Chapter 12

“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 andto 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.”

“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 andto allow the shooter to choose out his victim more readily. The Tunguts of the Steppes are especially skilled in finding and pursuing the Antelopes, and even the young maidens of these tribes take part in the chase. At one of the border-posts there was a celebrated hunter who in many winters had obtained as many as 200 of these Antelopes, which at this season go about in large herds. They are occasionally so crowded together, as this hunter assured me, that he had sometimes killed three and even four individuals with one bullet.

“In what large numbers this Antelope sometimes assembles I was able to convince myself in October 1856, when I was on the other side of the Argunj in Mongolian territory, for their tracks and their droppings were so numerous that it appeared as if some thousands of sheep had gone by.

“The winter pelts of this Antelope make very warm and durable coats (locally called dachas), which are worn with the hair outside: the hair is not so brittle as that of the Roe. They are valued at about one and a half roubles apiece. The flesh of this Antelope is very palatable and the old bucks in the autumn become extraordinarily fat.”

Fig. 56.Skull and horns of the Mongolian Gazelle.(P. Z. S. 1867, p. 245.)

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 inFebruary 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 calledHwang-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 theHwang-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.”

“The European gentlemen in Peking used to go into Mongolia on shooting-expeditions for the purpose of hunting theHwang-Yang. The animal, however, is very wary and generally keeps a long way out of range, so that the hunters are not very successful. It is considered a great feat to kill one of them.”

Besides an adult stuffed specimen of this species in the British Museum, stated, but probably erroneously, to have come from the Kirghiz Steppes, there are several skins and skulls in the collection obtained by the late Consul R. Swinhoe at Pekin, besides the two heads and horns already spoken of as brought home by Dr. Lockhart.

Our illustration (Plate LIV.), which represents both sexes of this Antelope, was put upon the stone by Mr. Smit from a sketch drawn by Mr. Wolf for the late Sir Victor Brooke. We have no record of what were the exact specimens figured.

January,1898.

THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LV.J. Smit del. et lith.Hanhart imp.The Persian Gazelle.GAZELLA SUBGUTTUROSA.Published by R. H. Porter.

THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LV.

J. Smit del. et lith.

Hanhart imp.

The Persian Gazelle.

GAZELLA SUBGUTTUROSA.

Published by R. H. Porter.

Antilope subgutturosa,Güld.Act. Ac. Sc. Imp. Petrop. 1778, pt. i. p. 251 (1780);Schreb.Säug. pl. cclxx. B (1785);Gmel.Linn. S. N. i. p. 186 (1788);Kerr, Linn. An. K. p. 311 (1792);Donnd.Zool. Beytr. i. p. 628 (1792);Link, Beytr. Nat. ii. p. 99 (1795);Bechst.Uebers. vierf. Thierr. ii. p. 645 (1800);Shaw, Gen. Zool. ii. pt. 2, p. 343 (1801);Turt.Linn. Syst. Nat. p. 113 (1802);G. Cuv.Dict. Sci. Nat. ii. p. 227 (1804);Pall.Zoogr. Ross.-As. i. p. 252 (1811);Afzel.N. Act. Ups. vii. p. 220 (1815);Desm.N. Dict. d’H. N. (2) ii. p. 185 (1816);Goldf.Schr. Säug. v. p. 1196 (1818);Desm.Mamm. ii. p. 454 (1822);H. Sm.Griff. An. K. iv. p. 210, v. p. 331 (1827);Less.Man. Mamm. p. 373 (1827);J. B. Fisch.Syn. Mamm. p. 460 (1829);Hohenacker, Bull. Soc. Mosc. 1837, viii. p. 137 (Transcaucasia);Ménétriés, Cat. rais. Zool. Caucase, p. 24 (borders of Caspian Sea);Less.Compl. Buff. x. p. 287 (1836);Oken, Allg. Naturg. vii. p. 1268 (1838);Gerv.Dict. Sci. Nat., Suppl. i. p. 261 (1840);Démidoff, Voy. Russ. Mérid. iii. p. 61 (1840) (Transcaucasia);Eichwald, Faun. Caspio-Caucas. p. 39 (1841);Less.N. Tabl. R. A., Mamm. p. 176 (1842);Wagn.Schr. Säug. Suppl. iv. p. 406 (1844), v. p. 404 (1855);Schinz, Syn. Mamm. ii. p. 402 (1845);Reichenb.Säug. iii. p. 114, pl. xxxiv. (1845);Sund.Pecora, K. Vet.-Ak. Handl. 1845, p. 269 (1847);id.Hornschuch’s Transl., Arch. Skand. Beitr. ii. p. 265; Reprint, p. 85 (1848);Gieb.Säug. p. 307 (1853);De Fil.Viagg. in Persia, p. 344 (1865);Fitz.SB. Wien, lix. p. 160 (1869).Antilope (Gazella) subgutturosa,Licht.Mag. nat. Freund. vi. p. 171 (1814).Cerophorus (Gazella) subgutturosa,Blainv.Bull. Soc. Philom. 1816, p. 75.Gazella subgutturosa,Gray, List Mamm. B. M. p. 160 (1843);id.Ann. Mag. N. H. (1) xviii. p. 231 (1846);Hutt.J. A. S. B. xv. p. 151 (1846) (Candahar);Gray,Knowsl. Men. p. 4 (1850);id.P. Z. S. 1850, p. 113;id.Cat. Ung. B. M. p. 58 (1852);Temm.Esq. Zool. Guin. p. 193 (1853);Blyth, Cat. Mamm. Mus. As. Soc. p. 172 (1863);Wolf, Zool. Sketches, pl. xxii.;Scl.P. Z. S. 1869, p. 602;Blanf.Zool. Abyss, p. 261, pl. i. fig. 4 (horns) (1870);Gray, Cat. Rum. B. M. p. 38 (1872);id.Hand-l. Rum. B. M. p. 107 (1873);Blanf.P. Z. S. 1873, p. 313 (distribution);Brooke, P. Z. S. 1873, p. 545;Przewalski, Mongolia (Russian ed.), pl. i. fig. 2 (1875);id.Morgan’s Engl. Transl. i. p. 207 (1876);Blanf.E. Persia, ii. p. 91 (1876);Severtz.Ann. Mag. N. H. (4) xviii. p. 170 (1876);Danf. & Alst.P. Z. S. 1877, p. 276 (Tigris);iid.P. Z. S. 1880, p. 55;Scl.List An. Z. S. (8) p. 141 (1883), (9) p. 155 (1896);Sterndale, Mamm. Ind. p. 466 (1884);Scl.P. Z. S. 1886, p. 2;Scully, J. A. S. B. lvi. pt. 2, p. 76 (1887);Jent.Cat. Ost. Leyd. Mus. (Mus. P.-B. ix.) p. 136 (1887);Thos.Linn. Trans. (2) v. p. 64 (1889);Büchn.Mél. Biol. xiii. p. 160 (1890);W. Scl.Cat. Mamm. Calc. Mus. ii. p. 160 (1891);Blanf.Faun. Brit. Ind., Mamm. p. 528 (1891);Jent.Cat. Mamm. Leyd. Mus. (Mus. P.-B. xi.) p. 168 (1892);Ward, Horn Meas. (1) p. 118 (1892), (2) p. 159 (1896);Lyd.Horns and Hoofs, p. 180 (1893);Percy, Badm. Big Game Shooting, ii. p. 342 (1894);Satunin, Zool. JB. Syst. ix. p. 310 (1896) (Transcaucasia).“Antilope dorcas, var.persica, Rüpp.,”Gray, List Mamm. B. M. p. 160 (1843).Gazella subgutturosa, var.yarkandensis,Blanf.J. A. S. B. xliv. pt. 2, p. 112;id.Yark. Miss., Mamm. p. 88, pl. xv. (1879).Gazella hillierianaetG. 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(orSai-kik) andTairanof Turkis of Yarkand (Blanford).

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 hillierianaetG. 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(orSai-kik) andTairanof 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.

Femalesimilar 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 inAntilope 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. subgutturosais the Gazelle of the highlands, and is found inalmost 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 (probablyG. 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 thisfamily, 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 callGazella 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 formGazella subgutturosa yarkandensis.

We have already mentioned the four living examples of this Gazelle brought to London by Dr. Aitchison and presented to the Zoological Society’s Collection. These, however, were not the first specimens of this animal brought to England alive. As long ago as 1852 females of the present species were obtained from Bussorah on the Persian Gulf and presented to the Society by Alderman Finnis, and in 1869 examples from the same country were given to the collection by the late Mr. T. K. Lynch, F.Z.S.Other specimens, mostly from the same country, were received in subsequent years[6]. The examples of this animal just spoken of as being the first to arrive in England formed the subjects of a beautiful drawing by Mr. Wolf, a coloured lithograph taken from which has been published in the first volume of Wolf and Sclater’s ‘Zoological Sketches’ (plate xxii.).

Our figures of this species for the present work (Plate LV.) have been prepared by Mr. Smit from the descendants of the animals brought by Dr. Aitchison from Northern Persia, now living in the Society’s Gardens.

The series of specimens of this species in the British Museum comprises a skull from near Ispahan in Persia, presented by Dr. W. T. Blanford, F.R.S.; a head-skin and some horns from Gulran and Galicha, on the Afghan frontier, collected by Dr. Aitchison during the Afghan Boundary Commission; and some skins and skulls from the Saiar Mountains, Altai, presented by Mr. St. George Littledale. There are likewise a skin from the River Aksu, in Chinese Turkestan, presented by Major C. S. Cumberland, and several fine skulls and pairs of horns from the plains of Yarkand, obtained by the late Mr. Dalgleish, and presented to the Museum by Mr. A. C. Hume, C.B. All these last-named specimens represent the Yarkand subspecies,Gazella subgutturosa yarkandensis.

January,1898.

THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LVI.J. Smit del. et lith.Hanhart imp.The Marica Gazelle.GAZELLA MARICA.Published by R. H. Porter.

THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL. LVI.

J. Smit del. et lith.

Hanhart imp.

The Marica Gazelle.

GAZELLA MARICA.

Published by R. H. Porter.

Gazella bennetti,Scl.List Vert. An. Z. S. 1896, p. 155, ex.f.(err.).Gazella marica,Thos.Ann. Mag. N. H. (6) xix. p. 162 (1897).Vernacular Name:—Reemof Arabs of Nejd (Jayakar).

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:—Reemof Arabs of Nejd (Jayakar).

Closely allied toG. 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 inG. 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 magnificentcollections 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 namedHemitragus jayakariafter 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 hisGazella maricaupon 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 ofGazella 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 IndianGazella bennetti, which is known to extend along the coast of Baluchistan nearly tothe 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 isG. marica.

Our illustration of the Marica Gazelle (Plate LVI.) has been taken by Mr. Smit from the typical specimen from Nejd in the British Museum, and represents an adult male.

January,1898.

THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES PL. LVII.Wolf del J Smit lithHanhart imp.The Dorcas Gazelle.GAZELLA DORCAS.Published by R. H. Porter

THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES PL. LVII.

Wolf del J Smit lith

Hanhart imp.

The Dorcas Gazelle.

GAZELLA DORCAS.

Published by R. H. Porter

Gazella africana, cornibus brevibus,Ray, Quadr. p. 80 (1693), whenceCapra 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), whenceAntilope 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) (necCapra gazella, Linn.).Le Kevel,Buff.Hist. Nat. xii. p. 258, pl. xxvi. (1764), whenceAntilope 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), whenceAntilope 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:—RhozalorHemarof Arabs of Algeria (Pease);Ghasalaof Arabs (Tristram).

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) (necCapra 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:—RhozalorHemarof Arabs of Algeria (Pease);Ghasalaof 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 ofGG. przewalskii,marica,tilonura, andsoemmerringiwill 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 genusCapra, and calledCapra 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 hisCapra dorcasupon theGazella africanaof 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 placedAntilope dorcaseighth 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 calledGazella 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 ofGazella 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 nameGazella corinna(founded upon Buffon’s “Corine”) has been sometimes applied to theGazella rufifronsof Senegal. But, so far as we can judge from Buffon’s figure and description, the realtype of Buffon’s “Corine” must have been merely an ordinary female ofGazella 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 thanGazella 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 Auresand 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.”

“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 femaleG. 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.”

“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 femaleG. 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 afterCapra 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, usuallyGazella dorcasin Lower, andG. isabellain Upper Egypt, although they were probably also well acquainted withG. 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:—

Back to Index Next