| Type. | |
| Gazella, Licht. Mag. nat. Freund. Berl. vi. pp. 152 & 171 (1814) | G. subgutturosa[3]. |
| Dorcas, Gray, Med. Repos. xv. p. 307 (1821) | G. dorcas |
| Dama, Benn. Tr. Z. S. i. p. 7 (1833) | G. dama |
| Leptoceros, Wagn. Schr. Säug. Suppl. iv. p. 422 (1844) | G. leptoceros |
| Procapra, Hodgs. J. A. S. B. xv. p. 334 (1846) | G. picticaudata |
| Tragops, id. op. cit. xvi. p. 11 (1847) | G. bennetti |
| Tragopsis, Fitz. SB. Wien, lix. p. 157 (1869) | G. bennetti |
| Eudorcas, id. tom. cit. p. 159 (1869) | G. “lævipes” |
| Korin, Gray, Cat. Rum. B. M. p. 39 (1872) | G. rufifrons |
| Nanger, Lataste, Mamm. Barb. (Act. Bord. xxxix.), sep. cop., p. 173 (1885) | G. mhorr |
Size medium, but with a considerable range of variation. General form normal; the muzzle simple, neither expanded as in Pantholops nor elongated as in Saiga; the neck of ordinary length, and the back without any evertible fold as in Antidorcas. Coloration ordinarily sandy, with a white belly, the face generally marked with dark and light streaks; streaks also generally present on the flanks and rump. Knee-brushes usually present. Tail short or of medium length.
Skull generally with shallow anteorbital fossæ corresponding to the anteorbital glands, but occasionally—in the procaprine section—without any trace of them. Premolars 3/3, as usual in the Bovines.
Horns generally present in both sexes, the females of the first four species alone being without them. In the male the horns are strong, prominently ribbed, and generally of medium length, about the length of the head, but occasionally considerably longer. With the exception of their tips they are curved backwards, so as to be convex forwards below, while their ends are commonly more or less recurved forwards or upwards. The degrees of curvature seem to be fairly constant within the species, and to afford very fair specific characters. On the other hand, in the female the horns are slender, straighter, and shorter than in the male, very variable in direction, and as a rule showing little of the characteristic curvature peculiar to the male of each species, although there is a certain correspondence between the lengths of the horns in the two sexes.
Range of the Genus. Northern and Eastern Africa, and Western and Central Asia to Mongolia and British India.
The genus Gazella contains the great majority of the members 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.