INTRODUCTION. 81 



thus early an object of deep felt interest, we are 

 naturally led to ask the question, Whence dogs 

 originated ? For, as there must have been a period 

 when that species, or the genus whence the domestic 

 races have sprung, were in a state of nature, the 

 original and typical kind is to be sought in existing 

 wild dogs, or their real progenitors have totally dis- 

 appeared. In the present state of our knowledge 

 on this particular subject, no reply can be made 

 which is wholly free from objections. The oldest 

 records represent the dogs then noticed, though they 

 were less educated, as not very dissimilar in natural 

 qualities from the present races; for, referring to 

 the most ancient authorities (if we except a passage 

 in Aristotle attesting the co-existence of wild and 

 domesticated animals in his time in Europe, among 

 which the dog is enumerated, — and another in Pliny, 

 acknowledging that there were no domesticated ani- 

 mals then to be found which had not their counter- 

 parts in a wild state),* writers of the classic period 

 seem not to have bestowed much real attention on 

 the question. J Linnaeus, in his system, justly 



designating fitness, capacity, and power, with God, goodness, 

 and dog. In this view, Nabach, or Nabass, would not be a 

 true Semitic name, but a northern epithet signifying the 

 watch-dog or barker-after. The Hebrew, indeed, has many 

 other words that appear of foreign or Scythic origin ; iTSTn* 

 Hanubeak, or Anubis, is the more true Semitic term for 

 barker. 



* In omnibus animalibus placidum eiusdem invenitur et 

 ferum — Pliny. 



J What may be thought of the ancient opinions in Aris- 



