GENERAL HISTORY OF DOGS

From Armagetron Advanced Test
Jump to: navigation, search

In the ancient lands that are ancient, and normally among the early Mongolians, the dog stayed savage and failed for centuries, prowling in packs, gaunt and wolf-like, because it prowls now through the streets and under the walls of every Eastern city. No effort was made to allure it into individual companionship or to enhance it to docility. It isn't till we come to analyze the records of the greater civilisations of Assyria and Egypt we find any distinct varieties of puppy houses form.
The wolf's natural voice is a loud howl, however when restricted with dogs he'll learn to bark. Although he is carnivorous, he'll also eat vegetables, and when ailing he will nibble grass. From the chase, a bunch of wolves will split into parties, one after the trail of their quarry, the other endeavouring to intercept its escape, exercising a significant amount of plan, a characteristic that's exhibited by many of our athletic dogs and terriers when hunting in teams.
It has been suggested that the one indisputable argument contrary to the lupine relationship of this dog is the fact that most domestic dogs bark, while all wild Canidae express their feelings only by howls. However, the difficulty here is not so good as it seems, because we know that jackals, wild dogs, and wolf pups reared by bitches readily get the habit. On the other hand, domestic dogs permitted to run wild forget how to bark, while there are a few that have not yet heard so to express themselves.
The great multitude of different strains of the dog and the huge differences in their size, factors, and overall appearance are facts which make it difficult to believe that they could have had a frequent ancestry. Yet the disparity is no more than that between the Shire horse as well as the Shetland pony, the Shorthorn and the Kerry cows, or the Patagonian and the Pygmy; and all dog breeders understand how easy it's to generate a variety in type and size by analyzed choice.

The existence or absence of the habit of barking cannot, then, be regarded as a debate in determining the question regarding the origin of their dog. This stumbling block consequently disappears, leaving us in the position of agreeing with Darwin, whose closing hypothesis was that"it is highly likely that the domestic dogs of earth have descended from two good species of wolf (C. lupus and C. latrans), and from two or three other suspicious species of wolves specifically, the Indian, European, and North African forms; from at least one or two Southern American canine species; from several species or races of jackal; and perhaps from one or extinct species"; and that the blood of these, in some cases mingled together, flows in the veins of our domestic breeds.
The native dogs of regions approximate closely in size, coloration, form, and habit into the native wolf of these regions. Of this most important circumstance there are far too many instances to allow of its being looked upon as a mere coincidence. Sir John Richardson, composing in 1829, observed that"the similarity between the North American wolves and the national dog of the Indians is so great that the strength and size of the wolf appears to be the only real difference.
In order properly to understand this issue it's necessary first to consider the identity of construction in the wolf and the dog. This identity of structure could best be studied in a contrast of the osseous system, or skeletons, of the two creatures, which so closely resemble each other that their transposition would not easily be detected.
The back of the dog consists of seven vertebrae in the neck, thirteen in the back, seven in the loins, three cervical vertebrae, and twenty five to twenty-two in the tail. In both the dog and the wolf there are thirteen pairs of ribs, nine four and true untrue. Each has forty-two teeth. They both have five front and four hind toes, while seemingly the frequent wolf has much the appearance of a large, bare-boned dog, a favorite description of the one would function for another.
A further important point of resemblance between the Canis lupus along with the Canis familiaris can be found in the fact that the period of gestation in both species is sixty-three days. There are three to nine cubs at a wolf's litter, and these are blind for twenty five days. They are suckled for just two months, but in the end of the time they are able to consume half-digested flesh disgorged for them with their own dam or their sire.
The dog wasn't greatly appreciated in Palestine, and in both the Old and New Testaments it is commonly spoken of with scorn and contempt within an"unclean beast." Even the familiar reference to the Sheepdog in the Book of Job"But they that are younger than I have me in derision, whose fathers I would have disdained to set with the dogs of my flock" isn't without a hint of contempt, and it's significant that the only biblical allusion to the dog as a recognised companion of man occurs in the apocryphal Book of Tobit (v. 16),"So they went forth both, and the young man's dog with them."

There is no incongruity in the idea that in the very earliest period of man's habitation of this world he made a friend and companion of some type of aboriginal representative of our contemporary dog, which in return for its help in protecting him from wilder creatures, and in guarding his goats and sheep, he gave it a share of his meals, a corner at his house, and climbed to trust it and care for it. Probably the animal was originally little else than an unusually mild jackal, or a ailing wolf driven by its companions out of the wild marauding pack to look for refuge in alien surroundings. An individual can well imagine the possibility of this partnership beginning from the circumstance of a helpless whelps being brought home by the early hunters to be tended and reared by the women and children. Dogs introduced into the house as playthings for the kids could grow to respect themselves, and be regarded, as members of the family