[Sidenote: Claudian. de Laud. Stilicon. L. +iii.+]
_Hæ nare sagaces._
The multitudinous varieties of this class have one common quality,
by which they are united in the same family, and which Gratius terms
“venandi sagax virtus,” diversified in its phenomena, and operative
under great dissimilarity of external shape.[367]
Of the larger and more powerful varieties the type is given by Xenophon
in the third and fourth chapters of his Cynegeticus, and by Julius
Pollux in the fifth book of his Onomasticon:—that of the smaller and
more nimble sorts will be found hereafter in the examples of the Canis
Petronius of Gratius, and the Canis Agassæus of Oppian. The names of
the hounds, principally derived from the countries of which they were
supposed to be indigenous, have been already enumerated. Their mode of
hunting is faithfully struck off by the Latin poet of the Halieutica,
a fragment of disputed authorship, heretofore attributed to Ovid, but
latterly to Gratius:
[Sidenote: Halieutic. vs. 100.]
Quæ nunc elatis rimantur naribus auras,
Et nunc demisso quærunt vestigia rostro,
Et produnt clamore feram, dominumque vocando
Increpitant. Quem si collatis effugit armis,
Insequitur tumulosque canis camposque per omnes.
In our descriptions of the pugnacious class, we followed, where able,
the order of the Faliscian’s Cynegeticon,—filling up lacunæ, when
apparent, from extraneous sources; but, in the present class, we
have no such text-book by which to regulate our progress, and must
be beholden to the Greek and Latin Cynegetica, collectively, for an
arrangement of the individuals of this class in such sequence, as the
scale of their importance in the kennels of antiquity may seem to
justify. And first, and foremost, we place the well-known hound of
Lacedæmon.
[Sidenote: Xenophon Cyneg. c. +iii.+]
[Sidenote: Pollucis Onomast. L. +v.+ c. +v.+ 39.]
The Spartan dog, in its two varieties of Castorian and Foxite, was
employed by Xenophon for the common purposes of hunting.[368] The
Καστόριαι were so called ὅτι Κάστωρ ἡσθεὶς τῷ ἔργῳ μάλιστα αὐτὰς
διεφύλαξεν; or, in the words of the Onomasticon, because they were
Κάστορος θρέμματα, Ἀπόλλωνος τὸ δῶρον.
[Sidenote: Nonni Dionysiac. L. +xvi.+]
ἄξομαι ἐκ Σπάρτης ἑτέρους κύνας, οὓς ἀτιτάλλει
ἠϊθέων ἐς ἔρωτα ἐμὸς κάρνειος Ἀπόλλων.
[Sidenote: Xen. Cyneg. c. +iii.+]
The ἀλωπεκίδες had their name διότι ἐκ κυνῶν καὶ ἀλωπέκων ἐγένοντο;
Castor, according to Nicander, having united the dog to the fox, and
produced a hybrid sort of sporting hound of great repute.
[Sidenote: Natalis Comes de Venat. L. +i.+]
Castorides venatori gratissima turba.
[Sidenote: Hist. Animal. L. +ix.+ c. +i.+]
But as if Castor and Pollux, being twin brothers, born ὠδῖνι μιῇ,
(Apollon. L. +i.+) possessed a common identity, the honour of
having first initiated the canine race in the pursuit of game,
is indifferently awarded to both. Oppian, we have already seen,
bestows it on Pollux, and Xenophon on Castor—“ovo prognatus eodem.”
Aristotle considers all the Canes Laconici to be of the sort called
ἀλωπεκίδες—not that they were all sprung from the fox and dog, but were
fox-like in appearance:—and on the same authority, we hold that the
bitches of a Spartan kennel were superior to the dogs—Λάκαιναι κύνες αἱ
θήλειαι εὐφυέστεραι τῶν ἀῤῥένων εἰσί.
[Sidenote: Oratio +xxvii.+]
Although the eloquent compiler of the Cynegeticus distinguishes his
harriers, as above stated, into Castorian and Foxite hounds, he
notes no characteristic peculiarities in either: but Themistius, the
Paphlagonian philosopher, induces us to believe that each possessed
the distinctive features of a particular family—ἕτερον μὲν κάλλος
καστορίδων κύνων, ἕτερον δὲ ἀλωπεκίδων. Vlitius’s fanciful emendation
of the text of the Onomasticon has led him into an error, and produced
the monstrous birth of a third variety, which he ascribes to Julius
Pollux, called ἀλωπεκικαστόρες; but which that learned man’s work will
not admit.
Of the whole Spartan tribe the swiftest, perhaps, were the κυνοσουρίδες
of Callimachus—deriving their name from Cynosura of Laconia—
[Sidenote: Statii Thebaid. L. +iv.+]
Dives et Orchomenos pecorum, et Cynosura ferarum.
They were the gift of the Arcadian God Pan to Diana, and possessed
sagacity of nose equal to their speed of foot:[369]
[Sidenote: Callimach. H. in Dian. vs. 93.]
ἑπτὰ δ’ ἔδωκε
θάσσονας αὐράων κυνοσουρίδας, αἵ ῥα διῶξαι
ὤκισται νεβρούς τε καὶ οὐ μύοντα λαγωὸν,
καὶ κοίτην ἐλάφοιο, καὶ ὕστριχος ἔνθα καλιαὶ
σημῆναι, καὶ ζορκὸς ἐπ’ ἴχνιον ἡγήσασθαι....
—and near a-kin to them, we may suppose, if not of the same blood, were
the brace presented by the worshipful Agrotera to her much-favoured
Cyrene:
[Sidenote: Ejusd. vs. 207.]
—θηρητῆρε δύω κύνε, τοῖς ἔνι κούρη
Ὑψηῒς παρὰ τύμβον Ἰώλκιον ἔμμορ’ ἀέθλου.
[Sidenote: Xenophon de Venat. c. +x.+]
But of fable, enough—The Spartan’s shape, qualities, and style of
hunting, singly and in pack, are fully described by Xenophon in the
third, fourth, and sixth chapters of his Manual. The quarry is here
that of which the Athenian was most enamoured, viz. the hare,—with
which the woods and parks of his Scilluntian retreat abounded. But for
the boar-chase the hound of Lacedæmon is also employed. To the Indian,
Cretan, and Locrian dogs, the sportsman, who would successfully combat
the savage boar, must add the choicest individuals of the Spartan
kennel. And in this chase, he will find one of the latter hounds most
useful as a _limier_,[370] to follow up the trail to the boar’s couch
in silence, and then, with the rest of the pack, to bay the started
quarry:
[Sidenote: Silii Italici de 2^{do} bello Punico L. +i.+]
Fulmineus seu Spartanis latratibus actus,
Cum sylvam occursu venantum perdidit, hirto
Horrescit sævus dorso, et postrema capessit
Prælia, candentem mandens aper ore cruorem:
Jamque gemens geminum contra venabula torquet.
[Sidenote: Onomastic. L. +v.+ 37.]
[Sidenote: Propert. L. +ii.+ 13.]
Julius Pollux, on the authority of Nicander, has transmitted to us
subordinate varieties of the Spartan, entitled _Menelaides_ from
Menelaus, _Harmodii_ from Harmodius, and others from other persons,
and places of inferior note. Virgil applies the epithets _Taygetan_
to the race, from the “juga longa Taygeti” which traverse Laconia, a
favourite resort of the Sylvan Goddess:
[Sidenote: Virgil. Georg. L. +iii.+ 43.]
vocat ingenti clamore Cithæron,
Taygetique canes:
and _Amyclean_, from the birth-place of Castor and Pollux:
[Sidenote: Ejusdem vs. 343.]
omnia secum
Armentarius Afer agit, tectumque laremque,
Armaque Amyclæumque canem, Cressamque pharetram;
a local epithet also found in a supposed fragment of Pindar, cited
by Plutarch, Quæst. Conviv. +ix.+ 15. 748. and admitted amongst the
Fragmenta ex Hyporchematibus. Vol. +ii.+ of Heyne’s edition. (Oxon.
1807.)
But a few words, before we proceed farther, on the lineage of the
ἀλωπεκίδες.
[Sidenote: Bulletin Universel.]
Modern naturalists, with the exception of Mons. Desmoulins, are pretty
generally agreed that the Canis _aureus_ is the real origin of the
domestic dog. And if so, being a native of Asia Minor, and of a dirty
fulvous colour, may we not suppose him to have been the cross, from
which the foxite hounds of Xenophon were bred? The latter had more
or less of a ferine aspect, and fulvous colour, softened down by the
admixture of hair of a different hue about the muzzle. Still tawny was
the predominant colour—“_fulvus_ Lacon,” (Hor.)
[Sidenote: Philosoph. Transact. Vol. 77. p. 24.]
Mr. Hunter denies the existence of a genuine foxite, as the dog and fox
are of different species, and will not produce together. Guldenstadt
allows the jackal may be the Thos of Aristotle. May he not also be the
Thos of Gratius, and “_Cat o’ mountaine_”[371] of his translator? May
not Hagnon’s pack,[372]
[Sidenote: Gratii Cyneg. vs. 250.]
Hagnon magne, tibi Divôm concessa favore,
derived from a Thoan cross, and other such semiferous commixtures, be
founded in fact?
[Sidenote: Ejusdem vs. 253.]
Hic et semiferam Thoum de sanguine prolem
Finxit. Non alio major sua pectore virtus,
Seu nôrit voces, seu nudi ad pignora Martis.
Thoës commissos (clarissima fama) leones
Et subiêre astu, et parvis domuêre lacertis.
Nam genus exiguum, et pudeat quàm informe fateri
Vulpinâ specie, &c.
[Sidenote: Pennant’s Quadrupeds.]
[Sidenote: Daniel’s Field-Sports. Vol. +i.+ p. 12.]
May not these possible tales have given currency and belief to the
supposed, impossible, fictitious, engendering of the fox and dog, and
the breed of semi-wild ἀλωπεκίδες?—Aristotle says roundly, when animals
resemble each other in size, outward character, and time of gestation,
they may breed together; and that it positively happens with the dog,
fox, and wolf—οἱ δὲ θῶες, says the Stagirite also, ὁμοίως κυΐσκονται
τοῖς κυσὶ, καὶ τίκτουσι τυφλὰ, κ. τ. λ.—and therefore, by his own
canons, may engender with dogs. Galen, Hesychius, and Gesner, seem to
allow the possibility of vulpi-canine issue: Caius accounts for such
a birth by the “pruriens libido” of the parties concerned:[373] even
Blumenbach and Desmoulins, on the authority of others, have given
credency to it. Pennant reports a case of prolific engendering of the
fox and dog, on the word of an Oxfordshire woodman; and Daniel cites
a second in London. Hunter, who assumed nothing in natural history of
doubtful character as fact, till he had put it to the test, denies this
cross, _à priori_, not from actual experiment; for he did not live to
make the trial. The former crosses he fully established: see Phil.
Trans. Vol. 77.
May not Ovid be supposed to allude to the cross of the Thos and dog,
and to exemplify it in the individual of Actæon’s pack whom he calls
Thous?
[Sidenote: Ovid. Metam. L. +iii.+ 220.]
Et Thous, et Cyprio velox cum fratre Lycisca.
[Sidenote: Cyneg. L. +iii.+ vs. 336.]
The fanciful origin of Oppian’s Thos from the wolf and panther, ὅθεν
κρατερόφρονα φῦλα, baffles all elucidation.
[Sidenote: Philosoph. Transactions. Vol. 77.]
Let the ἀλωπεκίδες, then, be considered as possible hybrids, the
produce of authenticated crosses.[374] The wolf, jackal, and dog, all
differ but little. “The dog himself,” says Mr. Hunter, “may be the
wolf tamed, and the jackal may probably be the dog returned to his wild
state.”
All animals having been originally wild, the more a specific class may
differ from its prototype in appearance, the further it is removed in
consequence of variation arising from cultivation. Where dogs have been
least cultivated, they still retain most of their original character,
or similarity to the wolf, or jackal, both in shape and disposition.
Thus the shepherd’s dog, all over the world, has strongly the character
of these wild animals—and so I have no doubt had the dog of Laconia.
The wild dogs of modern travellers, as found in Congo, Lower Æthiopia,
and towards the Cape of Good Hope, somewhat resemble the Spartan
type. They are stated to be “greyhound-like in shape, red-haired,
with upright ears, rough tails, and extremely fierce.” The Dingo of
Australasia, and Dhole of the East Indies, look very like ἀλωπεκίδες.
The North and South-American half-reclaimed varieties have the
elongated jaws of the semi-barbarous breeds, and tend to prove from
their general shape, their character of countenance, their quick
manner, and pricked and erect ears, identity of species in the dog,
wolf, and jackal.
But on this subject enough:—let us now return within the pale of the
kennel of Lacedæmon. The true Spartan dogs of the olden time were
strong, swift, and courageous; and barked on scent of their game. We
know that they were strong, on the authority of Ovid’s “prævalidusque
Lacon;” and swift, from Virgil calling them “Veloces Spartæ catulos,”
and Pindar alluding to the same excellence in the fragment beginning
[Sidenote: Apud Athenæi Deipnosoph. Epist. L. +i.+ c. 21.]
ἀπὸ Ταϋγέτου μὲν Λάκαιναν
ἐπὶ θηρσὶ κύνα τρέχειν πυκινώτατον ἑρπετόν.
Still their speed, like that of the Etolian of Gratius, was of a
qualified character, and very much below the Vertragus.
Their strength and courage recommended them to shepherds and herdsmen,
as guardians of their flocks—the goatherd Lacon’s dog, from his
venatico-pastoral cast, being probably, of this variety.
[Sidenote: Theocriti Idyll. v. 106.]
χ’ ἁμῖν ἐντὶ κύων φιλοποίμνιος, ὃς λύκος ἄγχει·
ὃν τῷ παιδὶ δίδωμι τὰ θηρία πάντα διώκεν.
Virgil enjoins feeding the Spartan and Molossian on fattening whey, for
the safe custody of cattle;
[Sidenote: Virgil. Georg. L. +iii.+ 404.]
Veloces Spartæ catulos, acremque Molossum
Pasce sero pingui: nunquam custodibus illis
Nocturnum stabulis furem, incursusque luporum,
Aut impacatos à tergo horrebis Iberos....
and briefly runs through the ordinary chases in which the canine tribe
generally are used;
[Sidenote: Ejusdem vs. 409.]
Sæpè etiam cursu timidos agitabis onagros;
Et canibus leporem, canibus venabere damas.
Sæpè volutabris pulsos sylvestribus apros
Latratu turbabis agens: montesque per altos
Ingentem clamore premes in retia cervum.
The trailing quality of the Spartan, and keenness of scent,[375] Plato
refers to, in his Parmenides—ὥσπεργε αἱ Λάκαιναι σκύλακες μεταθεὶς καὶ
ἰχνεύεις τὰ λεχθέντα, (Zeno Socrati)—and Sophocles in the prologue
of the Ajax Flagellifer, where the wily son of Laertes, tracking the
murderous maniac, Αἴαντι τῷ σακεσφόρῳ, is likened to a sharp-nosed
Spartan hound,
[Sidenote: Sophoclis Ajac. Flagell. vs. 7.]
εὖ δέ σ’ ἐκφέρει
κυνὸς Λακαίνης ὥστις εὔρινος βάσις.
Homer’s kindly and vivid description of the hunting excellencies of
the faithful Argus, his keenness of sight and smell, and speed of
foot, would lead us to place him amongst the swiftest of the sagacious
class: and where can we assign him a more honourable station than in a
Spartan kennel?—I am aware some ancient Greek writer (to whom I have
lost my clue of reference) considers this far-famed hound an isolated
variety of no particular family—ὅμως ἡ φύσις καὶ ἐν ἄλλοις καὶ ἅπασι
τόποις διασπείρει κύνας ἀγαθοὺς, ὁποῖός τις καὶ ὁ Ἄργος—not reducible
within the pale of a general classification founded on geographical
distribution; but he has evidently all the characteristic qualities of
a genuine Spartan, and I never heard of any breed peculiar to Ithaca.
[Sidenote: Odyss. L. +xvii.+ 292.]
Ἄργος Ὀδυσσῆος ταλασίφρονος, ὅν ῥά ποτ’ αὐτὸς
θρέψε μὲν, οὐδ’ ἀπόνητο· πάρος δ’ εἰς Ἴλιον ἱρὴν
ᾤχετο· τὸν δὲ πάροιθεν ἀγίνεσκον νέοι ἄνδρες
αἶγας ἐπ’ ἀγροτέρας, ἠδὲ πρόκας, ἠδὲ λαγωούς.
[Sidenote: Pope’s Odyssey. B. +xvii.+ 348.]
Bred by Ulysses, nourish’d at his board,
But ah! not fated long to please his lord!
To him his swiftness and his strength were vain;
The voice of glory call’d him o’er the main.
Till then in every sylvan chase renown’d,
With Argus, Argus, rung the woods around;
With him the youth pursued the goat or fawn,
Or traced the mazy lev’ret o’er the lawn.
The answer of Eumæus, in which he fondly dilates on the prowess of the
old dog in the better days of his youth, throws farther light on his
supposed connexion with a Spartan kennel:
[Sidenote: Odyss. L. +xvii.+ 316.]
οὐ μὲν γάρ τι φύγεσκε βαθείης βένθεσιν ὕλης
κνώδαλον ὅττι ἴδοιτο· καὶ ἴχνεσι γὰρ περιῄδη....
—evidently showing that he ran on _sight_ of his game as well as
_scent_: for the common reading ἴδοιτο is preferable to the δίοιτο of
Eustathius, and is followed by Pope in his inimitable translation:
[Sidenote: Pope’s Odyssey. B. +xvii.+ 380.]
Oh! had you seen him, vig’rous, bold and young,
Swift as a stag, and as a lion strong;
Him no fell savage on the plain withstood,
None ’scaped him, bosom’d in the gloomy wood;
His eye how piercing, and his scent how true,
To wind the vapour in the tainted dew!
[Sidenote: See Scott’s “Maida:” a Scene at Abbotsford.]
A Spartan huntsman might value such omnifarious qualifications; but
we cannot allow such a hound, εἰ δὴ καὶ ταχὺς ἔσκε θέειν, within the
precincts of a coursing kennel, where speed and keen-sightedness are
essential properties, according to the modern canons of the leash;
but to stoop to “the tainted green” with the sagacity of a harrier,
or even of a Caledonian deer-hound, of which Argus has been deemed a
prototype, invalidates the claim to εὐγένεια in the breed.[376]