Gunda was shot by Carl Akeley on 21 June 1915
Philadelphia Zoo Bolivar The elephant at Philadelphia Zoo 1888-1908
- Thread starter Bonnie Griffin
- Start date
AmbikaFan
Well-Known Member
I knew this, but there's something about the way you state this so matter-of-factly that's very powerful. Animals were/are considered property. The CPZ elephant, Gunda, and of course Topsy, who was electrocuted to a paying crowd at Coney Island, were just property, not living beings. Snyder is right that the circuses were responsible for bringing them here and then "gifting" them to zoos when they became unmanageable, but zoos at this time were hardly above reproach. In addition to having Gunda shot, Hornaday was notoriously responsible for exhibiting a Mbuti Congo human dwarf named Ota Benga in the Primate House for years. Benga later shot himself, the same fate as the Pachyderm "oddities." They were all animals, just property.
Last edited:
AmbikaFan
Well-Known Member
Look how tiny Xavira was! Could she have been Sumatran?! They're so endangered..... We all know of the efforts to bring the northern
white back from what is considered extinction. Are there any Sumatrans even in human care to try for an assurance colony? Jackson and Ironsides turn out to be as special as Bolivar was.....
white back from what is considered extinction. Are there any Sumatrans even in human care to try for an assurance colony? Jackson and Ironsides turn out to be as special as Bolivar was.....
Zooplantman
Well-Known Member
I have pm the contact info to Bonnie (I think it best not to put it on the Forum publically). If any of you want the contact info please pm me.
Xavira was an Indian rhino. The camera lens doesn't do her size justice. She was BIG for a female Indian. She was born in 1975 at Basel Zoo in Switzerland and came to the zoo in 1979. Xavira had a male calf, Dhualagiri who lived at the Buffalo zoo She previously lived at the zoo with her mate Billy. He was a long lived rhino and he's in one of my videos where they're in the pool being fed watermelon. Xavira had a male calf with Billy, Dhualagiri who later lived at the Buffalo Zoo. Later after Billy passed, Sanjay came to the zoo but never bred with Xavira as she was post-reproductive at this point and was relocated to another facility in late 2004. She spent her remaining golden years at the zoo often spending a hot summers day in her pool or being groomed and rubbed by her keepers. She passed away in July 2011 at age 35 having issues with spine and joint deterioration and was definitely my favorite animal at the zoo!
The last Sumatran Rhino in a zoo under human care was Harapan from the Cincinnati Zoo who was relocated to Sumatra in fall 2015 to the Sumatran Rhino Sanctuary. I got to see his older brother Andalas and mother Emi at the zoo in the early 2000's. I think that the Northern White Rhino project San Diego Safari Park is conducting is a noble idea, but I feel that the money should be put towards saving Javan and Sumatran rhinos instead.
Last edited:
AmbikaFan
Well-Known Member
I don't think the two are necessarily mutually exclusive, or even the same thing. I'm sure conservation organizations are donating to in situ protection of the few hundred left in the wild, but it would also help if there were zoos specializing in the breeding of megafauna who could be given a few pairs to ensure these sub-species survive. From what I understand, the northern white work is largely science as of yet. Sperm of the last male northern white was mistakenly used/wasted on impregnating a southern white, so now they're working to derive egg and sperm material from the DNA of saved frozen parts. I think all three projects should be pursued
I think its a safe bet to think that the Northern White Rhino project is kind of a prototype for bringing back a large extinct subspecies. Once they get it down to a successful practice then they should use it for the other species, but only after they've had multiple successes with the Northern Whites.
AmbikaFan
Well-Known Member
I stumbled upon the tale of this "killer" elephant, Romeo, who preceded Bolivar by at least a decade. His story is remarkably similar to Bolivar's--owned by von Amburgh, then sold to Forepaugh. He arrived in 1848 and killed five men, three of them his keepers. But Romeo did not die by a bullet; this article fully describes the practice of "taking" an elephant, tying it up, and then subjecting it to spear wounds to the body and legs and repeated bird shot to the trunk until the elephant submitted. This was followed by periods of starvation to keep elephants weak. Romeo met his end when his legs--necrotic from ankle to knee--were set upon by surgeons weilding sharp knives and red-hot branding irons. Reportedly, 100 irons were used, and the knives created holes that a man could put his whole arm through to the other side. He was thin as a rail upon his death, not unlike the image of the emaciated preserved Bolivar found by Sarus. Interest in Romeo was such that he was also preserved, even in his tortured condition. This despicable treatment was not viewed as despicable for half a century at least. Interest continued partly in natural history, partly in horror, and partly in a pride of man being able to prevail over the giant beasts of nature.
The Ghost of Romeo, the Circus Elephant - Haunted Ohio Books
Three takeaways from this recounting of historical sources:
1) THIS is the cruel abusive, fear-dominated method of handling elephants in captivity that activists ascribed to all elephant trainers until Protected Contact became the norm. While it's doubtful that anything remotely this barbaric has been done in the modern era, activists have been able to write about such atrocities because they really did happen--just 50-100 years earlier. I suggest everyone read this. "Taking an Elephant" was an accepted practice that should make us shudder.
2). This practice was common in the 1840s and 50s, yet as evidenced by Bonnie's research, impressarios were not at all deterred from importing more male elephants. Such cruel practices were not banned, more male elephants came, culminating in the famous public killing of female Topsy at Coney Island's Luna Park in 1903 to those who bought tickets. Here, finally, the ASPCA stepped in, but only had the power to prevent ticket sales to the entire paying public. The owners then invited a limited paying audience that included press, indicating they expected wide public interest (if not tacit approval) and free advertising. After more than a half-century of such abuse, there was still a market for it despite a fledgling ASPCA. Topsy was simultaneously poisoned, electrocuted, and strangled as cameras rolled. Public interest was indeed wide and resulted in the existing bit of film, Electrocuting an Elephant.
3). The sources for information about these issues are not the academic sources I immediately went to. I was certain there would be recountings and opinion pieces of such events in the burgeoning subject of 1970s performance art and popular culture that includes everything from atypical theatrical or gallery fare to professional wrestling. Surprisingly, circus history has fallen between the cracks of history and theatre, with only coverage of circuses like Barnum's, that played in NY's theatre district. As I had guessed, the sources for this kind of study lie outside the academic, in circus lore, and in this case, stories of the supernatural. This source, Hauntedohiobooks.com, is one I wouldn't have found if I were looking. This, though, is where all the information lies.
The Ghost of Romeo, the Circus Elephant - Haunted Ohio Books
Three takeaways from this recounting of historical sources:
1) THIS is the cruel abusive, fear-dominated method of handling elephants in captivity that activists ascribed to all elephant trainers until Protected Contact became the norm. While it's doubtful that anything remotely this barbaric has been done in the modern era, activists have been able to write about such atrocities because they really did happen--just 50-100 years earlier. I suggest everyone read this. "Taking an Elephant" was an accepted practice that should make us shudder.
2). This practice was common in the 1840s and 50s, yet as evidenced by Bonnie's research, impressarios were not at all deterred from importing more male elephants. Such cruel practices were not banned, more male elephants came, culminating in the famous public killing of female Topsy at Coney Island's Luna Park in 1903 to those who bought tickets. Here, finally, the ASPCA stepped in, but only had the power to prevent ticket sales to the entire paying public. The owners then invited a limited paying audience that included press, indicating they expected wide public interest (if not tacit approval) and free advertising. After more than a half-century of such abuse, there was still a market for it despite a fledgling ASPCA. Topsy was simultaneously poisoned, electrocuted, and strangled as cameras rolled. Public interest was indeed wide and resulted in the existing bit of film, Electrocuting an Elephant.
3). The sources for information about these issues are not the academic sources I immediately went to. I was certain there would be recountings and opinion pieces of such events in the burgeoning subject of 1970s performance art and popular culture that includes everything from atypical theatrical or gallery fare to professional wrestling. Surprisingly, circus history has fallen between the cracks of history and theatre, with only coverage of circuses like Barnum's, that played in NY's theatre district. As I had guessed, the sources for this kind of study lie outside the academic, in circus lore, and in this case, stories of the supernatural. This source, Hauntedohiobooks.com, is one I wouldn't have found if I were looking. This, though, is where all the information lies.
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm always willing to help! You already have my schedule for the next two months so if there's any free time you have to meet up in Philly, let me know
Bonnie Griffin
Active Member
Hi! I’m so sorry I wasn’t getting alerts for these replies for some reason! This is really interesting information, I hadn’t considered that he may have been born captive in Sri Lanka. Thank you so much for this interesting insight!
Bonnie Griffin
Active Member
Yes they were in together but no babies sadly!
Bonnie Griffin
Active Member
Yes it’s really fascinating that he managed to live so long. Apparently his hairy ears caused a sensation for or the visitors to the zoo!
I've never seen any reference to Jackson and Begum sharing an enclosure, and doubt that they did. Do you have a source for this, Bonnie? Zoos of that era are likely to have been nervous of running rhinoceroses together, because of their likely mutual antagonism. Pretty sure Jim & Miss Bet were never run together.
Bonnie Griffin
Active Member
Hi, hmm, yes sorry that does sound misleading- I meant in the same ‘house’ but you’re right, they probably would have been kept separately. Although there’s no images of them physically together, we have two images of them at the zoo in the same spot taken around the same time. I assume there was a paddock and they took turns? I’m sure you’re correct that the normal thing was to keep them separated, I really know nothing of rhino husbandry! I’m afraid I can’t work out how to post these images, hopefully the below links work showing Jackson and Begum in the same enclosure
Google Image Result for https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8f/Begum%2C_London_Zoo.jpg
Google Image Result for https://www.zoochat.com/community/media/sumatran-rhino-jackson.16599/full?d=0
There were two outside paddocks that the inhabitants of the eight inside stalls used in turn. If you read Lee Crandall's 'Management of Wild Mammals in Captivity', it gives a few pointers on just about every (non-Cetacean) mammal you can think of, and it's captive history up to the early 1960s. Just about to try & look @ your photographs, but expect they're in John Edwards' book.
Yep, they're both in there. I wish I could access pics of the inside of that house, the two outside paddocks really weren't bad for that period, bathing facilities (not sure if both paddocks had ponds) look good.
Bonnie Griffin
Active Member
Ahh amazing! Very interesting, yes these images are widely available. I would still like to do a review of Jackson in the newspapers but one research project at a time! that book sounds excellent, but thanks for sharing your knowledge too! Invaluable!
AmbikaFan
Well-Known Member
I'm all about context, a literary historicist in real life, so I keep thinking of other elephants and elephant things that captivated the people of the era. The (similarly poor) mount of Jumbo reminds me of Bolivar, as does the deteriorating Bastille elephant. Add these to Topsy, Romeo, Bolivar, Gunda, etc:
Tufts Journal: Tufts at 150: Elephant tales
Tufts Journal: Tufts at 150: Elephant tales
Elephant of the Bastille
Elephant of the Bastille - Wikipedia
Elephantine Colossus
Elephantine Colossus - Wikipedia
Tufts Journal: Tufts at 150: Elephant tales
Tufts Journal: Tufts at 150: Elephant tales
Elephant of the Bastille
Elephant of the Bastille - Wikipedia
Elephantine Colossus
Elephantine Colossus - Wikipedia
If you're interested in Jumbo, the book Jumbo The Greatest Elephant In The World by Paul Chambers is a great account of Jumbo's life. It was so good that I read it in a day. Matthew Scott also wrote an account of his life with Jumbo titled Autobiography of Jumbo's Keeper & Jumbo's Biography. Its a quick free read from Internet Archive.
I concur. Jumbo: the Greatest Elephant in the World (Paul Chambers; 2007) is a good book; well worth reading.
I also recommend Jumbo (W. P. Jolly; 1976)