26 The Dog Book 
remains, we are safe in saying that there were no large dogs in that section 
of South America, but that they ranged from twelve to eighteen inches in 
height, and varied in type from the square-fronted, possibly undershot jaw, 
to the extreme of the borzoi and the fineness of the Italian greyhound. It is 
much to be regretted that nothing more definite than “before the conquest” 
can be learned as to the possible date of the existence of these dogs, as it is 
the most interesting of all the “exhibits,” bringing us into actual touch 
with the dog and not looking at him through the eyes of a conventional 
painter or sculptor. 
Of the dogs in Central and South America when first visited by Euro- 
peans we have sufficient data to prove that there were several varieties. 
Columbus found dogs in several of the West India islands; Alonso Harara 
found domesticated dogs in New Granada, and Garallasso in Peru; Fer- 
nandez describes two breeds, one of which is called the Alco or Michua- 
caneus, and by the natives Ytzcuinte Porzotli. The name as given us at the 
Museum of Natural History was Itz-Cuintli; the other breed was the broad- 
footed Alco, said to be the carrier-dog of the country. The native name was 
the Techichi, or Chichi. The fat alco was early described as without hair, 
resembling what the old recorders called the Barbary dog, undoubtedly the 
hairless dog of Turkey. They said that this fat alco was eaten by the 
inhabitants. We have been told that the hairless dog was an importation 
of the sixteenth century, but he is somewhat of a cosmopolitan and is to be 
found in China, South Africa, Turkey, and Mexico. The Chihuahua dog, 
we fully believe, is one of the oldest breeds of dogs and is unique as a Mexican 
production. With regard to the orifice in the centre of the skull in the 
Chihuahua, there is in Mivart’s “Monograph of the Canide”’ an illustra- 
tion of a Japanese spaniel skull with a similar orifice at the junction of the 
four quarters of the skull. In speaking of the dogs of Central America, 
Mivart expressed the opinion that they might have been bred from wild 
species of the new continent or been brought from Asia by man at some 
remote period. With regard to the latter suggestion, it must not be over- 
looked that the dogs of Asia in ancient times, of which we have any informa- 
tion, were much larger and altogether different from those found among 
the Peruvian mummies. 
So also of the wild dogs. Buffon, in “Hist. Gén. des Antilles,” Paris, 
1669, says, “Those belonging to the savages of the Antilles had the head 
and ears very long and resembled a fox in appearance.” Again he says: 
