WITH mammals
the male appears to win the
female much more through
the law of battle than through
the display of his charms. The
most timid animals, not provided
with any special weapons for
fighting, engage in desperate
conflicts during the season of
love. Two male hares have been
seen to fight together until
one was killed; male moles often
fight, and sometimes with fatal
results; male squirrels engage
in frequent contests, "and often
wound each other severely"; as
do male beavers, so that "hardly
a skin is without scars."* I
observed the same fact with the
hides of the guanacoes in Patagonia;
and on one occasion several were
so absorbed in fighting that
they fearlessly rushed close
by me. Livingstone speaks of
the males of the many animals
in southern Africa as almost
invariably shewing the scars
received in former contests.
* See Waterton's account of
two hares fighting, Zoologist,
vol. i., 1843, p. 211. On moles,
Bell, Hist. of British Quadrupeds,
1st ed., p. 100. On squirrels,
Audubon and Bachman, Viviparous
Quadrupeds of N. America, 1846,
p. 269. On beavers, Mr. A. H.
Green, in Journal of Linnean
Society, Zoology, vol. x., 1869,
p. 362.
The law of battle
prevails with aquatic as with
terrestrial mammals.
It is notorious how desperately
male seals fight, both with their
teeth and claws, during the breeding-season;
and their hides are likewise
often covered with scars. Male
sperm-whales are very jealous
at this season; and in their
battles "they often lock their
jaws together, and turn on their
sides and twist about"; so that
their lower jaws often become
distorted.*
* On the battles of seals, see
Capt. C. Abbott in Proc. Zool.
Soc., 1868, p. 191; Mr. R. Brown,
ibid., 1868, p. 436; also L.
Lloyd, Game Birds of Sweden,
1867, p. 414; also Pennant. On
the sperm-whale see Mr. J. H.
Thompson, in Proc. Zool. Soc.,
1867, p. 246.
All male animals
which are furnished with special
weapons for fighting,
are well known to engage in fierce
battles. The courage and the
desperate conflicts of stags
have often been described; their
skeletons have been found in
various parts of the world, with
the horns inextricably locked
together, shewing how miserably
the victor and vanquished had
perished.* No animal in the world
is so dangerous as an elephant
in "must". Lord Tankerville has
given me a graphic description
of the battles between the wild
bulls in Chillingham Park, the
descendants, degenerated in size
but not in courage, of the gigantic
Bos primigenius. In 1861 several
contended for mastery; and it
was observed that two of the
younger bulls attacked in concert
the old leader of the herd, overthrew
and disabled him, so that he
was believed by the keepers to
be lying mortally wounded in
a neighbouring wood. But a few
days afterwards one of the young
bulls approached the wood alone;
and then the "monarch of the
chase," who had been lashing
himself up for vengeance, came
out and, in a short time, killed
his antagonist. He then quietly
joined the herd, and long held
undisputed sway. Admiral Sir
B. J. Sulivan informs me that,
when he lived in the Falkland
Islands, he imported a young
English stallion, which frequented
the hills near Port William with
eight mares. On these hills there
were two wild stallions, each
with a small troop of mares; "and
it is certain that these stallions
would never have approached each
other without fighting. Both
had tried singly to fight the
English horse and drive away
his mares, but had failed. One
day they came in together and
attacked him. This was seen by
the captain who had charge of
the horses, and who, on riding
to the spot, found one of the
two stallions engaged with the
English horse, whilst the other
was driving away the mares, and
had already separated four from
the rest. The captain settled
the matter by driving the whole
party into a corral, for the
wild stallions would not leave
the mares."
* See Scrope (Art of Deer-stalking,
p. 17) on the locking of the
horns with the Cervus elaphus.
Richardson, in Fauna Bor. Americana,
1829, p. 252, says that the wapiti,
moose, and reindeer have been
found thus locked together. Sir.
A. Smith found at the Cape of
Good Hope the skeletons of two
gnus in the same condition.
Male animals
which are provided with efficient
cutting or tearing
teeth for the ordinary purposes
of life, such as the Carnivora,
Insectivora, and rodents, are
seldom furnished with weapons
especially adapted for fighting
with their rivals. The case is
very different with the males
of many other animals. We see
this in the horns of stags and
of certain kinds of antelopes
in which the females are hornless.
With many animals the canine
teeth in the upper or lower jaw,
or in both, are much larger in
the males than in the females,
or are absent in the latter,
with the exception sometimes
of a hidden rudiment. Certain
antelopes, the musk-deer, camel,
horse, boar, various apes, seals,
and the walrus, offer instances.
In the females of the walrus
the tusks are sometimes quite
absent.* In the male elephant
of India and in the male dugong*(2)
the upper incisors form offensive
weapons. In the male narwhal
the left canine alone is developed
into the well-known, spirally-twisted,
so-called horn, which is sometimes
from nine to ten feet in length.
It is believed that the males
use these horns for fighting
together; for "an unbroken one
can rarely be got, and occasionally
one may be found with the point
of another jammed into the broken
place."*(3) The tooth on the
opposite side of the head in
the male consists of a rudiment
about ten inches in length, which
is embedded in the jaw; but sometimes,
though rarely, both are equally
developed on the two sides. In
the female both are always rudimentary.
The male cachalot has a larger
head than that of the female,
and it no doubt aids him in his
aquatic battles. Lastly, the
adult male Ornithorhynchus is
provided with a remarkable apparatus,
namely a spur on the foreleg,
closely resembling the poison-fang
of a venomous snake; but according
to Harting, the secretion from
the gland is not poisonous; and
on the leg of the female there
is a hollow, apparently for the
reception of the spur.*(4)
* Mr. Lamont (Seasons with the
Sea-Horses, 1861, p. 143) says
that a good tusk of the male
walrus weighs 4 pounds, and is
longer than that of the female,
which weighs about 3 pounds.
The males are described as fighting
ferociously. On the occasional
absence of the tusks in the female,
see Mr. R. Brown, Proceedings,
Zoological Society, 1868, p.
429.
*(2) Owen, Anatomy of Vertebrates,
vol. iii., p. 283.
*(3) Mr. R. Brown, in Proc.
Zool. Soc., 1869, p. 553. See
Prof. Turner, in Journal of Anat.
and Phys., 1872, p. 76, on the
homological nature of these tusks.
Also Mr. J W. Clarke on two tusks
being developed in the males,
in Proceedings of the Zoological
Society, 1871, p. 42.
*(4) Owen on the cachalot and
Ornithorhynchus, ibid., vol.
iii., pp. 638, 641. Harting is
quoted by Dr. Zouteveen in the
Dutch translation of this work,
vol. ii., p. 292.
When the males are provided
with weapons which in the females
are absent, there can be hardly
a doubt that these serve for
fighting with other males; and
that they were acquired through
sexual selection, and were transmitted
to the male sex alone. It is
not probable, at least in most
cases, that the females have
been prevented from acquiring
such weapons, on account of their
being useless, superfluous, or
in some way injurious. On the
contrary, as they are often used
by the males for various purposes,
more especially as a defence
against their enemies, it is
a surprising fact that they are
so poorly developed, or quite
absent, in the females of so
many animals. With female deer
the development during each recurrent
season of great branching horns,
and with female elephants the
development of immense tusks,
would be a great waste of vital
power, supposing that they were
of no use to the females. Consequently,
they would have tended to be
eliminated in the female through
natural selection; that is, if
the successive variations were
limited in their transmission
to the female sex, for otherwise
the weapons of the males would
have been injuriously affected,
and this would have been a greater
evil. On the whole, and from
the consideration of the following
facts, it seems probable that
when the various weapons differ
in the two sexes, this has generally
depended on the kind of transmission
which has prevailed.
As the reindeer is the one species
in the whole family of deer,
in which the female is furnished
with horns, though they are somewhat
smaller, thinner, and less branched
than in the male, it might naturally
be thought that, at least in
this case, they must be of some
special service to her. The female
retains her horns from the time
when they are fully developed,
namely, in September, throughout
the winter until April or May,
when she brings forth her young.
Mr. Crotch made particular enquiries
for me in Norway, and it appears
that the females at this season
conceal themselves for about
a fortnight in order to bring
forth their young, and then reappear,
generally hornless. In Nova Scotia,
however, as I hear from Mr. H.
Reeks, the female sometimes retains
her horns longer. The male on
the other hand casts his horns
much earlier, towards the end
of November. As both sexes have
the same requirements and follow
the same habits of life, and
as the male is destitute of horns
during the winter, it is improbable
that they can be of any special
service to the female during
this season, which includes the
larger part of the time during
which she is horned. Nor is it
probable that she can have inherited
horns from some ancient progenitor
of the family of deer, for, from
the fact of the females of so
many species in all quarters
of the globe not having horns,
we may conclude that this was
the primordial character of the
group.*
* On the structure and shedding
of the horns of the reindeer,
Hoffberg, Amaenitates Acad.,
vol. iv., 1788, p. 149. See Richardson,
Fauna Bor. Americana,. p. 241,
in regard to the American variety
or species: also Major W. Ross
King, The Sportsman in Canada,
1866, p. 80.
The horns of
the reindeer are developed
at a most unusually
early age; but what the cause
of this may be is not known.
The effect has apparently been
the transference of the horns
to both sexes. We should bear
in mind that horns are always
transmitted through the female,
and that she has a latent capacity
for their development, as we
see in old or diseased females.*
Moreover the females of some
other species of deer exhibit,
either normally or occasionally,
rudiments of horns; thus the
female of Cervulus moschatus
has "bristly tufts, ending in
a knob, instead of a horn"; and "in
most specimens of the female
wapiti (Cervus canadensis) there
is a sharp bony protuberance
in the place of the horn."*(2)
From these several considerations
we may conclude that the possession
of fairly well-developed horns
by the female reindeer, is due
to the males having first acquired
them as weapons for fighting
with other males; and secondarily
to their development from some
unknown cause at an unusually
early age in the males, and their
consequent transference to both
sexes.
* Isidore Geoffroy
St-Hilaire, Essais de Zoolog.
Generale, 1841,
p. 513. Other masculine characters,
besides the horns, are sometimes
similarly transferred to the
female; thus Mr. Boner, in speaking
of an old female chamois (Chamois
Hunting in the Mountains of Bavaria,
1860, 2nd ed., p. 363), says, "not
only was the head very male-looking,
but along the back there was
a ridge of long hair, usually
to be found only in bucks."
*(2) On the Cervulus, Dr. Gray,
Catalogue of Mammalia in the
British Museum, part iii., p.
220. On the Cervus canadensis
or wapiti, see Hon. J. D. Caton,
Ottawa Academy of Nat. Sciences,
May, 1868, p. 9.
Turning to the sheath-horned
ruminants: with antelopes a graduated
series can be formed, beginning
with species, the females of
which are completely destitute
of horns- passing on to those
which have horns so small as
to be almost rudimentary (as
with the Antilocapra americana,
in which species they are present
in only one out of four or five
females*)- to those which have
fairly developed horns, but manifestly
smaller and thinner than in the
male and sometimes of a different
shape,*(2)- ending with those
in which both sexes have horns
of equal size. As with the reindeer,
so with antelopes, there exists,
as previously shewn, a relation
between the period of the development
of the horns and their transmission
to one or both sexes; it is therefore
probable that their presence
or absence in the females of
some species, and their more
or less perfect condition in
the females of other species,
depends, not on their being of
any special use, but simply on
inheritance. It accords with
this view that even in the same
restricted genus both sexes of
some species, and the males alone
of others, are thus provided.
It is also a remarkable fact
that, although the females of
Antilope bezoartica are normally
destitute of horns, Mr. Blyth
has seen no less than three females
thus furnished; and there was
no reason to suppose that they
were old or diseased.
* I am indebted to Dr. Canfield
for this information; see also
his paper in the Proceedings
of the Zoological Society, 1866,
p. 105.
*(2) For instance the horns
of the female Ant. euchore resemble
those of a distinct species,
viz. the Ant. dorcas var. corine,
see Desmarest, Mammalogie, p.
455.
In all the wild species of goats
and sheep the horns are larger
in the male than in the female,
and are sometimes quite absent
in the latter.* In several domestic
breeds of these two animals,
the males alone are furnished
with horns; and in some breeds,
for instance, in the sheep of
North Wales, though both sexes
are properly horned, the ewes
are very liable to be hornless.
I have been informed by a trustworthy
witness, who purposely inspected
a flock of these same sheep during
the lambing season, that the
horns at birth are generally
more fully developed in the male
than in the female. Mr. J. Peel
crossed his Lonk sheep, both
sexes of which always bear horns,
with hornless Leicesters and
hornless Shropshire Downs; and
the result was that the male
offspring had their horns considerably
reduced, whilst the females were
wholly destitute of them. These
several facts indicate that,
with sheep, the horns are a much
less firmly fixed character in
the females than in the males;
and this leads us to look at
the horns as properly of masculine
origin.
* Gray, Catalogue of Mammalia,
the British Museum, part iii.,
1852, p. 160.
With the adult
musk-ox (Ovibos moschatus)
the horns of the male
are larger than those of the
female, and in the latter the
bases do not touch.* In regard
to ordinary cattle Mr. Blyth
remarks: "In most of the wild
bovine animals the horns are
both longer and thicker in the
bull than in the cow, and in
the cow-banteng (Bos sondaicus)
the horns are remarkably small,
and inclined much backwards.
In the domestic races of cattle,
both of the humped and humpless
types, the horns are short and
thick in the bull, longer and
more slender in the cow and ox;
and in the Indian buffalo, they
are shorter and thicker in the
bull, longer and more slender
in the cow. In the wild gaour
(B. gaurus) the horns are mostly
both longer and thicker in the
bull than in the cow."*(2) Dr.
Forsyth Major also informs me
that a fossil skull, believed
to be that of the female Bos
estruscus, has been found in
Val d'Arno, which is wholly without
horns. In the Rhinoceros simus,
as I may add, the horns of the
female are generally longer but
less powerful than in the male;
and in some other species of
rhinoceros they are said to be
shorter in the female.*(3) From
these various facts we may infer
as probable that horns of all
kinds, even when they are equally
developed in the two sexes, were
primarily acquired by the male
in order to conquer other males,
and have been transferred more
or less completely to the female.
* Richardson, Fauna Bor. Americana,
p. 278.
*(2) Land and Water, 1867, p.
346.
*(3) Sir Andrew Smith, Zoology
of S. Africa, pl. xix. Owen,
Anatomy of Vertebrates, vol.
iii., p. 624.
The effects
of castration deserve notice,
as throwing light on
this same point. Stags after
the operation never renew their
horns. The male reindeer, however,
must be excepted, as after castration
he does renew them. This fact,
as well as the possession of
horns by both sexes, seems at
first to prove that the horns
in this species do not constitute
a sexual character;* but as they
are developed at a very early
age, before the sexes differ
in constitution, it is not surprising
that they should be unaffected
by castration, even if they were
aboriginally acquired by the
male. With sheep both sexes properly
bear horns; and I am informed
that with Welch sheep the horns
of the males are considerably
reduced by castration; but the
degree depends much on the age
at which the operation is performed,
as is likewise the case with
other animals. Merino rams have
large horns, whilst the ewes "generally
speaking are without horns";
and in this breed castration
seems to produce a somewhat greater
effect, so that if performed
at an early age the horns "remain
almost undeveloped."*(2)
* This is the conclusion of
Seidlitz, Die Darwin'sche Theorie,
1871, p. 47.
*(2) I am much obliged to Prof.
Victor Carus, for having made
enquiries for me in Saxony on
this subject. H. von Nathusius
(Viehzucht, 1872, p. 64) says
that the horns of sheep castrated
at an early period, either altogether
disappear or remain as mere rudiments;
but I do not know whether he
refers to merinos or to ordinary
breeds.
On the Guinea coast there is
a breed in which the females
never bear horns, and, as Mr.
Winwood Reade informs me, the
rams after castration are quite
destitute of them. With cattle,
the horns of the males are much
altered by castration; for instead
of being short and thick, they
become longer than those of the
cow, but otherwise resemble them.
The Antilope bezoartica offers
a somewhat analogous case: the
males have long straight spiral
horns, nearly parallel to each
other, and directed backwards;
the females occasionally bear
horns, but these when present
are of a very different shape,
for they are not spiral, and
spreading widely, bend round
with the points forwards. Now
it is a remarkable fact that,
in the castrated male, as Mr.
Blyth informs me, the horns are
of the same peculiar shape as
in the female, but longer and
thicker. If we may judge from
analogy, the female probably
shews us, in these two cases
of cattle and the antelope, the
former condition of the horns
in some early progenitor of each
species. But why castration should
lead to the reappearance of an
early condition of the horns
cannot be explained with any
certainty. Nevertheless, it seems
probable, that in nearly the
same manner as the constitutional
disturbance in the offspring,
caused by a cross between two
distinct species or races, often
leads to the reappearance of
long-lost characters;* so here,
the disturbance in the constitution
of the individual, resulting
from castration, produces the
same effect.
* I have given various experiments
and other evidence proving that
this is the case, in my Variation
of Animals and Plants under Domestication,
vol. ii., 1868, pp. 39-47.
The tusks of
the elephant, in the different
species or races,
differ according to sex, nearly
as do the horns of ruminants.
In India and Malacca the males
alone are provided with well-developed
tusks. The elephant of Ceylon
is considered by most naturalists
as a distinct race, but by some
as a distinct species, and here "not
one in a hundred is found with
tusks, the few that possess them
being exclusively males."* The
African elephant is undoubtedly
distinct, and the female has
large well-developed tusks, though
not so large as those of the
male.
* Sir J. Emerson Tennent, Ceylon,
1859, vol. ii., p. 274. For Malacca,
Journal of Indian Archipelago,
vol. iv., p. 357.
These differences in the tusks
of the several races and species
of elephants- the great variability
of the horns of deer, as notably
in the wild reindeer- the occasional
presence of horns in the female
Antilope bezoartica, and their
frequent absence in the female
of Antilocapra americana- the
presence of two tusks in some
few male narwhals- the complete
absence of tusks in some female
walruses- are all instances of
the extreme variability of secondary
sexual characters, and of their
liability to differ in closely-allied
forms.
Although tusks and horns appear
in all cases to have been primarily
developed as sexual weapons,
they often serve other purposes.
The elephant uses his tusks in
attacking the tiger; according
to Bruce, he scores the trunks
of trees until they can be thrown
down easily, and he likewise
thus extracts the farinaceous
cores of palms; in Africa he
often uses one tusk, always the
same, to probe the ground and
thus ascertain whether it will
bear his weight. The common bull
defends the herd with his horns;
and the elk in Sweden has been
known, according to Lloyd, to
strike a wolf dead with a single
blow of his great horns. Many
similar facts could be given.
One of the most curious secondary
uses to which the horns of an
animal may be occasionally put
is that observed by Captain Hutton*
with the wild goat (Capra aegagrus)
of the Himalayas and, as it is
also said with the ibex, namely
that when the male accidentally
falls from a height he bends
inwards his head, and by alighting
on his massive horns, breaks
the shock. The female cannot
thus use her horns, which are
smaller, but from her more quiet
disposition she does not need
this strange kind of shield so
much.
* Calcutta Journal of Natural
History, vol. ii, 1843, p. 526.
Each male animal
uses his weapons in his own
peculiar fashion.
The common ram makes a charge
and butts with such force with
the bases of his horns, that
I have seen a powerful man knocked
over like a child. Goats and
certain species of sheep, for
instance the Ovis cycloceros
of Afghanistan,* rear on their
hind legs, and then not only
butt, but "make a cut down and
a jerk up, with the ribbed front
of their scimitar-shaped horn,
as with a sabre. When the O.
cycloceros attacked a large domestic
ram, who was a noted bruiser,
he conquered him by the sheer
novelty of his mode of fighting,
always closing at once with his
adversary, and catching him across
the face and nose with a sharp
drawing jerk of the head, and
then bounding out of the way
before the blow could be returned." In
Pembrokeshire a male goat, the
master of a flock which during
several generations had run wild,
was known to have killed several
males in single combat; this
goat possessed enormous horns,
measuring thirty-nine inches
in a straight line from tip to
tip. The common bull, as every
one knows, gores and tosses his
opponent; but the Italian buffalo
is said never to use his horns:
he gives a tremendous blow with
his convex forehead, and then
tramples on his fallen enemy
with his knees- an instinct which
the common bull does not possess.*(2)
Hence a dog who pins a buffalo
by the nose is immediately crushed.
We must, however, remember that
the Italian buffalo has been
long domesticated, and it is
by no means certain that the
wild parent-form had similar
horns. Mr. Bartlett informs me
that when a female Cape buffalo
(Bubalus caffer) was turned into
an enclosure with a bull of the
same species, she attacked him,
and he in return pushed her about
with great violence. But it was
manifest to Mr. Bartlett that,
had not the bull shewn dignified
forbearance, he could easily
have killed her by a single lateral
thrust with his immense horns.
The giraffe uses his short, hair-covered
horns, which are rather longer
in the male than in the female,
in a curious manner; for, with
his long neck he swings his head
to either side, almost upside
down, with such force that I
have seen a hard plank deeply
indented by a single blow.
* Mr. Blyth, in Land and Water,
March, 1867, p. 134, on the authority
of Capt. Hutton and others. For
the wild Pembrokeshire goats,
see the Field, 1869, p. 150.
*(2) M. E. M.
Bailly, "Sur l'Usage
des cornes," &c., Annal des Sciences
Nat., tom. ii., 1824, p. 369.
With antelopes it is sometimes
difficult to imagine how they
can possibly use their curiously-shaped
horns; thus the springboc (Ant.
euchore) has rather short upright
horns, with the sharp points
bent inwards almost at right
angles, so as to face each other;
Mr. Bartlett does not know how
they are used, but suggests that
they would inflict a fearful
wound down each side of the face
of an antagonist. The slightly-curved
horns of the Oryx leucoryx (see
fig. 63) are directed backwards,
and are of such length that their
points reach beyond the middle
of the back, over which they
extend in almost parallel lines.
Thus they seem singularly ill-fitted
for fighting; but Mr. Bartlett
informs me that when two of these
animals prepare for battle, they
kneel down, with their beads
between their forelegs, and in
this attitude the horns stand
nearly parallel and close to
the ground, with the points directed
forwards and a little upwards.
The combatants then gradually
approach each other, and each
endeavours to get the upturned
points under the body of the
other; if one succeeds in doing
this, he suddenly springs up,
throwing up his head at the same
time, and can thus wound or perhaps
even transfix his antagonist.
Both animals always kneel down,
so as to guard as far as possible
against this manoeuvre. It has
been recorded that one of these
antelopes has used his horn with
effect even against a lion; yet
from being forced to place his
head between the fore legs in
order to bring the points of
the horns forward, he would generally
be under a great disadvantage
when attacked by any other animal.
It is, therefore, not probable
that the horns have been modified
into their present great length
and peculiar position, as a protection
against beasts of prey. We can
however see that, as soon as
some ancient male progenitor
of the Oryx acquired moderately
long horns, directed a little
backwards, he would be compelled,
in his battles with rival males,
to bend his head somewhat inwards
or downwards, as is now done
by certain stags; and it is not
improbable that he might have
acquired the habit of at first
occasionally and afterwards of
regularly kneeling down. In this
case it is almost certain that
the males which possessed the
longest horns would have had
a great advantage over others
with shorter horns; and then
the horns would gradually have
been rendered longer and longer,
through sexual selection, until
they acquired their present extraordinary
length and position.
With stags of
many kinds the branches of
the horns offer a
curious case of difficulty; for
certainly a single straight point
would inflict a much more serious
wound than several diverging
ones. In Sir Philip Egerton's
museum there is a horn of the
red-deer (Cervus elaphus), thirty
inches in length, with "not fewer
than fifteen snags or branches";
and at Moritzburg there is still
preserved a pair of antlers of
a red-deer, shot in 1699 by Frederick
I, one of which bears the astonishing
number of thirty-three branches
and the other twenty-seven, making
altogether sixty branches. Richardson
figures a pair of antlers of
the wild reindeer with twenty-nine
points.* From the manner in which
the horns are branched, and more
especially from deer being known
occasionally to fight together
by kicking with their fore feet,*(2)
M. Bailly actually comes to the
conclusion that their horns are
more injurious than useful to
them. But this author overlooks
the pitched battles between rival
males. As I felt much perplexed
about the use or advantage of
the branches, I applied to Mr.
McNeill of Colonsay, who has
long and carefully observed the
habits of red-deer, and he informs
me that he has never seen some
of the branches brought into
use, but that the brow antlers,
from inclining downwards, are
a great protection to the forehead,
and their points are likewise
used in attack. Sir Philip Egerton
also informs me both as to red-deer
and fallow-deer that, in fighting,
they suddenly dash together,
and getting their horns fixed
against each other's bodies,
a desperate struggle ensues.
When one is at last forced to
yield and turn round, the victor
endeavours to plunge his brow
antlers into his defeated foe.
It thus appears that the upper
branches are used chiefly or
exclusively for pushing and fencing.
Nevertheless in some species
the upper branches are used as
weapons of offence; when a man
was attacked by a wapiti deer
(Cervus canadensis) in Judge
Caton's park in Ottawa, and several
men tried to rescue him, the
stag "never raised his head from
the ground; in fact he kept his
face almost flat on the ground,
with his nose nearly between
his fore feet, except when he
rolled his head to one side to
take a new observation preparatory
to a plunge." In this position
the ends of the horns were directed
against his adversaries. "In
rolling his head he necessarily
raised it somewhat, because his
antlers were so long that he
could not roll his head without
raising them on one side, while,
on the other side they touched
the ground." The stag by this
procedure gradually drove the
party of rescuers backwards to
a distance of 150 or 200 feet;
and the attacked man was killed.*(3)
* On the horns of red-deer,
Owen, British Fossil Mammals,
1846, p. 478; Richardson on the
horns of the reindeer, Fauna
Bor. Americana, 1829, p. 240.
I am indebted to Prof. Victor
Carus, for the Moritzburg case.
*(2) Hon. J.
D Caton (Ottawa Acad. of Nat.
Science, May, 1868,
p. 9) says that the American
deer fight with their fore feet,
after "the question of superiority
has been once settled and acknowledged
in the herd." Bailly, "Sur l'Usage
des cornes," Annales des Sciences
Nat., tom. ii., 1824, p. 371.
*(3) See a most interesting
account in the Appendix to Hon.
J. D. Caton's paper, as above
quoted.
Although the horns of stags
are efficient weapons, there
can, I think, be no doubt that
a single point would have been
much more dangerous than a branched
antler; and Judge Caton, who
has had large experience with
deer, fully concurs in this conclusion.
Nor do the branching horns, though
highly important as a means of
defence against rival stags,
appear perfectly well adapted
for this purpose, as they are
liable to become interlocked.
The suspicion has therefore crossed
my mind that they may serve in
part as ornaments. That the branched
antlers of stags as well as the
elegant lyrated horns of certain
antelopes, with their graceful
double curvature (see fig. 64),
are ornamental in our eyes, no
one will dispute. If, then, the
horns, like the splendid accoutrements
of the knights of old, add to
the noble appearance of stags
and antelopes, they may have
been modified partly for this
purpose, though mainly for actual
service in battle; but I have
no evidence in favour of this
belief.
An interesting
case has lately been published,
from which it
appears that the horns of a deer
in one district in the United
States are now being modified
through sexual and natural selection.
A writer in an excellent American
journal* says that he has hunted
for the last twenty-one years
in the Adirondacks, where the
Cervus virginianus abounds. About
fourteen years ago he first heard
of spike-horn bucks. These became
from year to year more common;
about five years ago he shot
one, and afterwards another,
and now they are frequently killed. "The
spike-horn differs greatly from
the common antler of the C. virginianus.
It consists of a single spike,
more slender than the antler,
and scarcely half so long, projecting
forward from the brow, and terminating
in a very sharp point. It gives
a considerable advantage to its
possessor over the common buck.
Besides enabling him to run more
swiftly through the thick woods
and underbrush (every hunter
knows that does and yearling
bucks run much more rapidly than
the large bucks when armed with
their cumbrous antlers), the
spike-horn is a more effective
weapon than the common antler.
With this advantage the spike-horn
bucks are gaining upon the common
bucks, and may, in time, entirely
supersede them in the Adirondacks.
Undoubtedly, the first spike-horn
buck was merely an accidental
freak of nature. But his spike-horns
gave him an advantage, and enabled
him to propagate his peculiarity.
His descendants having a like
advantage, have propagated the
peculiarity in a constantly increasing
ratio, till they are slowly crowding
the antlered deer from the region
they inhabit." A critic has well
objected to this account by asking,
why, if the simple horns are
now so advantageous, were the
branched antlers of the parent-form
ever developed? To this I can
only answer by remarking, that
a new mode of attack with new
weapons might be a great advantage,
as shewn by the case of the Ovis
cycloceros, who thus conquered
a domestic ram famous for his
fighting power. Though the branched
antlers of a stag are well adapted
for fighting with his rivals,
and though it might be an advantage
to the prong-horned variety slowly
to acquire long and branched
horns, if he had to fight only
with others of the same kind,
yet it by no means follows that
branched horns would be the best
fitted for conquering a foe differently
armed. In the foregoing case
of the Oryx leucoryx, it is almost
certain that the victory would
rest with an antelope having
short horns, and who therefore
did not need to kneel down, though
an Oryx might profit by having
still longer horns, if he fought
only with his proper rivals.
* The American Naturalist, Dec.,
1869, p. 552.
Male quadrupeds,
which are furnished with tusks,
use them in various
ways, as in the case of horns.
The boar strikes laterally and
upwards; the musk-deer downwards
with serious effect.* The walrus,
though having so short a neck
and so unwieldy a body, "can
strike either upwards, or downwards,
or sideways, with equal dexterity."*(2)
I was informed by the late Dr.
Falconer, that the Indian elephant
fights in a different manner
according to the position and
curvature of his tusks. When
they are directed forwards and
upwards he is able to fling a
tiger to a great distance- it
is said to even thirty feet;
when they are short and turned
downwards he endeavours suddenly
to pin the tiger to the ground
and, in consequence, is dangerous
to the rider, who is liable to
be jerked off the howdah.*(3)
* Pallas Spicilegia Zoologica,
fasc. xiii., 1779, p. 18.
*(2) Lamont, Seasons with the
Sea-Horses, 1861, p. 141.
*(3) See also Corse (Philosophical
Transactions, 1799, p. 212) on
the manner in which the short-tusked
Mooknah variety attacks other
elephants.
Very few male
quadrupeds possess weapons
of two distinct kinds
specially adapted for fighting
with rival males. The male muntjac-deer
(Cervulus), however, offers an
exception, as he is provided
with horns and exserted canine
teeth. But we may infer from
what follows that one form of
weapon has often been replaced
in the course of ages by another.
With ruminants the development
of horns generally stands in
an inverse relation with that
of even moderately developed
canine teeth. Thus camels, guanacoes,
chevrotains, and musk-deer, are
hornless, and they have efficient
canines; these teeth being "always
of smaller size in the females
than in the males." The Camelidae
have, in addition to their true
canines, a pair of canine-shaped
incisors in their upper jaws.*
Male deer and antelopes, on the
other hand, possess horns, and
they rarely have canine teeth;
and these, when present, are
always of small size, so that
it is doubtful whether they are
of any service in their battles.
In Antilope montana they exist
only as rudiments in the young
male, disappearing as he grows
old; and they are absent in the
female at all ages; but the females
of certain other antelopes and
of certain deer have been known
occasionally to exhibit rudiments
of these teeth.*(2) Stallions
have small canine teeth, which
are either quite absent or rudimentary
in the mare; but they do not
appear to be used in fighting,
for stallions bite with their
incisors, and do not open their
mouths wide like camels and guanacoes.
Whenever the adult male possesses
canines, now inefficient, whilst
the female has either none or
mere rudiments, we may conclude
that the early male progenitor
of the species was provided with
efficient canines, which have
been partially transferred to
the females. The reduction of
these teeth in the males seems
to have followed from some change
in their manner of fighting,
often (but not in the horse)
caused by the development of
new weapons.
* Owen, Anatomy of Vertebrates,
vol. iii., p. 349.
*(2) See Ruppell (in Proc. Zoolog.
Soc., Jan. 12, 1836, p. 3) on
the canines in deer and antelopes,
with a note, by Mr. Martin on
a female American deer. See also
Falconer (Palaeont. Memoirs and
Notes, vol. i., 1868, p. 576)
on canines in an adult female
deer. In old males of the musk-deer
the canines (Pallas, Spic. Zoolog.,
fasc. xiii., 1779, p. 18) sometimes
grow to the length of three inches,
whilst in old females a rudiment
projects scarcely half an inch
above the gums.
Tusks and horns
are manifestly of high importance
to their possessors,
for their development consumes
much organised matter. A single
tusk of the Asiatic elephant-
one of the extinct woolly species-
and of the African elephant,
have been known to weigh respectively
150, 160, and 180 pounds; and
even greater weights have been
given by some authors.* With
deer, in which the horns are
periodically renewed, the drain
on the constitution must be greater;
the horns, for instance, of the
moose weigh from fifty to sixty
pounds, and those of the extinct
Irish elk from sixty to seventy
pounds- the skull of the latter
weighing on an average only five
pounds and a quarter. Although
the horns are not periodically
renewed in sheep, yet their development,
in the opinion of many agriculturists,
entails a sensible loss to the
breeder. Stags, moreover, in
escaping from beasts of prey
are loaded with an additional
weight for the race, and are
greatly retarded in passing through
a woody country. The moose, for
instance, with horns extending
five and a half feet from tip
to tip, although so skilful in
their use that he will not touch
or break a twig when walking
quietly, cannot act so dexterously
whilst rushing away from a pack
of wolves. "During his progress
he holds his nose up, so as to
lay the horns horizontally back;
and in this attitude cannot see
the ground distinctly."*(2) The
tips of the horns of the great
Irish elk were actually eight
feet apart! Whilst the horns
are covered with velvet, which
lasts with red-deer for about
twelve weeks, they are extremely
sensitive to a blow; so that
in Germany the stags at this
time somewhat change their habits,
and avoiding dense forests, frequent
young woods and low thickets.*(3)
These facts remind us that male
birds have acquired ornamental
plumes at the cost of retarded
flight, and other ornaments at
the cost of some loss of power
in their battles with rival males.
* Emerson Tennent, Ceylon, 1859,
vol. ii., p. 275; Owen, British
Fossil Mammals, 1846, p. 245.
*(2) Richardson, Fauna Bor.
Americana, on the moose, Alces
palmata, pp. 236, 237; on the
expanse of the horns, Land and
Water, 1869, p. 143. See also
Owen, British Fossil Mammals,
on the Irish elk, pp. 447, 455.
*(3) Forest Creatures, by C.
Boner, 1861, p. 60.
With mammals,
when, as is often the case,
the sexes differ in
size, the males are almost always
larger and stronger. I am informed
by Mr. Gould that this holds
good in a marked manner with
the marsupials of Australia,
the males of which appear to
continue growing until an unusually
late age. But the most extraordinary
case is that of one of the seals
(Callorhinus ursinus), a full-grown
female weighing less than one-sixth
of a full-grown male.* Dr. Gill
remarks that it is with the polygamous
seals, the males of which are
well known to fight savagely
together, that the sexes differ
much in size; the monogamous
species differing but little.
Whales also afford evidence of
the relation existing between
the pugnacity of the males and
their large size compared with
that of the female; the males
of the right-whales do not fight
together, and they are not larger,
but rather smaller, than their
females; on the other hand, male
sperm-whales fight much together,
and their bodies are "often found
scarred with the imprint of their
rival's teeth," and they are
double the size of the females.
The greater strength of the male,
as Hunter long ago remarked,*(2)
is invariably displayed in those
parts of the body which are brought
into action in fighting with
rival males- for instance, in
the massive neck of the bull.
Male quadrupeds are also more
courageous and pugnacious than
the females. There can be little
doubt that these characters have
been gained, partly through sexual
selection, owing to a long series
of victories, by the stronger
and more courageous males over
the weaker, and partly through
the inherited effects of use.
It is probable that the successive
variations in strength, size,
and courage, whether due to mere
variability or to the effects
of use, by the accumulation of
which male quadrupeds have acquired
these characteristic qualities,
occurred rather late in life,
and were consequently to a large
extent limited in their transmission
to the same sex.
* See the very interesting paper
by Mr. J. A. Allen in Bull. Mus.
Comp. Zoology of Cambridge, United
States, vol. ii., No. 1, p. 82.
The weights were ascertained
by a careful observer, Capt.
Bryant. Dr. Gill in The American
Naturalist, January, 1871, Prof.
Shaler on the relative size of
the sexes of whales, American
Naturalist, January, 1873.
*(2) Animal Economy, p. 45.
From these considerations
I was anxious to obtain information
as to the Scotch deer-hound,
the sexes of which differ more
in size than those of any other
breed (though blood-hounds differ
considerably), or than in any
wild canine species known to
me. Accordingly, I applied to
Mr. Cupples, well known for his
success with this breed, who
has with great kindness collected
for me the following facts from
various sources. Fine male dogs,
measured at the shoulder, range
from 28 inches, which is low,
to 33 or even 34 inches in height;
and in weight from 80 pounds,
which is light, to 120 pounds,
or even more. The females range
in height from 23 to 27, or even
to 28 inches; and in weight from
50 to 70, or even 80 pounds.*
Mr. Cupples concludes that from
95 to 100 pounds for the male,
and 70 for the female, would
be a safe average; but there
is reason to believe that formerly
both sexes attained a greater
weight. Mr. Cupples has weighed
puppies when a fortnight old;
in one litter the average weight
of four males exceeded that of
two females by six and a half
ounces; in another litter the
average weight of four males
exceeded that of one female by
less than one ounce; the same
males when three weeks old, exceeded
the female by seven and a half
ounces, and at the age of six
weeks by nearly fourteen ounces.
Mr. Wright of Yeldersley House,
in a letter to Mr. Cupples, says: "I
have taken notes on the sizes
and weights of puppies of many
litters, and as far as my experience
goes, dog-puppies as a rule differ
very little from bitches till
they arrive at about five or
six months old; and then the
dogs begin to increase, gaining
upon the bitches both in weight
and size. At birth, and for several
weeks afterwards, a bitch-puppy
will occasionally be larger than
any of the dogs, but they are
invariably beaten by them later." Mr.
McNeill, of Colonsay, concludes
that "the males do not attain
their full growth till over two
years old, though the females
attain it sooner." According
to Mr. Cupples' experience, male
dogs go on growing in stature
till they are from twelve to
eighteen months old, and in weight
till from eighteen to twenty-four
months old; whilst the females
cease increasing in stature at
the age of from nine to fourteen
or fifteen months, and in weight
at the age of from twelve to
fifteen months. From these various
statements it is clear that the
full difference in size between
the male and female Scotch deer-hound
is not acquired until rather
late in life. The males almost
exclusively are used for coursing,
for, as Mr. McNeill informs me,
the females have not sufficient
strength and weight to pull down
a full-grown deer. From the names
used in old legends, it appears,
as I hear from Mr. Cupples, that,
at a very ancient period, the
males were the most celebrated,
the females being mentioned only
as the mothers of famous dogs.
Hence, during many generations,
it is the male which has been
chiefly tested for strength,
size, speed, and courage, and
the best will have been bred
from. As, however, the males
do not attain their full dimensions
until rather late in life, they
will have tended, in accordance
with the law often indicated,
to transmit their characters
to their male offspring alone;
and thus the great inequality
in size between the sexes of
the Scotch deer-hound may probably
be accounted for.
* See also Richardson's Manual
on the Dog, p. 59. Much valuable
information on the Scottish deer-hound
is given by Mr. McNeill, who
first called attention to the
inequality in size between the
sexes, in Scrope's Art of Deer-Stalking.
I hope that Mr. Cupples will
keep to his intention of publishing
a full account and history of
this famous breed.
The males of some few quadrupeds
possess organs or parts developed
solely as a means of defence
against the attacks of other
males. Some kinds of deer use,
as we have seen, the upper branches
of their horns chiefly or exclusively
for defending themselves; and
the Oryx antelope, as I am informed
by Mr. Bartlett, fences most
skilfully with his long, gently
curved horns; but these are likewise
used as organs of offence. The
same observer remarks that rhinoceroses
in fighting, parry each other's
sidelong blows with their horns,
which clatter loudly together,
as do the tusks of boars. Although
wild boars fight desperately,
they seldom, according to Brehm,
receive fatal wounds, as the
blows fall on each other's tusks,
or on the layer of gristly skin
covering the shoulder, called
by the German hunters, the shield;
and here we have a part specially
modified for defence. With boars
in the prime of life (see fig.
65) the tusks in the lower jaw
are used for fighting, but they
become in old age, as Brehm states,
so much curved inwards and upwards
over the snout that they can
no longer be used in this way.
They may, however, still serve,
and even more effectively, as
a means of defence. In compensation
for the loss of the lower tusks
as weapons of offence, those
in the upper jaw, which always
project a little laterally, increase
in old age so much in length
and curve so much upwards that
they can be used for attack.
Nevertheless, an old boar is
not so dangerous to man as one
at the age of six or seven years.*
* Brehm, Thierleben, B. ii.,
ss. 729-32.
In the full-grown
male Babirusa pig of Celebes
(see fig. 66),
the lower tusks are formidable
weapons, like those of the European
boar in the prime of life, whilst
the upper tusks are so long and
have their points so much curled
inwards, sometimes even touching
the forehead, that they are utterly
useless as weapons of attack.
They more nearly resemble horns
than teeth, and are so manifestly
useless as teeth that the animal
was formerly supposed to rest
his head by hooking them on to
a branch! Their convex surfaces,
however, if the head were held
a little laterally, would serve
as an excellent guard; and hence,
perhaps, it is that in old animals
they "are generally broken off,
as if by fighting."* Here, then,
we have the curious case of the
upper tusks of the Babirusa regularly
assuming during the prime of
life a structure which apparently
renders them fitted only for
defence; whilst in the European
boar the lower tusks assume in
a less degree and only during
old age nearly the same form,
and then serve in like manner
solely for defence.
* See Mr. Wallace's interesting
account of this animal, The Malay
Archipelago, 1869, vol. i., p.
435.
In the wart-hog (see Phacochoerus
aethiopicus, fig. 67) the tusks
in the upper jaw of the male
curve upwards during the prime
of life, and from being pointed
serve as formidable weapons.
The tusks in the lower jaw are
sharper than those in the upper,
but from their shortness it seems
hardly possible that they can
be used as weapons of attack.
They must, however, greatly strengthen
those in the upper jaw, from
being ground so as to fit closely
against their bases. Neither
the upper nor the lower tusks
appear to have been specially
modified to act as guards, though
no doubt they are to a certain
extent used for this purpose.
But the wart-hog is not destitute
of other special means of protection,
for it has, on each side of the
face, beneath the eyes, a rather
stiff, yet flexible, cartilaginous,
oblong pad (see fig. 67), which
projects two or three inches
outwards; and it appeared to
Mr. Bartlett and myself, when
viewing the living animal, that
these pads, when struck from
beneath by the tusks of an opponent,
would be turned upwards, and
would thus admirably protect
the somewhat prominent eyes.
I may add, on the authority of
Mr. Bartlett, that these boars
when fighting stand directly
face to face.
Lastly, the African river-hog
(Potomochoerus penicillatus)
has a hard cartilaginous knob
on each side of the face beneath
the eyes, which answers to the
flexible pad of the wart-hog;
it has also two bony prominences
on the upper jaw above the nostrils.
A boar of this species in the
Zoological Gardens recently broke
into the cage of the wart-hog.
They fought all night long, and
were found in the morning much
exhausted, but not seriously
wounded. It is a significant
fact, as shewing the purposes
of the above-described projections
and excrescences, that these
were covered with blood, and
were scored and abraded in an
extraordinary manner.
Although the males of so many
members of the pig family are
provided with weapons, and as
we have just seen with means
of defence, these weapons seem
to have been acquired within
a rather late geological period.
Dr. Forsyth Major specifies*
several miocene species, in none
of which do the tusks appear
to have been largely developed
in the males; and Professor Rutimeyer
was formerly struck with this
same fact.
* Atti della Soc. Italiana di
Sc. Nat., 1873, vol. xv. fasc.
iv.
The mane of
the lion forms a good defence
against the attacks
of rival lions, the one danger
to which he is liable; for the
males, as Sir A. Smith informs
me, engage in terrible battles,
and a young lion dares not approach
an old one. In 1857 a tiger at
Bromwich broke into the cage
of a lion and a fearful scene
ensued: "the lion's mane saved
his neck and head from being
much injured, but the tiger at
last succeeded in ripping up
his belly, and in a few minutes
he was dead."* The broad ruff
round the throat and chin of
the Canadian lynx (Felis canadensis)
is much longer in the male than
in the female; but whether it
serves as a defence I do not
know. Male seals are well known
to fight desperately together,
and the males of certain kinds
(Otaria jubata)*(2) have great
manes, whilst the females have
small ones or none. The male
baboon of the Cape of Good Hope
(Cynocephalus porcarius) has
a much longer mane and larger
canine teeth than the female;
and the mane probably serves
as a protection, for, on asking
the keepers in the Zoological
Gardens, without giving them
any clue to my object, whether
any of the monkeys especially
attacked each other by the nape
of the neck, I was answered that
this was not the case, except
with the above baboon. In the
Hamadryas baboon, Ehrenberg compares
the mane of the adult male to
that of a young lion, whilst
in the young of both sexes and
in the female the mane is almost
absent.
* The Times, Nov. 10, 1857.
In regard to the Canada lynx,
see Audubon and Bachman, Quadrupeds
of North America, 1846, p. 139.
*(2) Dr. Murie, on Otaria, Proc.
Zoolog. Soc., 1869, p. 109. Mr.
J. A. Allen, in the paper above
quoted (p. 75), doubts whether
the hair, which is longer on
the neck in the male than in
the female, deserves to be called
a mane.
It appeared
to me probable that the immense
woolly mane of the
male American bison, which reaches
almost to the ground, and is
much more developed in the males
than in the females, served as
a protection to them in their
terrible battles; but an experienced
hunter told Judge Caton that
he had never observed anything
which favoured this belief. The
stallion has a thicker and fuller
mane than the mare; and I have
made particular inquiries of
two great trainers and breeders,
who have had charge of many entire
horses, and am assured that they "invariably
endeavour to seize one another
by the neck." It does not, however,
follow from the foregoing statements,
that when the hair on the neck
serves as a defence, that it
was originally developed for
this purpose, though this is
probable in some cases, as in
that of the lion. I am informed
by Mr. McNeill that the long
hairs on the throat of the stag
(Cervus elaphus) serve as a great
protection to him when hunted,
for the dogs generally endeavour
to seize him by the throat; but
it is not probable that these
hairs were specially developed
for this purpose; otherwise the
young and the females would have
been equally protected.
Choice in Pairing by either
Sex of Quadrupeds.- Before describing
in the next chapter, the differences
between the sexes in voice, odours
emitted, and ornaments, it will
be convenient here to consider
whether the sexes exert any choice
in their unions. Does the female
prefer any particular male, either
before or after the males may
have fought together for supremacy;
or does the male, when not a
polygamist, select any particular
female? The general impression
amongst breeders seems to be
that the male accepts any female;
and this owing to his eagerness,
is, in most cases, probably the
truth. Whether the female as
a general rule indifferently
accepts any male is much more
doubtful. In the fourteenth chapter,
on birds, a considerable body
of direct and indirect evidence
was advanced, shewing that the
female selects her partner; and
it would be a strange anomaly
if female quadrupeds, which stand
higher in the scale and have
higher mental powers, did not
generally, or at least often,
exert some choice. The female
could in most cases escape, if
wooed by a male that did not
please or excite her; and when
pursued by several males, as
commonly occurs, she would often
have the opportunity, whilst
they were fighting together,
of escaping with some one male,
or at least of temporarily pairing
with him. This latter contingency
has often been observed in Scotland
with female red-deer, as I am
informed by Sir Philip Egerton
and others.*
* Mr. Boner,
in his excellent description
of the habits of
the red-deer in Germany (Forest
Creatures, 1861, p. 81) says, "while
the stag is defending his rights
against one intruder, another
invades the sanctuary of his
harem, and carries off trophy
after trophy." Exactly the same
thing occurs with seals; see
Mr. J. A. Allen, ibid., p. 100.
It is scarcely
possible that much should be
known about female
quadrupeds in a state of nature
making any choice in their marriage
unions. The following curious
details on the courtship of one
of the eared seals (Callorhinus
ursinus) are given* on the authority
of Capt. Bryant, who had ample
opportunities for observation.
He says, "Many of the females
on their arrival at the island
where they breed appear desirous
of returning to some particular
male, and frequently climb the
outlying rocks to overlook the
rookeries, calling out and listening
as if for a familiar voice. Then
changing to another place they
do the same again.... As soon
as a female reaches the shore,
the nearest male goes down to
meet her, making meanwhile a
noise like the clucking of a
hen to her chickens. He bows
to her and coaxes her until he
gets between her and the water
so that she cannot escape him.
Then his manner changes, and
with a harsh growl he drives
her to a place in his harem.
This continues until the lower
row of harems is nearly full.
Then the males higher up select
the time when their more fortunate
neighbours are off their guard
to steal their wives. This they
do by taking them in their mouths
and lifting them over the heads
of the other females, and carefully
placing them in their own harem,
carrying them as cats do their
kittens. Those still higher up
pursue the same method until
the whole space is occupied.
Frequently a struggle ensues
between two males for the possession
of the same female, and both
seizing her at once pull her
in two or terribly lacerate her
with their teeth. When the space
is all filled, the old male walks
around complacently reviewing
his family, scolding those who
crowd or disturb the others,
and fiercely driving off all
intruders. This surveillance
always keeps him actively occupied."
* Mr. J. A. Allen in Bull. Mus.
Comp. Zoolog. of Cambridge, United
States, vol. ii., No. 1, p. 99.
As so little
is known about the courtship
of animals in a
state of nature, I have endeavoured
to discover how far our domesticated
quadrupeds evince any choice
in their unions. Dogs offer the
best opportunity for observation,
as they are carefully attended
to and well understood. Many
breeders have expressed a strong
opinion on this head. Thus, Mr.
Mayhew remarks, "The females
are able to bestow their affections;
and tender recollections are
as potent over them as they are
known to be in other cases, where
higher animals are concerned.
Bitches are not always prudent
in their loves, but are apt to
fling themselves away on curs
of low degree. If reared with
a companion of vulgar appearance,
there often springs up between
the pair a devotion which no
time can afterwards subdue. The
passion, for such it really is,
becomes of a more than romantic
endurance." Mr. Mayhew, who attended
chiefly to the smaller breeds,
is convinced that the females
are strongly attracted by males
of a large size.* The well-known
veterinary Blaine states*(2)
that his own female pug dog became
so attached to a spaniel, and
a female setter to a cur, that
in neither case would they pair
with a dog of their own breed
until several weeks had elapsed.
Two similar and trustworthy accounts
have been given me in regard
to a female retriever and a spaniel,
both of which became enamoured
with terrier-dogs.
* Dogs: their Management, by
E. Mayhew, M. R. C. V. S., 2nd
ed., 1864, pp. 187-192.
*(2) Quoted by Alex. Walker,
On Intermarriage, 1838, p. 276;
see also p. 244.
Mr. Cupples
informs me that he can personally
vouch for the
accuracy of the following more
remarkable case, in which a valuable
and wonderfully-intelligent female
terrier loved a retriever belonging
to a neighbour to such a degree,
that she had often to be dragged
away from him. After their permanent
separation, although repeatedly
showing milk in her teats, she
would never acknowledge the courtship
of any other dog, and to the
regret of her owner never bore
puppies. Mr. Cupples also states,
that in 1868, a female deerhound
in his kennel thrice produced
puppies, and on each occasion
shewed a marked preference for
one of the largest and handsomest,
but not the most eager, of four
deerhounds living with her, all
in the prime of life. Mr. Cupples
has observed that the female
generally favours a dog whom
she has associated with and knows;
her shyness and timidity at first
incline her against a strange
dog. The male, on the contrary,
seems rather inclined towards
strange females. It appears to
be rare when the male refuses
any particular female, but Mr.
Wright, of Yeldersley House,
a great breeder of dogs, informs
me that he has known some instances;
he cites the case of one of his
own deerhounds, who would not
take any notice of a particular
female mastiff, so that another
deerhound had to be employed.
It would be superfluous to give,
as I could, other instances,
and I will only add that Mr.
Barr, who has carefully bred
many bloodhounds, states that
in almost every instance particular
individuals of opposite sexes
shew a decided preference for
each other. Finally, Mr. Cupples,
after attending to this subject
for another year, has written
to me, "I have had full confirmation
of my former statement, that
dogs in breeding form decided
preferences for each other, being
often influenced by size, bright
colour, and individual characters,
as well as by the degree of their
previous familiarity."
In regard to
horses, Mr. Blenkiron, the
greatest breeder of race-horses
in the world, informs me that
stallions are so frequently capricious
in their choice, rejecting one
mare and without any apparent
cause taking to another, that
various artifices have to be
habitually used. The famous Monarque,
for instance, would never consciously
look at the dam of Gladiateur,
and a trick had to be practised.
We can partly see the reason
why valuable race-horse stallions,
which are in such demand as to
be exhausted, should be so particular
in their choice. Mr. Blenkiron
has never known a mare to reject
a horse; but this has occured
in Mr. Wright's stable, so that
the mare had to be cheated. Prosper
Lucas* quotes various statements
from French authorities, and
remarks, "On voit des etalons
qui s'eprennent d'une jument,
et negligent toutes les autres." He
gives, on the authority of Baelen,
similar facts in regard to bulls;
and Mr. H. Reeks assures me that
a famous short-horn bull belonging
to his father "invariably refused
to be matched with a black cow." Hoffberg,
in describing the domesticated
reindeer of Lapland says, "Foeminae
majores et fortiores mares prae,
caeteris admittunt, ad eos confugiunt,
a junioribus agitatae, qui hos
in fugam conjiciunt."*(2) A clergyman,
who has bred many pigs, asserts
that sows often reject one boar
and immediately accept another.
* Traite de l'Hered. Nat., tom.
ii., 1850, p. 296.
*(2) Amaenitates Acad., vol.
iv., 1788, p. 160.
From these facts there can be
no doubt that, with most of our
domesticated quadrupeds, strong
individual antipathies and preferences
are frequently exhibited, and
much more commonly by the female
than by the male. This being
the case, it is improbable that
the unions of quadrupeds in a
state of nature should be left
to mere chance. It is much more
probable that the females are
allured or excited by particular
males, who possess certain characters
in a higher degree than other
males; but what these characters
are, we can seldom or never discover
with certainty. |