Chapter VIII: Section II: (Adenota) (4)

This recently described species has been founded upon a single specimen obtained by Mr. Astor Chanler, during his recent expedition into the interior of British East Africa, on the slopes of the Jambene mountains, about 45 miles N.N.E. of Mount Kenia. In his volume entitled ‘Through Jungle and Desert,’ in which an account of his expedition is given, Mr. Chanler speaks of this animal as follows:--“During the rains (of 1893) three small Antelopes visited the hill just above my camp (at Daicho[16]) and I was able to secure one of them. I felt convinced that it was a new species, so I carefully preserved its skeleton and skin. It proved to be a species of Reedbuck heretofore unknown, and has since been designated ‘_Cervicapra chanleri_.’”

Head of _Cervicapra chanleri_.

(From the typical specimen.)]

Mr. Chanler’s specimen of this Reedbuck was placed in the hands of Messrs. Rowland Ward & Co., of Piccadilly, for the purpose of being mounted, and there attracted Mr. Ward’s special attention, as he had previously seen a flat skin somewhat similar, and had called Mr. Chanler’s attention to it before his departure on his expedition. Before sending the specimen to its destination in the United States National Museum at Washington, Mr. Ward showed it to Mr. Walter Rothschild as probably belonging to an undescribed species, and shortly afterwards Mr. Rothschild dedicated it to its discoverer in a paper published in the second volume of ‘Novitates Zoologicæ,’ with the following characters:--“This new species belongs to the group of the smaller species of _Cervicapra_, and is nearest to _C. bohor_, but much the smallest of the genus. Perhaps the most striking difference to the ordinary observer is the central black stripe running from the nose to between the eyes. Head and neck generally orange-buff, as in _C. bohor_; back, sides of body, upperside of tail, and outer sides of limbs warm buffy grey, instead of being of the same colour as the neck, as in _C. bohor_ and _C. redunca_. Belly, underside of tail, and inside of limbs down to the knees white. Just below the knee in front is a dark brown patch. The ears seem to be longer and narrower in proportion than those of _C. bohor_; they are sparingly covered on the outside with short hair of the colour of the neck, and inside thickly lined with long white hair. The horns are much smaller and thinner than those of _C. bohor_, and much more so, of course, than those of _C. redunca_, both of which are much more curved forward. The rings on the horns project much more and are much sharper than in my specimens of _C. bohor_ and _C. redunca_, and are also much more regular. They are five in number, besides the basal ring.”

“The skull is in all its proportions much smaller than that of _C. bohor_, but the palatine is, if anything, longer than in _C. bohor_.

“Height about 30 inches, hoofs on the bottom line 1½, fore legs 20, tail about 6, ear 6¼, horns along the curve nearly 6.”

After the description was made the specimen was unfortunately sent off to America before we had time to make a special examination of it. In reply to our enquiries, however, Mr. F. W. True, of the U.S. National Museum at Washington, has most kindly forwarded to us a large-sized black-and-white drawing of the head of this species, from which the accompanying reduction (fig. 43, p. 184) has been made by photography. In the absence of a coloured figure, this we trust will serve to make Chanler’s Reedbuck, if rediscovered, more easily recognizable by future travellers.

This is, we fear, nearly all that we can say respecting the present Antelope, of the claims of which to specific separation we are by no means certain. In fact, it appears to be doubtfully separable from _C. fulvorufula_, with which Mr. Rothschild did not compare it, and we should not have given it a separate heading had it not been for its very wide difference in locality. Up to the present time _C. fulvorufula_ has not been found north of the Zambesi, while the district of British East Africa in which Mr. Chanler shot the type of this species lies nearly under the Equator.

Our knowledge of the proper position of this Antelope is mainly due to an accurate cast of the typical skull prepared by Messrs. Rowland Ward & Co., and generously presented by them to the National Museum.

* * * * *

P.S.--Since this was written Thomas has examined some examples of Chanler’s Reedbuck obtained by Mr. F. J. Jackson in British East Africa, probably near the Ravine Station, where he is now resident. So far as can be made out in their present condition, these specimens are very similar to the South-African _C. fulvorufula_, without special face-markings, and therefore confirm our view that _C. chanleri_ cannot be well distinguished from its South-African relative.

_February, 1897._

GENUS III. PELEA.

(See p. 93.)

Type.
_Pelea_, =Gray=, P. Z. S. 1850, p. 126 P. CAPREOLUS.

Size small. Fur rather woolly. Naked muzzle large. No subauricular glandular patch. Skull much as in _Cervicapra_. No anteorbital fossa. Lacrymal fissure long and narrow. Premaxillæ not reaching the nasals. Bullæ small. Horns medium in length, slender, ringed, nearly vertical, straight or slightly curved forwards; absent in the female.

_Distribution._ South Africa. (One species only.)

THE BOOK OF ANTELOPES, PL XLVI.

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

The Vaal Rhebok.

PELEA CAPREOLUS.

_Published by R. H. Porter._]

75. THE VAAL RHÉBOK.

PELEA CAPREOLUS (BECHST.).

[PLATE XLVI.]

_Antilope capreolus_, =Bechst.= Syst. Uebers. vierf. Thiere, i.
p. 98 (1799), ii. p. 646 (1800); =Thunb.= Mém. Ac. Pétersb. iii.
p. 312 (1811) (Cape Flats); =Afzel.= N. Act. Ups. vii. pp. 251
& 262 (1815); =Goldf.= Schr. Säug. v. p. 1232 (1818); =Schinz=,
Cuv. Thierr. i. p. 393 (1821); =Desm.= Mamm. ii. p. 461 (1822);
=Licht.= Darst. Säug. pl. viii. (♂ ♀) (1827); =Less.= Man.
Mamm. p. 377 (1827); =J. B. Fisch.= Syn. Mamm. p. 467 (1829);
=Smuts=, En. Mamm. Cap. p. 77 (1832); =Less.= Compl. Buff. x. p.
291 (1836); =Oken=, Allg. Naturg. vii. p. 1364 (1838); =Forst.=
Descr. Anim. p. 392 (1844); =Wagn.= Schr. Säug. Suppl. iv. p.
428 (1844), v. p. 430 (1855); =Schinz=, Syn. Mamm. ii. p. 410
(1845); =id.= Mon. Antil. p. 14, pl. xiii. (1848); =Gieb.= Säug.
p. 315 (1853).

_Antilope_ (_Gazella_) _capreolus_, =Licht.= Mag. nat. Fr. vi.
p. 174 (1814).

_Cemas capreolus_, =Oken=, Lehrb. Nat. iii. pt. 2, p. 740 (1816).

_Redunca capreolus_, =A. Sm.= S. Afr. Quart. J. ii. p. 107
(1834); =Harris=, Wild Anim. S. Afr. p. 138, pl. xxv. fig. 1
(1840); =Fitz.= SB. Wien, lix. pt. 1, p. 169 (1869).

_Cervicapra capreolus_, =Sund.= Pecora, K. Vet.-Ak. Handl. 1844,
p. 193 (1846); =id.= Hornschuch’s Transl., Arch. Skand. Beitr.
ii. p. 145; Reprint, p. 69 (1848).

_Eleotragus capreolus_, =Gray=, Ann. Mag. N. H. (1) xviii. p.
232 (1846); =id.= List Ost. B. M. p. 57 (1847); =id.= Knowsl.
Men. p. 12 (1850); =Blyth=, Cat. Mamm. Mus. As. Soc. p. 168
(1863).

_Eleotragus_ (_Pelea_) _capreolus_, =Gray=, P. Z. S. 1850, p.
126; =id.= Ann. Mag. N. H. (1) viii. p. 144 (1851).

_Pelea capreolus_, =Gray=, Cat. Ung. B. M. p. 90, pl. xxxvi.
fig. 2 (skull) (1852); =Gerrard=, Cat. Bones Mamm. B. M. p.
238 (1862); =Gray=, Cat. Rum. B. M. p. 29, pl. iii. fig. 5
(1872); =id.= Hand-1. Rum. B. M. p. 99 (1873); =Bryden=, Kloof
and Karroo, pp. 125 & 297 (1889); =Ward=, Horn Meas. (1) p. 85
(1892), (2) p. 130 (1896); =Nicolls & Egl.= Sportsm. S. Afr. p.
33, pl. vii. fig. 24 (1892); =Lyd.= Horns and Hoofs, p. 220
(1893); =Lorenz=, Ann. Mus. Wien, ix., Notizen, p. 60 (1894);
=Rendall=, P. Z. S. 1895, p. 360 (Transvaal).

_Calotragus capreolus_, =Temm.= Esq. Zool. Guin. p. 191 (1853).

_Antilope lanata_, =Desmoul.= Dict. Class. d’H. N. i. p. 445
(1822); =Laurill.= Dict. Univ. d’H. N. i. p. 623 (1839).

_Antilope villosa_, =Burch.= Trav. ii. p. 302 (1824); =id.= List
of Mamm. pres. to B. M. p. 5 (1825) (Swellendam, Nov. 19, 1814);
=H. Sm.= Griff. An. K. iv. p. 241, v. p. 339 (1827); =Less.=
Compl. Buff. x. p. 290 (1836); =Gerv.= Dict. Sci. Nat. i. p. 262
(1840); =Less.= N. Tabl. R. A., Mamm. p. 177 (1842).

_Eleotragus villosus_, =Gray=, List Mamm. B. M. p. 165 (1843).

VERNACULAR NAMES:--_Rhébok_ or _Vaal Rhébok_ of Dutch and
English Colonists; _Peeli_ of Bechuanas (_Burchell and others_);
_Iza_ of Zulus (_Rendall_).

Height at withers about 29 or 30 inches. General form comparatively slender and delicate. Fur soft and woolly, though not very thick. Colour dull pale grey all over, the head and limbs tending rather towards fawn-colour. Ears very long and narrow, their backs grey. Throat and belly similar to and scarcely paler than the back; chin, however, with a distinct blackish patch. Lower part of limbs slightly and inconspicuously darker in front. Tail reaching to about the level of the groin, rather bushy; fawn-grey above near the body, white below and at the end.

Horns slender, barely 2½ inches in circumference at the base, strongly ringed on their lower half, smooth at the tips; rising nearly vertically, and slightly curving forwards. In length they ordinarily attain to about 8 or 9 inches, though some of 11½ inches have been recorded.

Dimensions of an old male skull:--Basal length 7·35 inches, greatest breadth 3·95, muzzle to orbit 5.

_Female._ Like the male, but hornless.

_Hab._ S. Africa, south of the Zambesi.

Closely allied to the Reedbucks, and, in fact, hardly differing from them in general structure, except in its nearly straight horns and the want of the naked patch beneath the ears, is the Vaal Rhébok of the South-African colonists, so named by the Dutch settlers from its fancied resemblance to the Roebuck of Europe (_Capreolus caprea_), and so called by Le Vaillant, Sparrman, and the older authors. Bechstein in 1799 appears to be the first author who gave it a scientific name, and he wisely chose for it that of “_capreolus_” following the precedent of the vernacular. In this he was followed by Thunberg, Afzelius, and other subsequent writers on the Antelopes, and the name has been mostly accepted and appended to the generic term _Pelea_ bestowed upon it by Gray in 1850, taken from “Peeli,” the Bechuana name of this Antelope.

In 1822, however, Desmoulins, in his article on Antelopes in the ‘Dictionnaire Classique d’Histoire Naturelle,’ redescribed the species as _Antilope lanata_, from specimens transmitted to Paris from the Cape by Delalande; and two years subsequently Burchell, who had met with this Antelope during his travels in Bechuanaland, gave it the new name _Antilope villosa_; but neither of these appellations has attained much circulation.

The earliest recognizable figures of the Vaal Rhébok were published about 1829, when Lichtenstein gave representations of both sexes in his ‘Darstellung der Thiere’ from specimens in the Berlin Museum.

This species appears to have qualities that enable it to resist the advancing tide of civilization better than some of its kindred, and is consequently still found scattered over wide districts of the Cape. Mr. W. L. Sclater, who has kindly sent us an account of the present distribution of the Antelopes still existing within the limits of the Colony, gives us the following list of actual localities of the present species:--In the west, Namaqualand, Clanwilliam, Malmesbury, Caledon, Bredarsdorp, Zwellendam, Riversdale, Ceres, Sutherland, Prince Albert, Beaufort West, Carnarvon, Kenhardt, and Pruska (scarce); in the middle districts, Mossel Bay, Middelburg, Colesburg, and Albert; in the east of the Colony, Bathurst, Albany, Tembuland, Barkly East, Griqualand East, and Queenstown; and in the north, Great Namaqualand, Kimberley, Barkly West, and Herbert.

Besides these districts of the Cape Colony we shall presently see that the Vaal Rhébok is also found in the Orange Free State, the Transvaal, Natal, Mashonaland, and Matabeleland, and in the adjoining districts up to the Zambesi.

In the days of Harris (1836–37) we learn from his ‘Portraits’ that the “Rhébok,” as he calls it, was extremely common throughout the Cape Colony, even in the more thickly inhabited cantons. “Never entering the forest,” he tells us, “but residing chiefly among rocky glens and mountain-passes, the Rhébok inhabits the vicinage of little stagnant pools that have been left by the winter torrents, where small families, comprising one old male and five or six females with their fawns, may frequently be seen grazing quietly on the bare hillsides or gambolling amongst the dwarf trees and underwood. To guard against surprise a vidette is invariably on the alert; and should a human figure or other suspicious object be descried nearer than is judged to be safe, the wary sentinel forthwith extends her slender neck, and gives warning to her companions by a sharp sneeze. Away they all bound, lightly as the wind, tossing their graceful heads, whilst their dainty feet scarcely seem to touch the earth; and never slackening their pace until they have gained the summit of some distant eminence, they halt as if by word of command, and suddenly facing half round, reconnoitre the enemy. Exceedingly shy and possessed of a keen scent and a hawk-vision, it is difficult enough to approach within rifle-range; but the little herd, when thus in motion, usually winding round the base of a hill instead of taking directly up the acclivity, an opportunity is often presented to the pursuer to gallop across the path they have selected, and thus obtain an easy snap-shot.”

Mr. H. A. Bryden, in his ‘Kloof and Karroo,’ devotes a whole chapter to the pleasures of “Vaal Rhébok-shooting,” which, for some reason or other, he says, has been unaccountably neglected by hunters and naturalists, in “their rush to follow the larger and nobler game of this game-abounding country.” The most peculiar feature of this Antelope, he tells us, “lies in its coat, which differs essentially from that of every other South-African species, consisting of a thick woolly fur, approaching very closely to the texture of that of the rabbit, but softer, finer, and longer.” The venison, he adds, “although inferior to that of the Spring-bok and some of the larger Antelopes, is by no means inestimable, but has the fault, common to much South-African game, of being somewhat dry.”

Our most recent authorities on the game-animals of South Africa, Messrs. Nicolls and Eglington, speak of this species as fairly well distributed, even in these days, throughout the Cape Colony, the Orange Free State, the Transvaal, the Bechuanaland Protectorate, and portions of Natal, Zululand, and Matabeleland, but nowhere, at the present time, to be met with in large numbers.

“Like the Red Rhébuck and the Klipspringer, it is only met with in very broken country, frequenting the highest points on the mountains and kopjies, never descending to the valleys or plains except at night when in search of water. It is generally found in flocks of six or seven up to a dozen, and is most wary and difficult of approach, one old ram usually standing on guard while the remainder feed. On the least sign of danger, the sentry immediately decamps among the rocky boulders, being instantly followed by the whole herd, springing from rock to rock with great activity. Driving is the best plan to adopt when hunting this species, the guns taking up a position in some narrow valley through which the Rhébuck are bound to pass on being driven by natives and dogs from one range of hills to another. It is worthy of remark that at certain portions of the year the entire body of this animal is often found to be burrowed with a large sort of warble, and consequently the flesh, at such times, is unfit for food, in addition to which it decomposes with great rapidity.”

Head of Vaal Rhébok, ♂.]

In the Transvaal it appears, from what Dr. Percy Rendall tells us (see P. Z. S. 1895, p. 360), under present circumstances, to be growing rather scarce in the mining districts that he visited. It is still found, however, on the highest ridges of the Makongwe Range near Barberton. In the less frequented north-eastern portion of the Transvaal, north of the Crocodile River, Mr. Kirby found the Vaal Rhébok “throughout the mountain-ranges and near the stony krantzes bordering the terrace-lands.” They were also occasionally seen amongst the lower hills, and were observed to run in small troops of from ten to twelve in number.

The Rhébok seems to be impatient of captivity and is very seldom brought to Europe alive. The register of the Zoological Society of London contains the record of only four examples as received, two of which were transmitted by Sir George Grey from the Cape in 1861. These were both females; but a male was presented by Mr. E. R. Wodehouse in 1863, and a female was obtained by purchase in 1864. During his many visits to the continental menageries, Sclater does not recollect to have observed a single individual of this Antelope. Besides a stuffed pair of adults of this species in the Gallery of the British Museum, from the male of which our drawing of the head (fig. 44, p. 193) has been taken, there are a skin and several skulls from the Burchell and other collections. But fresh specimens of this Antelope would be desirable acquisitions.

Our coloured Plate (no. XLVI.) represents both sexes of this beautiful Antelope, giving special prominence to the long ears, one of its most remarkable features. It has been put upon the stone by Mr. Smit from an original sketch by Mr. Wolf, which Sir Douglas Brooke has kindly allowed us to examine. But we regret to say that we have no information as to the exact individuals from which these figures were taken.

_February, 1897._

FOOTNOTES:

[1] Besides the normally coloured specimens of Steinbok and Grysbok found so commonly in various parts of the Cape Colony, there occasionally occur pale-coloured, more or less albino, examples to which the names “Bleekbok” and “Vlackte-Steenbok” have been applied by the Dutch.

On such albinistic individuals the following synonymy rests, but whether the names really belong to the Steinbok or to the Grysbok, or some to one and some to the other, it is quite impossible and of little importance now to determine:--

_Antilope tragulus pallida_, =Licht.= Mag. nat. Freund. vi. p.
177 (1814); =Forst.= Descr. Anim. p. 376 (1844).

_Antilope pallida_, =H. Sm.= Griff. An. K. iv. p. 251, v. p. 342
(1827).

_Antilope pediotragus_, =Afzel.= N. Act. Ups. vii. pp. 260 & 264
(1815); =Goldf.= Schr. Säug. v. p. 1236 (1818); =Smuts=, En.
Mamm. Cap. p. 84 (1832); =Gerv.= Dict. Sci. Nat. Supp. i. p. 262
(1840); =Less.= N. Tabl. R. A., Mamm. p. 177 (1842).

_Tragulus pediotragus_, =A. Sm.= S. Afr. Quart. J. ii. p. 213
(1834).

_Antilope rufescens_, =H. Sm.= Griff. An. K. iv. p. 249, v.
p. 341 (1827); =Less.= N. TabL R. A., Mamm. p. 177 (1842);
=Schinz=, Syn. Mamm. ii. p. 412 (1845).

_Calotragus melanotis pallida_, =Gray=, Knowsl. Men. p. 7
(1850); =id.= Cat. Ung. B. M. p. 72 (1852).

_Calotragus rufescens_, =Temm.= Esq. Zool. Guin. p. 192 (1853).

_Pediotragus rufescens_, =Jent.= Cat. Mamm. Leyd. Mus. (Mus.
Pays-Bas, xi.) p. 165 (1892).

[2] Nauwkeurige Beschryving van de Guinese Goud-Tand en Slave-Kust. Door Willem Bosman. Utrecht, 1704.

[3] See “On Mr. E. Lort Phillips’s Collection of Birds from Somali-land,” by Captain G. E. Shelley, F.Z.S., Ibis, 1885, p. 389, plates x.-xii., and another article which will appear in ‘The Ibis’ for January 1896.

[4] We are indebted to the authorities of the Smithsonian Institution for a series of measurements of the hoofs of the Kilimanjaro Dik-diks collected by Dr. Abbott. These measurements have helped materially to bring us to the conclusion we have come to above, as their wide range of variation shows that certain differences in the hoof-lengths that we had previously noted in the different forms cannot be regarded as of any value for distinguishing the species, and must merely be due to individual variation.

[5] “A Journey from the Shiré River to Lake Mweru and the Upper Luapula,” Geogr. Journ. i. p. 524.

[6] At Rhodesia, at the extreme N.E. corner of Lake Mweru, 8° 39’ 28’’ S. lat. See Geogr. Journ. i. p. 527.

[7] “On the Antelopes of Nyasaland,” by Richard Crawshay, P. Z. S. 1890, p. 648.

[8] See his work ‘Egypt, Sudan, and the White Nile,’ London, Blackwood & Co., 1861.

[9] ‘Travels in Central Africa and Explorations of the Western Nile Tributaries,’ by Mr. and Mrs. Petherick. 2 vols. London: Tinsley Bros., 1869.

[10] The _Antilope lervia_, of Pallas (Spic. Zool. xii. p. 12) has been referred to this species by some authors; but that name is clearly based on Shaw’s Lerwea (‘Travels in Barbary,’ p. 243), which, as Gray has rightly pointed out, is referable to the Barbary Sheep (_Ovis tragelaphus_).

[11] In his paper on the generic subdivision of the Bovidæ, P. Z. S. 1851, p. 170.

[12] Dr. Günther, using the name given by Gray, speaks of this skull as that of _C. redunca_, but it certainly belongs to _C. fulvorufula_.

[13] In Sclater’s List of Speke’s Mammals (P. Z. S. 1864, p. 103) this skull was referred to “_Kobus_, sp. inc.”

[14] This reference was put down on a previous occasion (Vol. II. p. 23) to _Ourebia nigricaudata_, but on finding that Schinz’s name depended on it, a more careful study of the figure and description has been made, and we now consider that Sundevall’s reference of it to the Nagor was probably correct.

[15] In the southern part of the Bechuanaland Protectorate.

[16] See Geogr. Journ. ii. p. 534 (1893).

Transcriber’s Notes:

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

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

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

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

5. Italics are shown as _xxx_.

6. Bold print is shown as =xxx=.