204 



THE BEASTS OF PREY. 



great that the size and strength of the Wolf seems 

 to be the only difference. I have more than once 

 mistaken a band of Wolves for the Dogs of a party 

 of Indians, and the howls of the animals of both 

 species is prolonged so exactly in the same key that 

 even the practiced ear of the Indian fails at times to 

 discriminate them. Dr. Kane has often seen in his 

 teams of sledge Dogs the oblique eye (a character- 

 istic on which some naturalists lay great stress), the 

 drooping eye and scared look of the Wolf. In dis- 

 position the Eskimo Dogs differ little from Wolves, 

 and according to Dr. Hayes they are capable of no 

 attachment to Man, and are so savage that when hun- 

 gry they will attack even their masters. According 

 to Kane they readily become feral. Their affinity is 

 so close with Wolves that they frequently cross with 

 them, and the Indians take the whelps of Wolves to 

 improve the breed of their Dogs. Turning to the 

 southern parts of the New World: Columbus found 

 two kinds of Dogs in the West Indies, and Fernan- 

 dez describes three in Mexico. Some of these native 

 Dogs were dumb, that is, did not bark. In Guiana 

 it has been known since the time of Buffon that the 

 natives cross their Dogs with an aboriginal species, 

 apparently the Marcong or Carissi {Canis cancrivorus). 

 A careful observer, Rengger, gives reasons for believ- 

 ing that a hairless Dog was domesticated when Amer- 

 ica was first discovered by Europeans. Some of these 

 Dogs in Paraguay are still dumb, and Tschudi states 

 that they suffer from cold in the Cordilleras. This 

 naked Dog is, however, quite distinct from that found 

 preserved in the ancient Peruvian burial places, and 

 described by Tschudi, under the name of the Inca 

 Dog {Canis ingcB) as withstanding cold well and as 

 barking. It is not known whether these two distinct 

 kinds of Dog are the descendants of native species, 

 and it might be argued that when Man first emigrated 

 into America he brought with him from the Asiatic 

 continent Dogs which had not learned to bark, but 

 this view does not seem probable, as the natives along 

 the line of their march from the north reclaimed, as 

 we have seen, at least two North American species of 

 Canidae. 



"Turning to the Old World: some European Dogs 

 closely resemble the Wolf. Thus the Shepherd 

 Dog of the Hungarian plains so much resembles a 

 Wolf that Mr. Paget, who gives this description, 

 says he has known a Hungarian to mistake a Wolf 

 for one of his own Dogs. 



"The European Wolf differs slightly from that of 

 North America, and has been ranked by many 

 naturalists as a distinct species. The common Wolf 

 of India is also, by some, esteemed as a third spe- 

 cies, and here again we find a marked resemblance 

 between the Pariah Dogs of certain districts of 

 India and the Indian Wolf. With respect to Jackals 

 Isidore Geoffroy Saint-Hillaire says that not, one 

 constant difference can be pointed out between their 

 structure and that of the smaller races of Dogs, and 

 they agree closely in habits. Ehrenberg asserts 

 that the domestic Dogs of Lower Egypt and cer- 

 tain mummied Dogs have for their wild types a 

 species of Wolf {Canis lupaster) of the country; 

 whereas certain other mummied Dogs have the 

 closest relation to a wild species of the same coun- 

 try, namely, Canis sabbar, which is only a form of 

 the common Jackal. Jackals and Dogs sometimes 

 naturally cross in the East, and a case is on record 

 in Algeria. I may add that the domestic Dogs on 

 the coast of Guinea are Fox-like animals and are 

 dumb. On the east coast of Africa between latitude 



4° and 6° south and about ten days' journey inland, 

 the Rev. S. Erhardt informs me a semi-domestic' 

 Dog is kept, which the natives assert is derived^ 

 from a similar wild animal. Lichtenstein says that 

 the Dogs of the Bushmen present a striking resem- 

 blance even in color with the Brown Hyaena. Mr. 

 E. Layard informs me that he has seen a Caffrc; 

 Dog which closely resembled an Eskimo Dog. In- 

 Australia the Dingo is both domesticated and wild. 

 Though this animal may have been introduced', 

 aboriginally by Man yet it must be considered as 

 almost an endemic form, for its remains have been' 

 found in a similar state of preservation and associ- 

 ated with extinct mammals, so that its introduction 

 must have been ancient. 



" Fronj this resemblance in several countries of' 

 the half-domesticated Dogs to the wild species still 

 living there; from the facility with which they can 

 often be crossed together; from even half-tamed 

 animals being so much valued by savages, and from 

 the other circumstances previously remarked and 

 which favor their domestication, it is highly prob- 

 able that the domestic Dogs of the world have' 

 descended from two good species of Wolf (namely,.t 

 the Common Wolf and the Coyote) and from two or 

 three other doubtful species of Wolves (namely, the 

 European, Indian and north African forms); from 

 at least one or two South American canine species ; 

 from several races or species of the Jackal ; and' 

 perhaps one or more extinct species. Those authors 

 who attribute great influence to the action of climate 

 by itself may thus account for the resemblance of 

 the domesticated Dogs and native animals in the 

 same countries; but 1 know of no facts supporting 

 the belief in so powerful an action of climate. So I 

 conclude the domestic Dog is nothing but the arti- 

 ficial product of Man." 



The Dingo, An instructive example of the state- 

 or Australian ment that domestic Dogs may return 

 Wild Dog. to the wild state, is given us by the- 

 Dingo or Warragal {Canis dingo), the so-called Aus- 

 tralian Wild Dog, which, in view of his mode of 

 life, I myself have considered one of the original 

 species of wild Dogs ; now that I have seen several 

 specimens of this doubtful tribe, I can only suppose- 

 him to be a domestic Dog run wild. The fact that 

 the Dingo is, with the exception of a few Wing- 

 handed animals and rodents, the only Australian 

 mammal not belonging either to the pouched ani- 

 mals or to the Monotremata, is of great importance 

 in this question. The reasons to the contrary are 

 not valid, unless one considers as such the alleged- 

 discovery of Dingo remains in diluvial strata. It. 

 is, however, difficult to establish the period and cir- 

 cumstances of the return to savagery, and to do so 

 seems of no great importance in the settling of this 

 question, in view of the general character of the 

 animal, which is that of a domestic Dog, and not 

 that of a wild one.* 



Physical The Dingo attains the size of a moder- 

 Characteristics ately large Shepherd Dog. His shape- 

 of the Dingo, js thick-set, the head large and clumsy, 

 the muzzle short and blunt. The ear is erect, wide at 

 the root and rounded at the extremity ; the tail is 

 bushy and reaches lower than the ankle-joints; the 

 limbs appear muscular and are somewhat short; the 



'In the latest researches of MacCoy and Nehring the fossil remains of 

 the Dingo have been found in the pliocene and quartenarystrata of Victo- 

 ria, and therefore the Dingo is proved to be a genuine Wolf, and not a 

 domestic Dog returned to the savage state. He is allied to the Wolf oi 

 India, and immigrated into Australia through the country uniting Australia 

 and southeastern Asia at a certain period of the pliocene epoch. (Note to 

 last German edition.) 



