Early History of the Dog 19 
to the left by attendants and taken away on camels. The two animals 
which might be taken for dogs are quite clear and distinct and by them- 
selves at the lower part of the relief. They have collars with a long ribbon 
like a leash. One of the animals is over the fence, and no other animals 
but the dead ones and the camels are outside. The collars and one hay- 
ing leaped the fence distinguish them, but in the outline of the drawing 
they are exact duplicates of the does seen higher on the relief: the same 
heads, the same deer-like bodies, thick in the paunch, and the same short 
tail. It does not seem possible to our mind for an artist such as must 
have been engaged on this beautifully executed piece of work to have erred 
so conspicuously in these two animals, if he had meant them for dogs. It 
is a little out of chronological order to speak of Persia at this point, but 
as it can be dismissed as supplying no evidence it is not of much conse- 
quence. 
Turning to those prior to what Rawlinson calls the five great monarchies 
of the ancient Eastern world, we find fewer traces of the dog than in Egyptian 
antiquities. Some of the old cylinders dating from the time of the Chaldean 
kings, that is, some two thousand years prior to the Christian era, and the 
Second or Medean Dynasty, show animals which somewhat resemble dogs, 
but the crudeness of the engraving and the number of figures on the small 
space render it difficult to state with any degree of positiveness that they are 
dogs. What is stated by several authorities on Assyrian relics as possibly 
dating from the first monarchy is the dog on the terra-cotta tablet. There 
are also the dogs of the time of Asurbanipal, some being shown in the act 
of catching the wounded wild asses, and of these a number of small clay 
models were found, each having the name of the individual dog in cuneiform 
characters on his body. 
The late Rev. M. B. Wynn in his monogram on the mastiff held that 
the tablet representation was the old mastiff, because of the heavy flews and 
hanging ears. With this we cannot agree, the model of the named dog of 
Asurbanipal being the mastiff type, until modern breeders put on the 
extra flews and the later-day “character,” as we will show when we come to 
treat of the mastiff in proper course. Howitt’s drawing of the mastiff of a 
hundred years ago—and he was always accurate—might have been made 
from this Assyrian clay model, but for the hound-tail. And as to this tail 
curled on the quarters as shown on the tablet, perhaps the modeller could 
not fashion the hound-carriage of tail in the material he was using. Com- 
