Chapter Six.Tame Dogs.Perhaps of all other animals the dog has been the earliest and most constant companion of man. His swiftness and strength, but more especially his highly-developed power of smelling, have made him a powerful ally against the other animals; and these qualities must have attracted the attention of man at an early period—particularly in those times when the chase was, perhaps, the only pursuit of mankind.No animal is more widely distributed over the earth. He has followed man everywhere; and wherever human society exists, there this constant and faithful attendant may be found—devoted to his master, adopting his manners, distinguishing and defending his property, and remaining attached to him even after death.It is a question among naturalists as to what was the parent stock of the dog. Some allege that he has sprung from the wolf; others that he is a descendant of the jackal; while not a few believe that there were true wild dogs, from which the present domesticated race had their origin. These ideas are mere speculations, and not very reasonable ones either. It would not be difficult to show, that different kinds of dogs have sprung from different kinds of animals—that is, animals of the same great family—from wolves, foxes, jackals,zerdas, and even hyenas. This can be proved from the fact, that domesticated breeds among savage tribes, both in Asia and America, are undoubtedly the descendants of wolves and jackals: such, for instance, as the Esquimaux dog of the Arctic regions, the Dingo of Australia, the Indian dogs of North America—of which there are several varieties—and also one or two kinds existing in Mexico and South America.Naturalists deny that there are any true dogs living in a wild state. This is simply an unreasonable assertion. Wild dogs of several species are to be met with in Asia and America; and if it be asserted that these originally came from a domesticated stock, the same cannot be said of the hunting dog of Southern Africa—which is neither more nor less than awild hound.Perhaps none of the animals that have submitted to the conquest of man have branched off into a greater number of varieties than this one. There are more kinds than either of horses or oxen. We shall not, therefore, attempt a description of each; but limit ourselves to speak of those breeds that are the most remarkable—or rather those with which the reader is supposed to be least familiar. To describe such varieties as the spaniel, the greyhound, the mastiff, or the terrier, would not add much to the knowledge which the English reader already possesses.One of the most remarkable of dogs is the huge mastiff of Tibet. He is long-haired, and usually of a jet black colour. He is quite a match in size for either the Newfoundland or San Bernard breeds, and not unlike one or the other—for it may be remarked, that these in many points resemble each other.The Tibet dog, as his name implies, is the property of the Tibetians: especially the Bhootees—the same people who own that curious species of cattle, theYäk, or grunting ox, and who reside on the northern slopes of the Himalaya mountains. It may be inferred, therefore, that the Tibet dog affects a cold climate; and such is in reality the case. He cannot bear heat; and does not thrive, even in the kingdom of Nepaul. Attempts to introduce the breed into England have resulted in failure: the animals brought hither having died shortly after their arrival.The masters of these dogs—the Bhootees, or Bhoteas, are a singular race, of a ruddy copper colour, rather short in stature, but of excellent disposition. Their clothing consists of furs and woollen cloths, adapted to the cold climate which they inhabit. The men till the ground, and keep yäks and sheep, and sometimes come down into the warm plains to trade—penetrating even to Calcutta. The women remain at home, their only protectors being these great dogs, who watch faithfully over their villages and encampments, and fly fiercely at any stranger who may approach them. It is said that they are especially hostile to people who have awhiteface; but this disposition is also characteristic of the dogs belonging to the American Indians—and perhaps those possessed by all savages with a coloured skin.The Dingo, or dog of Australia, is an animal domesticated among the aborigines of that country. He is a dog of wolf-like shape, who does not bark, but utters only a mournful howling. He is used by the wretched natives both for the chase and as an article of food; and is a fierce and voracious creature—not hesitating to launch himself on the larger kinds of animals. He is especially employed in hunting the kangaroo; and sometimes terrible combats occur between the dingo and the larger species of kangaroos—resulting always in the death of the latter.The San Bernard dog, supposed to be a cross between the mastiff and shepherd’s dog, is too celebrated to require a description here. His sagacity in discovering travellers amid the Alpine snows, and guiding them upon their path, is the quality upon which the fame of this dog has been founded; but it may be remarked that many of the feats attributed to him have their origin in the fertile fancies of Parisian writers.The Esquimaux dog is another celebrated variety. He is an animal with a fox-like face and thick coat of whitish hair, generally tinged with yellow. He is to the Esquimaux a most valuable companion: trained to draw their sledges over the surface of the snow, and enabling them to make long and rapid journeys—without which these singular people would be ofttimes in danger of perishing amid the inhospitable regions they inhabit.The Indians of North America possess two or three varieties of domesticated dogs, evidently derived from the wolves of that region. Indeed, the common Indian dogs, found among the Sioux and other northern tribes, bear so close a resemblance to the large American wolf, that they are often taken for this animal, and in consequence shot, or otherwise killed by mistake. The Indians use them for carrying burdens: their tents and tent poles being transported by these animals on long journeys across the prairies. Their flesh is a favourite article of the savagecuisine; but it is too costly to be used as an every-day food; and is only served up on grand festive occasions. Like the dogs of Tibet, these Indian wolf dogs have the greatest antipathy to a white skin; so much so, that even a friend in that guise can rarely obtain either their confidence or friendship.A smaller kind than the common one is found among certain tribes, and appears to have derived its origin from the prairie wolf—the jackal of America—while the Hare Indians of the Rocky Mountains possess a third variety; and it is known that still another exists among the tribes of Russian America. This last is short-haired and smooth-coated: therefore differing altogether from the Indian dogs of the prairies.In Mexico, there are two or three native dogs: found there on the arrival of Europeans. One is theAlco—a dog remarkable for a curious hunch or protuberance upon the back and shoulders, a thick short neck, and small pointed muzzle. He is thinly covered with long hair, of a yellowish colour.Another singular variety is the dog of Chihuahua and this is, perhaps, the smallest of all canine creatures. Full-grown specimens have been seen, whose dimensions did not exceed those of the common rat; and a singular fact, well authenticated, is, that this dog, when transported from Chihuahua to any other place—even to the city of Mexico itself—invariably becomes larger, or degenerates, as the Mexicans have it! There is also in Mexico a hairless dog. It is, no doubt, the same as that known by the name of Turkish dog; since this variety came originally from Spanish America.In South America, there are several species of native dogs, found among the savages of the Orinoco and Amazon. They are small animals, usually of a whitish colour: but their owners follow the curious practice of dyeing them with annatto, indigo, and other brilliant dyes, for the purpose of rendering them more ornamental!We can only find space to say that there are many other varieties of domesticated dogs, almost unknown beyond the countries in which they are found. Such are theQuaoof Rhamgur, the Sumatran dog, thePoullof New Ireland, the dogs of Patagonia and Tierra del Fuego—those of the South Sea Islands; and theWahtthat inhabits some of the ranges of the Himalayas.It is reasonable to suppose that there is not a nation upon earth, hardly a tribe—civilised or savage—that does not possess some variety of the canine race differing from all the others.
Perhaps of all other animals the dog has been the earliest and most constant companion of man. His swiftness and strength, but more especially his highly-developed power of smelling, have made him a powerful ally against the other animals; and these qualities must have attracted the attention of man at an early period—particularly in those times when the chase was, perhaps, the only pursuit of mankind.
No animal is more widely distributed over the earth. He has followed man everywhere; and wherever human society exists, there this constant and faithful attendant may be found—devoted to his master, adopting his manners, distinguishing and defending his property, and remaining attached to him even after death.
It is a question among naturalists as to what was the parent stock of the dog. Some allege that he has sprung from the wolf; others that he is a descendant of the jackal; while not a few believe that there were true wild dogs, from which the present domesticated race had their origin. These ideas are mere speculations, and not very reasonable ones either. It would not be difficult to show, that different kinds of dogs have sprung from different kinds of animals—that is, animals of the same great family—from wolves, foxes, jackals,zerdas, and even hyenas. This can be proved from the fact, that domesticated breeds among savage tribes, both in Asia and America, are undoubtedly the descendants of wolves and jackals: such, for instance, as the Esquimaux dog of the Arctic regions, the Dingo of Australia, the Indian dogs of North America—of which there are several varieties—and also one or two kinds existing in Mexico and South America.
Naturalists deny that there are any true dogs living in a wild state. This is simply an unreasonable assertion. Wild dogs of several species are to be met with in Asia and America; and if it be asserted that these originally came from a domesticated stock, the same cannot be said of the hunting dog of Southern Africa—which is neither more nor less than awild hound.
Perhaps none of the animals that have submitted to the conquest of man have branched off into a greater number of varieties than this one. There are more kinds than either of horses or oxen. We shall not, therefore, attempt a description of each; but limit ourselves to speak of those breeds that are the most remarkable—or rather those with which the reader is supposed to be least familiar. To describe such varieties as the spaniel, the greyhound, the mastiff, or the terrier, would not add much to the knowledge which the English reader already possesses.
One of the most remarkable of dogs is the huge mastiff of Tibet. He is long-haired, and usually of a jet black colour. He is quite a match in size for either the Newfoundland or San Bernard breeds, and not unlike one or the other—for it may be remarked, that these in many points resemble each other.
The Tibet dog, as his name implies, is the property of the Tibetians: especially the Bhootees—the same people who own that curious species of cattle, theYäk, or grunting ox, and who reside on the northern slopes of the Himalaya mountains. It may be inferred, therefore, that the Tibet dog affects a cold climate; and such is in reality the case. He cannot bear heat; and does not thrive, even in the kingdom of Nepaul. Attempts to introduce the breed into England have resulted in failure: the animals brought hither having died shortly after their arrival.
The masters of these dogs—the Bhootees, or Bhoteas, are a singular race, of a ruddy copper colour, rather short in stature, but of excellent disposition. Their clothing consists of furs and woollen cloths, adapted to the cold climate which they inhabit. The men till the ground, and keep yäks and sheep, and sometimes come down into the warm plains to trade—penetrating even to Calcutta. The women remain at home, their only protectors being these great dogs, who watch faithfully over their villages and encampments, and fly fiercely at any stranger who may approach them. It is said that they are especially hostile to people who have awhiteface; but this disposition is also characteristic of the dogs belonging to the American Indians—and perhaps those possessed by all savages with a coloured skin.
The Dingo, or dog of Australia, is an animal domesticated among the aborigines of that country. He is a dog of wolf-like shape, who does not bark, but utters only a mournful howling. He is used by the wretched natives both for the chase and as an article of food; and is a fierce and voracious creature—not hesitating to launch himself on the larger kinds of animals. He is especially employed in hunting the kangaroo; and sometimes terrible combats occur between the dingo and the larger species of kangaroos—resulting always in the death of the latter.
The San Bernard dog, supposed to be a cross between the mastiff and shepherd’s dog, is too celebrated to require a description here. His sagacity in discovering travellers amid the Alpine snows, and guiding them upon their path, is the quality upon which the fame of this dog has been founded; but it may be remarked that many of the feats attributed to him have their origin in the fertile fancies of Parisian writers.
The Esquimaux dog is another celebrated variety. He is an animal with a fox-like face and thick coat of whitish hair, generally tinged with yellow. He is to the Esquimaux a most valuable companion: trained to draw their sledges over the surface of the snow, and enabling them to make long and rapid journeys—without which these singular people would be ofttimes in danger of perishing amid the inhospitable regions they inhabit.
The Indians of North America possess two or three varieties of domesticated dogs, evidently derived from the wolves of that region. Indeed, the common Indian dogs, found among the Sioux and other northern tribes, bear so close a resemblance to the large American wolf, that they are often taken for this animal, and in consequence shot, or otherwise killed by mistake. The Indians use them for carrying burdens: their tents and tent poles being transported by these animals on long journeys across the prairies. Their flesh is a favourite article of the savagecuisine; but it is too costly to be used as an every-day food; and is only served up on grand festive occasions. Like the dogs of Tibet, these Indian wolf dogs have the greatest antipathy to a white skin; so much so, that even a friend in that guise can rarely obtain either their confidence or friendship.
A smaller kind than the common one is found among certain tribes, and appears to have derived its origin from the prairie wolf—the jackal of America—while the Hare Indians of the Rocky Mountains possess a third variety; and it is known that still another exists among the tribes of Russian America. This last is short-haired and smooth-coated: therefore differing altogether from the Indian dogs of the prairies.
In Mexico, there are two or three native dogs: found there on the arrival of Europeans. One is theAlco—a dog remarkable for a curious hunch or protuberance upon the back and shoulders, a thick short neck, and small pointed muzzle. He is thinly covered with long hair, of a yellowish colour.
Another singular variety is the dog of Chihuahua and this is, perhaps, the smallest of all canine creatures. Full-grown specimens have been seen, whose dimensions did not exceed those of the common rat; and a singular fact, well authenticated, is, that this dog, when transported from Chihuahua to any other place—even to the city of Mexico itself—invariably becomes larger, or degenerates, as the Mexicans have it! There is also in Mexico a hairless dog. It is, no doubt, the same as that known by the name of Turkish dog; since this variety came originally from Spanish America.
In South America, there are several species of native dogs, found among the savages of the Orinoco and Amazon. They are small animals, usually of a whitish colour: but their owners follow the curious practice of dyeing them with annatto, indigo, and other brilliant dyes, for the purpose of rendering them more ornamental!
We can only find space to say that there are many other varieties of domesticated dogs, almost unknown beyond the countries in which they are found. Such are theQuaoof Rhamgur, the Sumatran dog, thePoullof New Ireland, the dogs of Patagonia and Tierra del Fuego—those of the South Sea Islands; and theWahtthat inhabits some of the ranges of the Himalayas.
It is reasonable to suppose that there is not a nation upon earth, hardly a tribe—civilised or savage—that does not possess some variety of the canine race differing from all the others.
Chapter Seven.Wild Dogs.ByWild Dogs, we mean not only several sorts of true dogs, that in different parts of the world are found living in a wild state; but also Wolves, Foxes, Jackals, Hyenas, and Fennecs—for all these are but dogs in a state of nature.First, we shall speak of the true dogs living in a wild state—that is, apart from the society of man.It is not necessary here to go into the often-debated question, as to whether dogs were originally wolves, or what species of wolf the dog is descended from. This is all mere speculation, and answers no purpose. It is just as likely that wolves sprang from dogs, as that dogs came from wolves; and every one may perceive that two breeds of the dog species are often far more unlike each other—both in appearance and habits—than a dog is to a wolf itself. Again, foxes differ only from wolves in point of size; and a small wolf is in reality a fox, while a large fox may be equally regarded as a wolf. Furthermore, the jackal is nothing else than another form of the same animal—the wolf or dog, whichever you choose to term it; and the hyenas but a stillugliershape of the same carnivorous creature.With regard to the true wild dogs—which are not regarded as wolves—we find them existing in various parts of the world. They usually live in communities,and have the habit of hounds—that is, they hunt in packs. Whether they were originally dogs in a domesticated state, and have since seceded from the society of man, is a question which naturalists are unable to agree upon.In India there are two or three kinds of wild dogs living thus. One in the Deccan—called Kolsun by the Mahratta people—is a reddish-coloured animal, nearly as large as the common European wolf. It dwells in the forests, far remote from the villages—and of course lives by preying upon other animals—just as wolves and foxes do. Again, in the forests of the Himalaya mountains there is another species of wild dog, different from that of the Deccan. It is usually known as the wild dog of Nepaul, from its being found in many parts of that kingdom. A large community of these animals is often met with in the mountain forests—living in caves, or at the bottoms of cliffs, where there are deep crevices among the boulders of loose rocks, that afford them a secure asylum when pursued by their enemies. In these places the dogs sleep, and bring forth their young; and the puppies are taught to be exceedingly wary, and not stray far from their dens during the absence of the mothers. Indeed, so cunning do they become when only a few days old, that it is difficult to capture one of them outside its impenetrable lodging-place.During many hours the old ones are abroad, in pursuit of the animals upon whose flesh they subsist; and, as already stated, these dogs follow their game not singly, but in bands or packs. In this way, instinct teaches them that they will have a better chance of success; since they are more able to head the pursued animal, turn it in different directions, and at length run it to the ground. A curious fact is related of the cunning of these wild dogs. It is stated that when in pursuit of the larger animals—such as stags and large antelopes that inhabit the same district—instead of running them down at once, the dogs manoeuvre so as to guide the game to their breeding place, before giving the finalcoupto the chase! The object of this is to bring the carcass within reach of their young; which, were it killed at a great distance off, would be obviously impossible. Such a habit as this would prove them possessed of something more than instinct; but for all that, it may be true. A fact seems to confirm it: the fact that a large quantity of bones is always observed in the immediate neighbourhood of the breeding places—some of these being of such a size as to preclude the belief that they could have been carried thither by the dogs themselves.In Ramghur there is a wild dog called Quao, or Quaw, which lives in communities, just as those of Nepaul; and still another kind inhabits the forests of the Island of Sumatra.None of these kinds are to be confounded with the half-wild dogs of India, called pariah dogs; since the latter, although not owned by individuals, dwell in the villages, and of course associate with man. Besides, the pariahs are of no particular breed—there being several sorts of pariah dogs. They are merelyoutcast curs, without owners, that pick up a living as they best can.Passing from India to the tropical countries of America, we find another sort of wild dog in the forests of Guiana, known as the Koupara, or Crab-dog. It is not certain whether these dogs are indigenous to Guiana, or the progeny of some domestic variety introduced by the colonists. They dwell in small troops or families, of six or seven individuals each, and their food is furnished by thepacas, agoutis, and other small rodent animals of tropical America. They also find sustenance in several kinds of crabs, which they adroitly capture upon the banks of the rivers; and it is from their habit of feeding upon these they have derived the name of crab-dogs. They are easily tamed; and when crossed with other breeds, a variety is produced which is esteemed by the natives as the very best kind for the hunting of the agoutis, cavies, and capibaras.The wild dogs of the Cape country, calledWilde Hunden(wild hounds) by the Dutch, are usually regarded as near akin to thehyenas. But they are more like real wild hounds than hyenas; and their colour—which is a mixture of black, white, and tan—almost points to them as the progenitors of that variety of dog known as the hound. Their habits, too, would seem to confirm this hypothesis: for it is well-known that these animals pursue their prey just after the manner of a pack of real hounds—doubling upon it, and using every artifice to run it down. The numerous species of ruminant animals—the antelope in particular—are the especial objects of their pursuit, and upon these they subsist. Like the Indian wild dogs, they live in communities—using the burrows of the wild hog and ant-eater, as also the hollow ant-hills, for their lairs and breeding places. Travellers passing across the plains of South Africa have often witnessed the splendid spectacle of a pack of these beautiful wild hounds in pursuit of a large antelope, and almost fancied themselves looking at a stag hunt, with a kennel of real hounds going at full view!The true wild dog of all is that creature so well-known and celebrated in all our tales of childhood—theWolf.To describe the wolf, or even to give an account of his habits, would be superfluous. Almost every one is acquainted with the gaunt form, the shaggy hide, and tierce aspect of this formidable creature; and every one has heard of his fierce and savage disposition: for who is ignorant of the story of “Little Red Riding Hood?”The presence of this much-disliked animal is almost universal: by which I mean, that in some form or other he is represented in almost every corner of the globe. You may say there are no wolves in Africa; but this is not true: for the hyenas are nothing more nor less than wolves, and wolves of the very ugliest kind.Fortunately wolves are no longer found in Britain, though they were once plentiful enough in these islands; but all over the continent of Europe there are still numerous wolves in the forests and mountains.The Common Wolf, that is, the wolf of Europe, is the type of the family; but this type offers many varieties—according to the different localities in which it is found. I shall here notice these varieties.French wolves are generally browner and smaller than those of Germany; and the wolves of Russia, Sweden, and Norway are still stronger animals, and of a more sinister appearance. These differ very much in colour, which in winter is almost white. Again, the Alpine wolves are smaller than the French, and of a brownish-grey colour; while those of Italy and Turkey have a yellowish tinge. Black wolves are not uncommon, especially in the Pyrenees of Spain; but whether these, as well as the others, are all mere varieties of the common wolf, or whether there are two or three distinct species of European wolf, are questions to be left to the disputation of systematic naturalists.Over all the continent of America, from the Arctic shores in the north to Tierra del Fuego in the south, wolves are found; and here again there are varieties in size, colour, and even habits, that may fairly entitle the different kinds to rank as separate species. Most certainly there are distinct species, for that known as the Prairie Wolf, and also the Coyote of Mexico, are two kinds that more resemble jackals than real wolves.Besides, other wolves of the American continent, as the Brown Wolf of Mexico, the great Dusky Wolf of the Upper Missouri, the Aguara Dog of South America, the Wild Dog of the Falkland Islands, the Fox Wolves of Patagonia and Terra del Fuego, the Guazu of Paraguay and Chili, and the North American Common Wolf—are all animals of such different appearance and habits, that it is absurd to term them varieties of the same species. In Asia we have just the same series of varieties—that is, in every part of the great continent is found some representative of the tribe, which in reality is no variety, but an original and indigenous animal of the wolf kind—such as the Sandgah, or Indian wolf of the Himalayas; the Beriah, another Indian wolf; and the Derboom, a black species that inhabits the mountains of Arabia and Syria.In Africa the wolf is represented by the hyenas, of which there are at least four species—one of them, the common hyena, belonging to the northern half of the African continent, and extending its range into several countries of Asia. At the Cape, and northward into Central Africa, three large species of hyena, and one small one (the Aard wolf), represent the lupine family. The Jackal, too—of which there are several distinct kinds in Asia and Africa—is only a wolf of diminutive size and gregarious habit.This creature is fairly represented in America by the Coyote of Mexico, and the Barking Wolf of the prairies; and in Asia, upon the steppes of Tartary, by the Corsac.Even in Australia, where new mammalia have turned up in such odd and fantastic forms, the wolf has his congener in that curious creature known as the Tasmanian wolf.With regard to foxes, they, like the wolves, are distributed almost universally over the globe; and exhibit a like variety of forms and colours, according to the different localities which they inhabit. Their name is legion.As the smallest representatives of the wild dogs, we find in Africa the curious little creatures known as the Fennecs. Of these there are also varieties; for, although very much alike in habits, the Fennecs of Abyssinia and those of the Cape are evidently distinct species.
ByWild Dogs, we mean not only several sorts of true dogs, that in different parts of the world are found living in a wild state; but also Wolves, Foxes, Jackals, Hyenas, and Fennecs—for all these are but dogs in a state of nature.
First, we shall speak of the true dogs living in a wild state—that is, apart from the society of man.
It is not necessary here to go into the often-debated question, as to whether dogs were originally wolves, or what species of wolf the dog is descended from. This is all mere speculation, and answers no purpose. It is just as likely that wolves sprang from dogs, as that dogs came from wolves; and every one may perceive that two breeds of the dog species are often far more unlike each other—both in appearance and habits—than a dog is to a wolf itself. Again, foxes differ only from wolves in point of size; and a small wolf is in reality a fox, while a large fox may be equally regarded as a wolf. Furthermore, the jackal is nothing else than another form of the same animal—the wolf or dog, whichever you choose to term it; and the hyenas but a stillugliershape of the same carnivorous creature.
With regard to the true wild dogs—which are not regarded as wolves—we find them existing in various parts of the world. They usually live in communities,and have the habit of hounds—that is, they hunt in packs. Whether they were originally dogs in a domesticated state, and have since seceded from the society of man, is a question which naturalists are unable to agree upon.
In India there are two or three kinds of wild dogs living thus. One in the Deccan—called Kolsun by the Mahratta people—is a reddish-coloured animal, nearly as large as the common European wolf. It dwells in the forests, far remote from the villages—and of course lives by preying upon other animals—just as wolves and foxes do. Again, in the forests of the Himalaya mountains there is another species of wild dog, different from that of the Deccan. It is usually known as the wild dog of Nepaul, from its being found in many parts of that kingdom. A large community of these animals is often met with in the mountain forests—living in caves, or at the bottoms of cliffs, where there are deep crevices among the boulders of loose rocks, that afford them a secure asylum when pursued by their enemies. In these places the dogs sleep, and bring forth their young; and the puppies are taught to be exceedingly wary, and not stray far from their dens during the absence of the mothers. Indeed, so cunning do they become when only a few days old, that it is difficult to capture one of them outside its impenetrable lodging-place.
During many hours the old ones are abroad, in pursuit of the animals upon whose flesh they subsist; and, as already stated, these dogs follow their game not singly, but in bands or packs. In this way, instinct teaches them that they will have a better chance of success; since they are more able to head the pursued animal, turn it in different directions, and at length run it to the ground. A curious fact is related of the cunning of these wild dogs. It is stated that when in pursuit of the larger animals—such as stags and large antelopes that inhabit the same district—instead of running them down at once, the dogs manoeuvre so as to guide the game to their breeding place, before giving the finalcoupto the chase! The object of this is to bring the carcass within reach of their young; which, were it killed at a great distance off, would be obviously impossible. Such a habit as this would prove them possessed of something more than instinct; but for all that, it may be true. A fact seems to confirm it: the fact that a large quantity of bones is always observed in the immediate neighbourhood of the breeding places—some of these being of such a size as to preclude the belief that they could have been carried thither by the dogs themselves.
In Ramghur there is a wild dog called Quao, or Quaw, which lives in communities, just as those of Nepaul; and still another kind inhabits the forests of the Island of Sumatra.
None of these kinds are to be confounded with the half-wild dogs of India, called pariah dogs; since the latter, although not owned by individuals, dwell in the villages, and of course associate with man. Besides, the pariahs are of no particular breed—there being several sorts of pariah dogs. They are merelyoutcast curs, without owners, that pick up a living as they best can.
Passing from India to the tropical countries of America, we find another sort of wild dog in the forests of Guiana, known as the Koupara, or Crab-dog. It is not certain whether these dogs are indigenous to Guiana, or the progeny of some domestic variety introduced by the colonists. They dwell in small troops or families, of six or seven individuals each, and their food is furnished by thepacas, agoutis, and other small rodent animals of tropical America. They also find sustenance in several kinds of crabs, which they adroitly capture upon the banks of the rivers; and it is from their habit of feeding upon these they have derived the name of crab-dogs. They are easily tamed; and when crossed with other breeds, a variety is produced which is esteemed by the natives as the very best kind for the hunting of the agoutis, cavies, and capibaras.
The wild dogs of the Cape country, calledWilde Hunden(wild hounds) by the Dutch, are usually regarded as near akin to thehyenas. But they are more like real wild hounds than hyenas; and their colour—which is a mixture of black, white, and tan—almost points to them as the progenitors of that variety of dog known as the hound. Their habits, too, would seem to confirm this hypothesis: for it is well-known that these animals pursue their prey just after the manner of a pack of real hounds—doubling upon it, and using every artifice to run it down. The numerous species of ruminant animals—the antelope in particular—are the especial objects of their pursuit, and upon these they subsist. Like the Indian wild dogs, they live in communities—using the burrows of the wild hog and ant-eater, as also the hollow ant-hills, for their lairs and breeding places. Travellers passing across the plains of South Africa have often witnessed the splendid spectacle of a pack of these beautiful wild hounds in pursuit of a large antelope, and almost fancied themselves looking at a stag hunt, with a kennel of real hounds going at full view!
The true wild dog of all is that creature so well-known and celebrated in all our tales of childhood—theWolf.
To describe the wolf, or even to give an account of his habits, would be superfluous. Almost every one is acquainted with the gaunt form, the shaggy hide, and tierce aspect of this formidable creature; and every one has heard of his fierce and savage disposition: for who is ignorant of the story of “Little Red Riding Hood?”
The presence of this much-disliked animal is almost universal: by which I mean, that in some form or other he is represented in almost every corner of the globe. You may say there are no wolves in Africa; but this is not true: for the hyenas are nothing more nor less than wolves, and wolves of the very ugliest kind.
Fortunately wolves are no longer found in Britain, though they were once plentiful enough in these islands; but all over the continent of Europe there are still numerous wolves in the forests and mountains.
The Common Wolf, that is, the wolf of Europe, is the type of the family; but this type offers many varieties—according to the different localities in which it is found. I shall here notice these varieties.
French wolves are generally browner and smaller than those of Germany; and the wolves of Russia, Sweden, and Norway are still stronger animals, and of a more sinister appearance. These differ very much in colour, which in winter is almost white. Again, the Alpine wolves are smaller than the French, and of a brownish-grey colour; while those of Italy and Turkey have a yellowish tinge. Black wolves are not uncommon, especially in the Pyrenees of Spain; but whether these, as well as the others, are all mere varieties of the common wolf, or whether there are two or three distinct species of European wolf, are questions to be left to the disputation of systematic naturalists.
Over all the continent of America, from the Arctic shores in the north to Tierra del Fuego in the south, wolves are found; and here again there are varieties in size, colour, and even habits, that may fairly entitle the different kinds to rank as separate species. Most certainly there are distinct species, for that known as the Prairie Wolf, and also the Coyote of Mexico, are two kinds that more resemble jackals than real wolves.
Besides, other wolves of the American continent, as the Brown Wolf of Mexico, the great Dusky Wolf of the Upper Missouri, the Aguara Dog of South America, the Wild Dog of the Falkland Islands, the Fox Wolves of Patagonia and Terra del Fuego, the Guazu of Paraguay and Chili, and the North American Common Wolf—are all animals of such different appearance and habits, that it is absurd to term them varieties of the same species. In Asia we have just the same series of varieties—that is, in every part of the great continent is found some representative of the tribe, which in reality is no variety, but an original and indigenous animal of the wolf kind—such as the Sandgah, or Indian wolf of the Himalayas; the Beriah, another Indian wolf; and the Derboom, a black species that inhabits the mountains of Arabia and Syria.
In Africa the wolf is represented by the hyenas, of which there are at least four species—one of them, the common hyena, belonging to the northern half of the African continent, and extending its range into several countries of Asia. At the Cape, and northward into Central Africa, three large species of hyena, and one small one (the Aard wolf), represent the lupine family. The Jackal, too—of which there are several distinct kinds in Asia and Africa—is only a wolf of diminutive size and gregarious habit.
This creature is fairly represented in America by the Coyote of Mexico, and the Barking Wolf of the prairies; and in Asia, upon the steppes of Tartary, by the Corsac.
Even in Australia, where new mammalia have turned up in such odd and fantastic forms, the wolf has his congener in that curious creature known as the Tasmanian wolf.
With regard to foxes, they, like the wolves, are distributed almost universally over the globe; and exhibit a like variety of forms and colours, according to the different localities which they inhabit. Their name is legion.
As the smallest representatives of the wild dogs, we find in Africa the curious little creatures known as the Fennecs. Of these there are also varieties; for, although very much alike in habits, the Fennecs of Abyssinia and those of the Cape are evidently distinct species.
Chapter Eight.Cats.The Lion is theking of cats; though there are some who think that the Tiger has a better claim to thethrone. In point of size and strength, there is not much difference between these two animals. The lionappearslarger, on account of his shaggy mane; but specimens of the tiger have been taken whose measurement was equal to that of the largest lion. Otherwise, the tiger is decidedly superior in courage, in address, and in beauty; in fact, the royal tiger is one of the most beautiful of animals; while the lion, notwithstanding the great fame he enjoys, is among the very ugliest of brutes.These two powerful creatures often meet in the jungles of India, and try their strength in single combat. It is not decided which is superior in prowess, since victory is sometimes on one side and sometimes on the other. No doubt this depends on the individuals who may engage, for lions are not all alike, nor tigers neither. Both differ in strength and courage, just as men do; and this difference is caused by a variety of circumstances—such as age, size, season of the year, nature of the country and climate, and many like contingencies.Remember that the lion is found both in Asia and Africa, and nowhere else. He inhabits the whole ofAfrica, from the Cape to the shores of the Mediterranean, and there are three well-marked varieties on that continent. In Asia he is only found in its southern part—that is, in the tropical and sub-tropical regions; and there are also two or three varieties of the Asiatic lion.With regard to the tiger, he is altogether an Asiatic. There are no tigers in Europe, Africa, and America—of course we mean in their wild state; and the stories of tiger-hunts in Africa and America, frequently to be met with in books and newspapers, are the narratives of mere ignorant travellers, who confound the royal tiger with several species of spotted cats—of which we shall presently speak. We may add that the tiger, although exclusively Asiatic, is not exclusively tropical in his haunts. Tigers are more abundant in the hot jungles of India and some of the larger islands of the Indian Ocean than elsewhere; but they have also been observed far to the north of the Himalayan chain on the greatsteppesthat extend almost to the confines of Siberia.To continue the monarchical analogy; there are four cats that may be called the princes of the family. These are theJaguar, theLeopard, thePanther, and theHunting-leopardorCheetah. The first of these is exclusively American; the other three, African and Asiatic. They are all four what are termed spotted cats; that is, having black markings on a buff or yellowish ground. I need not add that they are all beautiful creatures. A superficial observer would easily mistake the one for the other; and in common phrase, they are indifferently termed leopards, panthers, and even tigers; but the naturalist, and even thefurrierknows that they are four distinct species.I shall endeavour to point out as briefly as possible some marks that will enableyouto distinguish them. In the spots we find a tolerably good criterion of the species. Those upon the body of the jaguar are not spots, but rather what may be termed rosettes. So, too, the black markings of the leopard and panther are rosettes; that is, irregular black rings enclosing an open space of the yellow ground. On the contrary, the spots upon the hunting-leopard are real spots, of a uniform black; and, consequently, this animal is easily distinguished from the other three. He differs from them also in shape. He is longer in the legs, stands more upright upon them, and can run more swiftly than any of the cat tribe. In fact, he has a tendency towards the nature and habits of the dog, and might be appropriately termed the cat-dog, or the dog-cat, whichever you please. It is on account of his canine qualities that he is sometimes trained to the chase: hence his specific name of the hunting-leopard. He inhabits both Asia and Africa.But how are the jaguar, leopard, and panther to be distinguished from one another? The jaguar easily enough from the other two. His rosettes have a black point in the centre, which is wanting in the rings of the panther and leopard. Besides, the jaguar is a larger and more powerful animal. Humboldt and others have observed specimens of the jaguar nearly equal in dimensions to those of the royal tiger himself; and his feats of fierce prowess, in the forests of Spanish America, are scarce eclipsed by those of his congener in the jungles of India. Human beings are frequently his victims, and settlements have been abandoned on account of the dangerous proximity of the jaguars. His range in America is pretty nearly co-terminal with the Spanish territories—including, of course, Brazil and Guiana, and excluding the country of Patagonia, where a smaller species takes his place. In all these countries he is misnamed tiger (tigre)—hence the anomalous stories to which we have alluded. We may add that there is ablackjaguar in tropical America, just as there is ablackpanther in Asia. In neither case is it a different species: only a variety as regards colour. In all other respects the black and yellow kinds are alike. Even on the black ones the spots are observable in a certain light, being of a deeper hue than the general ground colour of the skin.Thus, then, it is easy to distinguish a cheetah from a jaguar, or either from a leopard or panther; but with regard to these last two, the distinction is more difficult. In fact, so much are they alike, that the two species are confounded even by naturalists; and it is yet an undecided point which is the leopard, and which the panther! That there are two distinct species is certain. The London furrier knows that there are two kinds of skins, which he distinguishes mainly by the feel; but the learned zoologist, Temminck, has pointed out a difference in the anatomical structure. Both animals are natives of Africa, and both were supposed to exist in Asia; but it is doubtful whether that known as the leopard extends beyond the limits of the African continent. The panther is that one which is a little heavier in the body, more cat-like in shape, and of a deeper yellow in the ground colour; but, perhaps, the truest distinction is found in the tail, which is longer in the panther than in the leopard, and consists of a greater number of vertebrae.The panther is a well-known animal in India and the Asiatic islands; and, as already stated, there is a dark-skinned variety, commonly known as the Black Panther of Java.Taking the cat family according to size, the next that deserves mention is the Couguar, or Puma. This is the panther of the Anglo-Americans, and the lion (leon) of the Mexicans and South Americans. His colour is a uniform tawny red, or calf colour; and he is inferior to the jaguar in size, strength, and courage. Notwithstanding, he is a formidable animal, and has been known to attack and destroy the larger mammalia. When wounded, or at bay, he will also defend himself against a human enemy; and there have been instances of hunters, both white and Indian, having succumbed to his strength. His range extends over nearly the whole continent of America; but he more particularly affects the deep shadow of the forests; and, like the jaguar, he is a tree-climber. He has no claim to the title of lion, except from some resemblance in colour; and no doubt it was this that led to his misnomer among the early settlers of Spanish America.The Ounce comes next. Of all the large cats this is the least known, either to naturalists or hunters. We only know that such a species exists; that it is a native of Western Asia (Persia, and perhaps Arabia); that it is an animal nearly as large as the leopard or panther, but of stouter build and clumsier shape; that it is covered with long woolly hair of a pale-yellow colour, and spotted, not so distinctly as the true leopards, from which it is easily distinguished, both by its form and colour. The name Ounce is from Buffon; but this specific appellation is also applied to the jaguar of America, the Jaguarundi, or lesser jaguar of Paraguay, and even to the Ocelot.TheRimau-dahanis one of the most beautiful species of cats. It is of a yellowish ground colour, not spotted like the leopard, but marked with broad black bands and patches; in other words, clouded. It is not so large as either of the species described. It is a tree-climber, and lies in wait for its prey in the forks of the lower limbs, where it also goes to sleep. From this habit it derives its name,Dalian; which, in the Sumatran language, signifies the fork of a tree.Not unlike theRimau-dahan, both in size and markings, is the Nepaul cat: a species, as its name imports, found in Nepaul, in the mountain forests.The Serval is a spotted cat—black upon a pale-yellowish ground—and considerably larger than the domestic species. It is a native of South Africa; and its skin is prized among the Kaffirs, for making their fur cloaks orkarosses.The Ocelot is about equal in size to the last-named, and equally prized for its beautiful skin, which is clouded with an admixture of spots and stripes upon a ground of yellowish-grey. It belongs to Spanish America—more especially Mexico: and it is said to have been this animal that is represented on the hieroglyphical paintings of the ancient Aztecs. More probably its nobler congener, the jaguar, which is also found in Mexico, is the animal that held this distinction in the land of Anahuac.In Central and South America there are a great many species of striped and spotted cats, known generally as tiger cats. The Ocelot is one of these; but there are also the Pampas cats, the Chati, the Jaguarundi, the Margay, the False Margay, and many others.Numerous species, too, exist in the forests of India; as also in the great tropical islands of Java, Sumatra, Borneo, and the Philippines.There is yet a section of the cat family to be described. These are the lynxes, or cats with short tails and long ears—the latter erect, and at the tips pointing inward, or towards each other.Of theLynxesthree species are found in North America. The largest of these is the Canada lynx, which in point of size approaches the smaller species of leopards. The colour of this animal is of a reddish grey, with spots very indistinctly marked. Its fur is long, and its skins form one of the principal articles of the Hudson’s Bay trade.The Canada lynx is not found so far south as the United States; but its place is there occupied by the Bay lynx—a smaller species, and one very similarly marked, except that the rufous tint on the back and sides of the latter is deeper, and the spots more pronounced.Still further south is a third species, only made known to naturalists within the last few years. It inhabits Texas, and is hence called the Texan lynx. It is of a darker red than either of the preceding; but in other respects—size, shape, and habits—it is almost identical with the Bay lynx. Both range to the Pacific.Of the lynxes of the Old World, there is the common or European lynx, which is still found in several European countries; the Caracal, a native of Africa and part of Asia; the Booted lynx, also indigenous to both continents; the Chaus, belonging to the country of the Mahrattas; the Kattlo, a large species, of Northern Europe; the Nubian lynx, of North Africa; and the Southern lynx, a native of Spain.It may be added that there is scarce one of these species of which there are not two or more varieties, known only to those who have made a study of the Kingdom of Nature.
The Lion is theking of cats; though there are some who think that the Tiger has a better claim to thethrone. In point of size and strength, there is not much difference between these two animals. The lionappearslarger, on account of his shaggy mane; but specimens of the tiger have been taken whose measurement was equal to that of the largest lion. Otherwise, the tiger is decidedly superior in courage, in address, and in beauty; in fact, the royal tiger is one of the most beautiful of animals; while the lion, notwithstanding the great fame he enjoys, is among the very ugliest of brutes.
These two powerful creatures often meet in the jungles of India, and try their strength in single combat. It is not decided which is superior in prowess, since victory is sometimes on one side and sometimes on the other. No doubt this depends on the individuals who may engage, for lions are not all alike, nor tigers neither. Both differ in strength and courage, just as men do; and this difference is caused by a variety of circumstances—such as age, size, season of the year, nature of the country and climate, and many like contingencies.
Remember that the lion is found both in Asia and Africa, and nowhere else. He inhabits the whole ofAfrica, from the Cape to the shores of the Mediterranean, and there are three well-marked varieties on that continent. In Asia he is only found in its southern part—that is, in the tropical and sub-tropical regions; and there are also two or three varieties of the Asiatic lion.
With regard to the tiger, he is altogether an Asiatic. There are no tigers in Europe, Africa, and America—of course we mean in their wild state; and the stories of tiger-hunts in Africa and America, frequently to be met with in books and newspapers, are the narratives of mere ignorant travellers, who confound the royal tiger with several species of spotted cats—of which we shall presently speak. We may add that the tiger, although exclusively Asiatic, is not exclusively tropical in his haunts. Tigers are more abundant in the hot jungles of India and some of the larger islands of the Indian Ocean than elsewhere; but they have also been observed far to the north of the Himalayan chain on the greatsteppesthat extend almost to the confines of Siberia.
To continue the monarchical analogy; there are four cats that may be called the princes of the family. These are theJaguar, theLeopard, thePanther, and theHunting-leopardorCheetah. The first of these is exclusively American; the other three, African and Asiatic. They are all four what are termed spotted cats; that is, having black markings on a buff or yellowish ground. I need not add that they are all beautiful creatures. A superficial observer would easily mistake the one for the other; and in common phrase, they are indifferently termed leopards, panthers, and even tigers; but the naturalist, and even thefurrierknows that they are four distinct species.
I shall endeavour to point out as briefly as possible some marks that will enableyouto distinguish them. In the spots we find a tolerably good criterion of the species. Those upon the body of the jaguar are not spots, but rather what may be termed rosettes. So, too, the black markings of the leopard and panther are rosettes; that is, irregular black rings enclosing an open space of the yellow ground. On the contrary, the spots upon the hunting-leopard are real spots, of a uniform black; and, consequently, this animal is easily distinguished from the other three. He differs from them also in shape. He is longer in the legs, stands more upright upon them, and can run more swiftly than any of the cat tribe. In fact, he has a tendency towards the nature and habits of the dog, and might be appropriately termed the cat-dog, or the dog-cat, whichever you please. It is on account of his canine qualities that he is sometimes trained to the chase: hence his specific name of the hunting-leopard. He inhabits both Asia and Africa.
But how are the jaguar, leopard, and panther to be distinguished from one another? The jaguar easily enough from the other two. His rosettes have a black point in the centre, which is wanting in the rings of the panther and leopard. Besides, the jaguar is a larger and more powerful animal. Humboldt and others have observed specimens of the jaguar nearly equal in dimensions to those of the royal tiger himself; and his feats of fierce prowess, in the forests of Spanish America, are scarce eclipsed by those of his congener in the jungles of India. Human beings are frequently his victims, and settlements have been abandoned on account of the dangerous proximity of the jaguars. His range in America is pretty nearly co-terminal with the Spanish territories—including, of course, Brazil and Guiana, and excluding the country of Patagonia, where a smaller species takes his place. In all these countries he is misnamed tiger (tigre)—hence the anomalous stories to which we have alluded. We may add that there is ablackjaguar in tropical America, just as there is ablackpanther in Asia. In neither case is it a different species: only a variety as regards colour. In all other respects the black and yellow kinds are alike. Even on the black ones the spots are observable in a certain light, being of a deeper hue than the general ground colour of the skin.
Thus, then, it is easy to distinguish a cheetah from a jaguar, or either from a leopard or panther; but with regard to these last two, the distinction is more difficult. In fact, so much are they alike, that the two species are confounded even by naturalists; and it is yet an undecided point which is the leopard, and which the panther! That there are two distinct species is certain. The London furrier knows that there are two kinds of skins, which he distinguishes mainly by the feel; but the learned zoologist, Temminck, has pointed out a difference in the anatomical structure. Both animals are natives of Africa, and both were supposed to exist in Asia; but it is doubtful whether that known as the leopard extends beyond the limits of the African continent. The panther is that one which is a little heavier in the body, more cat-like in shape, and of a deeper yellow in the ground colour; but, perhaps, the truest distinction is found in the tail, which is longer in the panther than in the leopard, and consists of a greater number of vertebrae.
The panther is a well-known animal in India and the Asiatic islands; and, as already stated, there is a dark-skinned variety, commonly known as the Black Panther of Java.
Taking the cat family according to size, the next that deserves mention is the Couguar, or Puma. This is the panther of the Anglo-Americans, and the lion (leon) of the Mexicans and South Americans. His colour is a uniform tawny red, or calf colour; and he is inferior to the jaguar in size, strength, and courage. Notwithstanding, he is a formidable animal, and has been known to attack and destroy the larger mammalia. When wounded, or at bay, he will also defend himself against a human enemy; and there have been instances of hunters, both white and Indian, having succumbed to his strength. His range extends over nearly the whole continent of America; but he more particularly affects the deep shadow of the forests; and, like the jaguar, he is a tree-climber. He has no claim to the title of lion, except from some resemblance in colour; and no doubt it was this that led to his misnomer among the early settlers of Spanish America.
The Ounce comes next. Of all the large cats this is the least known, either to naturalists or hunters. We only know that such a species exists; that it is a native of Western Asia (Persia, and perhaps Arabia); that it is an animal nearly as large as the leopard or panther, but of stouter build and clumsier shape; that it is covered with long woolly hair of a pale-yellow colour, and spotted, not so distinctly as the true leopards, from which it is easily distinguished, both by its form and colour. The name Ounce is from Buffon; but this specific appellation is also applied to the jaguar of America, the Jaguarundi, or lesser jaguar of Paraguay, and even to the Ocelot.
TheRimau-dahanis one of the most beautiful species of cats. It is of a yellowish ground colour, not spotted like the leopard, but marked with broad black bands and patches; in other words, clouded. It is not so large as either of the species described. It is a tree-climber, and lies in wait for its prey in the forks of the lower limbs, where it also goes to sleep. From this habit it derives its name,Dalian; which, in the Sumatran language, signifies the fork of a tree.
Not unlike theRimau-dahan, both in size and markings, is the Nepaul cat: a species, as its name imports, found in Nepaul, in the mountain forests.
The Serval is a spotted cat—black upon a pale-yellowish ground—and considerably larger than the domestic species. It is a native of South Africa; and its skin is prized among the Kaffirs, for making their fur cloaks orkarosses.
The Ocelot is about equal in size to the last-named, and equally prized for its beautiful skin, which is clouded with an admixture of spots and stripes upon a ground of yellowish-grey. It belongs to Spanish America—more especially Mexico: and it is said to have been this animal that is represented on the hieroglyphical paintings of the ancient Aztecs. More probably its nobler congener, the jaguar, which is also found in Mexico, is the animal that held this distinction in the land of Anahuac.
In Central and South America there are a great many species of striped and spotted cats, known generally as tiger cats. The Ocelot is one of these; but there are also the Pampas cats, the Chati, the Jaguarundi, the Margay, the False Margay, and many others.
Numerous species, too, exist in the forests of India; as also in the great tropical islands of Java, Sumatra, Borneo, and the Philippines.
There is yet a section of the cat family to be described. These are the lynxes, or cats with short tails and long ears—the latter erect, and at the tips pointing inward, or towards each other.
Of theLynxesthree species are found in North America. The largest of these is the Canada lynx, which in point of size approaches the smaller species of leopards. The colour of this animal is of a reddish grey, with spots very indistinctly marked. Its fur is long, and its skins form one of the principal articles of the Hudson’s Bay trade.
The Canada lynx is not found so far south as the United States; but its place is there occupied by the Bay lynx—a smaller species, and one very similarly marked, except that the rufous tint on the back and sides of the latter is deeper, and the spots more pronounced.
Still further south is a third species, only made known to naturalists within the last few years. It inhabits Texas, and is hence called the Texan lynx. It is of a darker red than either of the preceding; but in other respects—size, shape, and habits—it is almost identical with the Bay lynx. Both range to the Pacific.
Of the lynxes of the Old World, there is the common or European lynx, which is still found in several European countries; the Caracal, a native of Africa and part of Asia; the Booted lynx, also indigenous to both continents; the Chaus, belonging to the country of the Mahrattas; the Kattlo, a large species, of Northern Europe; the Nubian lynx, of North Africa; and the Southern lynx, a native of Spain.
It may be added that there is scarce one of these species of which there are not two or more varieties, known only to those who have made a study of the Kingdom of Nature.
Chapter Nine.Rats and other Rodents.In this group we include not only Rats, but a great many other small rodents, or gnawers, such as Mice, Marmots, Lemmings, Hamsters, Mole-Rats, Jerboas, and Jumping Mice. The Shrew-Mice and Moles may also be classed here—although naturalists separate them from rodents, because their food is not herbivorous, but consists of worms and insects. For all that, there is a certain general resemblance, both as to appearance and habits, among all these small quadrupeds; which, for purposes of classification, is, perhaps, of more value than mere difference of food, or tubercles upon the teeth; especially, as it can be proved, that the sort of food an animal eats, is often dependent on the circumstances in which it may be placed.Of theRats, properly so called, there are numerous species, as well as varieties. Their size is, in general, about the same as the Black and Norway rats—both of which belong to England, and have been introduced, by means of ships, into every country upon the habitable globe. They are said to have come originally from Asia. There is one species of rat, however, that is much larger than either of these—the Gigantic rat, found in Indian countries, and which in size quite equals a rabbit!The habits of the rats are too well-known to require description. Some—as the Wood Rat and Florida Rat of America—dwell apart from the habitations of man, in the woods; where, instead of living in burrows, they construct large nests, by collecting together heaps of sticks, leaves, and grass.Micemay be regarded as only a smaller kind of rats; and of these there are many distinct species—both in the Old and New Worlds.TheMarmotsare, perhaps, the most interesting of the small rodents. They stand in a sort of connection with the squirrels, more especially the ground squirrels: on the other hand, they resemble rabbits; and they have still many points of identity with rats. They belong to the northern zones of Europe, Asia, and America. There are three or four species belonging to the Old World; and a great many to North America. Moreover there is a considerable difference in the habits of these species, which has led zoologists to separate them into several genera. One genus, called the Seed-eaters, is a very curious kind. The marmots of this genus have a pair of pockets or pouches—one on the outside of each cheek—in which they actually carry seeds and other articles of food to their burrows. These pouches, when filled, impart to the little creatures a most ludicrous appearance.The marmots usually live in large communities—in burrows, as rabbits do. These burrows are sometimes very extensive—especially so, in the case of the prairie marmot of America—better known as the Prairie Dog—whosevillagessometimes cover an extent of many square miles; and whose odd social habits have been repeatedly and accurately described by late travellers who have crossed the American continent.TheMole-ratsare a sort of combination between moles and rats: hence their common name. One species is found in Eastern Russia; where it burrows much after the fashion of the mole—living principally upon roots. Two other kinds belong to South Africa. Both these are of large size, nearly as big as rabbits. On the plains, they make extensive excavations, which often prove dangerous to the horse and his rider—causing the former to stumble. The Dutch of the Cape know them by the name of Sand Moles.TheHamstersdiffer considerably from the marmots in their mode of burrowing. They make their underground dwellings very extensive—having a great many chambers and galleries. In these they collect vast stores of food—consisting of grain, peas, and seeds of various kinds. Sometimes two or three bushels of provision will be found in the storehouse of a single family. The hamsters do not confine themselves exclusively to a vegetable diet: since it is known that they will kill and eat birds, or even small quadrupeds. In this respect they resemble the common rats; and, therefore, it is idle to talk of mereherbivorousgenera of animals. The hamsters are very fierce little creatures: constantly fighting with other quadrupeds, and even among themselves; but the polecat is their master and tyrant, and carries on a war of extermination against them—following them through the intricate ways of their burrows, and destroying them even in their dens!There are several species of hamsters in Europe and Asia, and also in North America: for the animal known as the Canada Pouched Rat is of this kind, and so also is the Tucan of Mexico. So also is that very singular and beautiful creature, the Chinchilla of South America—so celebrated for its soft and valuable fur.TheLemmingsare another form of small rodent animals, celebrated for their extraordinary migratory habit; which resembles that of the grey squirrels of North America. There are several species of lemmings belonging to the northern section of the Old Continent—in Eastern Russia and Asia. One or two are found in North America—in that part of it known as the Hudson’s Bay Territory.TheSpinous Ratsare little animals much resembling ordinary rats; but with the peculiarity of having stiff spines growing among their hair, after the manner of porcupine quills. There are several species of them: all natives of tropical America.TheJerboasare, perhaps, the most singular of all the rodents. They are noted for having the hind legs much longer than the fore ones—in fact, being shaped very much like the kangaroos—of which they might be termed Lilliputian varieties, were it not that they lack the pouch, which distinguishes these curious creatures. Like the kangaroos, they use their fore-feet only to rest upon. When in motion, or desirous of passing quickly over the ground, they make use of their hind-feet only: proceeding by long leaps or jumps, and sometimes springing to the distance of twelve or fifteen feet. Their tails being long and slender, were supposednotto assist them in this operation; but an experiment made by a cruel Frenchman—that of cutting off these appendages—proved that a considerable portion of the jumping power is derived from the tail.Africa and Asia are the head-quarters of these quadrupeds—the most noted species being the Jerboas of Egypt, and the Leaping Hare of the Cape. They dwell in sandy deserts—burrowing in communities like the marmots. In America there are no true jerboas: they are there represented by the Jumping Mice of Labrador and the Hudson’s Bay Territory; which resemble the jerboas in almost everything except size, the jumping mice being much smaller animals.Field MiceandDormiceare other kinds of small rodents, differing from the common kind of mouse; but the habits and appearance of these little quadrupeds are well-known.TheBeaverandMusk-rat, orMusquashof America, are usually classed among the rat tribe; but these animals, for many reasons, deserve to stand apart and form a group of themselves. With regard to the shrew-mice and moles, there is less reason for separating them from other mice; and we shall speak of them in this connection.TheMolesare known to be the best burrowers in the world: since they can pass under the surface of the ground as fast as a man can dig after them, or even faster. In England, the common mole is well-known—too well, in fact—for it is the very pest of the farmer; and the damage done by it to the herbage is very considerable indeed—of greater amount than that occasioned by any other wild animal.In America, where there are several species of moles, their habits are similar; and the common American mole is very like its European congener in every respect. But there are two or three species found in North American countries very different from either; and the most singular of all is that known as the Star-nosed Mole. This creature has the cartilage of the snout extended into five or six branches, that radiate from each other, like spokes of a wheel, or the points of a star—hence the name of star-nosed mole. The use of this singular appendage is not clearly understood; and, indeed, it would appear to be an obstruction to the natural requirements of the animal. No doubt, however, it has its purpose—though that purpose be unknown to us.TheShrew-Miceare still another kind of small ratlike quadrupeds. They are distinguished by having upon each flank, under the ordinary skin, a little band of stiff and close hairs, from which an odoriferous humour is distilled. They dig holes in the earth, which they seldom come out of until towards evening; and their food consists of insects and worms. A species that inhabits the Pyrenees, and also the mountains of Russia, are called Desmans, and differ somewhat from the ordinary shrew-mice. They are aquatic in their habits; and their burrows always enter the ground below the level of the water. The Russian species are usually termed Musk-rats; but these are not to be confounded with the musk-rats of America—which last should undoubtedly be classed with the beavers.In India, the shrew-mice attain to the size of ordinary rats, and are there also called musk-rats, from the fact that a strong odour of musk is exhaled by them—so strong as to make the place through which the animal passes exceedingly disagreeable. The same is true of the Russian musk-rats, but for all that their skins are employed in chests containing clothing: since the musky smell is a good preservative against the moths.In addition to the numerous rat animals above-mentioned, there are still other kinds in different parts of the world—the names of which would alone fill many pages. Hence it is that the study of this section of the mammalia is, perhaps, the most difficult of all; and a true classification of these small quadrupeds has hitherto proved a puzzle to the most expert zoologists.
In this group we include not only Rats, but a great many other small rodents, or gnawers, such as Mice, Marmots, Lemmings, Hamsters, Mole-Rats, Jerboas, and Jumping Mice. The Shrew-Mice and Moles may also be classed here—although naturalists separate them from rodents, because their food is not herbivorous, but consists of worms and insects. For all that, there is a certain general resemblance, both as to appearance and habits, among all these small quadrupeds; which, for purposes of classification, is, perhaps, of more value than mere difference of food, or tubercles upon the teeth; especially, as it can be proved, that the sort of food an animal eats, is often dependent on the circumstances in which it may be placed.
Of theRats, properly so called, there are numerous species, as well as varieties. Their size is, in general, about the same as the Black and Norway rats—both of which belong to England, and have been introduced, by means of ships, into every country upon the habitable globe. They are said to have come originally from Asia. There is one species of rat, however, that is much larger than either of these—the Gigantic rat, found in Indian countries, and which in size quite equals a rabbit!
The habits of the rats are too well-known to require description. Some—as the Wood Rat and Florida Rat of America—dwell apart from the habitations of man, in the woods; where, instead of living in burrows, they construct large nests, by collecting together heaps of sticks, leaves, and grass.
Micemay be regarded as only a smaller kind of rats; and of these there are many distinct species—both in the Old and New Worlds.
TheMarmotsare, perhaps, the most interesting of the small rodents. They stand in a sort of connection with the squirrels, more especially the ground squirrels: on the other hand, they resemble rabbits; and they have still many points of identity with rats. They belong to the northern zones of Europe, Asia, and America. There are three or four species belonging to the Old World; and a great many to North America. Moreover there is a considerable difference in the habits of these species, which has led zoologists to separate them into several genera. One genus, called the Seed-eaters, is a very curious kind. The marmots of this genus have a pair of pockets or pouches—one on the outside of each cheek—in which they actually carry seeds and other articles of food to their burrows. These pouches, when filled, impart to the little creatures a most ludicrous appearance.
The marmots usually live in large communities—in burrows, as rabbits do. These burrows are sometimes very extensive—especially so, in the case of the prairie marmot of America—better known as the Prairie Dog—whosevillagessometimes cover an extent of many square miles; and whose odd social habits have been repeatedly and accurately described by late travellers who have crossed the American continent.
TheMole-ratsare a sort of combination between moles and rats: hence their common name. One species is found in Eastern Russia; where it burrows much after the fashion of the mole—living principally upon roots. Two other kinds belong to South Africa. Both these are of large size, nearly as big as rabbits. On the plains, they make extensive excavations, which often prove dangerous to the horse and his rider—causing the former to stumble. The Dutch of the Cape know them by the name of Sand Moles.
TheHamstersdiffer considerably from the marmots in their mode of burrowing. They make their underground dwellings very extensive—having a great many chambers and galleries. In these they collect vast stores of food—consisting of grain, peas, and seeds of various kinds. Sometimes two or three bushels of provision will be found in the storehouse of a single family. The hamsters do not confine themselves exclusively to a vegetable diet: since it is known that they will kill and eat birds, or even small quadrupeds. In this respect they resemble the common rats; and, therefore, it is idle to talk of mereherbivorousgenera of animals. The hamsters are very fierce little creatures: constantly fighting with other quadrupeds, and even among themselves; but the polecat is their master and tyrant, and carries on a war of extermination against them—following them through the intricate ways of their burrows, and destroying them even in their dens!
There are several species of hamsters in Europe and Asia, and also in North America: for the animal known as the Canada Pouched Rat is of this kind, and so also is the Tucan of Mexico. So also is that very singular and beautiful creature, the Chinchilla of South America—so celebrated for its soft and valuable fur.
TheLemmingsare another form of small rodent animals, celebrated for their extraordinary migratory habit; which resembles that of the grey squirrels of North America. There are several species of lemmings belonging to the northern section of the Old Continent—in Eastern Russia and Asia. One or two are found in North America—in that part of it known as the Hudson’s Bay Territory.
TheSpinous Ratsare little animals much resembling ordinary rats; but with the peculiarity of having stiff spines growing among their hair, after the manner of porcupine quills. There are several species of them: all natives of tropical America.
TheJerboasare, perhaps, the most singular of all the rodents. They are noted for having the hind legs much longer than the fore ones—in fact, being shaped very much like the kangaroos—of which they might be termed Lilliputian varieties, were it not that they lack the pouch, which distinguishes these curious creatures. Like the kangaroos, they use their fore-feet only to rest upon. When in motion, or desirous of passing quickly over the ground, they make use of their hind-feet only: proceeding by long leaps or jumps, and sometimes springing to the distance of twelve or fifteen feet. Their tails being long and slender, were supposednotto assist them in this operation; but an experiment made by a cruel Frenchman—that of cutting off these appendages—proved that a considerable portion of the jumping power is derived from the tail.
Africa and Asia are the head-quarters of these quadrupeds—the most noted species being the Jerboas of Egypt, and the Leaping Hare of the Cape. They dwell in sandy deserts—burrowing in communities like the marmots. In America there are no true jerboas: they are there represented by the Jumping Mice of Labrador and the Hudson’s Bay Territory; which resemble the jerboas in almost everything except size, the jumping mice being much smaller animals.
Field MiceandDormiceare other kinds of small rodents, differing from the common kind of mouse; but the habits and appearance of these little quadrupeds are well-known.
TheBeaverandMusk-rat, orMusquashof America, are usually classed among the rat tribe; but these animals, for many reasons, deserve to stand apart and form a group of themselves. With regard to the shrew-mice and moles, there is less reason for separating them from other mice; and we shall speak of them in this connection.
TheMolesare known to be the best burrowers in the world: since they can pass under the surface of the ground as fast as a man can dig after them, or even faster. In England, the common mole is well-known—too well, in fact—for it is the very pest of the farmer; and the damage done by it to the herbage is very considerable indeed—of greater amount than that occasioned by any other wild animal.
In America, where there are several species of moles, their habits are similar; and the common American mole is very like its European congener in every respect. But there are two or three species found in North American countries very different from either; and the most singular of all is that known as the Star-nosed Mole. This creature has the cartilage of the snout extended into five or six branches, that radiate from each other, like spokes of a wheel, or the points of a star—hence the name of star-nosed mole. The use of this singular appendage is not clearly understood; and, indeed, it would appear to be an obstruction to the natural requirements of the animal. No doubt, however, it has its purpose—though that purpose be unknown to us.
TheShrew-Miceare still another kind of small ratlike quadrupeds. They are distinguished by having upon each flank, under the ordinary skin, a little band of stiff and close hairs, from which an odoriferous humour is distilled. They dig holes in the earth, which they seldom come out of until towards evening; and their food consists of insects and worms. A species that inhabits the Pyrenees, and also the mountains of Russia, are called Desmans, and differ somewhat from the ordinary shrew-mice. They are aquatic in their habits; and their burrows always enter the ground below the level of the water. The Russian species are usually termed Musk-rats; but these are not to be confounded with the musk-rats of America—which last should undoubtedly be classed with the beavers.
In India, the shrew-mice attain to the size of ordinary rats, and are there also called musk-rats, from the fact that a strong odour of musk is exhaled by them—so strong as to make the place through which the animal passes exceedingly disagreeable. The same is true of the Russian musk-rats, but for all that their skins are employed in chests containing clothing: since the musky smell is a good preservative against the moths.
In addition to the numerous rat animals above-mentioned, there are still other kinds in different parts of the world—the names of which would alone fill many pages. Hence it is that the study of this section of the mammalia is, perhaps, the most difficult of all; and a true classification of these small quadrupeds has hitherto proved a puzzle to the most expert zoologists.
Chapter Ten.Beavers.Of true Beavers there is only one species—unless the beaver of the Old World be different from the well-known animal of the American continent. This is a question which has been much debated among naturalists; and certainly the difference which is known to exist between the habits of the two animals would seem to prove them distinct. The European beaver is generally supposed to lead a solitary life—burrowing in the banks of rivers as otters do; but this supposition is evidently erroneous: or, rather, we should say, its solitary habit is not its normal or original condition, but has been produced by circumstances. It is probable that if European beavers were left to themselves, in a situation remote from the presence of man, they would build dams, and dwell together in colonies, just as the American beavers do. In fact, such colonies have actually existed in some parts of Europe and Asia; and no doubt exist at the present hour. One has even been found on the small river Nutha, in a lonely canton of the Magdeburg district, near the Elbe. Moreover, it is well-known that the American beavers, when much hunted and persecuted (as they are certain to be whenever the settlements approach their territory) forsake their gregarious habit; and betake themselves to the “solitary system;” just as their European cousins have done. Did this constitute the only difference between the beavers of the Old and New Worlds, we might regard them as one and the same; but there are other and still more important points of distinction—reaching even to their anatomical structure—which seem to prove them distinct species. The probability is in favour of this view: since there is perhaps no indigenous quadruped of the one continent exactly identical with its synonymous species of the other; excepting the polar bears, and a few other kinds—whose arctic range leads them, as it were, all round the earth. The written natural history of the beaver is usually that of the American species; not that this differs materially from his European congener, but simply because it has been more extensively and accurately observed. Its valuable fur has long rendered it an object of the chase; and for fifty years it has been huntedà l’outrance, and, in fact, exterminated from a wide domain of more than a million of square miles. Formerly, its range extended from the Gulf of Mexico almost to the shores of the Arctic Sea, and latitudinally from ocean to ocean. At present, it is not found in the territory of the United States proper, except in remote and solitary situations, among the mountains, or in some tracts still unsettled. Even where found in these places, its mode of life approximates more to that of the European species; that is, it burrows instead of builds. The beaver has been long reputed as the most sagacious of quadrupeds. True it is, that the capacity of cutting down trees—often a foot or more in diameter—floating or rafting these trees down a stream, and constructing a dam with them, and afterwards building its singular houses or lodges in the water, would seem to indicate the presence of a rational power. But there are many other creatures—birds, insects, and quadrupeds—that exhibit instincts quite as surprising.Nevertheless the habits of the beaver are curious in the extreme, and deserve to be given in detail. The best account of them is that of the old and truthful traveller Hearne: upon whose homely but accurate observations scores of fireside naturalists have established a measure of their fame. We shall leavehimto tell the story of these singular animals.“The beavers,” he says, “being so plentiful, the attention of my companions was chiefly engaged on them, as they not only furnished delicious food, but their skins proved a valuable acquisition,—being a principal article of trade, as well as a serviceable one for clothing. The situation of the beaver-houses are various. Where the beavers are numerous, they are found to inhabit lakes, ponds, and rivers, as well as those narrow creeks which connect the numerous lakes with which this country abounds; but the two latter are generally chosen by them when the depth of water and other circumstances are suitable, as they have then the advantage of a current to convey wood and other necessaries to their habitations; and because, in general, they are more difficult to be taken than those that build in standing water. They always choose those parts that have such a depth of water as will resist the frost in winter, and prevent it from freezing to the bottom. The beavers that build their houses in small rivers or creeks, in which water is liable to be drained off when the back supplies are dried up by the frost, are wonderfully taught by instinct to provide against that evil by making a dam quite across the river, at a convenient distance from their houses. The beaver-dams differ in shape, according to the nature of the place in which they are built. If the water in the river or creek have but little motion, the dam is almost straight; but when the current is more rapid, it is always made with a considerable curve, convex towards the stream. The materials made use of are drift-wood, green willows, birch, and poplars if they can be got; also mud and stones, intermixed in such a manner as must evidently contribute to the strength of the dam; but there is no other order or method observed in the dams, except that of the work being carried on with a regular sweep, and all the parts being made of equal strength. In places which have been long frequented by beavers undisturbed, their dams, by frequent repairing, become a solid bank, capable of resisting a great force both of water and ice; and as the willow, poplar, and birch generally take root and shoot up, they by degrees form a regular planted hedge, which I have seen in some places so tall, that birds have built their nests among the branches.“The beaver-houses are built of the same materials as their dams, and are always proportioned in size to the number of inhabitants, which seldom exceeds four old and six to eight young ones; though, by chance, I have seen above double the number. Instead of order or regulation being observed in rearing their houses, they are of a much ruder structure than their dams; for, notwithstanding the sagacity of these animals, it has never been observed that they aim at any other convenience in their houses than to have a dry place to lie on; and there they usually eat their victuals, which they occasionally take out of the water. It frequently happens that some of the large houses are found to have one or more partitions (if they deserve that appellation), but it is no more than a part of the main building left by the sagacity of the beaver to support the roof. On such occasions it is common for these different apartments, as some are pleased to call them, to have no communication with each other but by water; so that, in fact, they may be called double or treble houses, rather than different apartments of the same house. I have seen a large beaver-house built in a small island that had near a dozen apartments under one roof; and, two or three of these only excepted, none of them had any communication with each other but by water. As there were beavers enough to inhabit each apartment, it is more than probable that each family knew their own, and always entered at their own door, without any further connection with their neighbours than a friendly intercourse, and to join their united labours in erecting their separate habitations, and building their dams where required. Travellers who assert that the beavers have two doors to their houses—one on the land side, and the other next the water—seem to be less acquainted with these animals than others who assign them an elegant suite of apartments. Such a construction would render their houses of no use, either to protect them from their enemies, or guard them against the extreme cold of winter.“So far are the beavers from driving stakes into the ground when building their houses, that they lay most of the wood crosswise, and nearly horizontal, and without any other variation than that of leaving a hollow or cavity in the middle. When any unnecessary branches project inward they cut them off with their teeth, and throw them in among the rest, to prevent the mud from falling through the roof. It is a mistaken notion that the woodwork is first completed and then plastered; for the whole of their houses, as well as their dams, are, from the foundation, one mass of mud and wood, mixed with stones, if they can be procured. The mud is always taken from the edge of the bank, or the bottom of the creek or pond near the door of the house; and though their fore-paws are so small, yet it is held close up between them under their throat: thus they carry both mud and stones, while they always drag the wood with their teeth. All their work is executed in the night, and they are so expeditious, that in the course of one night I have known them to have collected as much as amounted to some thousands of their little handfuls. It is a great piece of policy in these animals to cover the outside of their houses every fall with fresh mud, and as late as possible in the autumn, even when the frost becomes pretty severe, as by this means it soon freezes as hard as a stone, and prevents their common enemy, the wolverene, from disturbing them during the winter; and as they are frequently seen to walk over their work, and sometimes to give a flap with their tail, particularly when plunging into the water, this has, without doubt, given rise to the vulgar opinion that they use their tails as a trowel, with which they plaster their houses; whereas that flapping of the tail is no more than a custom which they always preserve, even when they become tame and domestic, and more particularly so when they are startled.“Their food consists of a large root, something resembling a cabbage-stalk, which grows at the bottom of the lakes and rivers. They also eat the bark of trees, particularly those of the poplar, birch, and willow; but the ice preventing them from getting to the land in the winter, they have not any bark to feed on in that season, except that of such sticks as they cut down in summer, and throw into the water opposite the doors of their houses; and as they generally eat a great deal, the roots above-mentioned constitute a principal part of their food during the winter. In summer they vary their diet by eating various kinds of herbage, and such berries as grow near their haunts during that season. When the ice breaks up in the spring the beavers always leave their houses, and rove about until a little before the fall of the leaf, when they return again to their old habitations, and lay in their winter-stock of wood. They seldom begin to repair their houses till the frost commences, and never finish the outer coat till the cold is pretty severe, as has been already mentioned. When they erect a new habitation they begin felling the wood early in the summer, but seldom begin to build until the middle or latter end of August, and never complete it till the cold weather be set in.“Persons who attempt to take beavers in winter should be thoroughly acquainted with their manner of life; otherwise they will have endless trouble to effect their purpose, because they have always a number of holes in the banks, which serve them as places of retreat when any injury is offered to their houses, and in general it is in those holes that they are taken. When the beavers which are situated in a small river or creek are to be taken, the Indians sometimes find it necessary to stake the river across to prevent them from passing; after which they endeavour to find out all their holes or places of retreat in the bank. This requires much practice and experience to accomplish, and is performed in the following manner:—Every man being furnished with an ice-chisel, lashes it to the end of a small staff about four to five feet long; he then walks along the edge of the banks, and keeps knocking his chisel against the ice. Those who are acquainted with that kind of work well know by the sound of the ice when they are opposite to any of the beavers’ holes or vaults. As soon as they suspect any, they cut a hole through the ice big enough to admit an old beaver; and in this manner proceed till they have found out all their places of retreat, or at least as many of them as possible. While the principal men are thus employed, some of the under-strappers and the women are busy in breaking open the house—which at times is no easy task, for I have frequently known these houses to be five or six feet thick; and one, in particular, was more than eight feet thick in the crown. When the beavers find that their habitations are invaded, they fly to their holes in the banks for shelter; and on being perceived by the Indians, which is easily done, by attending to the motion of the water, they block up the entrance with stakes of wood, and then haul the beaver out of its hole, either by hand, if they can reach it, or with a large hook made for that purpose, which is fastened to the end of a long stick. The beaver is an animal which cannot keep long under at a time; so that when their houses are broken open, and all their places of retreat discovered, they have but one choice left, as it may be called—either to be taken in their house or their vaults; in general they prefer the latter; for where there is one beaver caught in the house, many thousands are taken in the vaults in the banks. Sometimes they are caught in nets, and, in summer, very frequently in traps.“In respect to the beavers dunging in their houses, as some persons assert, it is quite wrong, as they always plunge into water to do it. I am the better enabled to make this assertion, from having kept several of them till they became so domesticated as to answer to their name, and follow those to whom they were accustomed in the same manner as a dog would do; and they were as much pleased at being fondled as any animal I ever saw. In cold weather they were kept in my own sitting-room, where they were the constant companions of the Indian women and children; and were so fond of their company, that when the Indians were absent for any considerable time, the beavers discovered great signs of uneasiness, and on their return showed equal marks of pleasure, by fondling on them, crawling into their laps, lying on their backs, sitting erect like a squirrel, and behaving like children who see their parents but seldom. In general, during the winter, they lived on the same food as the women did; and were immoderately fond of rice and plum-pudding; they would eat partridges and fresh venison very freely; but I never tried them with fish, though I have heard they will at times prey on them. In fact, there are few graminivorous animals that may not be brought to be carnivorous.”TheMusquash, orMusk-rat, is undoubtedly a beaver, and has been called at times the Little Beaver; but it has pleased the naturalists to constitute it a genus of itself, though there is only the one species known. Its habits are extremely like those of the beaver: it is aquatic, or amphibious, if you please—building itself a conical house in the midst of a swamp, or low islet, and feeding on shoots of trees, bits of green wood, leaves and stalks of nettles, and other herbaceous plants. Its fur bears a very great resemblance to that of the beaver, only it is shorter, and therefore less valuable. Notwithstanding this, it is an article of extensive commerce; and upwards of a million skins have been imported into England in a single year. The musquash might also be exterminated like the beaver; but being a smaller creature, and therefore less persecuted by the amateur sportsman, it is still common enough upon the streams of the northern and middle States of America. Further north it is plentiful; and the Hudson’s Bay Company procure a vast number of skins for annual exportation to Europe. Its name of musk-rat is derived from the scent of musk which the animal emits, and which is especially powerful during the season of rut.It is possible that the musk-rat of Siberia, as well as several species of water-rats belonging to South America—and known vaguely by the name of Lutras and Nutrias—may be animals of the beaver kind, rather than Water-Rats or Otters, among which they are generally classed.
Of true Beavers there is only one species—unless the beaver of the Old World be different from the well-known animal of the American continent. This is a question which has been much debated among naturalists; and certainly the difference which is known to exist between the habits of the two animals would seem to prove them distinct. The European beaver is generally supposed to lead a solitary life—burrowing in the banks of rivers as otters do; but this supposition is evidently erroneous: or, rather, we should say, its solitary habit is not its normal or original condition, but has been produced by circumstances. It is probable that if European beavers were left to themselves, in a situation remote from the presence of man, they would build dams, and dwell together in colonies, just as the American beavers do. In fact, such colonies have actually existed in some parts of Europe and Asia; and no doubt exist at the present hour. One has even been found on the small river Nutha, in a lonely canton of the Magdeburg district, near the Elbe. Moreover, it is well-known that the American beavers, when much hunted and persecuted (as they are certain to be whenever the settlements approach their territory) forsake their gregarious habit; and betake themselves to the “solitary system;” just as their European cousins have done. Did this constitute the only difference between the beavers of the Old and New Worlds, we might regard them as one and the same; but there are other and still more important points of distinction—reaching even to their anatomical structure—which seem to prove them distinct species. The probability is in favour of this view: since there is perhaps no indigenous quadruped of the one continent exactly identical with its synonymous species of the other; excepting the polar bears, and a few other kinds—whose arctic range leads them, as it were, all round the earth. The written natural history of the beaver is usually that of the American species; not that this differs materially from his European congener, but simply because it has been more extensively and accurately observed. Its valuable fur has long rendered it an object of the chase; and for fifty years it has been huntedà l’outrance, and, in fact, exterminated from a wide domain of more than a million of square miles. Formerly, its range extended from the Gulf of Mexico almost to the shores of the Arctic Sea, and latitudinally from ocean to ocean. At present, it is not found in the territory of the United States proper, except in remote and solitary situations, among the mountains, or in some tracts still unsettled. Even where found in these places, its mode of life approximates more to that of the European species; that is, it burrows instead of builds. The beaver has been long reputed as the most sagacious of quadrupeds. True it is, that the capacity of cutting down trees—often a foot or more in diameter—floating or rafting these trees down a stream, and constructing a dam with them, and afterwards building its singular houses or lodges in the water, would seem to indicate the presence of a rational power. But there are many other creatures—birds, insects, and quadrupeds—that exhibit instincts quite as surprising.
Nevertheless the habits of the beaver are curious in the extreme, and deserve to be given in detail. The best account of them is that of the old and truthful traveller Hearne: upon whose homely but accurate observations scores of fireside naturalists have established a measure of their fame. We shall leavehimto tell the story of these singular animals.
“The beavers,” he says, “being so plentiful, the attention of my companions was chiefly engaged on them, as they not only furnished delicious food, but their skins proved a valuable acquisition,—being a principal article of trade, as well as a serviceable one for clothing. The situation of the beaver-houses are various. Where the beavers are numerous, they are found to inhabit lakes, ponds, and rivers, as well as those narrow creeks which connect the numerous lakes with which this country abounds; but the two latter are generally chosen by them when the depth of water and other circumstances are suitable, as they have then the advantage of a current to convey wood and other necessaries to their habitations; and because, in general, they are more difficult to be taken than those that build in standing water. They always choose those parts that have such a depth of water as will resist the frost in winter, and prevent it from freezing to the bottom. The beavers that build their houses in small rivers or creeks, in which water is liable to be drained off when the back supplies are dried up by the frost, are wonderfully taught by instinct to provide against that evil by making a dam quite across the river, at a convenient distance from their houses. The beaver-dams differ in shape, according to the nature of the place in which they are built. If the water in the river or creek have but little motion, the dam is almost straight; but when the current is more rapid, it is always made with a considerable curve, convex towards the stream. The materials made use of are drift-wood, green willows, birch, and poplars if they can be got; also mud and stones, intermixed in such a manner as must evidently contribute to the strength of the dam; but there is no other order or method observed in the dams, except that of the work being carried on with a regular sweep, and all the parts being made of equal strength. In places which have been long frequented by beavers undisturbed, their dams, by frequent repairing, become a solid bank, capable of resisting a great force both of water and ice; and as the willow, poplar, and birch generally take root and shoot up, they by degrees form a regular planted hedge, which I have seen in some places so tall, that birds have built their nests among the branches.
“The beaver-houses are built of the same materials as their dams, and are always proportioned in size to the number of inhabitants, which seldom exceeds four old and six to eight young ones; though, by chance, I have seen above double the number. Instead of order or regulation being observed in rearing their houses, they are of a much ruder structure than their dams; for, notwithstanding the sagacity of these animals, it has never been observed that they aim at any other convenience in their houses than to have a dry place to lie on; and there they usually eat their victuals, which they occasionally take out of the water. It frequently happens that some of the large houses are found to have one or more partitions (if they deserve that appellation), but it is no more than a part of the main building left by the sagacity of the beaver to support the roof. On such occasions it is common for these different apartments, as some are pleased to call them, to have no communication with each other but by water; so that, in fact, they may be called double or treble houses, rather than different apartments of the same house. I have seen a large beaver-house built in a small island that had near a dozen apartments under one roof; and, two or three of these only excepted, none of them had any communication with each other but by water. As there were beavers enough to inhabit each apartment, it is more than probable that each family knew their own, and always entered at their own door, without any further connection with their neighbours than a friendly intercourse, and to join their united labours in erecting their separate habitations, and building their dams where required. Travellers who assert that the beavers have two doors to their houses—one on the land side, and the other next the water—seem to be less acquainted with these animals than others who assign them an elegant suite of apartments. Such a construction would render their houses of no use, either to protect them from their enemies, or guard them against the extreme cold of winter.
“So far are the beavers from driving stakes into the ground when building their houses, that they lay most of the wood crosswise, and nearly horizontal, and without any other variation than that of leaving a hollow or cavity in the middle. When any unnecessary branches project inward they cut them off with their teeth, and throw them in among the rest, to prevent the mud from falling through the roof. It is a mistaken notion that the woodwork is first completed and then plastered; for the whole of their houses, as well as their dams, are, from the foundation, one mass of mud and wood, mixed with stones, if they can be procured. The mud is always taken from the edge of the bank, or the bottom of the creek or pond near the door of the house; and though their fore-paws are so small, yet it is held close up between them under their throat: thus they carry both mud and stones, while they always drag the wood with their teeth. All their work is executed in the night, and they are so expeditious, that in the course of one night I have known them to have collected as much as amounted to some thousands of their little handfuls. It is a great piece of policy in these animals to cover the outside of their houses every fall with fresh mud, and as late as possible in the autumn, even when the frost becomes pretty severe, as by this means it soon freezes as hard as a stone, and prevents their common enemy, the wolverene, from disturbing them during the winter; and as they are frequently seen to walk over their work, and sometimes to give a flap with their tail, particularly when plunging into the water, this has, without doubt, given rise to the vulgar opinion that they use their tails as a trowel, with which they plaster their houses; whereas that flapping of the tail is no more than a custom which they always preserve, even when they become tame and domestic, and more particularly so when they are startled.
“Their food consists of a large root, something resembling a cabbage-stalk, which grows at the bottom of the lakes and rivers. They also eat the bark of trees, particularly those of the poplar, birch, and willow; but the ice preventing them from getting to the land in the winter, they have not any bark to feed on in that season, except that of such sticks as they cut down in summer, and throw into the water opposite the doors of their houses; and as they generally eat a great deal, the roots above-mentioned constitute a principal part of their food during the winter. In summer they vary their diet by eating various kinds of herbage, and such berries as grow near their haunts during that season. When the ice breaks up in the spring the beavers always leave their houses, and rove about until a little before the fall of the leaf, when they return again to their old habitations, and lay in their winter-stock of wood. They seldom begin to repair their houses till the frost commences, and never finish the outer coat till the cold is pretty severe, as has been already mentioned. When they erect a new habitation they begin felling the wood early in the summer, but seldom begin to build until the middle or latter end of August, and never complete it till the cold weather be set in.
“Persons who attempt to take beavers in winter should be thoroughly acquainted with their manner of life; otherwise they will have endless trouble to effect their purpose, because they have always a number of holes in the banks, which serve them as places of retreat when any injury is offered to their houses, and in general it is in those holes that they are taken. When the beavers which are situated in a small river or creek are to be taken, the Indians sometimes find it necessary to stake the river across to prevent them from passing; after which they endeavour to find out all their holes or places of retreat in the bank. This requires much practice and experience to accomplish, and is performed in the following manner:—Every man being furnished with an ice-chisel, lashes it to the end of a small staff about four to five feet long; he then walks along the edge of the banks, and keeps knocking his chisel against the ice. Those who are acquainted with that kind of work well know by the sound of the ice when they are opposite to any of the beavers’ holes or vaults. As soon as they suspect any, they cut a hole through the ice big enough to admit an old beaver; and in this manner proceed till they have found out all their places of retreat, or at least as many of them as possible. While the principal men are thus employed, some of the under-strappers and the women are busy in breaking open the house—which at times is no easy task, for I have frequently known these houses to be five or six feet thick; and one, in particular, was more than eight feet thick in the crown. When the beavers find that their habitations are invaded, they fly to their holes in the banks for shelter; and on being perceived by the Indians, which is easily done, by attending to the motion of the water, they block up the entrance with stakes of wood, and then haul the beaver out of its hole, either by hand, if they can reach it, or with a large hook made for that purpose, which is fastened to the end of a long stick. The beaver is an animal which cannot keep long under at a time; so that when their houses are broken open, and all their places of retreat discovered, they have but one choice left, as it may be called—either to be taken in their house or their vaults; in general they prefer the latter; for where there is one beaver caught in the house, many thousands are taken in the vaults in the banks. Sometimes they are caught in nets, and, in summer, very frequently in traps.
“In respect to the beavers dunging in their houses, as some persons assert, it is quite wrong, as they always plunge into water to do it. I am the better enabled to make this assertion, from having kept several of them till they became so domesticated as to answer to their name, and follow those to whom they were accustomed in the same manner as a dog would do; and they were as much pleased at being fondled as any animal I ever saw. In cold weather they were kept in my own sitting-room, where they were the constant companions of the Indian women and children; and were so fond of their company, that when the Indians were absent for any considerable time, the beavers discovered great signs of uneasiness, and on their return showed equal marks of pleasure, by fondling on them, crawling into their laps, lying on their backs, sitting erect like a squirrel, and behaving like children who see their parents but seldom. In general, during the winter, they lived on the same food as the women did; and were immoderately fond of rice and plum-pudding; they would eat partridges and fresh venison very freely; but I never tried them with fish, though I have heard they will at times prey on them. In fact, there are few graminivorous animals that may not be brought to be carnivorous.”
TheMusquash, orMusk-rat, is undoubtedly a beaver, and has been called at times the Little Beaver; but it has pleased the naturalists to constitute it a genus of itself, though there is only the one species known. Its habits are extremely like those of the beaver: it is aquatic, or amphibious, if you please—building itself a conical house in the midst of a swamp, or low islet, and feeding on shoots of trees, bits of green wood, leaves and stalks of nettles, and other herbaceous plants. Its fur bears a very great resemblance to that of the beaver, only it is shorter, and therefore less valuable. Notwithstanding this, it is an article of extensive commerce; and upwards of a million skins have been imported into England in a single year. The musquash might also be exterminated like the beaver; but being a smaller creature, and therefore less persecuted by the amateur sportsman, it is still common enough upon the streams of the northern and middle States of America. Further north it is plentiful; and the Hudson’s Bay Company procure a vast number of skins for annual exportation to Europe. Its name of musk-rat is derived from the scent of musk which the animal emits, and which is especially powerful during the season of rut.
It is possible that the musk-rat of Siberia, as well as several species of water-rats belonging to South America—and known vaguely by the name of Lutras and Nutrias—may be animals of the beaver kind, rather than Water-Rats or Otters, among which they are generally classed.