of the present subfamily, and forms a very natural and easily defined
group. All the species are lightly built and delicate animals, and
are among the best known of all the Antelopes, on account of their
beauty and the fact that they are common in confinement, so that every
zoological garden is always well provided with examples of them. In
the Zoological Society’s Gardens at the present time no less than ten
species are represented.
The genus _Gazella_ was always a favourite one with Sir Victor
Brooke, who devoted much time to its elucidation, and published in
1873 a monograph of it, which up to the present time has been the
standard work on the subject. From this monograph we venture to
quote the following paragraphs which explain the nomenclature of the
characteristic markings of the Gazelles: they also give an indication
of the difficulties to be met with in working out a genus which, while
the largest contained in the present work, is remarkable for the close
resemblance of the different species to one another and for the absence
of characters which will enable them to be readily separated:--
“For the sake of convenience, and the avoidance of constant
repetition, and also to throw into relief the traces of genetic
affinity afforded by coloration, I will describe the typical
ground-plan which may be seen underlying each variation,
the uniformity of the arrangement of the more salient and
characteristic markings (where they appear) throughout the group
clearly showing the existence of such a plan. To each of these
more prominent features, indicating what may be provisionally
called generic coloration, I will apply a definite name, which I
shall make use of in the following descriptions.
The anterior facial region in Gazelles, from the base of each
horn to the muzzle, is cut off from the sides of the face on
both sides by white streaks, which, starting externally to the
base of each horn, run downwards to within two inches of the
nostrils; the former I shall call the ‘_central facial band_,’
the latter the ‘_light facial streaks_.’ From the corner of
the suborbital gland, running downwards immediately below the
light facial streak, and of about equal width, is a dark line;
this I shall refer to as the ‘_dark facial streak_.’ Bordering
the white of the belly on each side, and extending from above
and behind the ulna to above and in front of the patella, are
two bands, the lower of which is darker, the upper lighter
than the colour of the back and flanks. The former I shall
speak of as the ‘_dark lateral band_,’ the latter the ‘_light
lateral band_.’ Lastly, bordering the white of the rump is
frequently seen a narrow indefinite darkish band, which may
be conveniently called the ‘_pygal band_.’ The difficulty of
expressing differences dependent to a large extent upon shades
of colour and texture of hair sufficiently sharply to give a
just impression of the effect produced by such differences upon
the eye may cause the distinction of some of the forms below
mentioned to appear doubtful. I can only say that upon occasions
when I have had ample opportunity of subsequently verifying
my identification, I have never experienced any difficulty in
referring specimens entirely new to me to their proper name
and habitat. The descriptions must be taken as applying to
thoroughly typical specimens, the intensity of the markings
and length and curvature of the horns being subject to great
individual variation.”
Since Sir Victor Brooke wrote his monograph of the Gazelles, many
species only known to him by descriptions or by imperfect specimens
have become represented in our National Museum by complete examples,
while several additional species have been discovered. Our arrangement
of the species is therefore necessarily different from his, but is, we
fear, still very far from being perfect, as more and better specimens
of most of the forms are still wanted before their exact geographical
distribution, their extent of variation, and their true relationships
to each other can be satisfactorily worked out.
As already noted, we have removed from the genus _Gazella_, under
the name _Antidorcas_, the South-African Springbuck, which Sir
Victor Brooke included in it. This being eliminated, the 25 species
which we are prepared to recognize as distinct may be arranged as
follows:--
A. Tail quite short. No Gazelline face-markings. Females without
horns.
_a._ Horns strongly curved backwards. Skull 7 in. or less in
basal length.
_a^1._ Horns not hooked at tip. (Tibet.)
82. _G. picticaudata._
_b^1._ Horns hooked at tip.
(Mongolia.) 83. _G. przewalskii._
_b._ Horns but little curved backwards, not hooked at tip.
Skull about 9 in. in basal length.
(N. China.) 84. _G. gutturosa._
B. Tail of average length, its terminal half generally more or less
crested with black. Face-markings present. Females (except in
_G. subgutturosa_) with horns.
_a._ Upper part of face white (at least in old age), interrupting
the central facial band.
_a^1._ No horns in female: size larger. (Central and Western
Asia.) 85. _G. subgutturosa._
_b^1._ Horns present in female: size smaller. (Arabia.)
86. _G. marica._
_b._ Central dark facial band uninterrupted by white above. Horns
present in the female.
_a^1._ Dark colour of back not invaded by white of rump.
_a^2._ Dark lateral band indistinctly marked, not strong and
blackish.
_a^3._ Tip of horns slightly curved inwards or upwards, not
bent in to a right angle.
_a^4._ Horns of medium length.
_a^5._ Horns truly lyrate, the middle portion twisted
outwards, the tips reapproaching each other.
(Algeria, Egypt, Palestine.)
87. _G. dorcas._
_b^5._ Horns not truly lyrate, more or less evenly
diverging upwards.
_a^6._ Top of muzzle ordinarily with a black spot on
it.
_a^7._ Nose simple.
_a^8._ Larger: hair rough. (Algeria.)
88. _G. cuvieri._
_b^8._ Smaller: hair smooth: darker. (Arabia.)
89. _G. arabica._
_c^8._ Smaller: hair smooth: lighter. (India and
S. Persia.) 90. _G. bennetti._
_b^7._ Nose with a flabby corrugated elevation
on it. (Somaliland.)
91. _G. spekei._
_b^6._ Top of muzzle without a black spot.
(Somaliland.) 92. _G. pelzelni._
_b^4._ Horns long and very slender. Colours very pale.
(Algeria and Egypt.) 93. _G. leptoceros._
_b^3._ Tip of horns hooked inwards or upwards, nearly or quite
to a right angle.
_a^4._ General colour pale fawn, the lateral band and other
markings also fawn. (Nubia.) 94. _G. Isabella._
_b^4._ General colour brownish fawn, the lateral band
blackish. (Muscat.) 95. _G. muscatensis._
_b^2._ Dark lateral band black and strongly marked.
_a^3._ Horns abruptly hooked inwards at the ends. (Abyssinia.)
96. _G. tilonura._
_b^3._ Horns not abruptly hooked at end.
_a^4._ No nose-spot; face uniform rufous.
_a^5._ Size smaller. (Senegambia.) 97. _G. rufifrons._
_b^5._ Size larger. (Algeria.) 98. _G. rufina._
_b^4._ Nose-spot black. (Masai-land.) 99. _G. thomsoni._
_b^1._ Dark colour of back more or less invaded by white of rump.
_a^2._ A dark pygal band present.
_a^3._ Dark colour of back continued in middle line on to the
top of the tail. Size smaller. (E. African Coast.)
100. _G. petersi._
_b^3._ Dark colour of back shut off from tail, which is
enclosed in the white anal disk. Size larger.
_a^4._ Dark lateral bands obsolete, or, in youth, present
below the light lateral band only. (Interior of East
Africa.) 101. _G. granti._
_b^4._ Dark bands present both above and below the light
lateral band, uniting with each other behind.
(Northern British E. Africa.)102. _G. notata._
_b^2._ No dark pygal band.
_a^3._ Tail black-tipped. Horns hooked inwards. (Abyssinian
Coast and Somaliland.) 103. _G. soemmerringi._
_b^3._ Tail all white, or merely tipped with fawn. Horns hooked
upwards and forwards.
_a^4._ Neck and anterior back alone rufous; lines of
demarcation indistinct. (Kordofan.)
104. _G. ruficollis.
b^4._ Rufous extending over body and flanks, well defined from the
white.
_a^5._ Sides of thighs white, the rufous of body not joining that
of hind legs. (Senegal.) 105. _G. dama._
_b^5._ Sides of thighs and legs rufous, continuous with that of
body. (Morocco.) 106. _G. mhorr._
[Illustration:
THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL LII
_Wolf del Smit lith_ _Hanhart imp_
The Tibetan Gazelle.
GAZELLA PICTICAUDATA.
_Published by R. H. Porter_]
82. THE TIBETAN GAZELLE.
GAZELLA PICTICAUDATA (HODGS.).
[PLATE LII.]
_Procapra picticaudata_, =Hodgs.= J. A. S. B. xv. p. 334, pl.
ii. (1846), xvi. p. 696 (1847); =Blyth=, J. A. S. B. xvi. p. 725
(1847); =Gray=, P. Z. S. 1850, p. 116; =Horsf.= Cat. Mamm. Mus.
E. I. C. p. 169 (1851); =Gray=, Cat. Ung. B. M. p. 55 (1852);
=Hooker=, Himalayan Journ. ii. p. 157 (1854); =Adams=, P. Z.
S. 1858, p. 523; =Gerr.= Cat. Bones Mamm. B. M. p. 232 (1862);
=Blyth=, Cat. Mamm. Mus. As. Soc. p. 173 (1863); =Gray=, P. Z.
S. 1867, p. 245, fig. (skull); =Fitz.= SB. Wien, lix. p. 161
(1869); =Kinloch=, Large Game Shooting, p. 10 (1869); =Blanf.=
J. A. S. B. xli. pt. 2, p. 39 (1872); =Gray=, Cat. Rum. B. M. p.
38 (1872); =id.= Hand-l. Rum. B. M. p. 105 (1873); =Przewalski=,
Mongolia (Russian ed.), pl. i. figs. 2 & 3 (♂ ♀) (1875);
=Blanf.= P. Z. S. 1876, p. 634; =Jent.= Cat. Ost. Leyd. Mus.
(Mus. Pays-Bas, ix.) p. 136 (1887); =id.= Cat. Mamm. Leyd. Mus.
(op. cit. xi.) p. 167 (1892).
_Antilope picticaudata_, =Wagn.= Schr. Säug. Suppl. v. p. 408
(1855); =Przewalski=, Mongolia (Morgan’s Engl. Transl.), ii. p.
208 (1876).
_Gazella picticaudata_, =Brooke=, P. Z. S. 1873, p. 547;
=Sternd.= Mamm. Ind. p. 467 (1884); =W. Scl.= Cat. Mamm. Ind.
Mus. ii. p. 161 (1891); =Blanf.= Faun. Brit. Ind., Mamm. p. 529
(1891); =Flow. & Lyd.= Mamm. p. 342 (1891); =Ward=, Horn Meas.
(1) p. 120 (1892), (2) p. 161 (1896); =Blanf.= P. Z. S. 1893, p.
449; =Lyd.= Horns and Hoofs, p. 183 (1893); =Percy=, Badm. Big
Game Shooting, ii. p. 342 (1894).
VERNACULAR NAMES:--_Ragoa_ and _Goa_ (_Hodgson_); _Ata-dzeren_
(_Przewalski_); all of the Tibetans.
Height at withers about 25 inches. Fur close and thick. General
body-colour pale fawn, darkening posteriorly and becoming almost rufous
brown along the edges of the white anal patch. No lateral nor pygal
bands. Face without any trace of the ordinary Gazelline markings,
coloured like the body, or the top of the muzzle sometimes brown; hairs
on the sides of the muzzle elongated, so as to form a sort of lateral
tuft, which extends backwards under the eyes. Ears short, narrow,
pointed, well haired, coloured like the body. Rump with a prominent
white patch surrounding the base of the tail. Tail quite short,
projecting little beyond the fur, its end black or dark fawn. Limbs
white or very pale fawn; no knee-tufts.
“In the summer the coat is short and of a slaty grey colour”
(_Brooke_).
Skull rather broad in proportion to its length. Anteorbital fossæ
practically obsolete. Nasals broad behind, evenly tapering forwards.
Basal length 6·4 inches, greatest breadth 3·75, muzzle to orbit 4·0.
Horns slender, of median length, much compressed laterally, very
closely ringed. With the exception of their tips (2–3 inches), after
starting vertically, they curve evenly and strongly backwards,
diverging laterally but little. Tips gently curved upwards and slightly
inwards, reapproaching each other above to a certain extent.
_Female._ Similar to the male but without horns.
_Hab._ Plateau of Tibet and adjoining districts of Central
Asia.
Like many other Himalayan and Tibetan animals this Antelope first
became known to science from the researches of the great Indian
naturalist and antiquarian, Bryan Houghton Hodgson, British Resident at
the capital of Nepal. Hodgson described it in 1846, in the ‘Journal of
the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ as _Procapra picticaudata_, and
gave a very recognizable figure to accompany his letterpress. He wrote
of it as follows:--
“The exceedingly graceful little animal, which is the subject of
our present description, is called by the Tibetans Rágóá, or Góá
simply, and they allege that it is found generally throughout
the plains of middle and eastern Tibet. But those plains, it
must be remembered, are, for the most part, broken by deep
ravines or low bare hills, and it is in such situations, more
especially, that the Góá dwells, either solitarily or in pairs,
or at most in small families, never in large flocks. The species
is said to breed but once a year, and to produce ordinarily
but one young one at birth, rarely two; and it is added that
it browses rather than grazes, preferring aromatic shrubs and
shoots to grass, of which latter, indeed, its habitat is nearly
void. I have not heard that the Góá is ever tamed, but it is
killed for the sake of its flesh, which is esteemed excellent,
and is free from all caprine odour, even in the mature males.”
Hodgson also entered into the structural peculiarities of this
Antelope, which he described at full length. It is quite evident
that, as pointed out by him, the present Gazelle, as also the two
allied species (_G. przewalskii_ and _G. gutturosa_), present
certain points of difference from the rest of the group, and that
there was, therefore, some justification for Hodgson’s proposal of
the generic term “_Procapra_,” although we do not think it necessary
to use it. These three species agree among themselves in the females
not possessing horns, in the absence of anteorbital glands, and the
corresponding absence of a fossa in the skull, in having no brushes on
the knees, and in several other characters, which show that they are
really more closely connected to each other than to the more typical
Gazelles. Nevertheless we think that, on the whole, it is best to
include them in the genus _Gazella_, as no one of these characters is
absolutely confined to them. Thus _G. subgutturosa_, often, though
wrongly, placed with them, has no horns in the female, while in other
characters it is a true _Gazella_, and several species besides these
three are without knee-brushes, while the anteorbital fossæ in others
are so shallow as to be practically non-existent.
[Illustration: Fig. 54.
Skull and horns of the Tibetan Gazelle.
(P. Z. S. 1867, p. 245.)]
Soon after his discovery of the Goa, Hodgson forwarded specimens of
it to the British Museum, and the species was included in Gray’s
catalogues as _Procapra picticaudata_. Under this name also Gray
figured a skull and pair of horns of this Gazelle in 1867, in order to
point out its differences from the allied Asiatic form, _Gazella
gutturosa_. This figure (fig. 54, p. 73), by the kind permission of
the Zoological Society of London, we are now able to reproduce.
In October 1849, Sir Joseph Hooker, as related in his ‘Himalayan
Journals’ (ii. p. 157), met with the Goa feeding on the short grass
near the Cholamoo Lake in Sikim, at an elevation of 17,000 feet
above the sea-level, and in other adjoining localities on the Donkia
Pass between Sikim and Tibet. Through his kindness and that of his
publishers we are enabled to introduce the illustration of this
striking scene (fig. 55) prepared for his well-known work.
[Illustration: Fig. 55.
Goa Antelopes on the Donkia Pass.
(Hooker’s ‘Himalayan Journals,’ ii. p. 139.)]
Other travellers and sportsmen have also noticed the Goa or Tibetan
Gazelle in Ladak and on the frontiers of Tibet. But by far the most
complete account of the habits and ways of life of this Antelope is
that given by Major-General Kinloch in the various editions of his
excellent work on Large-Game Shooting in Tibet.
To the east of Ladak, General Kinloch tells us, in the country that
lies between the Upper Indus and the Sutlej, are vast expanses of
undulating hills and valleys of great elevation utterly destitute of
forest and with but scanty indications of vegetation. The greater part
of these wild uplands would appear at first to be a perfect desert,
but, as a matter of fact, on closer inspection, it will be found
that there is hardly a slope, however rocky, or an expanse of sand,
however thirsty-looking, where an occasional tuft of grass or bunch of
sweet-scented herb may not be found, while wherever streams of water
exist their banks are often ornamented by the greenest of turf and
studded with flowers of the most brilliant hues. This bleak country,
General Kinloch continues, the elevation of which varies from 13,000
to 18,000 feet, is the home of the Goa, which is to be found there
scattered about in small parties usually varying from two or three
to about a dozen in number, and in certain localities is decidedly
plentiful. They are not generally very shy, but will seldom allow the
hunter to approach openly within shot.
In 1866 General Kinloch made an expedition to the Tsomoriri Lake in
this district, mainly with a view of hunting the Goa. We subjoin an
account of his adventures, extracted from his work:--
“In 1866 I went to the Tsomoriri Lake and Hanlé, the Goa being
one of my principal inducements to go there. I was accompanied
by a friend, and on the 2nd of June we pitched our camp at
the corner of the lake and ascended the plateau above. We had
not gone far before we discovered some animals feeding at a
distance, and the telescope showed them to be Goa. We made a
most careful stalk, and got within easy shot, but the small
size of the animals deceived us in our estimate of distance,
and we both missed. Soon afterwards we saw some more Goa, but I
again missed a fair chance. We then separated, but I could see
nothing for a long time; at length I caught a glimpse of the
heads of two or three Goas just as they were disappearing over
a ridge; I followed them, and shot a doe through the body as it
was galloping away. A greyhound which I had with me gave chase,
and ran into it after a long course. The next day I determined
to kill a buck, so I ascended the plateau very early in the
morning; I soon discovered some Goa at a great distance, but
after stalking to within seventy yards, I found that they were
all does and young ones. I therefore would not fire at them, but
lay watching the graceful little animals with much interest.
Before long they caught sight of me, but being unable to make me
out distinctly, they advanced towards me, occasionally rising on
their hind legs to obtain a better view. I at length arose and
showed myself, upon which they made off. Further on I found some
does, and shortly afterwards three bucks, but in a place where
they could not be stalked, so I sent a man round to drive them.
The driver failed, the Goas going off in the wrong direction,
but the man who went after them informed me that he had seen
five others, and pointed out the direction in which they had
gone. I crossed the plain, and saw them on the slopes at the
other side, and after a détour, found myself on the hill-side
straight above them. I watched them for some time as they fed
along the foot of the hill: at last they approached a deep but
narrow ravine which ran down the hill; I entered this, which
afforded me capital cover, and on reaching the plain and looking
over the bank, I saw the Goas quietly feeding within about
a hundred yards. Resting my rifle on the bank, I fired very
steadily at the best buck, but to my surprise missed with both
barrels, owing to over-estimating the distance. Dropping behind
the bank, I reloaded, and on again looking over was astonished
to see the Goas still feeding in the same place. I was more
successful this time, wounding one with the first barrel, and
killing another with the second. Even now the Goas did not move
far, and I had time to fire two more bullets, which, however,
missed. Meanwhile I had sent a man to bring my dog, and on his
arrival I slipped him at the Goas, but the wounded one seemed to
recover completely, and it soon distanced the greyhound. The one
I had killed had a very beautiful pair of horns.”
Besides the experiences of the travellers and sportsmen from the
Indian side, the only published record concerning the Tibetan Gazelle,
so far as we know, is that of the great Russian explorer Przewalski,
who, after treating of the “Orongo” of Northern Tibet (_Pantholops
hodgsoni_), mentions the present species as being found in the same
district, and there known to the Mongols as “Ata-dzeren,” or Little
Antelope[4]. Przewalski, who met with this animal near the headwaters
of the Tatong-gol, in Northern Tibet, and, as he believes, also in the
highlands of Kan-su in China, describes its habits as follows:--
“Like the Orongo it frequents elevated plains, preferring,
however, the valleys in the mountains where water is abundant.
Yet its habits are very different from the Orongo’s, and it is
without exception the most graceful and the swiftest of the
antelopes of Mongolia and Northern Tibet. It generally moves in
small herds of from five to seven (seldom as many as twenty),
though solitary males are often seen. It is extremely wary,
especially in those districts where it has learnt to fear man;
on the banks of the Muruiussu it is a little less timid. Its
swiftness is amazing; it bounds along like an india-rubber
ball, and when startled seems absolutely to fly. During their
breeding-season, which begins towards the close of December and
lasts a month, the males chase one another from their herds, but
we never saw them fighting like the Orongo, nor did we ever hear
them utter any sound other than a snort on seeing a man; and the
does when startled gave a short loud cry. They scrape themselves
trenches a foot deep, in which they lie at night (and probably
during the day), and in these we found heaps of their droppings.
“This little antelope is more difficult to shoot than the
Orongo, besides being much scarcer and extremely tenacious
of life. Its ashy-grey colour, exactly resembling the soil,
renders it almost invisible at a distance, and it is only by
its conspicuous white rump, and its snort, that you are able to
discover its presence.”
There are many specimens of this Antelope in the British Museum
presented by Mr. Hodgson, amongst which is the type of the species.
There are also in the National Collection skulls from Kumaon and other
localities presented by Mr. A. O. Hume, C.B.; from the Changchenmo
Valley, Ladak, presented by Mr. R. Lydekker; and from the confines of
Tibet north of Sikim, collected by Mandelli and presented by Dr. W. T.
Blanford, F.R.S.
There is also a good series of specimens of this Gazelle in the Museum
of the Academy of Sciences of St. Petersburg, obtained by the Russian
explorers in Northern Tibet and in the mountains of Nan-shan.
Our figure (Plate LII.), which has been put on the stone by Mr. Smit
from a sketch prepared for Sir Victor Brooke by Mr. Wolf, represents
a male and two females of this species, probably the specimens in the
British Museum.
_January,_ 1898.
[Illustration:
THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES PL. LIII.
_J Smit del, et lith._ _Hanhart imp._
Przewalski’s Gazelle.
GAZELLA PRZEWALSKII.
_Published by R H Porter_]
83. PRZEWALSKI’S GAZELLE.
GAZELLA PRZEWALSKII, BÜCHN.
[PLATE LIII.]
_Antilope gutturosa_, =Przewalski=, Mongolia (Russian ed.), p.
18, pl. i. fig. 1 (♂) (1875); =id.= op. cit. Morgan’s Engl.
Transl. i. pp. 20 & 28 (1876).
_Antilope cuvieri_, =Przewalski=, Cat. Coll. (Russian) p. 110
(1888) (_nec_ Ogilb.).
_Gazella przewalskii_, =Büchn.= Mélang. Biol. xiii. p. 164
(1890).
VERNACULAR NAME:--_Dzéren_ of Mongols (_Przewalski_)--applied to
all the Gazelles of Central Asia.
Size rather greater than in _G. picticaudata_. General colour deep
fawn in summer, pale finely grizzled fawn in winter. Sides of neck (at
least in winter) and top of muzzle slaty brown; no ordinary gazelline
face-markings. Ears short, acutely pointed[5]; coloured like the back.
Rump with the white of the anal region running up on to the upper
surface, divided in its centre by a narrow fawn-coloured line running
from the back on to the tail. Tail very short, hidden in the fur; fawn
along its top, inconspicuously pale brown at its tip. Front of limbs
more or less brownish; no knee-tufts.
Skull short and stoutly built. No anteorbital fossæ. Nasals broad and
short; premaxillæ not reaching up to the latter, the nasal opening
unusually large and broad. Basal length of an adult male 7 inches,
greatest breadth 3·8, muzzle to orbit 4.
Horns of median length and thickness, much compressed laterally; with
the exception of their terminal two inches, they are evenly curved
backwards and divergent outwards, the divergence increasing above;
tips abruptly hooked inwards and slightly upwards, at a sharper angle
with the rest of the horn than a right angle.