Descent of Man [ 1871 ]

Charles Darwin [ 1809 - 1882 ]

Chapter XVII - Secondary Sexual Characters of Mammals




  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.
Last updated: Friday, 30-Jan-98 10:45:17 MST