5 i6 THE CARNIVORES 



cated races are not descended from the wild dogs of Asia, is evident from the latter 

 having one molar tooth less in the lower jaw than is the case with the other mem- 

 bers of the genus. Additional testimony that the foxes have nothing to do with 

 the origin of the domestic dogs is afforded by Mr. Bartlett, who writes that he has 

 never met with a well-authenticated instance of a hybrid between a fox and a dog, 

 notwithstanding numerous specimens of supposed hybrids of this sort, which from 

 time to time have been brought to his notice. Since this was written there has, 

 however, been some evidence published in Land and Water, to the effect that 

 these animals may occasionally cross. 



The different breeds of domestic dogs present variations far greater, both as 

 regards size and form, than those between any wild members of the canine family. 

 Great as these differences undoubtedly are, they are to some extent paralleled 

 among the various breeds of the domestic pigeons and fowls, the former of which 

 are definitely known to have originated from a single wild stock. But, since dogs 

 of very different breeds freely cross with one another, and the resulting progeny is 

 perfectly fertile, there can be no difficulty in regarding all the domesticated races as 

 now constituting a single species. The fact that at the earliest historical period in 

 which we have evidence of the existence of domesticated dogs, there were several 

 distinct breeds, more or less closely resembling some of those still extant, has been 

 urged as an important argument in favor of the multiple origin of the group ; but 

 too much weight must not be attached to this. The main argument in favor of the 

 view of the multiple origin of the dog is that the different early and original breeds 

 of the domestic dogs of different countries approximate in appearance to the wild 

 species of the same regions. For instance, the Eskimo dogs are exceedingly like 

 wolves, and Mr. Bartlett states confidently that we are justified in regarding them 

 as nothing more than reclaimed wolves. Indeed, the Eskimos are said to be in the 

 constant habit of crossing their dogs with wolves, in order to maintain their size and 

 stamina. Then again, some of the more northerly tribes of the Indians of North 

 America have wolf-like dogs, their howls being so like those of wolves that even 

 their owners can scarcely distinguish between the two. On the other hand, the 

 domestic dogs of the Hare Indians closely resemble the coyote, which is the most 

 common species in the districts inhabited by those tribes. These dogs are stated 

 by Sir J. Richardson to present precisely the same relation to the coyote as is 

 borne by the Eskimo dog to the common wolf. Then again, the black wolf-dog of 

 Florida is almost indistinguishable from the black variety of the wolf characterizing 

 that country. Further, many of the sheep-dogs and wolf-dogs of Europe resemble 

 the wolves inhabiting the same districts ; and Blyth was struck with the marked 

 resemblance of some of the pariah dogs of India to the wolf of the same country. 

 Moreover in Southeastern Europe and Southern Asia many of the domestic dogs so 

 closely resemble jackals, that it is sometimes difficult to distinguish between them. 

 Still more important is the circumstance that some of the domestic dogs of South 

 Africa present a striking resemblance in form and color to the black-backed jackal 

 of the same regions, although they have lost the distinct black back characteristic 

 of the latter. Equally noteworthy is the resemblance observed between certain 

 South American domestic dogs and the wild Azara's dog of the same regions. 



