During the 1990s, a startling array of new
and rediscovered species of ungulate were revealed in Indochina.
Whereas the most famous of these is the saola or Vu Quang ox Pseudoryx
nghetinhensis (the remarkable antelope-horned, long-limbed bovine beast
that had remained entirely unknown to science until its discovery in Vu Quang,
Vietnam, during 1992), the most infamous is the holy goat or kting voar Pseudonovibos
spiralis – always assuming, of course, that this hoofed mystery beast ever
existed at all...
Its convoluted scientific history began in
earnest on a market stall in southern Vietnam's
Ho Chi Minh City
- for that is where, in early 1994, German zoologist Dr Wolfgang Peter,
visiting from Münster's Zoological Gardens, spotted a strange pair of horns
that were unlike any that he had seen before. They were approximately 18 in long, heavily
spiralled, blackish in colour, and their upper portions were greatly splayed -
so that they bore more than a passing resemblance to a somewhat strange pair of
motorbike handlebars!
Although he didn't purchase them, Peter did
take some photographs. And when he and his colleagues back home in Germany
and elsewhere around the world were unable to assign these mystifying horns to
any known species, he and fellow German zoologist Dr Alfred Feiler, from Dresden's
State Museum of Natural History, paid several further visits to southern Vietnam.
Here they succeeded in uncovering eight pairs of these peculiar horns, one pair
becoming the type specimen for the formal description (published by Peter and
Feiler later in 1994) of their still-unseen owner as a new species, housed
within its own, brand-new genus. Incredibly, this was the third new genus of
large ungulate to be described in just over a year, following on from Pseudoryx
in 1993 and Megamuntiacus in 1994 (although Megamuntiacus has
since been abandoned – its sole species, the giant muntjac M. vuquangensis,
having been reassigned to the typical muntjac genus Muntiacus).
Conversations with locals in the Vietnamese
districts of Kon Tum, Dac Lac, and Ban Me Thuot revealed that they were
familiar with this creature, which they call the linh duong - sometimes
translated as 'holy goat'. Another local name given to it translates as
'spiral-horn'. Scientifically, moreover, it is Pseudonovibos spiralis
('spiral-horned false kouprey') - emphasising its spiralled horns, and their
deceptive similarity in shape to those of the Cambodian wild ox or kouprey Bos
(Novibos) sauveli, which itself remained concealed from scientific
detection until 1936 and is also deemed controversial nowadays (but that, as
they say, is another story!).
Stunning life-sized statue of
a kouprey in Phnom
Penh, Cambodia, showing clearly its very distinctive horns (© Prof. Colin
Groves)
This, however, is only half of the Pseudonovibos
saga. At much the same time that Peter and Feiler were discovering its horns in
Vietnam,
Norway-based zoologist Dr Maurizio Dioli was visiting northeastern Cambodia's
Mondulkiri and Rattanakiri provinces when he purchased two pairs of unusual
spiral horns at a market. Each pair was attached to a portion of skull, and
seemed to resemble the horns of a juvenile female kouprey.
Upon closer observation, however, Dioli
found that the skulls' sutures were completely fused - conclusive proof that
the animals had been adults, not juveniles. Moreover, whereas those of female
koupreys are smooth and markedly oval in cross section, Dioli's horns bore very
pronounced rings, were almost perfectly circular in cross section, and were
more widely splayed. Clearly, then, these were not from a kouprey. Nor did they
match those from either of the other two species of wild cattle known in Cambodia
- the gaur Bos gaurus and the banteng B. javanicus. Indeed, they
did not correspond with the horns of any animal documented by science.
When Dioli made enquiries, he learnt from
local Cambodian hunters that these mystifying horns belonged to a large bovine
beast that they call the kting (or kthing) voar. This name translates as 'wild
cow with vine-like horns', referring to their rings and curved shape.
Judging from hunters' accounts collected by
Dioli and also, more recently, by the Cambodia National Tiger Survey, the kting
voar weighs 440-660
lb, stands 3.5-4 ft at the withers, and is
said to be somewhat bovine in basic form. However, it is taller and more
slender than a banteng or a domestic cow, and has legs like those of the sambar
deer Rusa unicolor, as well as a well-developed coat, which is variously
claimed to be uniformly greyish-black or dark red in colour. Very shy, rare,
fleet-footed, and agile, given to standing on its hind legs to browse off
leaves on trees, it lives in small family groups amid the region's mountainous
dipterocarp forests. Evidently, therefore, although it has successfully eluded
scientific detection, this reclusive animal is no stranger to the region's
people, thus making all the more interesting their second, alternative name for
it - kting sipuoh, or 'snake-eating wild cow'!
It is not unique for primitive native
folklore to incorporate fanciful beliefs regarding herbivorous ungulates
consuming serpents - Indian tribes tell similar stories concerning Asia's
ibex-like markhor Capra falconeri. Although intriguing, these curious
claims have no scientific corroboration.
An adult male markhor showing
its magnificent spiralled horns (© Geographer/Wikipedia – CC BY 2.5 licence)
The hunters alleged that when the kting
voar devours snakes, these reptiles bite its horns, creating their rings, and
imbuing them with venom. This supposedly bestows the horns with medicinal
properties against snake bite. Consequently, as soon as a kting voar is killed
by a hunter, its horns are removed and used for making venom antidote. This is
prepared by burning the horns in a fire - hence few survive to be sold at the
markets as trophies.
Not long afterwards, Dioli learnt of Peter
and Feiler's investigations, and he recognised that the horns of their
Vietnamese holy goat matched those of his Cambodian kting voar. These two
mysterious mammals were one and the same - both belonged to the newly-named
species Pseudonovibos spiralis. Moreover, Dioli revealed that two horns
supposedly from a young female kouprey that were collected in southern Vietnam
as long ago as 1929 and donated to the Kansas Museum of Natural History are
actually those of Pseudonovibos.
Researches have suggested that Pseudonovibos
had once been most common in Vietnam,
but has been so heavily hunted there that today it survives predominantly
across the border in Cambodia.
Despite being known to the western world now for over 20 years, however, one
major mystery remains unsolved. Scientists have yet to spy a living Pseudonovibos
- apart from native testimony, therefore, we still do not know for sure what it
looks like!
Having said that, however, a certain
antiquated Chinese encyclopedia may offer a unique clue, as revealed by Drs
Alastair A. Macdonald and Lixin N. Yang. Entitled San Cai Tu Hui,
compiled by Wang Chi and Wang Si Yi, and published in 1607, it contains a
drawing and short piece of accompanying text concerning a sturdy horned
creature known as the ling. According to this encyclopedia, the ling:
"...looks like a goat but is larger. Its horns are round and have pointed
tips". There is also a fanciful account of how it uses its horns to hang
from trees at night to sleep. The animal depicted in the drawing does not call
to mind any known species of ungulate - except, that is, for its horns, whose
shape and ribbed pattern, as acknowledged by Macdonald and Yang, do recall
those of Pseudonovibos.
Moreover, in 1999 a
team of German zoologists, which included Feiler and also Dr Ralph Tiedemann
from Kiel
University,
published a short communication documenting the results of some mitochondrial
DNA sequence analyses featuring DNA extracted from Pseudonovibos horn
fragments and compared with corresponding DNA sequences from a range of other
bovid ungulates in an attempt to ascertain its taxonomic affinities. These
analyses revealed that Pseudonovibos did seem to be more closely related
to goats than to antelopes or to cattle (despite its generic name), but in an e-mail
Dr Tiedemann informed me that his team would be publishing more extensive
genetic comparisons at a later date.
And in an e-mail to me of 15 December 1999,
highly-renowned ungulate and primate expert Prof. Colin Groves, then based at Canberra's
Australia
National
University,
revealed that Australian zoologist Dr Jack Giles of Taronga Zoo in Sydney
had recently visited Vietnam,
where he had been shown an old black-and-white photo of a local hunter sitting
upon a dead Pseudonovibos! Frustratingly, however, the photo was of such
poor quality that little detail could be discerned, other than the fact that
the animal was not particularly large. Making matters even worse, the hunter
was perched upon the dead beast's head, thereby obscuring any distinguishing
facial or cranial features that may have been visible. (After learning this, I promptly
wrote to Dr Giles requesting information and sight of this photograph, but unfortunately
I did not receive any reply from him.)
Even more tantalising are reports from
early January 1995 documenting the capture of a still-unidentified mystery
mammal in central Vietnam
during December 1994. An immature female specimen, it was caught alive near the
village of A Luoi in the central Vietnamese province of Thua Thien-Hue, more
than 180 miles
southeast of Vu Quang (the geographical epicentre for Vietnam's 1990s ungulate
discoveries). Referred to by its captors as a tuoa, it died shortly afterwards,
and was eaten before its body could be scientifically examined. Its mother had
also been captured, but escaped. The calf weighed 36 lb, and was said not to
be a saola. Instead, it resembled a goat, with a roundish head, long ears,
horns, stout body, and a black and white coat patterned with buff and grey
patches. According to quotes attributed to Hanoi
University
zoologist Prof. Ha Dinh Duc, it seemed to be different from any bovid species
known scientifically in Vietnam.
Nothing more has been heard about the tuoa,
but in view of its morphological description, could this cryptic creature be
one and the same as Pseudonovibos? If so, how ironic, and tragic, that
the only complete - and living - specimen to come within reach of modern-day
science found its way into a local cooking pot instead!
Spectacular painting of an
adult saola (right) and okapi (left) prepared specifically by
acclaimed American wildlife artist and longstanding friend Bill Rebsamen for my
second and third books on new and rediscovered animals (© William M. Rebsamen)
Moreover, in his above-noted e-mail to me,
Robert Timmins opined that it may already be too late for this most elusive
Indochinese hoofed debutante: "It's looking like Pseudonovibos has
disappeared like the rhinos for a perceived medicinal value to its horns".
However, we should not - indeed, cannot -
forget that during the 1990s Indochina
hosted an unparalleled spectacle of mammalogical revelations, and with research
continuing here the present 21st century may well witness many more
surprises in this cryptozoologically rich and still far from well-explored
region. There must surely be hope, therefore, that one of these surprises will
be the long-awaited discovery of living specimens of Pseudonovibos – or
will it...?
In January 2001, a
team of French biologists including Drs Arnoult Seveau, Herbert Thomas, and
Alexandre Hassanin published a pair of startling, highly controversial papers,
in which they claimed that Pseudonovibos is non-existent - a forgery.
They based their claim upon the results of two separate studies of Pseudonovibos
material. In one of these, they sequenced two DNA markers from the bony cores
of four sets of Pseudonovibos horns, and compared them with the
equivalent genetic markers in Vietnamese domestic cattle. In the second study,
they conducted a histological examination of the keratin in six Pseudonovibos
frontlets (the horn-bearing frontal bones of the skull that constitute the animal's
brow or forehead). The results of the DNA study revealed that the markers from
the Pseudonovibos material were a perfect match with those from the
Vietnamese domestic cattle. And the keratin study exposed the Pseudonovibos frontlets'
horns to be nothing more than domestic cattle horns whose keratin sheaths had
been skilfully manipulated by heat treatment, followed by twisting and
trimming, to create the distinctive spiral, heavily-ridged horns characterising
Pseudonovibos.
Yet although there can be little (if any?) doubt
that these particular specimens are indeed fakes, there is currently no
evidence that any of the several other sets of Pseudonovibos horns on
record (including this species' type material) are also fraudulent. Hence the
French team's bold statement that Pseudonovibos is not a new animal and
its scientific name should be abandoned is premature, to say the least. Kansas
University
mammalogist Prof. Robert M. Timm has published an extensive paper on Pseudonovibos,
in which he and fellow mammalogist Dr John H. Brandt documented two sets of Pseudonovibos
trophy horns procured by two western big game hunters in Vietnam
during 1929 (but not recognised back then to be from anything special or new).
Following the appearance of the French team's claims, Timm averred that he had
no doubt that Pseudonovibos is a valid taxon, having uncovered various
overlooked records from the 1880s and 1950s that documented a mysterious
spiral-horned bovine beast ostensibly synonymous with P. spiralis.
Moreover, in a separate paper a team of
Eastern European scientists announced that their phylogenetic analyses of
nearly-complete 12S mitochondrial rDNA sequences for this enigmatic creature
and a number of other bovids indicate that P. spiralis is a valid
species belonging to the buffalo subtribe (Bovina), and should be placed
between the Asiatic buffaloes Bubalus and the African buffalo Syncerus.
Asian water buffalo Bubalus
(top) and African buffalo Syncerus (bottom) (© Dr Karl Shuker / public
domain)
Personally, I consider it possible that the
answer to the riddle of whether Pseudonovibos truly exists is that this
enigmatic beast is a real but extremely rare species, so rare that procurement
of its much-prized, supposedly snake-repelling horns even by locals is
extremely difficult - which has in turn led to the deliberate preparation of
copies for use in rituals. In other words, some of the preserved horns on
record are indeed fakes, yet were created not to fool, but merely to act as
substitutes for the real thing. This is also an opinion that has been aired by
Prof. Colin Groves, though as he has noted to me, if the type material for Pseudonovibos
is examined and is also shown to be fake, then regardless of whether this
animal does exist, the name 'Pseudonovibos spiralis' must be abandoned,
and every remaining specimen must be examined to see whether any genuine
material does exist.
Meanwhile, however, the holy goat remains
suspended in a decidedly unholy scientific limbo, and seems destined to remain
there indefinitely, or at least until – if ever – further evidence for or
against its reality is obtained.
The above ShukerNature blog article is
excerpted and expanded from my book The Encyclopaedia of New and Rediscovered Animals. My sincere thanks
as ever to Dr Maurizio Dioli for very kindly permitting me to include some of his
photographs in my writings.
EPILOGUE
In early August 2016, cryptozoological
colleague Lorenzo Rossi brought to my attention a very strange but intriguing
photograph that he had recently discovered in the entry for Pseudonovibos
in Spain's version of Wikipedia (but not present at that time in other countries'
Wikipedia entries for Pseudonovibos, although, very oddly, it does
currently appear in the English-language Wikimedia Commons entry for the saola!).
According to the photo's subject and accompanying caption, it depicted in
close-up a living specimen of the kting voar encountered in Cambodia.
Remarkably, however, this potentially highly-significant image had (and still
has) attracted virtually no cryptozoological attention – ostensibly a very
surprising situation, bearing in mind the still-unresolved controversy
regarding this notoriously elusive/non-existent creature.
Moreover, in the photo, the creature has either
somehow lost its right-hand horn or it is twisted backwards out of sight; and,
very bizarrely, a snake appears to be fastened by its jaws to and hanging down
from the creature's still-present or visible left-hand horn. Here is the photo
in question:
Photograph of an alleged
living kting voar in Cambodia, currently still online in Spain's Wikipedia (click here to visit the entry) (© Stephenpkirrane/Wikipedia – CC BY-SA 4.0 licence – reproduced here on a strictly non-commercial Fair Use basis
only for academic/educational review purposes)
Naturally, I was exceedingly
curious as to what precisely was depicted in this odd photo (and in a
near-identical one that I shortly afterwards discovered on the Cryptidz Wikia
site – in the latter, there was more foliage partly obscuring the creature's
face), especially as to me it seemed very similar in appearance to ordinary domestic
goats commonly seen in Cambodia (such as several of the somewhat frisky individuals
currently viewable here in a short YouTube
video). Accordingly, I decided to obtain the opinion of a certain
internationally-renowned authority on ungulates, who also happened to have an
abiding interest in cryptozoology, and with whom I had corresponded on many
different subjects (including Pseudonovibos) for many years. I refer of
course to the earlier-mentioned mammalogist Prof. Colin Groves, who had
delineated and formally described several major new species of mammal in modern
times, and whose subsequent passing on 30 November 2017 was a massive loss to mainstream
zoology and cryptozoology alike.
I was very interested to discover
in his emailed response of 11 August 2016 to my enquiry sent to him a day
earlier (and also in a subsequent, more detailed phone conversation between us
regarding this matter) that Prof. Groves aired precisely the same thoughts that
had occurred to me when perusing the image. Here are his most significant
comments from his email:
I certainly agree with you about the goat… [and] if you
[look] carefully there is a very distinct join along the forehead. I
would think it just must be that rare thing, a goat standing in water (or else
the water has been photoshopped into the picture)… The other one [horn] is just
visible at the base, evidently skewed backward. It may be that the only
frontlet and horns available to the photographer or photoshopper was defective
in some way, maybe the right horn had broken off and what remained of it was
pulled out of sight… The rather scruffy hair along the bases of the horns is
brownish.
Summarising
his emailed and phone comments: Prof. Groves personally deemed the photo to be
of a domestic Cambodian goat either directly photographed or digitally
photoshopped standing in water, with a Pseudonovibos frontlet bearing
brown hair at its base either physically attached to or digitally photoshopped
onto its black-haired head, and with one of the frontlet's horns broken off or twisted
virtually out of sight. A nice touch also commented upon by Prof. Groves was
the snake hanging down from the fully-visible left horn, because this
immediately recalls the horn-biting snake-related folklore linked to the kting voar.
All
in all, a photograph every bit as enigmatic as the highly ambiguous animal that
it purportedly portrays – a fitting conclusion, in fact, to a lengthy, tortuous
tale as twisted and contorted as the spiralled horns of Pseudonovibos itself!
I
wish to dedicate this ShukerNature blog article to the memory of Prof. Colin
Groves, in grateful thanks to him for his kind and always much-valued assistance
and responses to my many enquiries on all manner of mutually interesting
wildlife subjects down through the years.
Very interesting Dr Shukar! Great analysis. I like the discussion regarding the Wikipedia photo (love the snake hanging from the horn!) - likely just a 'little' photoshopping of it.
ReplyDeleteThanks Terry! Definitely a fascinating if highly convoluted crypto-case, that's for sure. All the best, Karl
Delete