CHAPTER III. PIGS—CATTLE—SHEEP—GOATS

PIGS BELONG TO TWO DISTINCT TYPES, SUS SCROFA AND

INDICUS—TORFSCHWEIN—JAPAN PIGS—FERTILITY OF CROSSED PIGS—CHANGES IN THE

SKULL OF THE HIGHLY CULTIVATED RACES—CONVERGENCE OF

CHARACTER—GESTATION—SOLID-HOOFED SWINE—CURIOUS APPENDAGES TO THE

JAWS—DECREASE IN SIZE OF THE TUSKS—YOUNG PIGS LONGITUDINALLY

STRIPED—FERAL PIGS—CROSSED BREEDS.

CATTLE—ZEBU A DISTINCT SPECIES—EUROPEAN CATTLE PROBABLY DESCENDED FROM

THREE WILD FORMS—ALL THE RACES NOW FERTILE TOGETHER—BRITISH PARK

CATTLE—ON THE COLOUR OF THE ABORIGINAL SPECIES—CONSTITUTIONAL

DIFFERENCES—SOUTH AFRICAN RACES—SOUTH AMERICAN RACES—NIATA

CATTLE—ORIGIN OF THE VARIOUS RACES OF CATTLE.

SHEEP —REMARKABLE RACES OF—VARIATIONS ATTACHED TO THE MALE

SEX—ADAPTATIONS TO VARIOUS CONDITIONS—GESTATION OF—CHANGES IN THE

WOOL—SEMI-MONSTROUS BREEDS.

GOATS —REMARKABLE VARIATIONS OF.

The breeds of the pig have recently been more closely studied,

though much still remains to be done, than those of almost any

other domesticated animal. This has been effected by Hermann von

Nathusius in two admirable works, especially in the later one on

the Skulls of the several races, and by Rütimeyer in his celebrated

Fauna of the ancient Swiss lake-dwellings.[1] Nathusius has shown

that all the known breeds may be divided into two great groups: one

resembling in all important respects and no doubt descended from

the common wild boar; so that this may be called the _Sus scrofa_

group. The other group differs in several important and constant

osteological characters; its wild parent-form is unknown; the name

given to it by Nathusius, according to the law of priority, is _

Sus indicus,_ of Pallas. This name must now be followed, though an

unfortunate one, as the wild aboriginal does not inhabit India, and

the best-known domesticated breeds have been imported from Siam and

China.

First for the _Sus scrofa_ breeds, or those resembling the common

wild boar. These still exist, according to Nathusius

(‘Schweineschädel’ s. 75), in various parts of central and northern

Europe; formerly every kingdom,[2] and almost every province in

Britain, possessed its own native breed; but these are now

everywhere rapidly disappearing, being replaced by improved breeds

crossed with the _S. indicus_ form. The skull in the breeds of the

_ S. scrofa_ type resembles, in all important respects, that of the

European wild boar; but it has become (‘Schweineschädel’ s. 63-68)

higher and broader relatively to its length; and the hinder part is

more upright. The differences, however, are all variable in degree.

The breeds which thus resemble _S. scrofa_ in their essential skull

characters differ conspicuously from each other in other respects,

as in the length of the ears and legs, curvature of the ribs,

colour, hairiness, size and proportions of the body.

The wild _Sus scrofa_ has a wide range, namely, Europe, North

Africa, as identified by osteological characters by Rütimeyer, and

Hindostan, as similarly identified by Nathusius. But the wild boars

inhabiting these several countries differ so much from each other

in external characters, that they have been ranked by some

naturalists as specifically distinct. Even within Hindostan these

animals, according to Mr. Blyth, form very distinct races in the

different districts; in the N. Western provinces, as I am informed

by the Rev. R. Everest, the boar never exceeds 36 inches in height,

whilst in Bengal one has been measured 44 inches in height. In

Europe, Northern Africa, and Hindostan, domestic pigs have been

known to cross with the wild native species;[3] and in Hindostan an

accurate observer,[4] Sir Walter Elliot, after describing the

differences between wild Indian and wild German boars, remarks that

“the same differences are perceptible in the domesticated

individuals of the two countries.” We may therefore conclude that

the breeds of the _Sus scrofa_ type are descended from, or have

been modified by crossing with, forms which may be ranked as

geographical races, but which, according to some naturalists, ought

to be ranked as distinct species.

Pigs of the _Sus indicus_ type are best known to Englishmen under the

form of the Chinese breed. The skull of _S. indicus,_ as described by

Nathusius, differs from that of _S. scrofa_ in several minor respects,

as in its greater breadth and in some details in the teeth; but chiefly

in the shortness of the lachrymal bones, in the greater width of the

fore part of the palate-bones, and in the divergence of the premolar

teeth. It deserves especial notice that these latter characters are not

gained, even in the least degree, by the domesticated forms of _S.

scrofa._ After reading the remarks and descriptions given by Nathusius,

it seems to me to be merely playing with words to doubt whether _S.

indicus_ ought to be ranked as a species; for the above-specified

differences are more strongly marked than any that can be pointed out

between, for instance, the fox and the wolf, or the ass and the horse.

As already stated, _S. indicus_ is not known in a wild state; but its

domesticated forms, according to Nathusius, come near to _S. vittatus_

of Java and some allied species. A pig found wild in the Aru islands

(‘Schweineschädel’ s. 169) is apparently identical with _S. indicus_;

but it is doubtful whether this is a truly native animal. The

domesticated breeds of China, Cochin-China, and Siam belong to this

type. The Roman or Neapolitan breed, the Andalusian, the Hungarian, and

the “Krause” swine of Nathusius, inhabiting south-eastern Europe and

Turkey, and having fine curly hair, and the small Swiss

“Bündtnerschwein” of Rütimeyer, all agree in their more important

skull-characters with _S. indicus,_ and, as is supposed, have all been

largely crossed with this form. Pigs of this type have existed during a

long period on the shores of the Mediterranean, for a figure

(‘Schweineschädel’ s. 142) closely resembling the existing Neapolitan

pig was found in the buried city of Herculaneum.

Rütimeyer has made the remarkable discovery that there lived

contemporaneously in Switzerland, during the Neolithic period, two

domesticated forms, the _S. scrofa,_ and the _S. scrofa palustris_

or Torfschwein. Rütimeyer perceived that the latter approached the

Eastern breeds, and, according to Nathusius, it certainly belongs

to the _S. indicus_ group; but Rütimeyer has subsequently shown

that it differs in some well-marked characters. This author was

formerly convinced that his Torfschwein existed as a wild animal

during the first part of the Stone period, and was domesticated

during a later part of the same period.[5] Nathusius, whilst he

fully admits the curious fact first observed by Rütimeyer, that the

bones of domesticated and wild animals can be distinguished by

their different aspect, yet, from special difficulties in the case

of the bones of the pig (‘Schweineschädel’ s. 147), is not

convinced of the truth of the above conclusion; and Rütimeyer

himself seems now to feel some doubt. Other naturalists have also

argued strongly on the same side as Nathusius.[6]

Several breeds, differing in the proportions of the body, in the

length of the ears, in the nature of the hair, in colour, etc.,

come under the _S. indicus_ type. Nor is this surprising,

considering how ancient the domestication of this form has been

both in Europe and in China. In this latter country the date is

believed by an eminent Chinese scholar[7] to go back at least 4900

years from the present time. This same scholar alludes to the

existence of many local varieties of the pig in China; and at the

present time the Chinese take extraordinary pains in feeding and

tending their pigs, not even allowing them to walk from place to

place.[8] Hence these pigs, as Nathusius has remarked,[9] display

in an eminent degree the characters of a highly-cultivated race,

and hence, no doubt, their high value in the improvement of our

European breeds. Nathusius makes a remarkable statement

(‘Schweineschädel’ s. 138), that the infusion of the 1/32nd, or

even of the 1/64th, part of the blood of _S. indicus_ into a breed

of _S. scrofa,_ is sufficient plainly to modify the skull of the

latter species. This singular fact may perhaps be accounted for by

several of the chief distinctive characters of _S. indicus,_ such

as the shortness of the lachrymal bones, etc., being common to

several species of the genus; for in crosses characters which are

common to many species apparently tend to be prepotent over those

appertaining to only a few species.

Illustration: Fig. 2.—Head of Japan or Masked Pig.

The Japan pig (_S. pliciceps_ of Gray), which was formerly

exhibited in the Zoological Gardens, has an extraordinary

appearance from its short head, broad forehead and nose, great

fleshy ears, and deeply furrowed skin. Figure 2 is copied from that

given by Mr. Bartlett.[10] Not only is the face furrowed, but thick

folds of skin, which are harder than the other parts, almost like

the plates on the Indian rhinoceros, hang about the shoulders and

rump. It is coloured black, with white feet, and breeds true. That

it has long been domesticated there can be little doubt; and this

might have been inferred even from the fact that its young are not

longitudinally striped; for this is a character common to all the

species included within the genus _Sus_ and the allied genera

whilst in their natural state.[11] Dr. Gray[12] has described the

skull of this animal, which he ranks not only as a distinct

species, but places it in a distinct section of the genus.

Nathusius, however, after his careful study of the whole group,

states positively (‘Schweineschädel’ s. 153-158). that the skull in

all essential characters closely resembles that of the short-eared

Chinese breed of the _S. indicus_ type. Hence Nathusius considers

the Japan pig as only a domesticated variety of _S. indicus_: if

this really be the case, it is a wonderful instance of the amount

of modification which can be effected under domestication.

Formerly there existed in the central islands of the Pacific Ocean

a singular breed of pigs. These are described by the Rev. D.

Tyerman and G. Bennett[13] as of small size, hump-backed, with a

disproportionately long head, with short ears turned backwards,

with a bushy tail not more than two inches in length, placed as if

it grew from the back. Within half a century after the introduction

of European and Chinese pigs into these islands, the native breed,

according to the above authors, became almost completely lost by

being repeatedly crossed with them. Secluded islands, as might have

been expected, seem favourable for the production or retention of

peculiar breeds; thus, in the Orkney Islands, the hogs have been

described as very small, with erect and sharp ears, and “with an

appearance altogether different from the hogs brought from the

south.”[14]

Seeing how different the Chinese pigs, belonging to the _Sus indicus_

type, are in their osteological characters and in external appearance

from the pigs of the _S. scrofa_ type, so that they must be considered

specifically distinct, it is a fact well deserving attention, that

Chinese and common pigs have been repeatedly crossed in various

manners, with unimpaired fertility. One great breeder who had used pure

Chinese pigs assured me that the fertility of the half-breeds _inter

se_ and of their recrossed progeny was actually increased; and this is

the general belief of agriculturists. Again, the Japan pig or _S.

pliciceps_ of Gray is so distinct in appearance from all common pigs,

that it stretches one’s belief to the utmost to admit that it is simply

a domestic variety; yet this breed has been found perfectly fertile

with the Berkshire breed; and Mr. Eyton informs me that he paired a

half-bred brother and sister and found them quite fertile together.

Illustration: Fig. 3—Head of Wild Boar, and of “Golden Days,” a pig of

the Yorkshire Large Breed

The modification of the skull in the most highly cultivated races

is wonderful. To appreciate the amount of change, Nathusius’ work,

with its excellent figures, should be studied. The whole of the

exterior in all its parts has been altered: the hinder surface,

instead of sloping backwards, is directed forwards, entailing many

changes in other parts; the front of the head is deeply concave;

the orbits have a different shape; the auditory meatus has a

different direction and shape; the incisors of the upper and lower

jaws do not touch each other, and they stand in both jaws beyond

the plane of the molars; the canines of the upper jaw stand in

front of those of the lower jaw, and this is a remarkable anomaly:

the articular surfaces of the occipital condyles are so greatly

changed in shape, that, as Nathusius remarks (s. 133), no

naturalist, seeing this important part of the skull by itself,

would suppose that it belonged to the genus Sus. These and various

other modifications, as Nathusius observes, can hardly be

considered as monstrosities, for they are not injurious, and are

strictly inherited. The whole head is much shortened; thus, whilst

in common breeds its length to that of the body is as 1 to 6, in

the “cultur-racen” the proportion is as 1 to 9, and even recently

as 1 to 11.[15] The following woodcut[16] of the head of a wild

boar and of a sow from a photograph of the Yorkshire Large Breed,

may aid in showing how greatly the head in a highly cultivated race

has been modified and shortened.

Nathusius has well discussed the causes of the remarkable changes

in the skull and shape of the body which the highly cultivated

races have undergone. These modifications occur chiefly in the pure

and crossed races of the _S. indicus_ type; but their commencement

may be clearly detected in the slightly improved breeds of the _S.

scrofa_ type.[17] Nathusius states positively (s. 99, 103), as the

result of common experience and of his experiments, that rich and

abundant food, given during youth, tends by some direct action to

make the head broader and shorter; and that poor food works a

contrary result. He lays much stress on the fact that all wild and

semi-domesticated pigs, in ploughing up the ground with their

muzzles, have, whilst young, to exert the powerful muscles fixed to

the hinder part of the head. In highly cultivated races this habit

is no longer followed, and consequently the back of the skull

becomes modified in shape, entailing other changes in other parts.

There can hardly be a doubt that so great a change in habits would

affect the skull; but it seems rather doubtful how far this will

account for the greatly reduced length of the skull and for its

concave front. It is well known (Nathusius himself advancing many

cases, s. 104) that there is a strong tendency in many domestic

animals—in bull- and pug-dogs, in the niata cattle, in sheep, in

Polish fowls, short-faced tumbler pigeons, and in one variety of

the carp—for the bones of the face to become greatly shortened. In

the case of the dog, as H. Müller has shown, this seems caused by

an abnormal state of the primordial cartilage. We may, however,

readily admit that abundant and rich food supplied during many

generations would give an inherited tendency to increased size of

body, and that, from disuse, the limbs would become finer and

shorter.[18] We shall in a future chapter see also that the skull

and limbs are apparently in some manner correlated, so that any

change in the one tends to affect the other.

Nathusius has remarked, and the observation is an interesting one,

that the peculiar form of the skull and body in the most highly

cultivated races is not characteristic of any one race, but is

common to all when improved up to the same standard. Thus the

large-bodied, long-eared, English breeds with a convex back, and

the small-bodied, short-eared, Chinese breeds with a concave back,

when bred to the same state of perfection, nearly resemble each

other in the form of the head and body. This result, it appears, is

partly due to similar causes of change acting on the several races,

and partly to man breeding the pig for one sole purpose, namely,

for the greatest amount of flesh and fat; so that selection has

always tended towards one and the same end. With most domestic

animals the result of selection has been divergence of character,

here it has been convergence.[19]

The nature of the food supplied during many generations has

apparently affected the length of the intestines; for, according to

Cuvier,[20] their length to that of the body in the wild boar is as

9 to 1,—in the common domestic boar as 13·5 to 1,—and in the Siam

breed as 16 to 1. In this latter breed the greater length may be

due either to descent from a distinct species or to more ancient

domestication. The number of mammæ vary, as does the period of

gestation. The latest authority says[21] that “the period averages

from 17 to 20 weeks,” but I think there must be some error in this

statement: in M. Tessier’s observations on 25 sows it varied from

109 to 123 days. The Rev. W. D. Fox has given me ten carefully

recorded cases with well-bred pigs, in which the period varied from

101 to 116 days. According to Nathusius the period is shortest in

the races which come early to maturity; but the course of their

development does not appear to be actually shortened, for the young

animal is born, judging from the state of the skull, less fully

developed, or in a more embryonic condition,[22] than in the case

of common swine. In the highly cultivated and early matured races

the teeth, also, are developed earlier.

The difference in the number of the vertebræ and ribs in different

kinds of pigs, as observed by Mr. Eyton,[23] and as given in the

following table, has often been quoted. The African sow probably

belongs to the _S. scrofa_ type; and Mr. Eyton informs me that,

since the publication of this paper, cross-bred animals from the

African and English races were found by Lord Hill to be perfectly

fertile.

English

Long-legged

Male. African

Female. Chinese

Male. Wild Boar

from Cuvier. French

Domestic

Boar, from

Cuvier. Dorsal vertebræ 15 13 15 14 14

Lumbar 6 6 4 5 5 Dorsal and lumbar

together 21 19 19 19 19 Sacral 5

5 4 4 4 Total number of

vertebræ 26 24 23 23 23

Some semi-monstrous breeds deserve notice. From the time of

Aristotle to the present time solid-hoofed swine have occasionally

been observed in various parts of the world. Although this

peculiarity is strongly inherited, it is hardly probable that all

the animals with solid hoofs have descended from the same parents;

it is more probable that the same peculiarity has reappeared at

various times and places. Dr. Struthers has lately described and

figured[24] the structure of the feet; in both front and hind feet

the distal phalanges of the two greater toes are represented by a

single, great, hoof-bearing phalanx; and in the front feet, the

middle phalanges are represented by a bone which is single towards

the lower end, but bears two separate articulations towards the

upper end. From other accounts it appears that an intermediate toe

is likewise sometimes superadded.

Illustration: Old Irish Pig, with jaw-appendages.

Another curious anomaly is offered by the appendages, described by

M. Eudes-Deslongchamps as often characterizing the Normandy pigs.

These appendages are always attached to the same spot, to the

corners of the jaw; they are cylindrical, about three inches in

length, covered with bristles, and with a pencil of bristles rising

out of a sinus on one side: they have a cartilaginous centre, with

two small longitudinal muscles they occur either symmetrically on

both sides of the face or on one side alone. Richardson figures

them on the gaunt old “Irish Greyhound pig;” and Nathusius states

that they occasionally appear in all the long eared races, but are

not strictly inherited, for they occur or fail in animals of the

same litter.[25] As no wild pigs are known to have analogous

appendages, we have at present no reason to suppose that their

appearance is due to reversion; and if this be so, we are forced to

admit that a somewhat complex, though apparently useless, structure

may be suddenly developed without the aid of selection.

It is a remarkable fact that the boars of all domesticated breeds have

much shorter tusks than wild boars. Many facts show that with many

animals the state of the hair is much affected by exposure to, or

protection from, climate; and as we see that the state of the hair and

teeth are correlated in Turkish dogs (other analogous facts will be

hereafter given), may we not venture to surmise that the reduction of

the tusks in the domestic boar is related to his coat of bristles being

diminished from living under shelter? On the other hand, as we shall

immediately see, the tusks and bristles reappear with feral boars,

which are no longer protected from the weather. It is not surprising

that the tusks should be more affected than the other teeth; as parts

developed to serve as secondary sexual characters are always liable to

much variation.

It is a well-known fact that the young of wild European and Indian

pigs,[26] for the first six months, are longitudinally banded with

light-coloured stripes. This character generally disappears under

domestication. The Turkish domestic pigs, however, have striped

young, as have those of Westphalia, “whatever may be their

hue;”[27] whether these latter pigs belong to the same curly-haired

race as the Turkish swine, I do not know. The pigs which have run

wild in Jamaica and the semi-feral pigs of New Granada, both those

which are black and those which are black with a white band across

the stomach, often extending over the back, have resumed this

aboriginal character and produce longitudinally-striped young. This

is likewise the case, at least occasionally, with the neglected

pigs in the Zambesi settlement on the coast of Africa.[28]

The common belief that all domesticated animals, when they run

wild, revert completely to the character of their parent-stock, is

chiefly founded, as far as I can discover, on feral pigs. But even

in this case the belief is not grounded on sufficient evidence; for

the two main types, namely, _S. scrofa_ and _indicus,_ have not

been distinguished. The young, as we have just seen, reacquire

their longitudinal stripes, and the boars invariably reassume their

tusks. They revert also in the general shape of their bodies, and

in the length of their legs and muzzles, to the state of the wild

animal, as might have been expected from the amount of exercise

which they are compelled to take in search of food. In Jamaica the

feral pigs do not acquire the full size of the European wild boar,

“never attaining a greater height than 20 inches at the shoulder.”

In various countries they reassume their original bristly covering,

but in different degrees, dependent on the climate; thus, according

to Roulin, the semi-feral pigs in the hot valleys of New Granada

are very scantily clothed; whereas, on the Paramos, at the height

of 7000 to 8000 feet, they acquire a thick covering of wool lying

under the bristles, like that on the truly wild pigs of France.

These pigs on the Paramos are small and stunted. The wild boar of

India is said to have the bristles at the end of its tail arranged

like the plumes of an arrow, whilst the European boar has a simple

tuft; and it is a curious fact that many, but not all, of the feral

pigs in Jamaica, derived from a Spanish stock, have a plumed

tail.[29] With respect to colour, feral pigs generally revert to

that of the wild boar; but in certain parts of S. America, as we

have seen, some of the semi-feral pigs have a curious white band

across their stomachs; and in certain other hot places the pigs are

red, and this colour has likewise occasionally been observed in the

feral pigs of Jamaica. From these several facts we see that with

pigs when feral there is a strong tendency to revert to the wild

type; but that this tendency is largely governed by the nature of

the climate, amount of exercise, and other causes of change to

which they have been subjected.

The last point worth notice is that we have unusually good evidence

of breeds of pigs now keeping perfectly true, which have been

formed by the crossing of several distinct breeds. The Improved

Essex pigs, for instance, breed very true; but there is no doubt

that they largely owe their present excellent qualities to crosses

originally made by Lord Western with the Neapolitan race, and to

subsequent crosses with the Berkshire breed (this also having been

improved by Neapolitan crosses), and likewise, probably, with the

Sussex breed.[30] In breeds thus formed by complex crosses, the

most careful and unremitting selection during many generations has

been found to be indispensable. Chiefly in consequence of so much

crossing, some well-known breeds have undergone rapid changes;

thus, according to Nathusius,[31] the Berkshire breed of 1780 is

quite different from that of 1810; and, since this latter period,

at least two distinct forms have borne the same name.

CATTLE.

Domestic cattle are certainly the descendants of more than one wild

form, in the same manner as has been shown to be the case with our

dogs and pigs. Naturalists have generally made two main divisions

of cattle: the humped kinds inhabiting tropical countries, called

in India Zebus, to which the specific name of _ Bos indicus_ has

been given; and the common non-humped cattle, generally included

under the name of _Bos taurus._ The humped cattle were

domesticated, as may be seen on the Egyptian monuments, at least as

early as the twelfth dynasty, that is 2100 B.C. They differ from

common cattle in various osteological characters, even in a greater

degree, according to Rütimeyer,[32] than do the fossil and

prehistoric European species, namely, _Bos primigenius_ and _

longifrons,_ from each other. They differ, also, as Mr. Blyth,[33]

who has particularly attended to this subject, remarks, in general

configuration, in the shape of their ears, in the point where the

dewlap commences, in the typical curvature of their horns, in their

manner of carrying their heads when at rest, in their ordinary

variations of colour, especially in the frequent presence of

“nilgau-like markings on their feet,” and “in the one being born

with teeth protruding through the jaws, and the other not so.” They

have different habits, and their voice is entirely different. The

humped cattle in India “seldom seek shade, and never go into the

water and there stand knee-deep, like the cattle of Europe.” They

have run wild in parts of Oude and Rohilcund, and can maintain

themselves in a region infested by tigers. They have given rise to

many races differing greatly in size, in the presence of one or two

humps, in length of horns, and other respects. Mr. Blyth sums up

emphatically that the humped and humpless cattle must be considered

as distinct species. When we consider the number of points in

external structure and habits, independently of important

osteological differences, in which they differ from each other; and

that many of these points are not likely to have been affected by

domestication, there can hardly be a doubt, notwithstanding the

adverse opinion of some naturalists, that the humped and non-humped

cattle must be ranked as specifically distinct.

The European breeds of humpless cattle are numerous. Professor Low

enumerates 19 British breeds, only a few of which are identical

with those on the Continent. Even the small Channel islands of

Guernsey, Jersey, and Alderney possess their own sub-breeds;[34]

and these again differ from the cattle of the other British

islands, such as Anglesea, and the western isles of Scotland.

Desmarest, who paid attention to the subject, describes 15 French

races, excluding sub-varieties and those imported from other

countries. In other parts of Europe there are several distinct

races, such as the pale-coloured Hungarian cattle, with their light

and free step, and enormous horns sometimes measuring above five

feet from tip to tip:[35] the Podolian cattle also are remarkable

from the height of their fore-quarters. In the most recent work on

Cattle,[36] engravings are given of fifty-five European breeds; it

is, however, probable that several of these differ very little from

each other, or are merely synonyms. It must not be supposed that

numerous breeds of cattle exist only in long-civilised countries,

for we shall presently see that several kinds are kept by the

savages of Southern Africa.

With respect to the parentage of the several European breeds, we

already know much from Nilsson’s Memoir,[37] and more especially

from Rütimeyer’s works and those of Boyd Dawkins. Two or three

species or forms of Bos, closely allied to still living domestic

races, have been found in the more recent tertiary deposits or

amongst prehistoric remains in Europe. Following Rütimeyer, we

have:—

_Bos primigenius._This magnificent, well known species was

domesticated in Switzerland during the Neolithic period; even at

this early period it varied a little, having apparently been

crossed with other races. Some of the larger races on the

Continent, as the Friesland, etc., and the Pembroke race in

England, closely resemble in essential structure _B. primigenius,_

and no doubt are its descendants. This is likewise the opinion of

Nilsson. _Bos primigenius_ existed as a wild animal in Cæsar’s

time, and is now semi-wild, though much degenerated in size, in the

park of Chillingham; for I am informed by Professor Rütimeyer, to

whom Lord Tankerville sent a skull, that the Chillingham cattle are

less altered from the true primigenius type than any other known

breed.[38]

_Bos trochoceros._ This form is not included in the three species

above mentioned, for it is now considered by Rütimeyer to be the

female of an early domesticated form of _B. primigenius,_ and as

the progenitor of his _frontosus_ race. I may add that specific

names have been given to four other fossil oxen, now believed to be

identical with _B. primigenius._[39]

_Bos longifrons_ (or _ brachyceros_) of Owen.—This very distinct

species was of small size, and had a short body with fine legs.

According to Boyd Dawkins[40] it was introduced as a domesticated

animal into Britain at a very early period, and supplied food to

the Roman legionaries.[41] Some remains have been found in Ireland

in certain crannoges, of which the dates are believed to be from

843-933 A.D.[42] It was also the commonest form in a domesticated

condition in Switzerland during the earliest part of the Neolithic

period. Professor Owen[43] thinks it probable that the Welsh and

Highland cattle are descended from this form; as likewise is the

case, according to Rütimeyer, with some of the existing Swiss

breeds. These latter are of different shades of colour from

light-grey to blackish-brown, with a lighter stripe along the

spine, but they have no pure white marks. The cattle of North Wales

and the Highlands, on the other hand, are generally black or

dark-coloured.

_Bos frontosus_ of Nilsson.—This species is allied to _B.

longifrons,_ and, according to the high authority of Mr. Boyd

Dawkins, is identical with it, but in the opinion of some judges is

distinct. Both co-existed in Scania during the same late geological

period,[44] and both have been found in the Irish crannoges.[45]

Nilsson believes that his _B. frontosus_ may be the parent of the

mountain cattle of Norway, which have a high protuberance on the

skull between the base of the horns. As Professor Owen and others

believe that the Scotch Highland cattle are descended from his _B.

longifrons,_ it is worth notice that a capable judge[46] has

remarked that he saw no cattle in Norway like the Highland breed,

but that they more nearly resembled the Devonshire breed.

On the whole we may conclude, more especially from the researches

of Boyd Dawkins, that European cattle are descended from two

species; and there is no improbability in this fact, for the genus

Bos readily yields to domestication. Besides these two species and

the zebu, the yak, the gayal, and the arni[47] (not to mention the

buffalo or genus Bubalus) have been domesticated; making altogether

six species of Bos. The zebu and the two European species are now

extinct in a wild state. Although certain races of cattle were

domesticated at a very ancient period in Europe, it does not follow

that they were first domesticated here. Those who place much

reliance on philology argue that they were imported from the

East.[48] It is probable that they originally inhabited a temperate

or cold climate, but not a land long covered with snow; for our

cattle, as we have seen in the chapter on Horses, have not the

instinct of scraping away the snow to get at the herbage beneath.

No one could behold the magnificent wild bulls on the bleak

Falkland Islands in the southern hemisphere, and doubt about the

climate being admirably suited to them. Azara has remarked that in

the temperate regions of La Plata the cows conceive when two years

old, whilst in the much hotter country of Paraguay they do not

conceive till three years old; “from which fact,” as he adds, “one

may conclude that cattle do not succeed so well in warm

countries.”[49]

_Bos primigenius_ and _longifrons_ have been ranked by nearly all

palæontologists as distinct species; and it would not be reasonable

to take a different view simply because their domesticated

descendants now intercross with the utmost freedom. All the

European breeds have so often been crossed both intentionally and

unintentionally, that, if any sterility had ensued from such

unions, it would certainly have been detected. As zebus inhabit a

distant and much hotter region, and as they differ in so many

characters from our European cattle, I have taken pains to

ascertain whether the two forms are fertile when crossed. The late

Lord Powis imported some zebus and crossed them with common cattle

in Shropshire; and I was assured by his steward that the cross-bred

animals were perfectly fertile with both parent-stocks. Mr. Blyth

informs me that in India hybrids, with various proportions of

either blood, are quite fertile; and this can hardly fail to be

known, for in some districts[50] the two species are allowed to

breed freely together. Most of the cattle which were first

introduced into Tasmania were humped, so that at one time thousands

of crossed animals existed there; and Mr. B. O’Neile Wilson, M.A.,

writes to me from Tasmania that he has never heard of any sterility

having been observed. He himself formerly possessed a herd of such

crossed cattle, and all were perfectly fertile; so much so, that he

cannot remember even a single cow failing to calve. These several

facts afford an important confirmation of the Pallasian doctrine

that the descendants of species which when first domesticated would

if crossed have been in all probability in some degree sterile,

become perfectly fertile after a long course of domestication. In a

future chapter we shall see that this doctrine throws some light on

the difficult subject of Hybridism.

I have alluded to the cattle in Chillingham Park, which, according

to Rütimeyer, have been very little changed from the _Bos

primigenius_ type. This park is so ancient that it is referred to

in a record of the year 1220. The cattle in their instincts and

habits are truly wild. They are white, with the inside of the ears

reddish-brown, eyes rimmed with black, muzzles brown, hoofs black,

and horns white tipped with black. Within a period of thirty-three

years about a dozen calves were born with “brown and blue spots

upon the cheeks or necks; but these, together with any defective

animals, were always destroyed.” According to Bewick, about the

year 1770 some calves appeared with black ears; but these were also

destroyed by the keeper, and black ears have not since reappeared.

The wild white cattle in the Duke of Hamilton’s park, where I have

heard of the birth of a black calf, are said by Lord Tankerville to

be inferior to those at Chillingham. The cattle kept until the year

1780 by the Duke of Queensberry, but now extinct, had their ears,

muzzle, and orbits of the eyes black. Those which have existed from

time immemorial at Chartley, closely resemble the cattle at

Chillingham, but are larger, “with some small difference in the

colour of the ears.” “They frequently tend to become entirely

black; and a singular superstition prevails in the vicinity that,

when a black calf is born, some calamity impends over the noble

house of Ferrers. All the black calves are destroyed.” The cattle

at Burton Constable in Yorkshire, now extinct, had ears, muzzle,

and the tip of the tail black. Those at Gisburne, also in

Yorkshire, are said by Bewick to have been sometimes without dark

muzzles, with the inside alone of the ears brown; and they are

elsewhere said to have been low in stature and hornless.[51]

The several above-specified differences in the park-cattle, slight

though they be, are worth recording, as they show that animals living

nearly in a state of nature, and exposed to nearly uniform conditions,

if not allowed to roam freely and to cross with other herds, do not

keep as uniform as truly wild animals. For the preservation of a

uniform character, even within the same park, a certain degree of

selection—that is, the destruction of the dark-coloured calves—is

apparently necessary.

Boyd Dawkins believes that the park-cattle are descended from

anciently domesticated, and not truly wild animals; and from the

occasional appearance of dark-coloured calves, it is improbable

that the aboriginal _Bos primigenius_ was white. It is curious what

a strong, though not invariable, tendency there is in wild or

escaped cattle to become white with coloured ears, under widely

different conditions of life. If the old writers Boethius and

Leslie[52] can be trusted, the wild cattle of Scotland were white

and furnished with a great mane; but the colour of their ears is

not mentioned. In Wales,[53] during the tenth century, some of the

cattle are described as being white with red ears. Four hundred

cattle thus coloured were sent to King John; and an early record

speaks of a hundred cattle with red ears having been demanded as a

compensation for some offence, but, if the cattle were of a dark or

black colour, 150 were to be presented. The black cattle of North

Wales apparently belong, as we have seen, to the small _

longifrons_ type: and as the alternative was offered of either 150

dark cattle, or 100 white cattle with red ears, we may presume that

the latter were the larger beasts, and probably belonged to the

_primigenius_ type. Youatt has remarked that at the present day,

whenever cattle of the shorthorn breed are white, the extremities

of their ears are more or less tinged with red.

The cattle which have run wild on the Pampas, in Texas, and in two

parts of Africa, have become of a nearly uniform dark

brownish-red.[54] On the Ladrone Islands, in the Pacific Ocean,

immense herds of cattle, which were wild in the year 1741, are

described as “milk-white, except their ears, which are generally

black.”[55] The Falkland Islands, situated far south, with all the

conditions of life as different as it is possible to conceive from

those of the Ladrones, offer a more interesting case. Cattle have

run wild there during eighty or ninety years; and in the southern

districts the animals are mostly white, with their feet, or whole

heads, or only their ears black; but my informant, Admiral

Sulivan,[56] who long resided on these islands, does not believe

that they are ever purely white. So that in these two archipelagos

we see that the cattle tend to become white with coloured ears. In

other parts of the Falkland Islands other colours prevail: near

Port Pleasant brown is the common tint; round Mount Usborn, about

half the animals in some of the herds were lead- or mouse-coloured,

which elsewhere is an unusual tint. These latter cattle, though

generally inhabiting high land, breed about a month earlier than

the other cattle; and this circumstance would aid in keeping them

distinct and in perpetuating a peculiar colour. It is worth

recalling to mind that blue or lead-coloured marks have

occasionally appeared on the white cattle of Chillingham. So

plainly different were the colours of the wild herds in different

parts of the Falkland Islands, that in hunting them, as Admiral

Sulivan informs me, white spots in one district, and dark spots in

another district, were always looked out for on the distant hills.

In the intermediate districts, intermediate colours prevailed.

Whatever the cause may be, this tendency in the wild cattle of the

Falkland Islands, which are all descended from a few brought from

La Plata, to break up into herds of three different colours, is an

interesting fact.

Returning to the several British breeds, the conspicuous difference in

general appearance between Shorthorns, Longhorns (now rarely seen),

Herefords, Highland cattle, Alderneys, etc., must be familiar to every

one. A part of this difference may be attributed to descent from

primordially distinct species; but we may feel sure that there has been

a considerable amount of variation. Even during the Neolithic period,

the domestic cattle were to a certain extent variable. Within recent

times most of the breeds have been modified by careful and methodical

selection. How strongly the characters thus acquired are inherited, may

be inferred from the prices realised by the improved breeds; even at

the first sale of Colling’s Shorthorns, eleven bulls reached an average

of 214 pounds, and lately Shorthorn bulls have been sold for a thousand

guineas, and have been exported to all quarters of the world.

Some constitutional differences may be here noticed. The Shorthorns

arrive at maturity far earlier than the wilder breeds, such as

those of Wales or the Highlands. This fact has been shown in an

interesting manner by Mr. Simonds,[57] who has given a table of the

average period of their dentition, which proves that there is a

difference of no less than six months in the appearance of the

permanent incisors. The period of gestation, from observations made

by Tessier on 1131 cows, varies to the extent of eighty-one days;

and what is more interesting, M. Lefour affirms “that the period of

gestation is longer in the large German cattle than in the smaller

breeds.”[58] With respect to the period of conception, it seems

certain that Alderney and Zetland cows often become pregnant

earlier than other breeds.[59] Lastly, as four fully developed

mammæ is a generic character in the genus Bos,[60] it is worth

notice that with our domestic cows the two rudimentary mammæ often

become fairly well developed and yield milk.

As numerous breeds are generally found only in long-civilised

countries, it may be well to show that in some countries inhabited

by barbarous races, who are frequently at war with each other, and

therefore have little free communication, several distinct breeds

of cattle now exist or formerly existed. At the Cape of Good Hope

Leguat observed, in the year 1720, three kinds.[61] At the present

day various travellers have noticed the differences in the breeds

in Southern Africa. Sir Andrew Smith several years ago remarked to

me that the cattle possessed by the different tribes of Caffres,

though living near each other under the same latitude and in the

same kind of country, yet differed, and he expressed much surprise

at the fact. Mr. Andersson has described[62] the Damara, Bechuana,

and Namaqua cattle; and he informs me in a letter that the cattle

north of Lake Ngami are likewise different, as Mr. Galton has heard

is also the case with the cattle of Benguela. The Namaqua cattle in

size and shape nearly resemble European cattle, and have short

stout horns and large hoofs. The Damara cattle are very peculiar,

being big-boned, with slender legs, and small hard feet; their

tails are adorned with a tuft of long bushy hair nearly touching

the ground, and their horns are extraordinarily large. The Bechuana

cattle have even larger horns, and there is now a skull in London

with the two horns 8 ft. 8-1/4 in. long, as measured in a straight

line from tip to tip, and no less than 13 ft. 5 in. as measured

along their curvature! Mr. Andersson in his letter to me says that,

though he will not venture to describe the differences between the

breeds belonging to the many different sub-tribes, yet such

certainly exist, as shown by the wonderful facility with which the

natives discriminate them.

That many breeds of cattle have originated through variation,

independently of descent from distinct species, we may infer from

what we see in South America, where the genus Bos was not endemic,

and where the cattle which now exist in such vast numbers are the

descendants of a few imported from Spain and Portugal. In Columbia,

Roulin[63] describes two peculiar breeds, namely, _pelones,_ with

extremely thin and fine hair, and _calongos,_ absolutely naked.

According to Castelnau there are two races in Brazil, one like

European cattle, the other different, with remarkable horns. In

Paraguay, Azara describes a breed which certainly originated in S.

America, called _chivos,_ “because they have straight vertical

horns, conical, and very large at the base.” He likewise describes

a dwarf race in Corrientes, with short legs and a body larger than

usual. Cattle without horns, and others with reversed hair, have

also originated in Paraguay.

Another monstrous breed, called niatas or natas, of which I saw two

small herds on the northern bank of the Plata, is so remarkable as

to deserve a fuller description. This breed bears the same relation

to other breeds, as bull or pug dogs do to other dogs, or as

improved pigs, according to H. von Nathusius, do to common

pigs.[64] Rütimeyer believes that these cattle belong to the

primigenius type.[65] The forehead is very short and broad, with

the nasal end of the skull, together with the whole plane of the

upper molar-teeth, curved upwards. The lower jaw projects beyond

the upper, and has a corresponding upward curvature. It is an

interesting fact that an almost similar confirmation characterizes,

as I am informed by Dr. Falconer, the extinct and gigantic

Sivatherium of India, and is not known in any other ruminant. The

upper lip is much drawn back, the nostrils are seated high up and

are widely open, the eyes project outwards, and the horns are

large. In walking the head is carried low, and the neck is short.

The hind legs appear to be longer, compared with the front legs,

than is usual. The exposed incisor teeth, the short head and

upturned nostrils, give these cattle the most ludicrous,

self-confident air of defiance. The skull which I presented to the

College of Surgeons has been thus described by Professor Owen:[66]

“It is remarkable from the stunted development of the nasals,

premaxillaries, and fore-part of the lower jaw, which is unusually

curved upwards to come into contact with the premaxillaries. The

nasal bones are about one-third the ordinary length, but retain

almost their normal breadth. The triangular vacuity is left between

them, the frontal and lachrymal, which latter bone articulates with

the premaxillary, and thus excludes the maxillary from any junction

with the nasal.” So that even the connexion of some of the bones is

changed. Other differences might be added: thus the plane of the

condyles is somewhat modified, and the terminal edge of the

premaxillaries forms an arch. In fact, on comparison with the skull

of a common ox, scarcely a single bone presents the same exact

shape, and the whole skull has a wonderfully different appearance.

The first brief published notice of this race was by Azara, between the

years 1783-96; but Don F. Muniz, of Luxan, who has kindly collected

information for me, states that about 1760 these cattle were kept as

curiosities near Buenos Ayres. Their origin is not positively known,

but they must have originated subsequently to the year 1552, when

cattle were first introduced. Senor Muniz informs me that the breed is

believed to have originated with the Indians southward of the Plata.

Even to this day those reared near the Plata show their less civilised

nature in being fiercer than common cattle, and in the cow, if visited

too often, easily deserting her first calf. The breed is very true, and

a niata bull and cow invariably produce niata calves. The breed has

already lasted at least a century. A niata bull crossed with a common

cow, and the reverse cross, yield offspring having an intermediate

character, but with the niata character strongly displayed. According

to Senor Muniz, there is the clearest evidence, contrary to the common

belief of agriculturists in analogous cases, that the niata cow when

crossed with a common bull transmits her peculiarities more strongly

than does the niata bull when crossed with a common cow. When the

pasture is tolerably long, these cattle feed as well as common cattle

with their tongue and palate; but during the great droughts, when so

many animals perish on the Pampas, the niata breed lies under a great

disadvantage, and would, if not attended to, become extinct; for the

common cattle, like horses, are able to keep alive by browsing with

their lips on the twigs of trees and on reeds: this the niatas cannot

so well do, as their lips do not join, and hence they are found to

perish before the common cattle. This strikes me as a good illustration

of how little we are able to judge from the ordinary habits of an

animal, on what circumstances, occurring only at long intervals of

time, its rarity or extinction may depend. It shows us, also, how

natural selection would have determined the rejection of the niata

modification had it arisen in a state of nature.

Having described the semi-monstrous niata breed, I may allude to a

white bull, said to have been brought from Africa, which was

exhibited in London in 1829, and which has been well figured by Mr.

Harvey.[67] It had a hump, and was furnished with a mane. The

dewlap was peculiar, being divided between its fore-legs into

parallel divisions. Its lateral hoofs were annually shed, and grew

to the length of five or six inches. The eye was very peculiar,

being remarkably prominent, and “resembled a cup and ball, thus

enabling the animal to see on all sides with equal ease; the pupil

was small and oval, or rather a parallelogram with the ends cut

off, and lying transversely across the ball.” A new and strange

breed might probably have been formed by careful breeding and

selection from this animal.

I have often speculated on the probable causes through which each

separate district in Great Britain came to possess in former times

its own peculiar breed of cattle; and the question is, perhaps,

even more perplexing in the case of Southern Africa. We now know

that the differences may be in part attributed to descent from

distinct species; but this cause is far from sufficient. Have the

slight differences in climate and in the nature of the pasture, in

the different districts of Britain, directly induced corresponding

differences in the cattle? We have seen that the semi-wild cattle

in the several British parks are not identical in colouring or

size, and that some degree of selection has been requisite to keep

them true. It is almost certain that abundant food given during

many generations directly affects the size of a breed.[68] That

climate directly affects the thickness of the skin and the hair is

likewise certain: thus Roulin asserts[69] that the hides of the

feral cattle on the hot Llanos “are always much less heavy than

those of the cattle raised on the high platform of Bogota; and that

these hides yield in weight and in thickness of hair to those of

the cattle which have run wild on the lofty Paramos.” The same

difference has been observed in the hides of the cattle reared on

the bleak Falkland Islands and on the temperate Pampas. Low has

remarked[70] that the cattle which inhabit the more humid parts of

Britain have longer hair and thicker skins than other British

cattle. When we compare highly improved stall-fed cattle with the

wilder breeds, or compare mountain and lowland breeds, we cannot

doubt that an active life, leading to the free use of the limbs and

lungs, affects the shape and proportions of the whole body. It is

probable that some breeds, such as the semi-monstrous niata cattle,

and some peculiarities, such as being hornless, etc., have appeared

suddenly owing to what we may call in our ignorance spontaneous

variation; but even in this case a rude kind of selection is

necessary, and the animals thus characterised must be at least

partially separated from others. This degree of care, however, has

sometimes been taken even in little-civilised districts, where we

should least have expected it, as in the case of the niata, chivo,

and hornless cattle in S. America.

That methodical selection has done wonders within a recent period

in modifying our cattle, no one doubts. During the process of

methodical selection it has occasionally happened that deviations

of structure, more strongly pronounced than mere individual

differences, yet by no means deserving to be called monstrosities,

have been taken advantage of: thus the famous Longhorn Bull,

Shakespeare, though of the pure Canley stock, scarcely inherited a

single point of the long-horned breed, his horns excepted;[71] yet

in the hands of Mr. Fowler, this bull greatly improved his race. We

have also reason to believe that selection, carried on so far

unconsciously that there was at no one time any distinct intention

to improve or change the breed, has in the course of time modified

most of our cattle; for by this process, aided by more abundant

food, all the lowland British breeds have increased greatly in size

and in early maturity since the reign of Henry VII.[72] It should

never be forgotten that many animals have to be annually

slaughtered; so that each owner must determine which shall be

killed and which preserved for breeding. In every district, as

Youatt has remarked, there is a prejudice in favour of the native

breed; so that animals possessing qualities, whatever they may be,

which are most valued in each district, will be oftenest preserved;

and this unmethodical selection assuredly will in the long run

affect the character of the whole breed. But it may be asked, can

this rude kind of selection have been practised by barbarians such

as those of southern Africa? In a future chapter on Selection we

shall see that this has certainly occurred to some extent.

Therefore, looking to the origin of the many breeds of cattle which

formerly inhabited the several districts of Britain, I conclude

that, although slight differences in the nature of the climate,

food, etc., as well as changed habits of life, aided by correlation

of growth, and the occasional appearance from unknown causes of

considerable deviations of structure, have all probably played

their parts; yet that the occasional preservation in each district

of those individual animals which were most valued by each owner

has perhaps been even more effective in the production of the

several British breeds. As soon as two or more breeds were formed

in any district, or when new breeds descended from distinct species

were introduced, their crossing, especially if aided by some

selection, will have multiplied the number and modified the

characters of the older breeds.

SHEEP.

I shall treat this subject briefly. Most authors look at our

domestic sheep as descended from several distinct species. Mr.

Blyth, who has carefully attended to the subject, believes that

fourteen wild species now exist, but “that not one of them can be

identified as the progenitor of any one of the interminable

domestic races.” M. Gervais thinks that there are six species of

Ovis,[73] but that our domestic sheep form a distinct genus, now

completely extinct. A German naturalist[74] believes that our sheep

descend from ten aboriginally distinct species, of which only one

is still living in a wild state! Another ingenious observer,[75]

though not a naturalist, with a bold defiance of everything known

on geographical distribution, infers that the sheep of Great

Britain alone are the descendants of eleven endemic British forms!

Under such a hopeless state of doubt it would be useless for my

purpose to give a detailed account of the several breeds; but a few

remarks may be added.

Sheep have been domesticated from a very ancient period.

Rütimeyer[76] found in the Swiss lake-dwellings the remains of a

small breed, with thin tall legs, and horns like those of a goat,

thus differing somewhat from any kind now known. Almost every

country has its own peculiar breed; and many countries have several

breeds differing greatly from each other. One of the most strongly

marked races is an Eastern one with a long tail, including,

according to Pallas, twenty vertebræ, and so loaded with fat that

it is sometimes placed on a truck, which is dragged about by the

living animal. These sheep, though ranked by Fitzinger as a

distinct aboriginal form, bear in their drooping ears the stamp of

long domestication. This is likewise the case with those sheep

which have two great masses of fat on the rump, with the tail in a

rudimentary condition. The Angola variety of the long-tailed race

has curious masses of fat on the back of the head and beneath the

jaws.[77] Mr. Hodgson in an admirable paper[78] on the sheep of the

Himalaya infers from the distribution of the several races, “that

this caudal augmentation in most of its phases is an instance of

degeneracy in these pre-eminently Alpine animals.” The horns

present an endless diversity in character; being not rarely absent,

especially in the female sex, or, on the other hand, amounting to

four or even eight in number. The horns, when numerous, arise from

a crest on the frontal bone, which is elevated in a peculiar

manner. It is remarkable that multiplicity of horns “is generally

accompanied by great length and coarseness of the fleece.”[79] This

correlation, however, is far from being general; for instance, I am

informed by Mr. D. Forbes, that the Spanish sheep in Chile

resemble, in fleece and in all other characters, their parent

merino-race, except that instead of a pair they generally bear four

horns. The existence of a pair of mammæ is a generic character in

the genus Ovis as well as in several allied forms; nevertheless, as

Mr. Hodgson has remarked, “this character is not absolutely

constant even among the true and proper sheep: for I have more than

once met with Càgias (a sub-Himalayan domestic race) possessed of

four teats.”[80] This case is the more remarkable as, when any part

or organ is present in reduced number in comparison with the same

part in allied groups, it usually is subject to little variation.

The presence of interdigital pits has likewise been considered as a

generic distinction in sheep; but Isidore Geoffroy[81] has shown

that these pits or pouches are absent in some breeds.

In sheep there is a strong tendency for characters, which have

apparently been acquired under domestication, to become attached

either exclusively to the male sex, or to be more highly developed

in this than in the other sex. Thus in many breeds the horns are

deficient in the ewe, though this likewise occurs occasionally with

the female of the wild musmon. In the rams of the Wallachian breed,

“the horns spring almost perpendicularly from the frontal bone, and

then take a beautiful spiral form; in the ewes they protrude nearly

at right angles from the head, and then become twisted in a

singular manner.”[82] Mr. Hodgson states that the extraordinarily

arched nose or chaffron, which is so highly developed in several

foreign breeds, is characteristic of the ram alone, and apparently

is the result of domestication.[83] I hear from Mr. Blyth that the

accumulation of fat in the fat-tailed sheep of the plains of India

is greater in the male than in the female; and Fitzinger[84]

remarks that the mane in the African maned race is far more

developed in the ram than in the ewe.

Different races of sheep, like cattle, present constitutional

differences. Thus the improved breeds arrive at maturity at an

early age, as has been well shown by Mr. Simonds through their

early average period of dentition. The several races have become

adapted to different kinds of pasture and climate: for instance, no

one can rear Leicester sheep on mountainous regions, where Cheviots

flourish. As Youatt has remarked, “In all the different districts

of Great Britain we find various breeds of sheep beautifully

adapted to the locality which they occupy. No one knows their

origin; they are indigenous to the soil, climate, pasturage, and

the locality on which they graze; they seem to have been formed for

it and by it.”[85] Marshall relates[86] that a flock of heavy

Lincolnshire and light Norfolk sheep which had been bred together

in a large sheep-walk, part of which was low, rich, and moist, and

another part high and dry, with benty grass, when turned out,

regularly separated from each other; the heavy sheep drawing off to

the rich soil, and the lighter sheep to their own soil; so that

“whilst there was plenty of grass the two breeds kept themselves as

distinct as rooks and pigeons.” Numerous sheep from various parts

of the world have been brought during a long course of years to the

Zoological Gardens of London; but as Youatt, who attended the

animals as a veterinary surgeon, remarks, “few or none die of the

rot, but they are phthisical; not one of them from a torrid climate

lasts out the second year, and when they die their lungs are

tuberculated.”[87] There is very good evidence that English breeds

of sheep will not succeed in France.[88] Even in certain parts of

England it has been found impossible to keep certain breeds of

sheep; thus on a farm on the banks of the Ouse, the Leicester sheep

were so rapidly destroyed by pleuritis[89] that the owner could not

keep them; the coarser-skinned sheep never being affected.

The period of gestation was formerly thought to be of so

unalterable a character, that a supposed difference of this kind

between the wolf and the dog was esteemed a sure sign of specific

distinction; but we have seen that the period is shorter in the

improved breeds of the pig, and in the larger breeds of the ox,

than in other breeds of these two animals. And now we know, on the

excellent authority of Hermann von Nathusius,[90] that Merino and

Southdown sheep, when both have long been kept under exactly the

same conditions, differ in their average period of gestation, as is

seen in the following Table:—

Merinos 150·3 days. Southdowns 144·2 days. Half-bred Merinos and

Southdowns 146·3 days. 3/4 blood of Southdown 145·5 days. 7/8

blood of Southdown 144·2 days.

In this graduated difference in cross-bred animals having different

proportions of Southdown blood, we see how strictly the two periods of

gestation have been transmitted. Nathusius remarks that, as Southdowns

grow with remarkable rapidity after birth, it is not surprising that

their foetal development should have been shortened. It is of course

possible that the difference in these two breeds may be due to their

descent from distinct parent-species; but as the early maturity of the

Southdowns has long been carefully attended to by breeders, the

difference is more probably the result of such attention. Lastly, the

fecundity of the several breeds differs much; some generally producing

twins or even triplets at a birth, of which fact the curious Shangai

sheep (with their truncated and rudimentary ears, and great Roman

noses), lately exhibited in the Zoological Gardens, offer a remarkable

instance.

Sheep are perhaps more readily affected by the direct action of the

conditions of life to which they have been exposed than almost any

other domestic animal. According to Pallas, and more recently

according to Erman, the fat-tailed Kirghisian sheep, when bred for

a few generations in Russia, degenerate, and the mass of fat

dwindles away, “the scanty and bitter herbage of the steppes seems

so essential to their development.” Pallas makes an analogous

statement with respect to one of the Crimean breeds. Burnes states

that the Karakool breed, which produces a fine, curled, black, and

valuable fleece, when removed from its own canton near Bokhara to

Persia or to other quarters, loses its peculiar fleece.[91] In all

such cases, however, it may be that a change of any kind in the

conditions of life causes variability and consequent loss of

character, and not that certain conditions are necessary for the

development of certain characters.

Great heat, however, seems to act directly on the fleece: several

accounts have been published of the change which sheep imported

from Europe undergo in the West Indies. Dr. Nicholson of Antigua

informs me that, after the third generation, the wool disappears

from the whole body, except over the loins; and the animal then

appears like a goat with a dirty door-mat on its back. A similar

change is said to take place on the west coast of Africa.[92] On

the other hand, many wool-bearing sheep live on the hot plains of

India. Roulin asserts that in the lower and heated valleys of the

Cordillera, if the lambs are sheared as soon as the wool has grown

to a certain thickness, all goes on afterwards as usual; but if not

sheared, the wool detaches itself in flakes, and short shining hair

like that on a goat is produced ever afterwards. This curious

result seems merely to be an exaggerated tendency natural to the

Merino breed, for as a great authority, namely, Lord Somerville,

remarks, “the wool of our Merino sheep after shear-time is hard and

coarse to such a degree as to render it almost impossible to

suppose that the same animal could bear wool so opposite in

quality, compared to that which has been clipped from it: as the

cold weather advances, the fleeces recover their soft quality.” As

in sheep of all breeds the fleece naturally consists of longer and

coarser hair covering shorter and softer wool, the change which it

often undergoes in hot climates is probably merely a case of

unequal development; for even with those sheep which like goats are

covered with hair, a small quantity of underlying wool may always

be found.[93] In the wild mountain-sheep (_0vis montana_) of North

America there is an analogous annual change of coat; “the wool

begins to drop out in early spring, leaving in its place a coat of

hair resembling that of the elk, a change of pelage quite different

in character from the ordinary thickening of the coat or hair,

common to all furred animals in winter,—for instance, in the horse,

the cow, etc., which shed their winter coat in the spring.”[94]

A slight difference in climate or pasture sometimes slightly affects

the fleece, as has been observed even in different districts in

England, and is well shown by the great softness of the wool brought

from Southern Australia. But it should be observed, as Youatt

repeatedly insists, that the tendency to change may generally be

counteracted by careful selection. M. Lasterye, after discussing this

subject, sums up as follows: “The preservation of the Merino race in

its utmost purity at the Cape of Good Hope, in the marshes of Holland,

and under the rigorous climate of Sweden, furnishes an additional

support of this my unalterable principle, that fine-woolled sheep may

be kept wherever industrious men and intelligent breeders exist.”

That methodical selection has effected great changes in several

breeds of sheep no one who knows anything on the subject,

entertains a doubt. The case of the Southdowns, as improved by

Ellman, offers perhaps the most striking instance. Unconscious or

occasional selection has likewise slowly produced a great effect,

as we shall see in the chapters on Selection. That crossing has

largely modified some breeds, no one who will study what has been

written on this subject—for instance, Mr. Spooner’s paper—will

dispute; but to produce uniformity in a crossed breed, careful

selection and “rigorous weeding,” as this author expresses it, are

indispensable.[95]

In some few instances new breeds have suddenly originated; thus, in

1791, a ram-lamb was born in Massachusetts, having short crooked

legs and a long back, like a turnspit-dog. From this one lamb the

_otter_ or _ancon_ semi-monstrous breed was raised; as these sheep

could not leap over the fences, it was thought that they would be

valuable; but they have been supplanted by merinos, and thus

exterminated. The sheep are remarkable from transmitting their

character so truly that Colonel Humphreys[96] never heard of “but

one questionable case” of an ancon ram and ewe not producing ancon

offspring. When they are crossed with other breeds the offspring,

with rare exceptions, instead of being intermediate in character,

perfectly resemble either parent; even one of twins has resembled

one parent and the second the other. Lastly, “the ancons have been

observed to keep together, separating themselves from the rest of

the flock when put into enclosures with other sheep.”

A more interesting case has been recorded in the Report of the Juries

for the Great Exhibition (1851), namely, the production of a merino

ram-lamb on the Mauchamp farm, in 1828, which was remarkable for its

long, smooth, straight, and silky wool. By the year 1833 M. Graux had

raised rams enough to serve his whole flock, and after a few more years

he was able to sell stock of his new breed. So peculiar and valuable is

the wool, that it sells at 25 per cent above the best merino wool: even

the fleeces of half-bred animals are valuable, and are known in France

as the “Mauchamp-merino.” It is interesting, as showing how generally

any marked deviation of structure is accompanied by other deviations,

that the first ram and his immediate offspring were of small size, with

large heads, long necks, narrow chests, and long flanks; but these

blemishes were removed by judicious crosses and selection. The long

smooth wool was also correlated with smooth horns; and as horns and

hair are homologous structures, we can understand the meaning of this

correlation. If the Mauchamp and ancon breeds had originated a century

or two ago, we should have had no record of their birth; and many a

naturalist would no doubt have insisted, especially in the case of the

Mauchamp race, that they had each descended from, or been crossed with,

some unknown aboriginal form.

GOATS.

From the recent researches of M. Brandt, most naturalists now

believe that all our goats are descended from the _Capra ægagrus_

of the mountains of Asia, possibly mingled with the allied Indian

species _C. falconeri_ of India.[97] In Switzerland, during the

neolithic period, the domestic goat was commoner than the sheep;

and this very ancient race differed in no respect from that now

common in Switzerland.[98] At the present time, the many races

found in several parts of the world differ greatly from each other;

nevertheless, as far as they have been tried,[99] they are all

quite fertile when crossed. So numerous are the breeds, that Mr. G.

Clark[100] has described eight distinct kinds imported into the one

island of Mauritius. The ears of one kind were enormously

developed, being, as measured by Mr. Clark, no less than 19 inches

in length and 4-3/4 inches in breadth. As with cattle, the mammæ of

those breeds which are regularly milked become greatly developed;

and, as Mr. Clark remarks, “it is not rare to see their teats

touching the ground.” The following cases are worth notice as

presenting unusual points of variation. According to Godron,[101]

the mammæ differ greatly in shape in different breeds, being

elongated in the common goat, hemispherical in the Angora race, and

bilobed and divergent in the goats of Syria and Nubia. According to

this same author, the males of certain breeds have lost their usual

offensive odour. In one of the Indian breeds the males and females

have horns of widely-different shapes;[102] and in some breeds the

females are destitute of horns.[103] M. Ramu of Nancy informs me

that many of the goats there bear on the upper part of the throat a

pair of hairy appendages, 70 mm. in length and about 10 mm. in

diameter, which in external appearance resemble those above

described on the jaws of pigs. The presence of inter-digital pits

or glands on all four feet has been thought to characterise the

genus Ovis, and their absence to be characteristic of the genus

Capra; but Mr. Hodgson has found that they exist in the front feet

of the majority of Himalayan goats.[104] Mr. Hodgson measured the

intestines in two goats of the Dúgú race, and he found that the

proportional length of the great and small intestines differed

considerably. In one of these goats the cæcum was thirteen inches,

and in the other no less than thirty-six inches in length!

REFERENCES

[1] Hermann von Nathusius ‘Die Racen des Schweines,’ Berlin, 1860; and

‘Vorstudien für Geschichte,’ etc., ‘Schweineschädel,’ Berlin, 1864.

Rütimeyer, ‘Die Fauna der Pfahlbauten,’ Basel, 1861.

[2] Nathusius, ‘Die Racen des Schweines,’ Berlin, 1860. An excellent

appendix is given with references to published and trustworthy

drawings of the breeds of each country.

[3] For Europe _see_ Bechstein, ‘Naturgesch. Deutschlands,’ 1801, B.

i., s. 505. Several accounts have been published on the fertility of

the offspring from wild and tame swine. _See_ Burdach’s ‘Physiology,’

and Godron ‘De l’Espèce,’ tom. i. p. 370. For Africa, ‘Bull. de la

Soc. d’Acclimat.’ tom. iv. p. 389. For India, _see_ Nathusius,

‘Schweineschädel,’ s. 148.

[4] Sir W. Elliot, Catalogue of Mammalia, ‘Madras Journal of Lit. and

Science,’ vol. x. p. 219.

[5] ‘Pfahlbauten,’ s. 163 _et passim._

[6] _See_ J. W. Schütz’ interesting essay, ‘Zur Kenntniss des

Torfschweins,’ 1868. This author believes that the Torfschwein is

descended from a distinct species, the _S. sennariensis_ of Central

Africa.

[7] Stan. Julien quoted by de Blainville, ‘Ostéographie,’ p. 163.

[8] Richardson, ‘Pigs, their Origin,’ etc., p. 26.

[9] ‘Die Racen des Schweines’ s. 47, 64.

[10] ‘Proc. Zoolog. Soc.,’ 1861, p. 263.

[11] Sclater, in ‘Proc. Zoolog. Soc.,’ Feb. 26, 1861.

[12] ‘Proc. Zoolog. Soc.,’ 1862, p. 13. The skull has since been

described much more fully by Professor Lucae in a very interesting

essay, ‘Der Schädel des Maskenschweines,’ 1870. He confirms the

conclusion of von Nathusius on the relationship of this kind of pig.

[13] ‘Journal of Voyages and Travels from 1821 to 1829,’ vol. i. p.

300.

[14] Rev. G. Low ‘Fauna Orcadensis,’ p. 10. _See also_ Dr. Hibbert’s

account of the pig of the Shetland Islands.

[15] ‘Die Racen des Schweines’ s. 70.

[16] These woodcuts are copied from engravings given in Mr. S.

Sidney’s excellent edition of ‘The Pig,’ by Youatt, 1860. _ See_ pp.

1, 16, 19.

[17] ‘Schweineschädel’ s. 74, 135.

[18] Nathusius, ‘Die Racen des Schweines,’ s. 71.

[19] ‘Die Racen des Schweines,’ s. 47. ‘Schweineschädel’ s. 104.

Compare, also, the figures of the old Irish and the improved Irish

breeds in Richardson on ‘The Pig,’ 1847.

[20] Quoted by Isid. Geoffroy, ‘Hist. Nat. Gén.,’ tom. iii. p. 441.

[21] S. Sidney, ‘The Pig,’ p. 61.

[22] ‘Schweineschädel,’ s. 2, 20.

[23] ‘Proc. Zoolog. Soc.,’ 1837, p. 23. I have not given the caudal

vertebræ, as Mr. Eyton says some might possibly have been lost. I have

added together the dorsal and lumbar vertebræ, owing to Prof. Owen’s

remarks (‘Journal Linn. Soc.,’ vol. ii. p. 28) on the difference

between dorsal and lumbar vertebræ depending only on the development

of the ribs. Nevertheless the difference in the number of the ribs in

pigs deserves notice. M. Sanson gives the number of lumbar vertebræ in

various pigs; ‘Comptes Rendus,’ lxiii. p. 843.

[24] ‘Edinburgh New Philosoph. Journal,’ April, 1863. _See also_ De

Blainville’s ‘Ostéographie,’ p. 128, for various authorities on this

subject.

[25] Eudes-Deslongchamps, ‘Mémoires de la Soc. Linn. de Normandie,’

vol. vii., 1842, p. 41. Richardson, ‘Pigs, their Origin, etc.,’ 1847,

p. 30. Nathusius, ‘Die Racen des Schweines,’ 1863, s. 54.

[26] D. Johnson’s ‘Sketches of Indian Field Sports,’ p. 272. Mr.

Crawfurd informs me that the same fact holds good with the wild pigs

of the Malay peninsula.

[27] For Turkish pigs _see_ Desmarest, ‘Mammalogie,’ 1820, p. 391. For

those of Westphalia _see_ Richardson’s ‘Pigs, their Origin, etc.,’

1847, p. 41.

[28] With respect to the several foregoing and following statements on

feral pigs, _see_ Roulin, in ‘Mém. présentés par divers Savans a

l’Acad.,’ etc., Paris, tom. vi. 1835, p. 326. It should be observed

that his account does not apply to truly feral pigs; but to pigs long

introduced into the country and living in a half-wild state. For the

truly feral pigs of Jamaica, _see_ Gosse’s ‘Sojourn in Jamaica,’ 1851,

p. 386; and Col. Hamilton Smith, in ‘Nat. Library,’ vol. ix. p. 93.

With respect to Africa _see_ Livingstone’s ‘Expedition to the

Zambesi,’ 1865, p. 153. The most precise statement with respect to the

tusks of the West Indian feral boars is by P. Labat (quoted by

Roulin); but this author attributes the state of these pigs to descent

from a domestic stock which he saw in Spain. Admiral Sulivan, R.N.,

had ample opportunities of observing the wild pigs on Eagle Islet in

the Falklands; and he informs me that they resembled wild boars with

bristly ridged backs and large tusks. The pigs which have run wild in

the province of Buenos Ayres (Rengger ‘Säugethiere,’ s. 331) have not

reverted to the wild type. De Blainville (‘Ostéographie,’ p. 132)

refers to two skulls of domestic pigs sent from Patagonia by Al.

d’Orbigny, and he states that they have the occipital elevation of the

wild European boar, but that the head altogether is “plus courte et

plus ramassée.” He refers, also, to the skin of a feral pig from North

America, and says “il ressemble tout à fait à un petit sanglier, mais

il est presque tout noir, et peut-être un peu plus ramassé dans ses

formes.”

[29] Gosse’s ‘Jamaica,’ p. 386, with a quotation from Williamson’s

‘Oriental Field Sports.’ Also Col. Hamilton Smith, in ‘Naturalist

Library,’ vol. ix. p. 94.

[30] S. Sidney’s edition of ‘Youatt on the Pig,’ 1860, pp. 7, 26, 27,

29, 30.

[31] ‘Schweineschädel’ s. 140.

[32] ‘Die Fauna der Pfahlbauten,’ 1861, s. 109, 149, 222. _See also_

Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire in ‘Mém. du Mus. d’Hist. Nat.,’ tom. x. p. 172;

and his son Isidore in ‘Hist. Nat. Gen.’ tom. iii. p. 69. Vasey, in

his ‘Delineations of the Ox Tribe,’ 1851, p. 127, says the zebu has

four, and common ox five, sacral vertebræ. Mr. Hodgson found the ribs

either thirteen or fourteen in number; _see_ a note in ‘Indian Field,’

1858, p. 62.

[33] ‘The Indian Field,’ 1858, p. 74, where Mr. Blyth gives his

authorities with respect to the feral humped cattle. Pickering, also,

in his ‘Races of Man,’ 1850, p. 274, notices the peculiar grunt-like

character of the voice of the humped cattle.

[34] Mr. H. E. Marquand, in ‘The Times,’ June 23rd, 1856.

[35] Vasey, ‘Delineations of the Ox-Tribe,’ p. 124. Brace’s ‘Hungary,’

1851, p. 94. The Hungarian cattle descend, according to Rütimeyer

‘Zahmen Europ. Rindes,’ 1866, s. 13 from _Bos primigenius._

[36] Moll and Gayot, ‘La Connaissance Gén. du Bœuf,’ Paris, 1860. Fig.

82 is that of the Podolian breed.

[37] A translation appeared in three parts in the ‘Annals and Mag. of

Nat. Hist.,’ 2nd series, vol. iv., 1849.

[38] _See also_ Rütimeyer’s ‘Beiträge pal. Gesch. der Wiederkäuer

Basel,’ 1865, s. 54.

[39] Pictet ‘Paléontologie,’ tom. i. p. 365 (2nd edit.). With respect

to _B. trochoceros, see_ Rütimeyer ‘Zahmen Europ. Rindes,’ 1866, s.

26.

[40] W. Boyd Dawkins on the British Fossil Oxen, ‘Journal of the

Geolog. Soc.,’ Aug. 1867, p. 182. Also ‘Proc. Phil. Soc. of

Manchester,’ Nov. 14th, 1871, and ‘Cave Hunting,’ 1875, p. 27, 138.

[41] ‘British Pleistocene Mammalia,’ by W. B. Dawkins and W. A.

Sandford, 1866, p. 15.

[42] W. R. Wilde, ‘An Essay on the Animal Remains, etc. Royal Irish

Academy,’ 1860, p. 29. Also ‘Proc. of R. Irish Academy,’ 1858, p. 48.

[43] ‘Lecture: Royal Institution of G. Britain,’ May 2nd, 1856, p. 4.

‘British Fossil Mammals,’ p. 513.

[44] Nilsson, in ‘Annals and Mag. of Nat. Hist.,’ 1849, vol. iv. p.

354.

[45] _See_ W. R. Wilde, ut supra; and Mr. Blyth, in ‘Proc. Irish

Academy,’ March 5th, 1864.

[46] Laing’s ‘Tour in Norway,’ p. 110.

[47] Isid. Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, ‘Hist. Nat. Gén.,’ tom. iii. 96.

[48] Idem, tom. iii. pp. 82, 91.

[49] ‘Quadrupèdes du Paraguay,’ tom. ii. p. 360.

[50] Walther ‘Das Rindvieh,’ 1817, s. 30.

[51] I am much indebted to the present Earl of Tankerville for

information about his wild cattle; and for the skull which was sent to

Prof. Rütimeyer. The fullest account of the Chillingham cattle is

given by Mr. Hindmarsh, together with a letter by the late Lord

Tankerville, in ‘Annals and Mag. of Nat. Hist.,’ vol. ii., 1839, p.

274. _See_ Bewick, ‘Quadrupeds,’ 2nd edit., 1791, p. 35, note. With

respect to those of the Duke of Queensberry, _see_ Pennant’s ‘Tour in

Scotland,’ p. 109. For those of Chartley, _see_ Low’s ‘Domesticated

Animals of Britain,’ 1845, p. 238. For those of Gisburne, _see_ Bewick

‘Quadrupeds,’ and ‘Encyclop. of Rural Sports,’ p. 101.

[52] Boethius was born in 1470; ‘Annals and Mag. of Nat. Hist.,’ vol.

ii., 1839, p. 281; and vol. iv., 1849, p. 424.

[53] n’Youatt on Cattle,’ 1834, p. 48: _See also_ p. 242, on

short-horn cattle. Bell, in his ‘British Quadrupeds,’ p. 423, states

that, after long attending to the subject, he has found that white

cattle invariably have coloured ears.ote

[54] Azara, ‘Quadrupèdes du Paraguay,’ tom. ii. p. 361. Azara quotes

Buffon for the feral cattle of Africa. For Texas _ see_ ‘Times,’ Feb.

18th, 1846.

[55] Anson’s Voyage. _See_ Kerr and Porter’s ‘Collection,’ vol. xii.

p. 103.

[56] _See also_ Mr. Mackinnon’s pamphlet on the Falkland Islands, p.

24.

[57] ‘The Age of the Ox, Sheep, Pig,’ etc., by Prof. James Simonds,

published by order of the Royal Agricult. Soc.

[58] ‘Ann. Agricult. France,’ April, 1837, as quoted in ‘The

Veterinary,’ vol. xii. p. 725. I quote Tessier’s observations from

‘Youatt on Cattle,’ p. 527.

[59] ‘The Veterinary,’ vol. viii. p. 681 and vol. x. p. 268. Low’s

‘Domest. Animals, etc.’ p. 297.

[60] Mr. Ogleby in ‘Proc. Zoolog. Soc.,’ 1836, p. 138, and 1840, p. 4.

Quatrefages quotes Philippi (‘Revue des Cours Scientifiques,’ Feb. 12,

1688, p. 657), that the cattle of Piacentino have thirteen dorsal

vertebræ and ribs in the place of the ordinary number of twelve.

[61] Leguat’s Voyage, quoted by Vasey in his ‘Delineations of the

Ox-tribe,’ p. 132.

[62] ‘Travels in South Africa,’ pp. 317, 336.

[63] ‘Mem. de l’Institut présent. par divers Savans,’ tom. vi., 1835,

p. 333. For Brazil, _see_ ‘Comptes Rendus,’ June 15, 1846. _See_ Azara

‘Quadrupèdes du Paraguay,’ tom. ii. pp. 359, 361.

[64] ‘Schweineschädel,’ 1864, s. 104. Nathusius states that the form

of skull characteristic in the niata cattle occasionally appears in

European cattle; but he is mistaken, as we shall hereafter see, in

supposing that these cattle do not form a distinct race. Prof. Wyman,

of Cambridge, United States, informs me that the common cod-fish

presents a similar monstrosity, called by the fishermen “bull-dog

cod.” Prof. Wyman also concluded, after making numerous inquiries in

La Plata, that the niata cattle transmit their peculiarities or form a

race.

[65] ‘Ueber Art des zahmen Europ. Rindes,’ 1866, s. 28.

[66] ‘Descriptive Cat. of Ost. Collect. of College of Surgeons,’ 1853,

p. 624. Vasey in his ‘Delineations of the Ox-tribe’ has given a figure

of this skull; and I sent a photograph of it to Prof. Rütimeyer.

[67] Loudon’s ‘Magazine of Nat. Hist.,’ vol. i. 1829, p. 113. Separate

figures are given of the animal, its hoofs, eye, and dewlap.

[68] Low, ‘Domesticated Animals of the British Isles,’ p. 264.

[69] ‘Mém. de l’Institut présent. Par divers Savans,’ tom. vi., 1835,

p. 332.

[70] Idem, pp. 304, 368, etc.

[71] ‘Youatt on Cattle,’ p. 193. A full account of this bull is taken

from Marshall.

[72] ‘Youatt on Cattle,’ p. 116. Lord Spencer has written on this same

subject.

[73] Blyth, on the genus Ovis, in ‘Annals and Mag. of Nat. History,’

vol. vii., 1841, p. 261. With respect to the parentage of the breeds

_see_ Mr. Blyth’s excellent articles in ‘Land and Water,’ 1867, pp.

134, 156. Gervais, ‘Hist. Nat. des Mammifères,’ 1855, tom. ii. p. 191.

[74] Dr. L. Fitzinger, ‘Ueber die Racen des Zahmen Schafes,’ 1860, s.

86.

[75] J. Anderson, ‘Recreations in Agriculture and Natural History,’

vol. ii. p. 264.

[76] ‘Pfahlbauten’ s. 127, 193.

[77] ‘Youatt on Sheep,’ p. 120.

[78] ‘Journal of the Asiatic Soc. of Bengal,’ vol.xvi. pp. 1007, 1016.

[79] ‘Youatt on Sheep,’ pp. 142-169.

[80] ‘Journal Asiat. Soc. of Bengal,’ vol. xvi., 1847, p. 1015.

[81] ‘Hist. Nat. Gén.,’ tom. iii. p. 435.

[82] ‘Youatt on Sheep,’ p. 138.

[83] ‘Journal Asiat. Soc. of Bengal,’ vol. xvi., 1847, pp. 1015, 1016.

[84] ‘Racen des Zahmen Schafes,’ s. 77.

[85] ‘Rural Economy of Norfolk,’ vol. ii. p. 136.

[86] ‘Youatt on Sheep,’ p. 312. On same subject, _see_ excellent

remarks in ‘Gardener’s Chronicle,’ 1858, p. 868. For experiments in

crossing Cheviot sheep with Leicesters _see_ Youatt, p. 325.

[87] ‘Youatt on Sheep,’ note, p. 491.

[88] M. Malingié-Nouel, ‘Journal R. Agricult. Soc.,’ vol. xiv. 1853,

p. 214. Translated and therefore approved by a great authority, Mr.

Pusey.

[89] ‘The Veterinary,’ vol. x. p. 217.

[90] A translation of his paper is given in ‘Bull. Soc. Imp.

d’Acclimat.,’ tom. ix., 1862, p. 723.

[91] Erman’s ‘Travels in Siberia,’ (Eng. trans.) vol. i. p. 228. For

Pallas on the fat-tailed sheep I quote from Anderson’s account of the

‘Sheep of Russia,’ 1794, p. 34. With respect to the Crimean sheep

_see_ Pallas’ ‘Travels’ (Eng. trans.) vol. ii. p. 454. For the

Karakool sheep _see_ Burnes’ ‘Travels in Bokhara,’ vol. iii. p. 151.

[92] _See_ Report of the Directors of the Sierra Leone Company, as

quoted in White’s ‘Gradation of Man,’ p. 95. With respect to the

change which sheep undergo in the West Indies _ see also_ Dr. Davy, in

‘Edin. New. Phil. Journal,’ Jan. 1852. For the statement made by

Roulin, _see_ ‘Mém. de l’Institut présent. par divers Savans,’ tom.

vi., 1835, p. 347.

[93] ‘Youatt on Sheep,’ p. 69, where Lord Somerville is quoted. _See_

p. 117 on the presence of wool under the hair. With respect to the

fleeces of Australian sheep, p. 185. On selection counteracting any

tendency to change, _see_ pp. 70, 117, 120, 168.

[94] Audubon and Bachman, ‘The Quadrupeds of North America,’ 1846,

vol. v. p. 365.

[95] ‘Journal of R. Agricult. Soc. of England,’ vol. xx., part ii., W.

C. Spooner on cross-Breeding.

[96] ‘Philosoph. Transactions,’ London, 1813, p. 88.

[97] Isidore Geoffroy St. Hilaire, ‘Hist. Nat. Générale,’ tom. iii. p.

87. Mr. Blyth, (‘Land and Water,’ 1867, p. 37) has arrived at a

similar conclusion, but he thinks that certain Eastern races may

perhaps be in part descended from the Asiatic markhor.

[98] Rütimeyer ‘Pfahlbauten,’ s. 127.

[99] Godron ‘De l’Espèce,’ tom. i. p. 402.

[100] ‘Annals and Mag. of Nat. History,’ vol ii. (2nd series), 1848,

p. 363.

[101] ‘De l’Espèce,’ tom. i. p. 406. Mr. Clark also refers to

differences in the shape of the mammæ. Godron states that in the

Nubian race the scrotum is divided into two lobes; and Mr. Clark gives

a ludicrous proof of this fact, for he saw in the Mauritius a male

goat of the Muscat breed purchased at a high price for a female in

full milk. These differences in the scrotum are probably not due to

descent from distinct species: for Mr. Clark states that this part

varies much in form.

[102] Mr. Clark, ‘Annals and Mag. of Nat. Hist.,’ vol. ii. (2nd

series), 1848, p. 361.

[103] Desmarest, ‘Encyclop. Méthod. Mammalogie,’ p. 480.

[104] ‘Journal of Asiatic Soc. of Bengal,’ vol. xvi., 1847, pp. 1020,

1025.