6S MAMMALIA— ORDER IV.—CARNIVORA, 



As regards their distribution, wild dogs are found in India, Burma, Siam, 

 and tlie Malayan Peninsula and islands ; while in Central Asia they 

 extend as far northwards as the Altai Mountains, which divide Mongolia from 

 Siberia, and as far westwards as Amurland, and the Isle of Saghalien in the 

 Sea of Okhotsk. It is, however, somewhat curious that, so far as our informa- 

 tion goes, these animals are quite unknown both in Northern China and 

 Japan. Wild dogs are, therefore, at the present day exclusively confined to 

 Asia, where they do not appear to extend eastwards of the longitude of the 

 Ural Mountains. Tliis distribution will, however, oaly hold good for the 

 present epoch, since there have been found in the caves of various parts of 

 Europe lower jaws of canine animals agreeing with those of livlng'wild dogs 

 in having 10 uistead of 11 teeth ; and we shall, therefore, De justified in 

 considering at or about the time when thomammothfkiurished that wild dogs 

 hunted over Europe as they do at the present day in Asia. The circum- 

 stances of the occurrence at a former epoch in Europe of a group of animals, 

 now confined to Asia is by no means an isolated one, since there is evidence 

 that at still earlier periods of the earth's history deer, like the muntjac and 

 spotted deer of India, and long-snouted crocodiles akin to the garials of the 

 Ganges and Borneo, flourished in various parts of Europe. All these facts 

 in distribution seem, indeed, to point to the conclusion that Asia has served 

 as a kind of refuge for groups of animals which, for some reason or another, 

 were unaoie to exist any longer in Europe. 



Naturalists have long been exercised as to whether the wild dog of the 

 Himalaya was identical with that of the plains of India, and also whether one 

 or both of these could be distinguished from the wild dog of Burma and the 

 Malayan islands. In many works the wild dog of India and the Himalaya 

 will be found alluded to by the name of Cyan rutilans — a name properly be- 

 longing to the Malayan form. These writers probably derived their informa- 

 tion from the late Dr. Jerdon, who in his " Indian Mammals" included the 

 Malayan, Indian, and Himalayan forms under this single name. Colonel 

 Sykes had, however, long before separated the Indian wild dog under the 

 name of C. duMuuensis, while for the Himalayan torm Hodgson proposed the 

 name of G. prhmevus. Mr. Blanford, who states that he can find no difierence 

 between the wild dog of the Himalaya and that of the plains of India, con- 

 siders that these are probably distinct from the kind found in Burma and 

 the Malayan region. The difference between the two is, however, very slight ; 

 but the Himalayan and Indian species (C. deccanemis) is a rather larger'and 

 stouter animal, with longer hair, and a woolly under-fur, and the general 

 colour varying from a ferruginous red to tawny ; while the Burmese and 

 Malayan species (0. rntilans)h smaller and slighter, with shorter hair,no under- 

 fur, and a brighter colour. The Indian species extends to the north-west as 

 far as Gilgit and Hunza, from whence it ranges eastwards through Ladak into 

 Tibet. Curiously enough, it is found that this wild dog is quite distinct 

 from the species inhabiting the Altai (0. alpinns) which has much larger 

 upper molar teeth. This, as Mr. Blanford well observes, is a most remark- 

 able feature m distribution, for whereas most of the animals ..f the Himalaya, 

 like the ibox and the great Tibetan shocp, are either identical with or closely 

 related to those of the Altai and adjacent regions, here we have a case where 

 the Himalayan form is identical with one inhabiting the plains of India, and 

 perfectly distinct from the one found in the Altai. This mav, however, be 

 explained by the greater facility with which the Carnivora can adapt them- 

 selves to different surroundings, owing to the circumstance that wherever 



