Chapter III: Pigs—cattle—sheep—goats (2)

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.