Cornua sublimes excelsa feruntur in auras,
In quibus est mucro fuscus, lethalis et acer.”
The classical term “Oryx” was first introduced into scientific literature by Pallas in his memoir on the genus Antilope published in 1767. But here he grossly misapplied the term “Oryx” to the Eland, which he called Antilope oryx. In his second memoir on the same subject, however (1777), Pallas corrected this unfortunate error, and transferred Oryx to the Gemsbok of the Cape, to which it was certainly much better applicable.
In 1816 De Blainville, when subdividing the Antelopes, first adopted Oryx as a generic term, and made the Antilope oryx of Pallas (that is, Oryx gazella) its type. The generic name of the present species was thus settled, but before we can arrive at its proper specific name some further explanation is necessary.
By modern authorities, almost without exception, the present Antelope has been called the “Leucoryx, Oryx leucoryx,” and it is well known by this name in the Museums and Zoological Gardens of Europe. But when we proceed to investigate the strict claims of the present animal to this title, a difficult question presents itself. The Antilope leucoryx of Pallas in all probability, and certainly the Antilope leucoryx of succeeding authors until about 1827, was not the present species, but, as will be clearly shown in our next article, the Beatrix.
Buffon, in his ‘Histoire Naturelle,’ called the present species “l’Algazel,” and Pallas and his followers named it Antelope gazella. But the term “gazella,” as we shall presently show, had been previously appropriated by Linnæus to the allied Gemsbok of Southern Africa. The fact is that most of the early authors had no clear ideas as to the distinctive characters of the present animal, and habitually confounded it both with the Beatrix of Arabia and the Gemsbok of the Cape.
The earliest travellers of modern days to meet with the Leucoryx in its native wilds and to transmit perfect specimens of it home to Europe were the well-known German naturalists Hemprich and Ehrenberg, who explored Nubia, Arabia, and the adjoining countries from 1820 to 1825. Unfortunately Lichtenstein, who first described and figured their specimens of this Antelope about the year 1827, chose to identify it with the Antilope leucoryx of Pallas and to employ Pallas’s name for it. In the ‘Symbolæ Physicæ,’ in which Hemprich and Ehrenberg’s own account of their expedition was given to the world in 1828, Lichtenstein’s example of using Antilope leucoryx as the scientific name of the present species was followed.
Hemprich and Ehrenberg state that they had originally intended to have called this species Antilope ensicornis, but that they eventually gave up their proposed designation for the term adopted by Lichtenstein. The same was the case also with nearly all the leading authorities subsequent to Lichtenstein, so that to attempt to restore the name “leucoryx” to what is probably its proper owner would now only create confusion. We prefer therefore to designate the present species as Oryx leucoryx (Licht.), to which name it is undoubtedly entitled.
After giving an accurate description of the present animal, and figures of the two specimens brought home, which, although of not first-rate quality, are perfectly recognizable, Hemprich and Ehrenberg inform us that they met with it in Dongola, between Ambukol on the Upper Nile and Simrie near Chor-el-Lebben, where they hunted it along with the Arabs on horseback.
In Dongola and Kordofan, they proceed to tell us, this Antelope is met with in herds in the deserts. Its flesh is much appreciated by the Arabs, and is dried and laid by for future use, being likewise often sold in the markets. Its skins are used for shields and sandals, but are not considered of first-rate quality for these purposes. The Arabs of the Kubabish tribe, they inform us, call this Antelope “Abu-harb,” and state that it lives chiefly on the leaves and twigs of the acacias (Acacia textilis and A. ehrenbergi) which are found in the valleys of the desert in this district.