Taylor, J.E., 1873. The new rhinoceros at the Zoological Gardens. Hardwicke's Science Gossip 8 (83, April): 78-79
|
|
|
|
| |
| Location: |
Captive |
| Subject: |
Captivity |
| Species: |
Sumatran Rhino |
 |
|
THE NEW RHINOCEROS AT THE ZOOLOGICAL GARDENS.
Of all the recent additions to the magnificent collection of the Zoological Society, few will be of more interest to the intelligent sight-seer than the Sumatran Rhinoceros. We paid a visit, a few days ago, to this animal, under the able guidance of Mr. Bartlett, and saw his surly bruteship rolled up in all the unapproachable dignity of one who has just dined, and does not care to be disturbed. After a few probes, assisted by bribes in the shape of biscuits, we managed to get it on its legs. Its appearance, thus seen, is very remarkable. It is not so large as the Indian or African species, and seems longer in proportion to its height. Its hide resembles that of its African brother, rather than its Indian, in being freer from the huge folds into which the thick skin of the Indian species is thrown, and which adds so much to the repulsive appearance of the latter. Its head is more elongated and pig-like than either, and its lower jaw is distinguished by being squarely cut; whereas in the two former it is more tapering, and so far is conformable to the upper part. Like the African species, the new arrival is marked by having its ears fringed with a long reddish hair, which gives it a very fierce look. This hair, however, is much longer and thicker than that on the ears of the African Rhinoceros, so that the ears themselves look longer and larger in consequence. It resembles the African species more than the Indian, also, in being two-horned.
Singular as it may seem, that a rhinoceros from the Indian region (Sumatra) should in so many respects resemble the African species more than that which is so well known to us as the “Indian” Rhinoceros, yet we think that even this peculiarity is secondary to the still more striking similarity between the animal of which we are speaking and a species which has been extinct probably since the appearance of man on the earth. We allude to that known as Rhinoceros tichorhinus, whose remains are usually found in the same post-glacial deposits as the Mammoth (Elephas primigenius). The long hair on the ears of our Sumatran species has already been mentioned, and so far this feature is partly shared by the African type. There, however, the resemblance stops, for the Sumatran Rhinoceros has the whole of its body more or less covered with short, brown, woolly hair; the hair on the back is longer, and like the “hog mane” of a [79] horse. Indeed so peculiar is this hirsute covering, that the species almost deserves the name of “hairy.”
In this respect, therefore, it at once puts us in mind of the Rhinoceros tichorhinus, or “Woolly-haired Rhinoceros,” whose bones and teeth are found in our bone-caverns and river-gravels. The latter was found, as a frozen carcass, in the intensely frozen soils of Siberia; and described by Pallas in 1793. This was before the discovery of a contemporaneous hairy elephant. But the woolly hair of the extinct species was much longer, and was evidently an adaptation to the rigorous circumstances under which the animals provided with it had to exist. There are other features shared partly in common between the extinct type and the animal in the Zoological Gardens. The former was two-horned, like the latter, and its teeth and bones indicate a close resemblance, as far as size is concerned. We conclude, therefore, that it is not impossible the Sumatran species may be a lineal descendant of the extinct Rhinoceros dichorhinus. Siberia, where the latter seems last to have roamed, is more intimately connected with India than is any other part of the globe; the Indian tiger still finds its way thither, when forced by hunger; and the short woolly hair of the Sumatran Rhinoceros may be the relics of a covering which once formed no unimportant character to the northern progenitor of the species we are dwelling upon. Further, the occurrence of this species on the island of Sumatra at once shows that it must have extended thither before the separation of that island from the Indian continent, as the sea is by far too extensive for it to have crossed by swimming. Its geographical distribution, therefore, is a good proof of its antiquity; whilst its general replacement in India by the Indian species would lead us to infer that the latter and dominant species was the most recently introduced. We strongly advise all our readers who have the opportunity to pay a visit to an animal which seems, in many respects, to be one of the “missing links.” J. E. TAYLOR.
|
|
|
The new rhinoceros at the Zoological Gardens
File available
details
Original text on this topic: