Cassell's Natural History, Vol. 2 (of 6) — John Shaqi
Cassell's Natural History, Vol. 2 (of 6)
Science
Cassell's Natural History, Vol. 2 (of 6)
Animal behavior; Animals; Zoology
The Carnivora, or flesh-eating Mammals, form a fourth order of the
Mammalia, and are divided into two great groups, or sub-orders as they
are called by zoologists, one terrestrial, and the other aquatic. The
first is the group of the _Fissipedia_, or “split-feet,” so called from
the fact that the feet are divided into well-marked toes; the second is
the group of the _Pinnipedia_, or “fin-feet” (Seals, &c.), so called
from the fact that the toes are bound together by skin, forming fins or
flippers rather than feet.
THE LAND CARNIVORA.[1]
This group, which comprises all the great “beasts of prey,” is one of
the most compact, as well as one of the most interesting among the
Mammalia. So many of the animals contained in it have become “familiar
in our mouths as household words,” bearing as they do an important
part in fable, in travel, and even in history: so many of them are of
such wonderful beauty, so many of such terrible ferocity, that no one
can fail to be interested in them, even apart from the fact likely to
influence us more in their favour than any other--that the two home
pets which of all others are the commonest and the most interesting
belong to the group.
No one who has had a Dog friend, no one who has watched the wonderful
instance of maternal love afforded by a Cat with her kittens, no one
who loves riding across country after a Fox, no lady with a taste for
handsome furs, no boy who has read of Lion and Tiger hunts, and has
longed to emulate the doughty deeds of the hunter, can fail to be
interested in an assemblage which furnishes animals at once so useful,
so beautiful, and so destructive.
It must not be supposed from the name of this group that all its
members are exclusively flesh-eaters--and, indeed, it will be hardly
necessary to warn the reader against falling into this mistake, as
there are few people who have never given a Dog a biscuit, or a Bear a
bun. Still, both the Dog and several kinds of Bears prefer flesh-meat
when they can get it; but there are some Bears which live almost
exclusively on fruit, and are therefore in strictness not carnivorous
at all. The name must, however, be taken as a sort of general title for
a certain set of animals which have certain characters in common, and
which differ from all other animals in particular ways.
Comparatively few of the flesh-eaters are of direct use to man, at any
rate while alive, yet one member of the group--the Dog--is the most
useful of all domestic quadrupeds, though derived from one of the most
savage of all--the Wolf. The Ferret, the Cheetah and the Cat are also
more or less domesticated; but they come far below the Dog in amiable
qualities, and in value to man. Below their value in service comes the
use of their most beautiful skins; and still lower down the scent,
derivable from a few species. Yet from these two last sources our fair
ones seek to derive new charms, not heeding the poet Cowley’s quaint
objurgation:--
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account