Chapter III: Pigs—cattle—sheep—goats (1)

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.