Seu canis umbrosam lustrans Gortynia vallem,
Si veteris poterit cervæ comprendere lustra,
Sævit in absentem, et circum vestigia latrans
Aëra per nitidum tenues sectatur odores:
Non amnes illam medii, non ardua tardant,
Perdita nec seræ meminit decedere nocti.
—affording the Cilician copyist one of a profusion of highly poetical
similes, with which he depicts the polypus, or preke, searching for its
beloved olive-tree:
[Sidenote: Oppian. Halieut. L. +iv.+ vs. 272.]
ἔνθα γὰρ ἀγλαόκαρπος ἁλὸς σχεδόν ἐστιν ἐλαίη
γείτοσιν ἐν γουνοῖσιν ἐπακταίη τεθαλυῖα,
κεῖθι δὲ πουλύποδος νόος ἕλκεται, ἠΰτ’ ἐπ’ ἴχνος
Κνωσσίου εὐρίνοιο κυνὸς μένος, ὅστ’ ἐν ὄρεσσι
θηρὸς ἀνιχνεύει σκολιὴν βάσιν ἐξερεείνων
ῥινὸς ὑπ’ ἀγγελίῃ νημερτέϊ, καί τέ μιν ὦκα
μάρψε, καὶ οὐκ ἐμάτησεν, ἑὸν δ’ ἐπέλασσεν ἄνακτα·
ὣς καὶ τηλεθόωσαν ἄφαρ μάθεν ἐγγὺς ἐλαίην
πούλυπος, ἐκδύνει δὲ βυθῶν, καὶ γαῖαν ἀνέρπει
καγχαλόων, πρέμνοισι δ’ Ἀθηναίης ἐπέλασσεν.
[Sidenote: See Wernsdorf in loco.]
In connexion with the kindred Spartans, the Cretans are briefly
mentioned by Gratius,—an allusion being, probably, intended to
an intermixture of the two allied breeds in order to produce the
Metagon,[378] whose praises are subsequently sung:
[Sidenote: Gratii Cyneg. vs. 211.]
At vestrum non vile genus, non patria vulgò,
Sparta suos et Creta suos promittit alumnos.
[Sidenote: Wase’s Illustrations. c. 5. p. 38.]
To your high breed countries of dogs not base,
Sparta and Creta do conferre their race.
Ovid specifies them by name in Actæon’s blood-thirsty pack,
[Sidenote: Ovid. Metam. L. +iii.+ 206.]
primusque Melampus
Ichnobatesque sagax latratu signa dedêre;
Gnossius Ichnobates, Spartanâ gente Melampus;
and subsequently a litter,
[Sidenote: Golding’s Ovid’s Metam. B. +iii.+]
that had a sire of Crete
And dam of Sparta,
as sings Sir Arthur Golding:
[Sidenote: Ovid. Metam. vs. 223.]
Et patre Dictæo, sed matre Laconide nati,
Labros et Agriodos, et acutæ vocis Hylactor.
Indeed almost all the Ovidian pack were of Cretan, Spartan, and
Arcadian blood, well chosen by the poet for the fabled chase of the son
of Autonoë,[379] “falsi sub imagine cervi”—[380]
[Sidenote: Nonni Dionysiac. L. +v.+]
εὖτε τανυπρέμνοιο καθήμενος ὑψόθι φηγοῦ,
λουομένης ἐνόησεν ὅλον δέμας ἰοχεαίρης·
θηητὴρ δ’ ἀκόρητος ἀθηήτοιο θεαίνης
ἁγνὸν ἀνυμφεύτοιο δέμας διεμέτρεε κούρης
ἀγχιφανὴς, κ. τ. λ.
The whole of the Spartan family, inclusive of the Cretan and Carian,
appear to have barked, as I have already observed, on scent of their
game[381]—a quality reprobated by Gratius (malignum officium!) when
shown before the quarry was started from his lair.
The noisy bark of the Etolian breed Gratius contrasts with the mute
cunning of its neighbour of Acarnania, already considered in the first
class:[382]
[Sidenote: Cyneg. vs. 186.]
At clangore citat, quos nondum conspicit, apros
Ætolâ quæcunque canis de stirpe (malignum
Officium) sive illa metus convicia rupit,
Seu frustra nimius properat furor. Et tamen illud
Ne vanum totas genus aspernere per artes,
Mirum quàm celeres, et quantum nare merentur:
Tum non est victi cui concessêre labori.
Too much addicted to _gladdening_, when near the lair of his game,
the Etolian is not admitted into the class of Canes Bellicosi,
whose general character was closeness till the game was started; at
which time a _cry_, however loud, was not objected to by classic
huntsmen,—but the dog, that roused the game by giving tongue
beforehand, was strongly reprobated. Such was the faulty dog of
Calydon, who needed all his other better qualities to counterbalance
this latrant propensity. That he had some valuable properties Gratius
allows, and recommends them to be turned to account by judicious
commixture with the mute Molossian’s blood:
[Sidenote: Cynegeticus vs. 106.]
vanæ tantum Calydonia linguæ
Exibit vitium patre emendata Molosso.[383]
In consequence of the common Canes Venatici giving tongue or _opening_,
before the game was roused, it was customary with classic sportsmen to
employ Inductores, mute finders, “canes tacitæ,” (Senecæ Hippolyt.,) to
search out the quarry by the trail;[384]
[Sidenote: Sir W. Davenant, Cant. +ii.+ stanza 30.]
Dogs such whose cold secrecy was meant
By nature for surprise—
Wise temperate limehounds, that proclaim no scent,
Nor harb’ring will their mouths in boasting spend.
[Sidenote: Wase, p. 79.]
These are the Metagontes of the Faliscian poet—so called from “drawing
after their game”—μετάγοντες:
[Sidenote: Gratii Cyneg. vs. 207.]
maturo pressantes gaudia lusu
Dissimulare feras tacitique accedere possent.
Steadiness and a _close_ mouth are essential attributes of the
limehound tribe.[385] Gratius, Lucan, Seneca, Ælian, and others, insist
on silence. And Oppian, seemingly forgetful of this negative quality
in the Armenian bear-hound, (whom I consider a limehound,) inculcates
_closeness_ in sagacious dogs, generally, from their very puppyhood;
[Sidenote: Oppian. Cyneg. L. +i.+ 448.]
μηδ’ ὑλάειν ἐθέλοιεν, ἐπεὶ μάλα θηρευτῆρσι
σιγὴ τέθμιός ἐστι, πανέξοχα δ’ ἰχνευτῆρσιν.
They are to be taught it with their names, and other matters of kennel
discipline.
The _limiers_ of classical antiquity, more numerous perhaps than the
reader may suppose, are found widely distributed. We gather traces
of them in Homer, Lucretius, Virgil, Pliny, Gratius, Ælian, Seneca,
Nemesian, Oppian, Silius Italicus, and others. The Belgic hound of the
poet of the Second Punic War is certainly an _inductor_ or _limier_:
[Sidenote: Silii Italici de 2^{do} B. P. L. +x.+ vs. 77.]
Ut canis ocultos agitat quum Belgicus apros,
Erroresque feræ sollers per devia mersâ
Nare legit, _tacitoque_ premens vestigia _rostro_
Lustrat inaccessos venantum indagine saltus:
Nec sistit, nisi conceptum sectatus odorem,
Deprendit spissis arcana cubilia dumis.
And it strikes me, that the Gelonian and Umbrian of Gratius, the Tuscan
of Nemesian, and the Armenian bear-hound of Oppian, are all varieties
of limehound. Of the Metagon, already mentioned, there can be no
doubt—he is clearly of the class described by the Greek poet of the
Halieutics:
[Sidenote: Oppian. Hal. L. +i.+ 18.]
σκύλακες δὲ συνέμποροι ἡγεμονῆες
κνώδαλα σημαίνουσι, καὶ ἰθύνουσιν ἄνακτας
εὐνὴν εἰς αὐτὴν—
The Homeric inductors occur in the boar-hunt of Mount Parnassus, in the
van of which Ulysses, οὐτάμεναι μεμαὼς, distinguishes himself, with the
sons of Autolycus:
[Sidenote: Odyss. L. +xix.+ 435.]
οἱ δ’ ἐς βῆσσαν ἵκανον ἐπακτῆρες· πρὸ δ’ ἄρ’ αὐτῶν
ἴχνη ἐρευνῶντες κύνες ἤϊσαν,[386] κ. τ. λ.
and the abstract phraseology of Lucretius affords a second early notice
of them:
[Sidenote: De Rerum Naturâ L. +iv.+ 684.]
tum fissa ferarum
Ungula quo tulerit gressum, præmissa canum vis
Ducit.
The first limehound in the annals of sporting was Glympicus, tutored in
the art of _harbouring_ by the Bœotian Hagnon, a huntsman immortalized
by Gratius:
[Sidenote: Gratii Cyneg. vs. 213.]
Sed primum celsâ lorum cervice ferentem,
Glympice, te silvis egit Bœotius Hagnon,
Hagnon Astylides, Hagnon, quem plurima semper
Gratia per nostros unum testabitur usus.
Hic trepidas artes et vix novitate sedentes
Vidit, quà propior patuit via: nec sibi turbam
Contraxit comitem, nec vasa tenentia longè.
Unus præsidium, atque operi spes magna petito,
Assumptus Metagon lustrat per nota ferarum
Pascua, per fontes, per quas trivêre latebras,
Primæ lucis opus: tum signa vapore ferino
Intemerata legens, si qua est, qua fallitur, ejus
Turba loci, majore secat spatia extera gyro.
Atque hic egressu jam tum sine fraude reperto
Incubuit spatiis, qualis permissa Lechæis
Thessalium quadriga decus, quam gloria patrum
Excitat, et primæ spes ambitiosa coronæ.
Sed ne qua ex nimio redeat jactura favore,
Lex dicta officiis: ne voce lacesseret hostem,
Neve levem prædam, aut propioris pignora lucri
Amplexus, primos nequicquam effunderet actus.
Jam vero impensum melior fortuna laborem
Quum sequitur, juxtaque domus quæsita ferarum,
Ut sciat, occultos et signis arguat hostes:
Aut effecta levi testatur gaudia caudâ,
Aut ipsa infodiens uncis vestigia plantis
Mandit humum, celsasve apprensat naribus auras.
Et tamen, ut ne prima faventem pignora fallant,
Circa omnem, aspretis medius qua clauditur orbis,
Ferre pedem, accessusque, abitusque, notâsse ferarum
Admonet, et, si forte loci spes prima fefellit,
(Rarum opus) incubuit spatiis ad prospera versis,
Intacto repetens prima ad vestigia gyro.
[Sidenote: Hist. Nat. L. +viii.+ c. +xl.+]
[Sidenote: De Naturâ Animalium L. +viii.+ c. +ii.+]
We here see the limier’s style of _harbouring_ portrayed to the
life—falling on the trail—coming to a fault—recovering the scent—and
following it up to the lair. The _harbourer_ of more modern days is
the _inquisitor_ of Pliny’s short sketch; “Scrutatur vestigia atque
persequitur, comitantem ad feram inquisitorem loro trahens: quâ visâ
quàm silens et occulta, quàm significans demonstratio est!” But
of all descriptions in the range of classical literature the most
exquisitively beautiful is Ælian’s—no painter can surpass this graphic
hunting-piece:—προηγεῖται τοῦ κυνηγέτου (ὁ κύων ὁ θηρατικὸς) ἱμάντι
μακρῷ προσημμένος, καὶ ῥινηλατεῖ, τῆς φωνῆς ἔχων ἐγκρατῶς καἰ σιωπῶν,
κ. τ. λ. The hound’s busy manner,—his steady search, even where
there is no game,—his burst of silent joy at catching a scent,—his
salutation of the harbourer as if sympathizing in his glee at being
successful,—his drawing on up to the boar’s couch,—the start—and final
pæan of exultation and victory, are all described in masterly style.
The Gelonian breed is very cursorily mentioned by Gratius, as timid and
sagacious;
Arma negant contrà, martemque odêre Geloni,
Sed natura sagax....
and is recommended to be crossed with the tigrine Hyrcanian; whence
spiritless Gelonian bitches have derived that courage and pluck, of
which they stood in need:
[Sidenote: Gratii Cyneg. vs. 195.]
traxêre animos de patre Gelonæ
Hyrcano.
The Umbrian had much of the Gelonian character—timorous and _soft_—but
remarkably keen of nose. Wishing to incorporate every good quality in
the same mongrel breed, Gratius ejaculates—
[Sidenote: Gratii Cyneg. vs. 171.]
At fugit adversos idem quos reperit hostes
Umber.[387] Quanta fides, utinam et solertia naris,
Tanta foret virtus, et tantum vellet in armis!
Silius Italicus notes the sagacity of the Umber, and seems to indicate
his _closeness_ of mouth in the contrasted barking of the Spartan,
[Sidenote: Silii Ital. de 2^{do} Bello Punico L. +iii.+]
Ceu pernix cum densa vagis latratibus implet
Venator dumeta Lacon, aut exigit Umber
Nare sagax è calle feras perterrita latè
Agmina præcipitant volucres formidine cervi.
But his habits are most vividly sketched in an elegant simile of
Seneca’s Thyestes, where Atreus, exulting in his artful entrapping
of his brother, (as a wild beast enveloped in the hunter’s
toils—plagis.....clusa dispositis fera,—) exclaims in a strain of
ill-dissembled self-gratulation,
[Sidenote: Senecæ Thyestes. Act. +iii.+ 493.]
venit in nostras manus
Tandem Thyestes; venit, et totus quidem.
Vix tempero animo, vix dolor frenos capit:
Sic, cum feras vestigat, et longo sagax
Loro tenetur Umber, ac _presso_ vias
Scrutatur _ore_; dum procul lento suem
Odore sentit, paret, et _tacito_ locum
_Rostro_ pererrat: præda cum propior fuit;
Cervice totâ pugnat, et gestu vocat
Dominum morantem, seque retinenti eripit.
The Virgilian Umbrian, to which Æneas in pursuit of Turnus is likened
in the last book of the Æneid, may be taken to signify any Canis
venaticus, and not that of Umbria particularly:
[Sidenote: Virgilii Æneid. L. +xii.+ 749.]
Inclusum veluti si quandò flumine nactus
Cervum, aut puniceæ septum formidine pennæ,
Venator cursu, canis et latratibus instat;
Ille autem, insidiis et ripâ territus altâ,
Mille fugit refugitque vias: at vividus Umber
Hæret hians, jam jamque tenet, similisque tenenti
Increpuit malis, morsuque elusus inani est.
The true Umbrian, I conceive, was mute—certainly so, until his game
was on foot; as were all the other _finders_ spoken of. But another
reason against the dog of Maro being the native dog of Umbria is
this—the poet would never have compared the brave and victorious Æneas
to a notoriously timid animal, who “fugit adversos idem quos repperit
hostes—” while the hero was dealing death and destruction on all sides
of him;
[Sidenote: Virgil. Æneid. L. +xii.+ 760.]
Æneas mortem contrà præsensque minatur
Exitium, si quisquam adeat; terretque trementes
Excisurum urbem minitans; et saucius instat.
If the character of the hounds of Umbria be such as stated, on the
authority of the ancient Cynegetica, the epithet “audaces” bestowed on
them by the Latin poet of Barga must be unmerited;
[Sidenote: P. Angelii Bargæi Cyneg. L. +v.+]
——Celtis velocibus Umbros,
Audaces Umbros, et odoris naribus acres.
Barthius, erroneously in my opinion, identifies the Tuscan dogs of
Nemesian with the fierce Molossian-like animals of Oppian’s first
Cynegetic (vs. 413.). To the passage already cited under the Canes
Bellicosi, the reader is referred, for the purpose of comparison with
the following from the Carthaginian poet:
[Sidenote: Nemesian. Cyneg. vs. 231.]
Quin et Tuscorum non est extrema voluptas
Sæpè canum: sit forma illis licet obsita villo,
Dissimilesque habeant catulis velocibus artus;
Haud tamen injucunda dabunt tibi munera prædæ.
Namque et odorato noscunt vestigia prato,
Atque etiam leporum secreta cubilia monstrant.
Oppian’s boar and lion-killers have very little resemblance to these
_indices_ of the form or seat of the timorous hare. The latter poet
recommends the Tuscans (whom he is also supposed to designate under the
title of Ausonians in his first kennel-roll) to be crossed with the
Spartan race;
[Sidenote: Oppian. Cyneg. L. +i.+ vs. 395.]
Τυρσηνὰ γένεθλα Λάκωσι—
The Armenian bear-dog was a sort of lyemmer used by sportsmen of the
East for tracking bears;[388]
[Sidenote: Oppian. Cyneg. L. +iv.+ vs. 356.]
πουλὺς ὄχλος βαίνουσι τανύσκια βένθεα δρυμῶν,
ἴδριες, αὐτολύτοις σὺν ἐϋρίνεσσι κύνεσσιν,
ἴχνια μεστεύσοντ’ ὀλοῶν πουλύπλανα θηρῶν.
ἀλλ’ ὁπότ’ ἀθρήσωσι κύνες σημήϊα ταρσῶν,
ἕσπονται, στιβέας τε ποδηγετέουσιν ὁμαρτῆ
ῥῖνας μὲν ταναὰς σχεδόθεν χέρσοιο τιθέντες,
ἐξοπίσω δ’ εἴπερ τι νεώτερον ἀθρήσειαν
ἴχνος, ἐπειγόμενοι θόρον αὐτίκα καγχαλόωντες,
ληθόμενοι τοῦ πρόσθεν· ἐπὴν δ’ εἰς ἄκρον ἵκωνται
εὐπλανέος στιβίης, θηρός τε παναίολον εὐνὴν,
αὐτίχ’ ὁ μὲν θρώσκει παλάμης ἀπὸ θηρητῆρος,
οἰκτρὰ μάλ’ ὑλακόων, κεχαρημένος ἔξοχα θυμόν.
The poet concludes this part of his description with a singularly
beautiful simile of a bare-footed little damsel in joyful search of
mountain violets, (discovered by their grateful odour, and plucked for
the decoration of her head,) with which she returns singing to the home
of her peasant parents:
ὣς κυνὸς ἰάνθη θυμὸς θρασύς. αὐτὰρ ἐπακτὴρ
καὶ μάλα μιν θύνοντα βιησάμενος τελαμῶσι,
καγχαλόων παλίνορσος ἔβη μεθ’ ὅμιλον ἑταίρων.
The δίκτυα and ἄρκυες, the δεῖμα πολύχροον of the feathered line, and
the other instruments of the savage chase, combine to secure the ursine
quarry. See Oppian. Cyneg. +iv.+ vs. 354 ad vs. 424.
Having already noticed the wary employment of the mute finder to
search out the lair of animals obnoxious to the chase, let us look at
the subsequent proceedings.[389] When the nets and snares were set,
the game found, and started by the Canes ductores, the attendants,
it seems, slipped the latrant pack, which were held in couples at
hand. That this was the ordinary routine is proved by Xenophon,
Lucan, Seneca, and others. The Greek sportsman of Scillus does not,
indeed, say that the dog first slipped should be mute, but merely
quick-scented. Lucan, however, particularly states his quality of
_closeness_ in the lines of his Pharsalia, where he likens the naval
tactics of Octavius, “Illyricæ custos Octavius undæ,” to the wily
stratagems of a huntsman preparing for the attack of his game;
[Sidenote: Lucani Pharsal. L. +iv.+ 437.]
—Sic dum pavidos formidine cervos
Claudat odoratæ metuentes aëra pennæ:
Aut dum dispositis attollat retia varis
Venator, tenet ora levis clamosa Molossi;
Spartanos Cretasque ligat; nec creditur ulli
Sylva cani, nisi qui _presso_ vestigia _rostro_
Colligit, et prædâ _nescit latrare_ repertâ,
Contentus tremulo monstrâsse cubilia loro.
—and Seneca implies the same,
[Sidenote: Senecæ Hippolyt. Act. +i.+ 30.]
at vos laxas
_Tacitis canibus_ mittite habenas:
Teneant acres lora Molossos,
Et pugnaces tendant Cressæ
Fortia trito vincula collo.
At Spartanos (genus est audax
Avidumque feræ) nodo cautus
Propriore liga. Veniet tempus
Cum latratu cava saxa sonent:
Nunc demissi nare sagaci
Captent auras, lustraque _presso_
Quærant _rostro_.[390]
Hitherto we have said nothing of the race of sagacious hunting-dogs,
most commonly known by the name of _hounds_,[391] the Petronius of
Gratius,[392] the Ἀγασσεὺς of Oppian, and the Segusian of Arrian.[393]
The Petronius belongs to the family of fleet sagacious hounds;
[Sidenote: Gratii Cyneg. vs. 199.]
at te leve si qua
Tangit opus, pavidosque juvat compellere dorcas,
Aut versuta sequi leporis vestigia parvi:
Petronios (sic fama) canes, volucresque Sicambros,
Et pictam maculâ Vertraham delige falsâ.
Ocyor affectu mentis pinnâque cucurrit,
Sed premit inventas, non inventura latentes
Illa feras; quæ Petroniis benè gloria constat.
We here see the distinction between the harrier and greyhound, the
former running _on scent_, the latter _on sight_.[394] That the
Petronii _opened_ as soon as they hit upon the trail of their game,
before it was roused, is much regretted by the poet—
[Sidenote: Ejusdem vs. 207.]
Quod si maturo pressantes gaudia lusu
Dissimulare feras tacitique accedere possent:
Illis omne decus, quod nunc, Metagontes, habetis,
Constaret sylvis; sed virtus irrita damno est!
Herein, however, they strikingly resemble their modern representatives;
for, with Ducange, I readily grant that the Canes Petronii “ii sunt
quos vulgò _chiens courans_ appellamus.” Whoever has heard the din of
the fox or hare-chase,
[Sidenote: Titus Andronicus, Act +ii.+ Sc. +iii.+]
—whilst the babbling echo mocks the hounds,
Replying shrilly to the well-tuned horns,
As if a double hunt were heard at once,
will grant that no Petronian pack could have been more noisy on the
trail than their modern representatives.
[Sidenote: Pope’s Essay on Man.]
[Sidenote: Encyclopédie Méthodique: sur les Chasses, p. 138.]
The Britannus sagax, “the hound sagacious on the tainted green,” next
claims our attention. Of the Britannus bellicosus we have already
spoken under the first class. The earlier cynegetical writers are
silent on the subject of British hounds: nor do they appear to have
been known in Italy till towards the decline of the Roman empire;
when, having been introduced into Celtic Gaul, their merits became
gradually known in southern Europe. And here, in spite of the French
encyclopedists, (the copyists of Messieurs D’Yauville and Le Verrier de
la Conterie,) who gratuitously assume “qu’en général les chiens Anglois
n’ont pas autant de noblesse que les beaux chiens François,”—and that
where the breed is improved, as they allow it to be in some cases,
the amelioration is attributable to Norman crosses,—we must, with our
native poet, claim the palm for Britain;
[Sidenote: Somerville. Chace, B. +i.+]
In thee alone, fair land of liberty!
Is bred the perfect hound, in scent and speed
As yet unrivall’d, while in other climes
Their virtue fails, a weak degenerate race!
By name, British hunting-dogs (as distinct from the pugnacious class)
are mentioned by the poets of Carthage and Anazarbus alone; by the
former, where singing the praises of different canine breeds, the
merits of the blood of distant countries;
[Sidenote: Nemesian. Cyneg. vs. 123.]
Sed non Spartanos tantùm, tantùmve Molossos
Pascendum catulos: divisa Britannia mittit
Veloces,[395] nostrisque orbis venatibus aptos;
—by the latter, in the conclusion of his first cynegetic, vs. 467,
hereafter cited. Of Nemesian’s “veloces,” probably not of the sagacious
class, I shall, in the sequel, speak. In the absence of any assigned
_habitat_ for the Petronius, may we not consider him indigenous of
Britain?[396] Our happy isle has ever been famous for excellent breeds
of hunting-dogs, for skilful sportsmen, and horses both fleet and
patient of the chase. All the Celtic nations indeed, and our ancestors
among the rest, were passionately addicted to the diversions of the
field, considering the prosecution of such laborious callings a kind of
apprenticeship and initiation for war. Thence the superiority of the
Celtic breeds of sporting-dogs, and more especially of the Britannus
sagax and Britannus bellicosus. With the latter, perhaps, the former
may have been sent to Italy by the resident Procurator Cynegii, as
worthy of admission into Roman kennels; for at this early period I
believe there were only these two _native_ varieties of the canine
race in Britain. In the field of battle, in public spectacles, and in
the wolf and boar-chases, the bellicosus, the rival of the truculent
Epirote, stood pre-eminent: and in the ordinary hunting of timid and
fugacious quarry, the hound “naribus utilis,” acquired an early name
and character.[397] For hideousness of aspect, and ugliness of shape,
both were remarkable;
[Sidenote: Gratii Cyneg. vs. 177.]
Si non ad speciem, mentiturosque decores
Protinùs: hæc una est catulis jactura Britannis:
—a notification of Ovid’s contemporary, which may be interpreted of the
sagacious with as much truth as of the pugnacious sorts.
[Sidenote: J. Caii de Canibus Britan. Libellus.]
Modern ingenuity has taught British hounds of chase to pursue many
varieties of prey. “Alius leporis, alius vulpis, alius cervi, alius
platycerotis, alius taxi, alius lutræ, alius mustelæ, alius cuniculi
tantùm odore gaudet.” The dog does not himself necessarily differ, for
adaptation to different game; and possibly, the old English Talbot
was the parent stock, whence all the sub-varieties, at present found
in the kennels of Great Britain, originally sprung,[398] modified in
shape and character by judicious breeding, and careful management as to
quarry:[399]
[Sidenote: Somerville’s Chace, B. +i.+]
strong, heavy, slow, but sure,
Whose ears down-hanging from his thick round head,
Shall sweep the morning dew; whose clanging voice
Awake the mountain echo in her cell,
And shake the forest: the bold Talbot kind
Of these the prime, &c.
The hounds of Theseus would be correctly placed, from the description
of our great dramatic poet, under the old English breed. With it they
have more points in common than with their fabled progenitors;
[Sidenote: Midsummer Night’s Dream.]
My hounds are bred out of the Spartan kind,
So flew’d, so sanded, and their heads are hung
With ears that sweep away the morning dew;
Crook-knee’d, and dew-lap’d, like Thessalian bulls;
Slow in pursuit; but match’d in mouth like bells,
Each under each. A cry more tuneable
Was never halloo’d to, nor cheer’d with horn,
In Crete, in Sparta, nor in Thessaly.
The vigorous and fleet Leverarius being a supposed representative of
some ancient types, I cite the masterly picture of Somerville for the
purpose of comparison with the classic poets of the Chase:
[Sidenote: Somerville’s Chace, B. +i.+]
See there with countenance blithe,
And with a courtly grin, the fawning hound
Salutes thee cowering; his wide opening nose
Upwards he curls, and his large sloe-black eyes
Melt in soft blandishments, and humble joy;
His glossy skin, or yellow-pied, or blue,
In lights or shades by nature’s pencil drawn,
Reflects the various tints; his ears and legs
Fleckt here and there, in gay enamell’d pride,
Rival the speckled pard; his rush-grown tail
O’er his broad back bends in an ample arch;
On shoulders clean, upright and firm he stands;
His round cat-foot, straight hams, and wide-spread thighs,
And his low-dropping chest, confess his speed,
His strength, his wind, or on the steepy hill,
Or far-extended plain; in every part
So well-proportion’d, that the nicer skill
Of Phidias himself can’t blame thy choice.
[Sidenote: P. A. Bargæi Cyneg. +v.+]
[Sidenote: De Canibus et Venatione Libellus.]
The Talbot, whose portrait is also sketched by the Latin poet of
Barga, as well as by the authors cited, is at present fallen into
disrepute—his slowness of foot being scarce compensated by his keenness
of scent. The fleeter Leverarius, whose consimilarity with the Gratian
Petronius almost approaches to identity, was apparently unknown to M.
A. Biondi; for he holds it quite impossible (like the elder Xenophon in
regard to the fair capture of the hare with his ἀλωπεκίδες _at force_)
that any hounds should have speed sufficient to run down a fox, without
the aid of wily instruments of destruction.[400] But the largest
varieties of Somerville’s last picture are found a match for the
arch-felon, “vulpem captare dolosam,”—the only approach to the modern
mode of pursuing whom, which the classics afford, is in the fourth book
of Oppian’s Cynegetics, where the κύνες ἀολλέες are evidently _a pack_
of hounds, though we look in vain for the well-mounted hunters;
[Sidenote: Cyneg. +iv.+ vs. 448.]
κερδὼ δ’ οὔτε λόχοισιν ἁλώσιμος, οὔτε βρόχοισιν,
οὔτε λίνοις· δεινὴ γὰρ ἐπιφροσύνῃσι νοῆσαι,
δεινὴ δ’ αὖτε κάλωα ταμεῖν, ὑπὸ δ’ ἅμματα λῦσαι,
καὶ πυκινοῖσι δόλοισιν ὀλισθῆσαι θανάτοιο·
ἀλλὰ κύνες μιν ἄειραν ἀολλέες, οὐδ’ ἄρ’ ἐκεῖνοι
καὶ κρατεροί περ ἐόντες ἀναιμωτεὶ δαμάσαντο.
In no case does he fall an easy prey to the disturbers of his
cunningly-wrought _latibulum_:
[Sidenote: Cyneg. +iii.+ vs. 450.]
μάλ’ ἀρήϊος ἐν πραπίδεσσι,
καὶ πινυτὴ ναίει πυμάτοις ἐνὶ φωλειοῖσιν,
ἑπταπύλους οἴξασα δόμους, τρητάς τε καλιὰς
τηλόθ’ ἀπ’ ἀλλήλων, μή μιν θηρήτορες ἄνδρες
ἀμφὶ θύρῃ λοχόωντες ὑπὸ βροχίδεσσιν ἄγωνται·
ἀργαλέη γενύεσσι καὶ ἀντία δηρίσασθαι
θηρσί τ’ ἀρειοτέροισι, καὶ ἀγρευτῆρσι κύνεσσιν.[401]
Even when, with the din of huntsmen and hounds, driven into nets, the
entangled felon, according to Martial, still fights it out, to the no
little discomfiture and injury of his canine antagonists;
[Sidenote: Martial. Epigr. L. +x.+ Ep. 37.]
Hic olidam clamosus ages in retia vulpem,
Mordebitque tuos sordida præda canes...[402]
[Sidenote: Brodæus in Oppianum, p. 46.]
[Sidenote: Rittershusius in Oppianum, p. 42.]
Identical with the least of the hound tribe of the British isles, the
_Canis venaticus minor_ of Ray’s Synopsis, and Charleton’s Onomasticon,
is the Oppianic Agassæus; the derivation of whose name has puzzled
Broadæus and other classic commentators not a little.[403] With the
hint that Ἀγασσεὺς may be connected with _Agassa_ of Macedonia,
_Agasus_ a port of Apulia, the Thracian _Agessus_, and _Agathia_ a city
of Phocis, no reason is alleged why a British dog should deduce his
name from countries and places so remote. Of the existence of such a
tiny hound of chase in this country, Rittershusius seems not to have
been aware. British dogs, he remarks, are exceedingly keen-scented,
but he cannot divine why called small, βαιὸν γένος, being, in his days
at least, of great size. Brodæus, too, ignorant of any other than the
Britannus of Claudian, cannot reconcile the “Anglici canes prodigiosæ
staturæ” of this poet, and his own experience, with the portrait of the
Oppianic Ἀγασσεύς.[404]
[Sidenote: J. Caii de Can. Brit. Libellus.]
It is scarce necessary to observe that the dog in question has no
affinity with the Agasæus of Dr. Caius, who very absurdly borrows,
for his gazehound, a name previously engaged by a totally different
dog; as if to gratify his etymological mania by connecting the terms
Agasæus, a gaze, a gazehound—“neque enim odoratu, sed prospectu attento
et diligenti feram persequitur iste canis—(Agasæus, a gazehound)—etsi
non sum nescius etiam apud Latinos Agasæi vocabulum inter canum nomina
reperiri”—“Agasæum nostri abs re quòd intento sit in feram oculo
vocant.”
[Sidenote: Synopsis Animalium. Countrey Contentments, B. +i.+ c. +iv.+]
Camden has fallen into the same error with Caius, and confounded the
Agasseus of Oppian with the gazehound of Britain; and even Ray has made
the gazehound a variety of the _Canis venaticus sagax_, distinguished
from his supposed consimilars of the same family by running on sight of
his game—“qui aspectu feras insequitur.”
From the following portrait, compared with that drawn by Markham, we
may decide the identity of the Agassæus and Beagle:
[Sidenote: Oppian. Cyneg. L. +i.+ vs. 467.]
ἔστι δέ τι σκυλάκων γένος ἄλκιμον ἰχνευτήρων,
βαιὸν, ἀτὰρ μεγάλης ἀντάξιον ἔμμεν’ ἀοιδῆς·
τοὺς τράφεν ἄγρια φῦλα Βρετανῶν αἰολονώτων,
αὐτὰρ ἐπικλήδην σφὰς Ἀγασσαίους ὀνόμῃναν·
τῶν ἤτοι μέγεθος μὲν ὀμοίϊον οὐτιδανοῖσι
λίχνοις οἰκιδίοισι τραπεζήεσσι κύνεσσι,
γυρὸν, ἀσαρκότατον, λασιότριχον, ὄμμασι νωθές·
ἀλλ’ ὀνύχεσσι πόδας κεκορυθμένον ἀργαλέοισι,
καὶ θαμινοῖς κυνοδοῦσιν ἀκαχμένον ἰοφόροισι.
ῥίνεσι δ’ αὖτε μάλιστα πανέξοχός ἐστιν Ἀγασσεὺς,
καὶ στιβίῃ πανάριστος, ἐπεὶ κατὰ γαῖαν ἰόντων
ἴχνιον εὑρέμεναι μέγα δὴ σοφὸς, ἀλλὰ καὶ αὐτὴν
ἴδμων ἠερίην μάλα σημῄνασθαι ἀϋτμήν.
Let the reader compare these little pet-like, weakly, crooked, lank,
wire-haired, dull-looking creatures, keen however, and excellent of
nose, with his own experience of the beagle’s type and properties, and
the representations of authors.[405]
The poet gives some amusing instructions for breaking in the puppy of
the Agassæus;
[Sidenote: Ejusd. vs. 489.]
αὐτὰρ ὅγ’ αἶψα
ὠρίνθη, φριμάα τε λαγωείης ὑπ’ ἀϋτμῆς,
ἴχνια μαστεύει τε κατὰ χθονὸς, κ. τ. λ.
comparing his restlessness to that of a young woman in travail with her
first child,
[Sidenote: Ejusd. vs. 493.]
ὡς δ’ ὅτε τις κούρη δέκατον περὶ μῆνα σελήνης
πρωτοτόκος λοχίῃσιν ὑπ’ ὠδίνεσσι τυπεῖσα, κ. τ. λ.
[Sidenote: Lib. +ii.+ p. 18.]
The praises of the little beagle have been celebrated in Greek and
Latin, verse and prose. Amongst the modern poets, he is found in the
Album Dianæ Leporicidæ of Jac. Savary, under the title of “ululatorum
ordo minorum”—“gens parvis devota feris;” and placed in the kennels
of Britain—still sufficiently marked by her insular, geographical
position, and the staunchness of her canine breed, but, unfortunately
for the loyalty of Savary’s own countrymen, no longer _exclusively_
characterized by the traitorous, regicide spirit of her inhabitants:
Insula quos gignit septem vicina trioni,
Terra canum laudata fide, damnata virorum
Perfidiâ, Regisque sui execranda cruore, &c.
He is also mentioned by Angelinus Gazæus—see the Lagographia Curiosa
of Paullini. Of the Greek portrait of Arrian we shall presently speak,
under the Segusian dog.
[Sidenote: Countrey Contentments, B. +i.+ c. +iv.+ 14.]
It is to Gervase Markham, our “English master of economical
philosophy,” as Wase calls him, that we are indebted for the fullest
description of “the little beagle, which may be carried in a man’s
glove;”—“bred,” says Gervase, “for delight only, being of curious
scents, and passing cunning in their hunting, for the most part tiring,
but seldome killing the prey, except at some strange advantage.” “Their
musicke is very smalle, like reeds, and their pace like their body,
onely for exercise, and not for slaughter.”
[Sidenote: Animadvers. in Oppian. Cyneg. +i.+ 373.]
The Segusian dog mentioned by Arrian, in the third chapter of his
Treatise on Coursing, as a sorry brute, quick-scented, with a pitiful
and dolorous whine, instead of bark—rough and unsightly, and the
more high-bred the more ugly—I believe to be identical with the
last variety. The Bithynian has devoted an entire chapter of his
entertaining and original manual to a description of the Ἑγουσίαι
κύνες: whose name, he tells us, is derived from a Celtic people,[406]
amongst whom they were first bred, and held in repute for their nasal
sagacity. For a full description of these smaller hounds of Gaul, the
reader is referred to the cited chapter; and attached to my translation
of the same, he will find a few illustrative notes. The remarks of
Belin de Ballu, in his Animadversiones in Oppianum, show strange
misapprehension of the ancient distinctions in the Celtic kennels.
The _chiens courans_ of modern France are not the οὐέρτραγοι κύνες of
the younger Xenophon; nor are the latter’s Ἑγουσίαι the “genus canum,
quorum pili instar velleris ovium crispantur,” as incorrectly stated by
this most learned editor of the Greek poet of the chase. The Segusians
are rather the _bigles_ of the present day—perhaps the _bassets_, a
small variety of terrier-beagle, used in rabbit-hunting.[407]