two. I must say that this sound rarely occurred within my hearing during all my stay in that part, and with the exception of this time I never heard them make any loud sound during the day.
Another interesting specimen that I saw came prowling through the jungle as if he had lost his way. He found a small opening, or tunnel, which I had cut through the foliage in order to get a better view. Turning into that, he came a fewsteps towards the cage before he discovered it. Suddenly he stopped, squatted on the ground, but did not sit flat down. For a few seconds he was motionless, and so was I. He slowly raised one arm till his hand was above his head, in which position he sat for a few seconds, when he moved his hand quickly forward as if to motion at me. He did not drop his hand to the ground, but held it at an angle from his face for a short time, then slowly let it down till it reached the ground. During this time he kept his eyes fixed on me. At length he raised the other arm and seized hold of a strong bush, by which he slowly drew himself in a half-standing position. Thus he stood for a few seconds, with one hand resting on the ground. Suddenly he turned to one side, parted the bushes, and instantly disappeared. He uttered no sound whatever.
Another visitor that came within about thirty yards along the open path which led to my retreat, stopped when he discovered me, and stared in a perplexed manner. He turned away to retreat, but only went a few feet, turned around, and sat down on the ground. He remained in that attitude for more than half a minute, when he arose and retired in the direction from which he came.
The finest view that I ever had of any specimen, and at the same time the best subject for study, was a large female that came within a trifle more than three yards of me. There was a dog that belonged to a village a mile or two away that had become attached to me, and had found its waythrough the bush to my cage. He frequently came to visit me in my retreat, and I was always glad to welcome him. One afternoon, about three o'clock, he came, and I let him in the cage for a while to pass the usual greetings. I had a bone of a goat which I had saved from my last meal, and I threw this out to him in the bush a few feet away from the cage. He seized the bone, and began to gnaw it where it lay. His body was in the opening of a rough path cut through the jungle near the cage, but his head was concealed under a clump of leaves. All at once I caught a glimpse of some moving object at the edge of the path on the opposite side of the cage. It was a huge female gorilla, carrying a young one on her back. When I first saw her she was not more than thirty feet away. She was creeping along the edge of the bushes and watching the dog, who was busy with the bone. Her tread was so stealthy that I could not hear the rustle of a leaf. She advanced a few feet, crouched under the edge of the bushes, and cautiously peeped at the dog. She advanced again a little way, halted, crouched, and peeped again. It was evident that her purpose was to attack, and her approach was so wary as to leave no doubt of her dexterity in attacking a foe. Every movement was the embodiment of stealth. Her face wore a look of anxiety with a touch of ferocity. Her movements were quick but accurate, and her advance was not delayed by any indecision. The dog had not discovered her, and the smell of the bone and the noise he was makingwith it prevented his either smelling or hearing her. I could not warn him without alarming her. If he could have seen her before she made the attack, I should have left him to take his chances by flight or by battle. I should have been glad of an opportunity to witness such a combat and to study the actions of the belligerents, but I could not consent to see a friendly dog taken at such disadvantage. She was now rapidly covering the distance between them, and the dog had not yet discovered her. When she reached a point within about four yards of him I determined to break the silence. I cocked my rifle, and the click of the trigger caught her attention. I think this was the first thing that made her aware of my presence. She instantly stopped, turned her face and body towards the cage, and sat down on the ground in front of it. She gave me such a look that I almost felt ashamed of having interfered. She sat for fully one minute staring at me as if she had been transfixed. There was no trace of anger or of fear, but the look of surprise was on every feature. I could see her eyes move from my head to my feet. She scanned me as closely as if it had been her purpose to purchase me. At length she glanced at the dog, who was still eating the bone, then turned her head uneasily, as if to search for some way of escape. She rose, and retraced her steps with moderate haste; she did not run, but lost no time. She glanced back from time to time to see that she was not pursued. She uttered no sound of any kind.
From the time this ape came in view until she departed was about four minutes, and during that time I was afforded an opportunity of studying her in a way that no one else has ever been able to do. I watched every movement of her body, face and eyes. I could sit with perfect composure and study her without the fear of attack. With due respect for the temerity of men, I do not believe that any sane man could calmly sit and watch one of these huge beasts approach so near him without feeling a tremor of fear, unless he was protected as I was. Any man would either shoot or retreat, and he could not possibly study the subject with equanimity.
The temptation to shoot her was almost too great to resist, and the desire to capture her babe made it all the more so; but up to that time I had refrained from firing my gun anywhere within a radius of half a mile or so of my cage, and the natives had agreed to the same thing. My purpose in doing so was to avoid frightening the apes away from the locality. I had been told by the native hunters before this, that if I wounded one of them the others would leave the vicinity and not return perhaps for weeks. They say if you kill one the others do not appear to notice it so much as if it were wounded, although they seem to be aware of the fact and for the time flee, but will return again within a short time.
I could have shot this one with perfect ease and safety. As she approached, her head and breast were towards me; just before she discovered me her left side was in plain view, and when she sat downher breast was perfectly exposed, so that I could have shot her in the heart, the breast, or the head.
Her baby lay upon her back, with its arms embracing her neck and its feet caught under her arms. The cunning little imp saw me long before the mother did, but it gave her no warning of danger. It lay with its cheek resting on the back of her head. Its black face looked as smooth and soft as velvet. Its big brown eyes were looking straight at me, but it betrayed no sign of fear or even of concern. It really had a pleased expression, and was the nearest approach to a smile I have ever seen on the face of a gorilla. I believe that this is their method of carrying the young, and I have elsewhere assigned other reasons for this belief. In this case it is not a matter of belief, but one of knowledge, and everything that I have observed conspires to say that this is no exception to the rule.
During my sojourn of nearly four months in the jungle, where it was said the greatest number of gorillas could be found of any other place in the basin of that lake, I only saw a total of twenty-two, besides one other that I saw at another time in the forest while I was hunting. I only caught a glimpse of him, and should not even have done that had not the native guide discovered and pointed him out to me. I believe that no other white man has ever seen an equal number of these animals in a wild state, and it is certain that no other has ever seen them under as favourable conditions for study. I have compared notes with many white men on thatpart of the coast, but I have never found any reliable man who claims to have seen an equal number. I know men there who have lived in that part for years, who frequently hunt in the forest for days at a time, and yet never saw a live gorilla. I met one man on my last voyage who has lived on the edge of the gorilla country forty-nine years, makes frequent journeys through the bush and along the watercourses in the interest of trade, and this man told me himself that in all that time he had never seen a wild gorilla. I would cite Mr. James A. Deemin as an expert woodsman, a cool, daring hunter, and I have enjoyed several hunts with him. He has travelled, traded, and hunted through the gorilla country for more than thirteen years, and has told me that with one exception he had never seen but one wild gorilla. This was a young one, and the exception alluded to was that he one time saw a school of them at a distance. On this occasion he was in a canoe and under the cover of the bushes along the side of a river until he came near them unobserved. Another man, whose name I will take the liberty of giving, is Mr. J. H. Drake, of Liverpool. Mr. Drake has never been suspected by those who know him of lacking courage in the hunt or being given to romance, and yet in many years on the coast he never saw but one school of these apes, and that was the same one that Mr. Deemin saw when they were travelling together. I could cite many others to show that it is a rare thing for the most expert woodsman ever to see one of thesecreatures, and many of the stories told by the casual traveller cannot be received with implicit faith. I do not mean to impeach the veracity of others, but fancy must have something to do with the case. While we cannot prove the negative by direct evidence, we must be permitted to doubt whether or not these apes are so frequently met in the jungle as they are alleged to be. I will give some reasons why I am a sceptic on this subject.
Almost every yarn told by the novice is quite the same in substance and much the same in detail as those related by others. It seems that most of them meet the same old gorilla, still beating his breast and screaming just as he did thirty years ago. The number of gun-barrels that he is accused of having chewed up would make an arsenal that would arm the volunteers. What becomes of all those that are attacked by this fierce monarch of the jungle? Not one of them ever gets killed, and not one of them ever kills a gorilla. Does he merely do this as a bluff and then recede from the attack? Or does he follow it up and seize his victim, tear him open and drink his blood as he is supposed to do? How does the victim escape? What becomes of the assailant? Who lives to tell the tale?
The gorilla has good ears, good eyes, and is a skilful bushman. One man walking through the jungle will make more noise than half a dozen gorillas. The gorilla can always see and hear a man before he is seen or heard by him. He is shy, and will not attack a man unless he is disturbed by him.He is always on the alert for danger, and rarely comes into the open parts of the bush except for food. He can conceal himself with more ease than a man can, and has every advantage in making his escape. I do not believe that he will ever approach a man if he can evade him. I quite believe that he will make a strong defence if surprised or attacked, but I do not believe it possible for any one to see a great number of gorillas in any length of time unless he goes to some one place and remains there as I have done. Even then he must sometimes wait for days without a trace of one. Silence and patience alone will enable him to see them; but when the gorilla sees him he at once retires as soon as he discovers the nature of the thing before him. He does not always flee in haste as many other animals do, but is more deliberate and cool. He will retreat in good order, and as a rule always starts in time if possible to escape without being observed. I trust that I may be pardoned for not being able to believe that every stranger who visits that country is attacked by a gorilla.
In addition to those I have seen in a wild state, I have seen about ten in captivity. Two of those were my own. They were good subjects for study, and I made the best use of them for the time I had them.
I accomplished one thing while in the jungle, for which I feel a just sense of pride, and that was making a gorilla take a portrait of himself. This will interest the amateur in the art of snapshots, and I shall relate it.
I selected a place in the forest where I found some tracks of the animal along the edge of a dense thicket ofbatuna. Under cover of the foliage I set up two pairs of stakes which were crossed at the tops, and to them was lashed a short pole forming something like a sawbuck. To this was fastened the camera, to which had been attached a trigger made of bamboo splits. One end of a string was fastened to the trigger, and the other end carried under a yoke to a distance of eight feet from the lens. At this point was attached a fresh plantain stalk and a nice bunch of the red fruit of thebatuna. Upon this point the camera was focussed, the trigger was set, and it was left to await the gorilla. That afternoon I returned to find that something had taken the bait, broken the string, sprung the trigger and snapped the camera. I developed the plate, but could find no image of anything except the leaves in front of it. I repeated the experiment with the same results, but could not understand how anything could steal the bait and yet not be shown in the picture. The third time I did this I was gratified to find the image of a gorilla, and also to discover the cause why the others had not succeeded. The deep shadows of the forest make it difficult to take a photograph without giving it a time exposure, and when the sun is under a cloud or on the wrong side of an object it is quite impossible. The leaves that were shown in the first two plates were only those which were most exposed to the light, and all the lower part of the picture was without detail. In thethird trial it could be seen that the sun was shining at the instant of exposure. A part of the body of the gorilla was in the light, but most of it was in the shadow of the leaves above it. The left side of the head and face were quite distinct, also the left shoulder and arm. The hand and bait could not have been distinguished except by their context. The right side of the head, arm, and most of the body were lost. The picture showed that he had taken the bait with his left hand, and that he was in a crouching posture at the moment. While the photograph was very poor as a work of art, it was full of interest as an experiment.
Although it did not result in getting a good picture, I do not regard the effort as a failure. It shows at least that such a thing is possible, and by careful efforts often repeated it could be made a means of obtaining some novel pictures. A little ingenuity would widen the scope of this device, and make it possible to photograph birds, elephants, and everything else in the forest. When I return to that place on a like journey, I shall carry the scheme into better effect.
In the various records that constitute the history of these apes are found many novel and incoherent tales, but all of them appear to rest upon some basis of truth. In order to arrive at some more definite knowledge concerning them, we may review the data at our command. The first record in the annals of the world that alludes to these man-like apes, is that of Hanno, who made a voyage from Carthage to the west coast of Africa, nearly 500 years before the Christian era. He described an ape which was found in the locality about Sierra Leone. It is singular that the description which he gave of those apes should coincide so fully with those known of the present day, but to my mind it is quite certain that the ape of which he gives an account was neither a gorilla nor chimpanzee, nor is there anything to show that either of these ever occupied that part of the world, or that any similar type has done so. It is clear from the evidence that the ape described by him was not an anthropoid, but was the large, dog-faced monkey technically calledcynocephalus. These animals are found all along the north coast of the Gulf of Guinea,but there is not a trace of any true ape along it north of Cameroon River, which empties into the sea about 4° north of the equator. Here begins the first trace of the chimpanzee. In passing along the windward coast, casual reports are current to the effect that gorillas and chimpanzees occupy the interior north of there; but when these reports are sifted down to solid facts, it always turns out to be a big baboon or monkey upon which the story rests. Its likeness to man as described by Hanno was doubtless the work of fancy, and the nametroglodyteswhich he gave to it shows that he knew but little of its habits, or cared but little for the exactness of his statements.
The account given by Henry Battel, in 1590, contains a thread of truth woven into a web of fantasy. He must have heard the stories he relates, or seen the specimens along the coast north of the Congo, and there are certain facts which point to this conclusion. The namepongowhich he gave to one of them belongs to the Fiot tongue, which is spoken by the native tribes around Loango. Those people apply the name to the gorilla, and is commonly understood to be synonymous with the namenjina, used by the tribes north of there, and always applied to the gorilla. To me, however, it appears to coincide with the namentyiias used by the Esyira people for another ape which is described in the chapter devoted to gorillas. It was from Loango that Dr. Falkenstein secured an ape under that name in 1876. It is singular that Baron Wurmb, in1780, makes use of this same namepongofor an orang. I have not been able to learn where he acquired this name, but it appears to be a native Fiot name, and the history of their language is fairly well known for more than 400 years. The other name "Enjocko," given by Battel to the other ape, is beyond a doubt a corruption of the native namentyigo(ntcheego), and this name belongs north of the Congo from Mayumba to Gaboon. He may have inferred that these apes occupied Angola, but there is not a vestige of proof that any ape exists in that part of Africa. Even the native tribes of that part have no indigenous name for either one of these apes. Other parts of his account are erroneous, and while he may have believed that those apes "go in bodies to kill many natives that travel in the wood," and the natives may have told him such a thing, the apes do not practise such a habit. With all their sagacity they have no idea of the unity of action. If a band of them were attacked, they would no doubt act together in their defence, but it is not to be believed that they ever preconcert any plan of attack. Neither do these apes ever assault elephants. He is one animal they hold in mortal dread. I have incidentally mentioned elsewhere the conduct of my two kulus on board the ship when they saw a young elephant. Chico, the big ape that has also been mentioned, was often vicious and stubborn. Whenever he refused to obey his keeper or became violent, an elephant was brought in sight of his cage. On seeing it he became asdocile as a lamb, and showed every sign of the most intense fear. Mr. Bailey himself told me of the dread both of his apes had for an elephant. Battel was also wrong in the mode he described of the mother carrying its young, and the apes using sticks or clubs.
The ape known as "Mafuka," which was exhibited in Dresden in 1875, was also brought from the Loango coast, and it is possible that this is the ape to which the native namepongoreally belonged. This specimen in many respects conforms to the description of thentyiigiven, but the idea suggested by certain writers that "Mafuka" was a cross between the gorilla and chimpanzee is not, to my mind, a tenable supposition. It would be difficult to believe that two apes of different species in a wild state would cross, but to believe that two that belonged to different genera would do so is even more illogical.
I may state here, however, again that some of the Esyira people advance such a theory concerning thentyii, but the belief is not general, and those best skilled in woodcraft regard them as distinct species.
To quote, in pidjin English, the exact version of their relationship as it was given to me by my interpreter while in that country, may be of interest to the reader. I may remark, by way of explaining the nature of pidjin English, that it is a literal translation of the native mode of thought into English words. The statement was:
"Ntyiibe one:njinabe one: all two be one, one.Nytii'e one mudder:jnina'e one mudder: all two 'e one, one.Nytii'e one fader:njinaall same 'e one fader, 'e one. 'E all two one fader." By which the native means to say that thenytiihas one mother and thenjinahas one mother, so that the two have two mothers, but both have one father, therefore they are half-brothers.
The other version given in denial of this statement was as follows:
"Nytii'e one mudder:njina'e one mudder. 'E one, one.Nytii'e one fader:njina'e one fader. 'E be one, one. All two 'e one, one.Nytii'im mudder,njina'im mudder. 'E brudder.Nytii'im fader,njina'im fader 'e brudder. All two 'e one, one."
The translation of this elegant speech is, that thenytiihas a mother, and thenjinahas a mother which are not the same but sisters. Thenytiihas a father, and thenjinahas a father which are not the same, but are brothers, and therefore the two apes are only cousins, which in the native esteem is a remote degree of kinship.
The ape described by Lopez certainly belonged to the territory north of the Congo, which coast he explored, and gave his name to a cape about forty miles south of the equator, and it still bears the name Cape Lopez. At that time, however, it is probable that most of the low country now occupied by these apes was covered with water; that the lakes of that region were then all embraced in one great estuary, reaching from Fernan Vaz to NazarethBay, and extending eastward to the Foot hills below Lamberene. There is abundant evidence to show that such a state has once existed there, but it is not probable that these apes have ever changed their latitude.
The name "soko" appears to be a local name for the ordinary type of chimpanzee found throughout the whole range of their domain, and known in other parts by other names.
In Malimbu the name "kulu" appears to apply to the same species, while in the south-western part of their habitat that name, coupled with the verb "kamba," is confined strictly to the other type. Along the northern borders of the district to which that species belongs, but where he is very seldom found and little known to the natives, he is called Mkami tribe, "kanga ntyigo," to distinguish him from the common variety to which the latter name only is applied.
The etymology of the namekangaas applied to this ape is rather obscure. In common use it is a verb with the normal meaning to "parch" or "fry," and hence the secondary meaning to "prepare." Since this ape is said to be of a higher order of the race, the term is used to signify that he is "better prepared" than the other. That is to say, he is prepared to think and talk in a better manner.
Another history of this word appears to be more probable. The ape to which the name is applied lives between the Mkami country and the Congo, and the name is possibly a perversion of kongo, andimplies the kind ofntyigothat lives towards the great river of that name. The etymology of African names is always difficult because there is no record of them, but many of them can be traced out with great precision, and some of them are unique.
The name M'Bouvé, as given by Du Chaillu, I have not been able to identify. In one part of the country I was told that the word meant the "chief" or head of a family. In another part it was said to mean something like an advocate or champion, and was only applied to one ape in a family group. The Rev. A. C. Goode, a zealous missionary who recently died near Batanga, was stationed for twelve years at Gaboon. During that time he travelled all through the Ogowe and Gaboon valleys. He was familiar with the languages of that part, and he explained the word in about the same way.
Whatever may be said concerning the veracity of Paul Du Chaillu, there is one thing that must be said to his credit. He gave to the world more knowledge of these apes than all other men put together had ever done before, and while he may have given a touch of colour to many incidents, and related some native yarns, he told a vast amount of valuable truth, and I can forgive him for anything which he may have misstated, except one. That is starting that story about gorillas chewing up gun-barrels. It has been a staple yarn in stock ever since, and the instant you ask a native any question about the habits of a gorilla he begins with this.
In view of the fact that I have made careful andmethodic efforts to determine the exact boundary of the habitat and the real habits of these two apes, I feel at liberty to speak with an air of authority. I have acquired my knowledge on the subject by going to their own country and living in their own jungle, and I have thus obtained their secrets from first hands. With due respect to those who write books and speak freely upon subjects of which they know but little, I beg leave to suggest that if the authors had gone into the jungle and lived among those animals instead of consulting others who know less than themselves about it, many of them would have written in a very different strain. I do not mean this as a rebuke to any one, but seeing the same old stories repeated year after year, and knowing that there is no truth in them, I feel it incumbent as a duty to challenge them.
I believe that in the future it will be shown that there are two types of gorilla as distinct from each other as the two chimpanzees now known. This second variety of gorilla will be found between the third and fifth parallels south and east of the delta district, but west of the Congo. I believe it was represented in the ape "Mafuka." My researches among the apes have been confined chiefly to the two kinds heretofore described, but I have seen and studied in a superficial way the orang and the gibbon. I am not prepared as yet to discuss the habits of those two apes, but as they form a part of the group of anthropoids we cannot dismiss them without honourable mention.
The orang-outan, as he is called in his own country, is known to zoology by the first of these terms alone. He is a native of Borneo and Sumatra, and opinions differ as to whether there are two species or only one.
The general plan of the skeleton of the orang is very much the same as in the other apes. The chief points of difference are that it has one bone more in the wrist and one joint less in the spinal column than is found in man. He has thirteen pairs of ribs, which appear to be more constant in their number than in man. His arms are longer and his legs shorter in proportion to his body than the other two apes. The type of the skull is peculiar, and combines to a certain extent more human-like form in one part with a more beast-like form in another. The usual height of an adult male is about fifty-one inches.
I have never had an opportunity of studying this ape in a wild state, and have only had access to four of them in captivity, all of which were young and most of them inferior specimens. He is the most obtuse or stupid of the four great apes. And were it not for his skeleton alone he would be assigned a place below the gibbon, for in point of speech and mental calibre he is far inferior. The best authorities perhaps upon the habits of this ape in a wild state are Messrs. W. T. Horniday and R. A. Wallace.
The first and last in order of the anthropoid apes is the gibbon; he is much smaller in size, greater invariety, and more active than any other of the group. His habitat is in the south-east of Asia; its outline is vaguely defined, but it includes the Malayan Peninsula and many of the contiguous islands east and south of it.
The skeleton of the gibbon is the most delicate and graceful in build of all the apes, and in this respect is as far superior to man as man is to the gorilla, except for the long arms and digits. He is the only one of the four that can walk in an erect position, but in doing this the gibbon is awkward, and often uses his arms to balance himself, sometimes by touching his hands to the ground, or at other times raising them above his head or extending them on either side. The length of them is such that he can touch the fingers to the ground while the body is nearly if not quite erect. In the spinal column he has two and sometimes three sections more than man. His digits are very much longer, but his legs are nearly the same length in proportion to his body as those of man. He has fourteen pairs of ribs.
The gibbon is the most active, if not the most intelligent, of all apes. He is more arboreal in habit than any other. Many wonderful stories are told of his agility in climbing and leaping from limb to limb. One authentic report credits one of these apes with leaping a distance of forty-two feet from the limb of one tree to that of another. Perhaps a better term is to call it swinging rather than leaping, as these flights are performed by the arms. Another account is, that one swinging by one hand propelled himselfa horizontal distance of eighteen feet through the air, seizing a bird in flight, and alighting safely upon another limb with his prey in hand.
There are several of this ape known, the largest of which is about three feet high, but the usual height is not more than thirty inches. The voice of one species is remarkable for its strength, scope and quality above all other apes. Most of the members of this genus are endowed with better vocal qualities than other animals. This ends the list of the man-like apes, and next in order after them come the monkeys, but we will deal with that subject more at length at some future time.
The descent, as we have elsewhere observed, from the highest ape to the lowest monkey presents one unbroken scale of imbricating planes; and we have seen in what degree man is related to the higher ape. From whence we may discern in what degree his physical nature is the same as that of all the order to which he belongs. No matter in what respect he may differ in his mental and moral nature, his likeness to them should at least restrain his pride, evoke his sympathy, and share the bounty of his benevolence. Let man realise to its full extent that he is one in nature with the rest, and they will receive the benign influence of his dignity without impairing it, while he will elevate himself by having given it.
In conclusion, I deem it in order to offer a few remarks with regard to the causes of death among these apes, and to the proper treatment of the animals in captivity. We know so little and assume so much concerning them that we often violate the very laws under which they live.
We have already noticed the fact that the gorilla is confined by nature to a low, humid region, reeking with miasma and the effluvia of decaying vegetation. The atmosphere in which he thrives is one in which human life can hardly exist. We know in part why man cannot live in such an atmosphere and under such conditions, but we cannot say with certainty why the ape does do so. It would seem that the very element that is fatal to the life of man gives strength and vitality to the gorilla.
We know that all forms of animal life are not affected in the same way by the same things, and while it may be said in round numbers that whatever is good for man is good for apes also, it is not a fact.
The human race is the most widely distributed ofany genus of mammals and, as a race, can undergo the greatest extremes of change in climate, food and other conditions of any other animal. His migratory habits, both inherent and acquired, have fitted him for a life of vicissitudes, and such a life inures him as an individual to all extremes. On the other hand, the gorilla, as a genus, is confined to a small habitat, which is uniform in climate, products and topography; and having been so long restricted to these conditions he is unfitted for like changes, and when such are forced upon him the result must always be to his injury.
In certain parts of the American tropics there is found a rich, grey moss growing in great profusion in certain localities and on certain kinds of trees. It is not confined to any certain level, but thrives best on the lowest elevations. Under favourable conditions it will grow at altitudes far above the surrounding swamps. The character and quantity, however, are measured by the altitude at which it grows. It is an aerial plant, and may be detached from the boughs of one tree and transplanted upon those of another. It may be taken with safety for a great distance so long as an atmosphere is supplied to it that is suited to its nature; but when removed from its normal conditions and placed in a purer air it begins to languish and soon dies. If it be returned in time, however, to its former place or one of like character it will revive and continue to grow.
What element this plant extracts from the impure air is a matter of doubt; but it cannot be carbonicacid gas which is the chief food of plants, nor it cannot be any form of nitrogen; and it is well known that the plant cannot long survive in a pure atmosphere. Whatever the ingredient extracted may be, it is certain that it is one that is deadly to human life, and one which other plants refuse. Moisture and heat alone cannot account for it.
We have another striking instance in the eucalyptus, which lives upon the poison of the air around it. There are many other cases in vegetable life, and while the animal is a higher organism than the plant, there are certain laws of life that obtain in both kingdoms which are the same in principle.
Between the case of the gorilla and that of the plant there is some analogy. It may not be the same element that sustains them both, but it is possible that the very microbes which germinate disease and prove fatal to man sustain the life of the ape in the prime of health. The poison which destroys life in man preserves it in the ape.
The chimpanzee is distributed over a much greater range, and is capable of undergoing a much greater degree of change in food and temperature. The history of these apes in captivity shows that the chimpanzee lives much longer in that state and requires much less care. From my own observation I assert that all of these apes can undergo a greater range of temperature than they can of humidity. This appears to be one of the essential things to the life of a gorilla, and one fatal mistake made in treating him is furnishing him with a dry, warmatmosphere, and depriving him of the poison contained in the malarious air in which he spends his entire life. Both of these apes need humidity. The chimpanzee will live longer than a gorilla in a dry air, but neither of them can long survive it, and it would appear that a salt atmosphere is best for the gorilla.
I believe that one of these apes could be kept in good condition for any length of time if he were supplied with a normal humidity in an atmosphere laden with miasma and allowed to vary in temperature. A constant degree of heat is not good for any animal, there is nowhere in all the earth that nature sustains a uniform degree of it. We need not go to either extreme, but a change is requisite to bring into play all the organs of the body.
The theory of their treatment which I would advance is to build them a house entirely apart from that of any other animal. It should be 18 or 20 feet wide by 35 or 40 long, and at least 15 feet high. It should have no floor except earth, and that should be of sandy loam or vegetable mould. In one end of this building there should be a pool of water 12 or 15 feet in diameter, and embedded in the mould under the water should be a steam coil to regulate the temperature as might be desired. In this pool should be grown a dense crop of water plants such as are found in the marshes of the country in which the gorilla lives. This pool should not be cleaned out or the water changed, but the plants should be allowed to grow and decay in a naturalway. Neither the pool nor the house should be kept at a uniform heat, but allowed to vary from 60 to 90 degrees.
In addition to the things mentioned, the place should be provided with the means of giving it a spray of tepid water, which should be turned on once or twice a day, and allowed to continue for at least an hour at a time. The water for this purpose should be taken from the pool, but should never be warmer than the usual temperature of tropical rain. The animal should not be required to take a bath in this way, but should be left to his own choice about it.
The house should be separated by a thin partition that could be removed at will, and the other end of the building from the pool should be occupied by a strong tree, either dead or alive, to afford the inmates proper exercise. The rule that visitors or strangers should not annoy or tease them should be enforced without respect to person, time, or rank. No visitor should be allowed on any terms to give them any kind of food. The reasons for these precautions are obvious to any one familiar with the keeping of animals, but in the case of a gorilla their observance cannot be waived with impunity.
The south side of the house should be of glass, and at least half of the top should be of the same. These parts should be provided with heavy canvas curtains, to be drawn over them so as to adjust or regulate the sunlight. In summer-time the building should be kept quite open so as to admit air andrain. The ape does not need to be pampered: on the contrary, he should be permitted to rough it. Half of the gorillas that have ever been in captivity have died from over-nursing. By nature they are strong and robust if the proper conditions are supplied, but when these are changed he becomes a frail and tender creature. They should not be restricted to a vegetable diet nor limited to a few articles of food of any kind, but should be allowed to select such things as they prefer to eat. I have grave doubts as to the wisdom of limiting the quantity. One mistake is often committed in the treatment of animals, and that is to continue the same diet at all times and limit that to one or two items. It may be observed that the higher the form of organism is the more diverse the taste becomes, and while very hardy animals or those of low forms may be restricted to one staple kind of food, the higher forms demand a change.
One thing above all others that I would inhibit is the use of straw of any kind in their cage for beds or any other purpose. If it be desired to furnish them with such a comfort, nothing should ever be used but dead leaves if they can be supplied. In their absence a canvas hammock or wire matting should be used. There are certain kinds of dust given off by the dry straw of all cereal plants. This is deleterious to the health of man, but vastly more so to these apes. It is taken into the lungs, and through them act upon other parts of the body by suppressing the circulation and respiration. Nomatter how clean the straw may be, the effect will be the same in the end. Hay is better than straw, but even this should not be used.
Another thing which is necessary is to entertain or amuse them in some way, otherwise they become despondent and gloomy. It is believed by those who are familiar with these apes that loneliness or solitude is a fruitful cause of death. This is especially so with the gorilla. I have a photograph of one that was kept by a trader on the coast of Africa for nearly three years. She was devoted to him, and was never content when not in his company. His business required him to make a journey of a few days to the interior. He left the gorilla at his place on the coast where she had lived up to this time. The day after he departed she became morose and fretful, and within a few days died without any apparent cause except pining. This was observed by natives and by white traders, and her death has always been ascribed to the cause assigned. She was well known to all the traders on that part of the coast, and has been regarded as one of the best specimens known. She is the only one that I have ever known to become devoted to a human being.
Another important fact that is little known but very singular is, that tobacco smoke is absolutely fatal to a gorilla. Every native hunter that I met in Africa testifies that this simple thing will kill any gorilla in the forest if he is subjected to the fumes for a short time. I have reason to believe that it is true. It may not prove fatal in every instance, butit will in many. The chimpanzee is not so much affected by it, although he dislikes it, but the gorilla detests it and shows at all times his strong aversion to it. I have no doubt that this is one of the reasons that these apes always die on board the ships by which they are brought from Africa.
Both of these apes are possessed, in a degree, of savage and resentful instincts. But these are much stronger in the gorilla than in the chimpanzee. He therefore requires firm and consistent treatment. This can be used without being severe or cruel, but the intellect of the gorilla must not be underrated. He studies the motives and intentions of man with a keen perception, and is seldom mistaken in his interpretation of them. He often manifests a violent dislike for certain persons, and when such is discovered to be the case the object of his dislike should not be permitted in his presence, for the result is to enrage the ape and excite his nervous nature. When they become sullen or obstinate they should not be coaxed or indulged, nor yet used with harshness. They should either be left alone for the time or diverted by a change of treatment.
At this point I submit the foregoing to the world as the sum of my labours in this special field of research up to this time. I regret that I have been compelled to deny much that has been said, but I make no apology for having done so. In this work I have sought to place these apes before the reader as I have seen them in their native forest. I have not clothed them in fine raiment or invested them inglamour, but I trust that this contribution may be found worthy of the respect of all men who love Nature and respect fidelity.
I have the vanity to believe that the methods of study which I have employed will be made the means of farther research by more able students than the writer.
Printed byBallantyne, Hanson & Co.London and Edinburgh