THE TAME OR DOMESTIC GAYAL.

The representation of the Gayal here given was taken from a living specimen in the Zoological Gardens, 1846.

The scanty information I was able to glean concerning it, consists in its having been procured at Chitagong, and shipped, as a commercial speculation, from Calcutta for London, in January 1844, when about two years and a half old. It remained in the Zoological Gardens till the summer of 1846, when it died from inflammation of the bowels, brought on chiefly by eating too much green food.

I had the above particulars from Mr. Bartlett, naturalist, &c., who had been commissioned to dispose of it. He preserved the skeleton, which he kindly allowed me to examine, and from which I made the sketches of the skull and horns, which appear on the following page.

The skeleton has fourteen pairs of ribs.

Skull of Domestic Gayal, viewed in front, with Section of Horn.

Inches.
Distance from tip to tip (a to a)39
Length of horn (a to b)16
Circumference of horn at base17
Distance of bases (b to b)11
Length of skull (c to c)19
Fig. d, section of the horn, at the base.

Occipital view of the same Skull.

Head of Domestic Gayal.

In concluding these details of the Gayal and Gyall, let it be remarked that, when we hear one animal called Gayal and another Gyall, we are not, on that account merely, to set them down as of the same species. It is hardly necessary to say, that similarity or even identity of name, is not the slightest criterion of identity of species. The name Elephant is popularly applied to that animal, whether brought from Africa or Asia; they are, nevertheless, anatomically distinct. The same observation may be made respecting the Lions of those countries, and various other animals.

It may further be observed, that the value of external characters in determining a species is very different when applied to ascertain the distinctions of domestic races, to what it is when applied to ascertain the distinctions of animals living in a natural state. In domestication, varieties ramify to an indefinite extent, and under such circumstances external characters are comparatively valueless. But wild animals retain their external characters with undeviating exactness; exceptional cases may indeed occur, but so very rarely, that they are not worth taking into the account; consequently, external forms, and in some cases even colours, become of importance in ascertaining specific distinction.