Cassell's Natural History, Vol. 1 (of 6)

by Unknown

ORDER INSECTIVORA.

CHAPTER I.
COLUGOS—BANGSRINGS—JUMPING SHREWS—HEDGEHOGS—TANRECS—RIVER SHREWS.

Functions of the Insect-eaters in the Order of Nature—Their Leading Peculiarities—Classification—[COLUGOS]—Various Opinions regarding their Place—[COLUGO, OR FLYING LEMUR]—The Patagium—Parachute-like Membrane—Dentition—Offspring—Diet—[BANGSRINGS]—[TANA]—[FERRUGINOUS BANGSRING]—[HORSFIELD’S BANGSRING]—[LOW’S PTILOCERQUE]—[SHORT-TAILED BANGSRING]—[JUMPING SHREWS]—[ELEPHANT SHREW]—[ALGERIAN JUMPING SHREW]—[PETRODROME]—[RHYNCHOCYON]—[HEDGEHOG]—Characteristics—Distribution—Diet—Attacks Snakes and Vipers—Taste for Eggs and Game—Its “Spiny Skin”—“Rolled up”—Enemies—Female and Young—[LONG-EARED HEDGEHOG]—[COLLARED HEDGEHOG]—[BULAU]—[TANRECS]—[TANREC]—[TENDRAC]—[TELFAIR’S TENDRAC]—[RICE TENDRAC]—[EARED EARTH SHREW]—[AGOUTA]—[ALMIQUI]—[WEST AFRICAN RIVER SHREW]

IN the grand economy of nature small things play sometimes very considerable parts; and the innumerable hosts of insects, making up by their numbers for their individual insignificance, are of very great importance in a great variety of fashions. One of their most striking functions is undoubtedly the checking of vegetable growth. They attack plants in all parts—in the roots, the stem, the branches, the leaves, and the flowers and fruit—in this way, while merely obeying their own appetites, imposing a constant check upon the increase of vegetation; and being for the most part specially confined to particular plants or groups of plants, they assist materially in preserving the balance of power in the vegetable world. At the same time, it must be borne in mind that there is the same tendency in insects, as in any other group of organisms, to inordinate increase. The checkers thus need a check in their turn, and the number of other creatures whose business it seems to be to keep down the undue multiplication of insects is exceedingly great.

We have seen that among the Mammalia the Bats for the most part have this duty imposed upon them. They attack the winged armies of perfect insects in the air, and must cut off an enormous number of potential parents of plant-eating larvæ. But there are a great many insects which seldom or never rise into the air, and the larvæ of those which are aerial in their perfect state are of necessity confined to the ground or the vegetation growing on it; these are not without their Mammalian enemies. Many Mammals of the Carnivorous and Marsupial orders feed wholly or partially upon insects; but there is one order most of the species of which are exclusively, or almost exclusively, confined to a diet of terrestrial insects, worms and “such small deer,” and which has consequently received the name of Insectivora, or “the insect-eaters.” On trees, on the ground, and even beneath its surface, and in the water, these animals chase insects and their larvæ; and if they diversify their diet with worms and other invertebrates, or by attacking and devouring frogs, fishes, and small birds and Mammalia, or even in some cases feed chiefly upon such articles, or on fruit, the predominating taste for insects among the members of the order may justify the name.

SKELETON OF SHREW.

The Insectivora are in many respects related to the Bats, and in some cases show a sort of affinity to the lower Quadrumana. In appearance many of them show analogy to different families of Rodents, or gnawing Mammals, the Shrews especially exceedingly mouse-like in their aspect; but, as might be expected from the difference in the habits, and especially in the diet of the animals, the simple inspection of the teeth is always sufficient to distinguish the members of these two orders.

DENTITION OF HEDGEHOG.

The leading peculiarities of the Insectivora may be briefly indicated, with reference to the groups which approach them most closely in certain points of structure. The limbs are all organised for walking or digging, the fore limbs never being modified, as in the Bats, into organs of flight, and the two bones of the fore-arm (radius and ulna) are always more or less distinct. There is no opposable thumb, either on the fore or the hind feet. The teeth, which are always encased in enamel, are of the usual three kinds—incisors, canines, and molars[251]—and the dentition generally resembles that of the strictly Insectivorous Bats, the molars especially being similarly furnished with several sharp cusps or points, which are regarded as characteristic of Insect-eating Mammals. All the teeth are implanted in the jaws by roots.

In the development of the tail, and the nature of the covering of the skin, the Insectivora present considerable diversities, which will be referred to hereafter. Their feet generally consist of five toes, all armed with claws, and nearly all are plantigrade—that is to say, they apply the whole, or nearly the whole, of the sole of the foot to the ground in walking. With a single exception (Potamogale, which is rather anomalous in some other respects), all the Insectivora are provided with complete clavicles, or collar-bones—a character which serves to distinguish them from the Carnivora, in which the collar-bones are either deficient or imperfectly developed. The teats are generally numerous, and situated on the abdomen, the only exceptions being the anomalous Colugo, or so-called Flying Lemur, and the Golden Moles, in which the teats are situated on the breast.

Zoologists are now pretty well agreed as to the classification of these animals, although there are still differences of opinion as to the best arrangement of the families, and some minor points. The classification here adopted is founded upon that proposed by Professor Mivart in 1871, and afterwards modified by Professor Theodore Gill. In this the whole order is divided into nine families, the first of which is so anomalous, and so divergent from all the rest in its characters, as to have led to its being treated as constituting a distinct sub-order (Dermoptera).

FAMILY I.—GALEOPITHECIDÆ, OR COLUGOS.

The animals which constitute this family, now regarded as constituting only two species (although the right even of one of these to specific rank is somewhat doubtful), are in truth amongst the most anomalous of Mammals. In their characters they present the most singular resemblances to at least three orders of Mammalia, in which they have been successively placed by various zoologists. Discovered by the Dutch voyagers of the seventeenth century in the luxuriant forests of the Eastern islands, their general Lemur-like aspect led the naturalists of those days to class them with those creatures, and Camelli, the distinguished botanist, gave them the name of Galeopithecus, which became in Petiver’s hands, “Cato-simius volans,” or the Flying Cat-Monkey. Seba left out the Monkey, and called the animal simply the Flying Cat of Ternate (Felis volans ternatea); whilst Bontius, laying undue weight on its so-called flying powers, regarded it as a Bat, and gave it the name of Vespertilio admirabilis. Linnæus accepted the Lemur hypothesis, and placed the animal in his genus Lemur, under the name of Lemur volans, or the Flying Lemur, and this position it continued to hold for a very long time, although Pallas separated it from the true Lemurs under Camelli’s name of Galeopithecus. No one ever reverted to the notion that the Colugo was a Bat, but from time to time various naturalists have pointed out that in many of its characters it approached the Insectivora; and of late years the evidence in favour of its belonging to that order has been put forward so strongly, that nowadays nearly all zoologists regard it as an exceedingly aberrant member of the group, with more or less distinct tendencies towards the Bats and the Lemurs, and perhaps with some faint trace of the Marsupial about it. Mr. Wallace, speaking, of course, from the standpoint of the theory of evolution, says that “this animal seems, in fact, to be a lateral offshoot of some low form, which has survived during the process of development of the Insectivora, the Lemuroidea, and the Marsupials, from an ancestral type.” There is no doubt that the beast is sufficiently dissimilar from all other known Mammals to give a considerable air of probability to the assumption of its being a survivor from some earlier period of the earth’s history; but as it is here we must do the best we can with it, and its natural position is certainly between the true Insectivora and the Lemurs. As the characters of the family are founded virtually upon a single species, one description will serve.

THE COLUGO, OR FLYING LEMUR.[252]

The species known to the older naturalists is found in Malacca, Sumatra, and Borneo, where it inhabits the forests, climbing the trees like a Squirrel by the aid of its claws, and passing through the air from one tree to another by means of a membrane (patagium), which extends along the sides of the body, and can be stretched by the extension of the limbs to which it is attached so as to act as a sort of parachute, which supports its owner after the same fashion as the very similar fold of skin that exists in the same position in the so-called Flying Squirrels and Flying Opossums. In the Colugo, however, this curious arrangement is carried further than in the other groups of Mammals just mentioned; for, as in the Bats, there is a distinct antebrachial membrane, stretching along the front of the arms from the wrists to the sides of the neck; and the space between the hind limbs is occupied by an ample triangular membrane, down the middle of which the long tail passes, and which is also stretched by the extension of the limbs. Even the toes are joined by membranes as far as the base of the claws, and this great development of the skin must be regarded as to a certain extent approximating the creature to the Bats. The whole of this fold of skin is clothed both above and beneath with hair; and although some observers have described the animal as moving its expanded membranes during flight, no approach to the peculiar action of the Bat’s wing can ever be made by it. The most striking point in which it exceeds the other parachute-bearing Mammals is the development of the membrane between the hind limbs, and this, by the action of the tail, may be made to exert a powerful influence upon the course of the animal during its so-called flights. Mr. Wallace, who had the opportunity of observing the Colugo in its native haunts, describes its flight as follows:—“Once, in a bright twilight,” he says, “I saw one of these animals run up a trunk in a rather open place, and then glide obliquely through the air to another tree, on which it alighted near its base, and immediately began to ascend. I paced the distance from the one tree to the other, and found it to be seventy yards, and the amount of descent I estimated at not more than thirty-five or forty feet, or less than one in five. This, I think, proves that the animal must have some power of guiding itself through the air, otherwise in so long a distance it would have little chance of alighting exactly upon the trunk.” In a subsequent work, following other writers, he refers this power to the agency of the tail, and even thinks that the animal may rise over obstacles in its course by the elevatory action of that organ. The tail is of considerable length, and according to some writers its extremity has a slight prehensile action which is of assistance to the animal in climbing. The membranes, when not in use, as when the Colugo is walking or climbing, fall in great folds at the sides of the body.

Passing now, by a natural transition, from the parachute-like membranes to the limbs which traverse and serve to extend them, we find that these exhibit certain peculiarities of structure which are amongst the anomalies of this singular creature. The bones of both fore and hind limbs are elongated and slender—a character which contrasts strongly with the general state of things in the Insectivora—and the ulna, which is particularly slender, is united to the radius towards the extremity. The feet consist of five digits, and they are specially adapted to enable the animal to climb readily upon the bark of the trunks and branches of trees. In the hind feet especially part of the tarsal bones (the navicular and cuboides) are constructed so that they can easily turn upon the astragalus and calcaneum, and thus the sole is turned inwards, an arrangement which facilitates the clasping action of the feet. The inner digits in all the feet possess considerable power of independent motion, although they are never converted into opposable thumbs; and this arrangement, combined with the presence of sharp strong claws upon all the toes, must greatly favour the peculiar mode of life of the animal. It is to be remarked that the structure of the hind feet presents some analogy to that prevailing in Bats, and that in repose the Colugo suspends itself from a branch by the fore and hind feet, with the body and head hanging downwards, which is also a habit somewhat reminding us of the Chiroptera.

The head in the Galeopithecus is tolerably broad and a little flattened; the eyes are placed more laterally than in the Lemurs, and the orbits containing them form a bony ring which is interrupted behind.

HIND FOOT OF COLUGO.

BONES OF HIND FOOT OF COLUGO.

LOWER INCISORS OF COLUGO.

The teeth are very peculiar. In the upper jaw there are on each side two incisors, those of one side separated from those of the other by a very wide space. The foremost of these incisors on each side has a single root and a notched crown; the hinder one is pointed and implanted by two roots. The canine which follows also possesses two roots; and this is followed by a molar series of five teeth, each inserted into the maxillary bone by three roots, and having a crown with three, four, or five cusps. In the lower jaw, which has the condyle curiously produced outwards, we find again on each side a series of five molar teeth, and in front of these a long canine with two roots; but the whole fore part of the jaw is occupied by six single-fanged incisors; the crowns of these are nearly horizontal, broad, flat, and notched, the notching of the two middle pairs being so deep as to form a regular comb. This structure is exceedingly remarkable, and occurs in no other animals, the nearest approach to it being the slightly pectinated teeth in the Desmodont Bats.

The teats in the Galeopithecus are situated on the sides of the breast, in the neighbourhood of the armpits. There is a pair on each side, placed close together, and on the same level. The female produces only a single young one at a birth, and the little creature, described by Mr. Wallace as at first very small, blind, and naked, clings closely to the breast of the mother, which is quite bare and very much wrinkled. Mr. Wallace sees in this adaptation of the region of the teats to the wants of an exceedingly incomplete offspring, some trace of a remote relation to the peculiarities of the Marsupials. The stomach in this curious animal is of considerable size; and the intestine is furnished with sacculated cæcum as long as the stomach.

COLUGO.

The Colugo varies considerably in colour, but is usually of an olive, brown, or blackish colour, mottled with whitish spots and blotches, which are said by Mr. Wallace to give it a resemblance to the colour of mottled bark, sufficient to render it difficult of observation. The lower surface of the body and membrane is of a tawny grey colour, and the whole of the fur which clothes the body and membranes is, although short, most exquisitely soft in texture. The length of the animal is about eighteen or twenty inches.

SKULL OF COLUGO.

The brain in the Galeopithecus is very small, and Mr. Wallace found it to possess such a remarkable tenacity of life that it was killed with difficulty by any ordinary means. He describes it as sluggish in its habits, at least during the day, when it generally rests clinging to the trunks of trees, and at this time, if it has occasion to move, it goes up the tree by short runs of a few feet, and then stops a moment as if it found the action difficult and fatiguing. We have already quoted Mr. Wallace’s description of the flight of the animal as witnessed by him early in the evening, and no doubt it is active enough during the dark hours.

The regular food of the Colugo appears to consist of vegetable substances, but authors differ somewhat in their statements upon this subject. By most zoologists it is said to feed on fruits; but Mr. Wallace says that “like the cuscus of the Moluccas, the Galeopithecus feeds chiefly on leaves.” From the statements of some naturalists it would seem that it occasionally or habitually adds insects to its diet, and also that it frequently captures and devours small birds. In all probability the truth is that it eats almost anything that comes in its way.

Some five or six supposed species of Galeopithecus have been described by various authors, but most of these are now admitted to be founded upon young animals, or upon mere varieties. The Colugo of the Philippine Islands is, however, generally regarded as a distinct species, although even as to this there is some doubt. It was described by Mr. Waterhouse as Galeopithecus philippinensis, and presents a close general resemblance to the species above described, but is smaller, has a shorter head, and shows certain slight differences in the teeth.

FAMILY II.—TUPAIIDÆ OR BANGSRINGS.

The preceding family, as already stated, is regarded by Mr. Gill as constituting an actual sub-order of Insectivora, and we have seen that its characters are really of a very singular kind. The remainder of the order is treated by him as forming a single great group, characterised by the absence of parachute membranes, the shortness and robustness of the limbs, and by the want of that peculiar comb-like structure of the incisor teeth which distinguishes the Galeopitheci from all other Mammals. Moreover the condylar process of the lower jaw is never extended outwards. This group Mr. Gill proposes to name Bestiæ or Insectivora vera.

The Bangsrings, or Sinsrings, form the first family, called Tupaiidæ, from the name of the most characteristic and best known genus Tupaia, which again was derived by its discoverer and first describer, Sir Stamford Raffles, from the native name for a Squirrel, with which these animals are confounded by the Malays of Sumatra. The Bangsrings have either four or six incisors in the upper, and always six in the lower jaw; and three or four premolars, and four true molars on each side in both jaws. The canines are situated far back, and have a single root. In the skull the orbit is usually complete, or nearly so, and there is a complete zygomatic arch, with a small slit or aperture beneath the orbit. The bones of the shank are separate; the intestine has a large cæcum; and the feet are furnished with five toes, armed with strongly curved claws. The upper molar teeth are formed of two nearly equal parts, anterior and posterior, each of which represents a triangular prism narrowed inwards.

The Bangsrings live in and about trees, where their activity and general appearance give them a considerable resemblance to small Squirrels or Lemurs. They also remind one considerably of some of the smaller Marsupials. Their fur is exceedingly fine and soft; their tail generally long and well-clothed with hair (except in Hylomys); and their food consists partly of fruits and partly of insects. The species inhabit South-eastern Asia and the islands of the Eastern Archipelago.

THE TANA.[253]

DENTITION OF FERRUGINOUS BANGSRING.

In the genus Tupaia (or Cladobates) from which the present family takes its name, there are four small incisor teeth separated from each other in the upper jaw; and six incisors, the middle four of which are close together, long, and much inclined forwards in the lower jaw. The upper canines are at some distance from the hindmost incisors, the lower ones close to them (see [figure]). Behind the canines there are on each side in both jaws three premolars, which increase in size backwards. These are followed by three true molars. The bony orbit is a complete ring, and the zygomatic arch is also complete, but perforated by an elongated aperture. The ears are of moderate size, and rounded; the eyes large and prominent; and the tail long, and well clothed with hair throughout its whole length; in fact in most species it is a bushy organ like that of many Squirrels.

In the Tana (Tupaia tana) the arrangement of the hair on the tail in two rows, something after the fashion of the barbs of a feather on the shaft, which is more or less recognisable throughout this genus, is especially remarkable; and as the hair is very long, the tail is rendered particularly bushy. This animal is one of the larger species, the body measuring from eight to nine inches in length, and its colour is rather variable, although usually exhibiting various shades of reddish-brown, becoming darker or blackish on the hinder part of the back, where, moreover, the greater part of the hairs are of uniform tint and not grizzled. The colour of the tail appears to be especially liable to vary—thus, according to Dr. Günther, in the ordinary form of the species the tail is black above, with the basal half of each hair rusty brown, and dark brown below; in another variety, described by Wagner as a distinct species under the name of T. speciosa, the tail is brownish-red above, and bright rusty-red below; whilst in the beautiful form from which our illustration is taken the whole organ is of a reddish golden-yellow colour. This is Dr. Günther’s variety, chrysura (golden tail).

TANA—GOLDEN-TAILED VARIETY. (From the Proceedings of the Zoological Society.)

The Tana is an inhabitant of the forests of Sumatra and Borneo. According to Sir Stamford Raffles, the animal is known to the country people of Sumatra under the name of Tupai tana, and he was informed that it was always found on or near the ground. A nearly allied but much smaller species (T. splendidula of Dr. Gray) occurs with it in the last-named island; and another larger one (T. nicobarica) is found in the Nicobar Islands.

THE FERRUGINOUS BANGSRING.[254]

This species, the Tupai Press of the Malays of Sumatra, and the Kekkes of the Sundanese in Java, is more widely distributed than the preceding, being found not only in the two islands above mentioned, but also in Borneo, Penang, and Singapore. It was first described by Sir Stamford Raffles. It is one of the larger species, the head and body measuring about eight inches, and the tail being fully of equal length. The colour of its fur is almost entirely a rusty red, becoming darker, however, on the tail and the hinder part of the back, where the hairs are more or less grizzled with white. The tail is not so bushy as that of the Tana. The aperture under the orbits is of an elongated oval form.

Sir Stamford Raffles, in his original account of this animal, describes it as being very lively and playful in its habits, and as feeding on fruits. He first saw it tame in the house of a gentleman in Penang, and states that this individual “was suffered to go about in perfect liberty, ranged in freedom over the whole house, and never failed to present himself on the breakfast and dinner table, where he partook of fruit and milk.” Dr. Cantor, in his “Catalogue of the Mammalia inhabiting the Malayan Peninsula and Islands,” gives the following interesting account of this Bangsring:—“The young of this very numerous species in hilly jungle,” he says, “is easily found, and becomes familiar with its feeder, though towards strangers it retains its original mistrust, which, in mature age, is scarcely reclaimable. In a state of nature it lives singly or in pairs, fiercely attacking intruders of its own species. When several are confined together, they fight each other, or jointly attack and destroy the weakest. The natural food is mixed insectivorous and frugivorous. In confinement individuals may be fed exclusively on either, though preference is evinced for insects; and eggs, fish, and earth-worms are equally relished. A short, peculiar, tremulous whistling sound, often heard by calls and answers in the Malayan jungle, marks their pleasurable emotions; as, for instance, on the appearance of food; while the contrary is expressed by shrill protracted cries. Their disposition is very restless, and their great agility enables them to perform the most extraordinary bounds in all directions, in which exercise they spend the day, till night sends them to sleep in their rudely-constructed lairs in the highest branches of trees. At times they will sit on their haunches, holding their food between the fore-legs; and after feeding they smooth the head and face with both fore-paws, and lick the lips and palms. They are also fond of water, both to drink and to bathe in. The female usually produces one young.” Dr. Cantor also states that “the lateral raised lines of the palms and soles, the posterior part of the first phalanges and the third phalanx, which is widened into a small soft disc, in fact, all the points which rest on the ground, are studded with little transversely-curved ridges, or duplications, similar to those observed under the toes of some Geckotidæ [Wall-Lizards], which fully accounts for the precision with which these animals perform the most astounding leaps from below, barely touching with their soles the point d’appui above. In a cage,” he adds, “the Tupaia will continue for hours vaulting from below, back downwards, poise itself for an instant, continuing back downwards under the horizontal roof, and regain the point of starting, and thus describe a circle, the diameter of which may be three or four times the length of the animal, in far shorter time than is required for the description.”

Allied to the Ferruginous Bangsring, and of nearly the same size, are two species which must be referred to on account of their geographical distribution, which carries this type of animals much farther to the west than we should expect. These are Elliot’s Bangsring (T. Ellioti), a species with unusually short and harsh fur, specimens of which have been obtained from Madras, Bengal, and Bombay; and Belanger’s Bangsring (T. Belangeri), originally procured in Pegu, but which also occurs in Burmah and Sikkim.

Horsfield’s Bangsring (Tupaia javanica) is a smaller animal than the preceding, an adult specimen measuring only about thirteen inches long, of which about one-half goes to the tail. The colour of its fur is greyish-brown, grizzled on the back, and with a whitish line on each shoulder. It inhabits Borneo, Sumatra, Java, and Arracan. The Little Bangsring (T. minor) is a still smaller species, measuring only five inches and one-third in length of body, but closely resembling the preceding in its characters. It is described by Dr. Günther from Bornean specimens. The Murine Bangsring (T. murina), which forms the genus Dendrogale of the late Dr. Gray, has also only been found in Borneo. It is a small species allied to the preceding, but has the tail more rat-like, and clothed only with comparatively short hairs, those of the lower surface especially being very short.

LOW’S PTILOCERQUE.[255]

Besides the true Bangsrings forming the genus Tupaia, this family includes two other small animals, one of which, Low’s Ptilocerque, is a very elegant little creature. The specimen originally described by Dr. Gray in 1848 was captured by Mr. Low in Rajah Brooke’s house in Borneo. It has a rather shorter head than the true Bangsrings, but its dentition is nearly the same; the aperture under the orbit is round, and the circle of the bony orbit is not quite complete behind. The most distinctive character of the animal is, however, to be found in its tail, which is an exceedingly peculiar organ. The tail itself is long and slender, and instead of being thickly clothed with bushy hairs, as in the Bangsrings, it has the basal portion hairy; then a long piece naked, covered with rings of broad, square scales, among which there are only a few short, scattered hairs; and, finally, about a third of its length is furnished with long hairs arranged on the two sides of the tail, so as to produce the appearance of the two wings of a dart or arrow (see [figure, p. 342]).

The Ptilocerque, which is an inhabitant of Borneo and Sarawak, is between five and six inches long, with a tail rather longer than the body. Its general colour is blackish-brown above, minutely grizzled by the yellowish tips of the hairs; the lower parts and the cheeks are yellowish, and there is a black streak on each side of the face, enclosing the eyes. The tail is black, with the long hairs of the tip white, except a few towards the base. The habits of the animal are probably the same as those of the Tupaias.

THE SHORT-TAILED BANGSRING.[256]

A curious little animal belonging to this family was discovered in Sumatra by Dr. S. Müller. It has its muzzle produced into a long, movable snout, and the tail very short and naked. The skull is flatter than in the true Bangsrings; the orbit is incomplete; the sub-orbital aperture is in the form of a little fissure; and the dentition is different, there being six incisors in the upper as well as in the lower jaw, and four premolars on each side in both jaws. The total number of teeth is thus forty-four instead of thirty-eight. This animal has been found in Java and Sumatra.

The same, or a very nearly allied species, has been obtained in Pegu, and described by Mr. Blyth under the name of Hylomys peguensis. Professor Gill regards these animals as most nearly related to Gymnura in the family Erinaceidæ.

FAMILY III—MACROSCELIDIDÆ, OR JUMPING SHREWS.

SOLE OF RIGHT
HIND FOOT OF
ELEPHANT SHREW.

Some curious little creatures, peculiar to Africa and its islands, in which, as in the Jerboas and Kangaroos, the hind legs are more developed than the fore limbs, enabling the animals to advance in a biped fashion by a succession of leaps, are regarded by most zoologists as nearly related to the Bangsrings; in fact, both Professor Mivart and Mr. Gill make these two families form a distinct tribe of Insectivora. They both have the same kind of molar teeth, and the intestine furnished with a large cæcum. But whilst the Bangsrings are squirrel-like animals, with feet adapted for a life in trees, the Jumping Shrews are mouse-like creatures, of terrestrial jumping habits, and furnished with a long, thin, proboscis-like muzzle, which has procured for them the name of Elephant Shrews. They have large eyes, and ears of a moderate size and rather widely separated; their hind limbs are considerably elongated, especially the shank and the metatarsus, or portion forming the foot, which has a naked sole that is applied to the ground; the two bones of the shank (tibia and fibula), and in general those of the forearm (radius and ulna), are attached to each other at the lower end; and the first or inner toe is either placed further back than the others, or altogether deficient. The sides of the muzzle are usually furnished with very long whiskers. The tail is long, and more or less rat-like, but covered with short hairs.

In two of the three genera into which the family is divided the number of teeth is forty, namely, on each side, incisors, 33, canines, 11, premolars, 33, and molars, 33, the incisors being small, and the upper canines furnished with two roots. In the exceptional genus Rhynchocyon, which includes only a single species, there is only one incisor in the upper jaw, and even this falls out as the animal grows old.

The species of this family are peculiar to Africa, where they are found in Algeria and Barbary, along the east coast, and at the Cape of Good Hope.

THE ELEPHANT SHREW.[257]

This appears to be the commonest species in Southern Africa, where its habits were observed by the late Sir Andrew Smith, who founded for it the genus Macroscelides. It is about five inches long, with a tail of about three inches, and its colour is a tawny brown, becoming whitish on the limbs. It is diurnal in its habits, and very active, hunting for its insect prey among the scanty herbage and stunted shrubs, which alone flourish in the dry rocky spots which it chooses for its place of habitation. It resides in burrows in the ground, and when disturbed immediately rushes to take shelter in its home, or under some neighbouring rock or stone.

ELEPHANT SHREW.

Sir Andrew Smith described several other South African species, and at least one has been obtained on the Mozambique coast. In their structure and general habits they agree with the above-mentioned animal.

THE ALGERIAN JUMPING SHREW.[258]

Besides these southern species, however, the French naturalists have discovered a species of this genus in Algeria, and it is also found to inhabit Barbary. It is known to the French colonists in Algeria by the name of the “Rat à trompe.” This animal is of the same size as the preceding—that is to say, about five inches long; its tail measures four inches, and its long slender snout about half an inch. It has a soft tawny fur on the back and sides, and the lower surface is whitish. The Algerian Jumping Shrew is said to feed not only upon insects, but also upon vegetable matters. It is gentle and inoffensive, and may be easily tamed, when its gambols are said to be very sprightly and amusing.

THE PETRODROME.[259]

The Mozambique coast produces another species of this family, agreeing with those just noticed in nearly all its characters, but of much larger size, and further distinguished from them by having only four toes on each hind foot. The first toe, which is pushed far back, and considerably reduced in size in the Elephant Shrews, is entirely deficient in the Petrodrome.

While the Macroscelides generally live in the plains, among grass and under bushes, the Petrodrome, as its name implies, prefers localities among the hills, where cavities and fissures in the rocks furnish it with a secure refuge. In three places where Professor Peters found it, this was the case. It lives on insects. In captivity it soon becomes familiar, although at first shy, but never inclined to bite. The natives at Tette call it Sâro.

THE RHYNCHOCYON.[260]

SOLE OF RIGHT
HIND FOOT OF
PETRODROME.

Besides the species of Macroscelides already mentioned, and the Petrodrome, the coast of Mozambique has another animal which is referred to this family, although it presents several characters which separate it very decidedly from all the rest. It was first described by Professor Peters under the name of Rhynchocyon, which means “beaked dog,” although it must be confessed that there is nothing very dog-like about it. The name is in allusion to the large size of the canine teeth.

The Rhynchocyon, which is a very rare animal in collections, appears from the description and figure of Professor Peters to be a queer-looking beast. It measures about eight inches in length, exclusive of the tail, which is rather long, tapering, and rat-like, being covered with a ringed skin, and furnished with only a few scattered hairs. The muzzle is produced into a very long movable snout. The fur is of a rusty-brown colour, with a blackish tinge about the ears and the back of the head, and some light reddish spots on the hinder part of the back.

This animal, which is called Mutâu by the natives, lives in holes in the ground, from which it issues at night in search of the insects on which it feeds, and is chiefly interesting to the zoologist for the structural characters which it presents. Thus, whilst agreeing with the ordinary members of the present family sufficiently to warrant its being classified with them, and to prevent its going anywhere else, it differs from them in some exceedingly important particulars, which might almost justify its being placed in a family by itself. Although the hind legs are more developed than the fore limbs, the disproportion between them is hardly so great as in the true Jumping Shrews; and further, all the feet are reduced to the same four-toed condition as the hind feet in the Petrodrome, and the outer toe is shorter than the rest. But it is in the dentition that the anomaly is the greatest. The Rhynchocyon never has more than one small incisor tooth on each side in the upper jaw, and even this drops out as the creature advances in age; and the upper canine is a simple tooth with a single root. In the lower jaw there are three incisors on each side, and in both jaws the canines are followed by three premolars and three molars. In the hind legs the two shank-bones are united near the extremity as in the preceding species, but the two bones of the fore-arm (radius and ulna) are separate.

RHYNCHOCYON.

FAMILY IV.—ERINACEIDÆ, OR HEDGEHOGS.

We pass now from groups of insect-eating animals the members of which must be sought in far distant countries, to a family represented in England by a very well-known species. Our Common Hedgehog, in fact, may serve as an excellent example of the family to which it belongs, although this certainly includes one species which presents rather anomalous characters.

All the Erinaceidæ have the two molar teeth broad, as in the preceding families; in fact, here the hinder ones are nearly square, and the tubercles forming their upper surface are rounded in form. The skull has a complete zygomatic arch, and the tympanic bone forms a bubble-like swelling on each side of the back of the skull. The back is clothed with hairs, among which there are a number of strong spines or bristles. The legs are short, and formed exclusively for walking, and the hind legs have the two bones of the shank (tibia and fibula) united. The intestine has no cæcum.

These animals are confined to the Old World, in nearly all parts of which some of the species are to be found. They feed chiefly upon insects and other small animals; most of them have the power of rolling themselves up into a ball, when the prickles with which the back is armed constitute a most formidable defensive armour; and in cold countries they pass the winter in a state of torpidity. Several fossil species have been found in Tertiary deposits in Europe.

THE HEDGEHOG.[261]

Our Common English Hedgehog may serve as the type of this family; all the species of which, with only a single exception, belong to the same genus, and present a very close resemblance to each other, both in appearance and habits. All the Hedgehogs, in fact, are small animals of robust form, with very short tails, and the greater part of the hairs of the upper surface converted into sharp spines. The muzzle is conical, and the jaws contain thirty-six teeth, twenty of which are in the upper and sixteen in the lower jaw (see figure, [p. 343]). The arrangement of these teeth is peculiar. There are three incisors on each side, of which the inner one is considerably larger than the rest, and in the upper jaw these are separated by a small space from the next tooth, which is generally regarded as a premolar, in which case the animals have no canines. Behind this, in the upper jaw, are three premolars, gradually increasing in size until the third has very much the appearance of a true molar, but furnished with a cutting edge; and then three molar teeth, two of which are large and broad, nearly square, and crowned with very strong tubercles, admirably adapted for crushing the hard skins of the insects on which the Hedgehogs principally feed. The hindmost molar is a small tooth. In the lower jaw the innermost incisor is very large, and projects almost horizontally forward, and it is followed by three small teeth, the nature of which has been a matter of dispute. Two of them, however, are generally considered to be incisors, and the third a premolar, but by M. F. Cuvier they were all described as premolars, making, with another and larger tooth which follows them, four premolars in the lower as in the upper jaw, This last premolar is a carnassial or cutting tooth, corresponding to that in the upper jaw. It is separated by a small space from the last of the smaller anterior teeth, and is followed by three true molars, two of which are large, and furnished with four or five sharp tubercles, while the third is small, and shows only one strong point.

In the Common Hedgehog, as in most species of the genus Erinaceus, the feet are all composed of five toes; the legs are short, so that the animal runs along with its belly nearly touching the ground; the spines, with which the whole upper surface is covered, are hard, sharp, round, about an inch in length, of a dirty-white colour, with a dark-brown or nearly black ring a little above the middle; the nose is black, and the unspined parts of the body are clothed with coarse yellowish-white hair. The ears are small and rounded. The total length of the adult Hedgehog is usually about ten inches.

HEDGEHOG.

The Hedgehog inhabits the whole of Europe except Scandinavia and the north of Russia. It is found in the Caucasus, but does not appear to extend further into Asia. It lives both in the low country and in the mountains, ascending, in the Alps and Carpathians, to an elevation of above 6,000 feet. It may be met with in almost all situations, in forests, woods, fields, gardens, and orchards, where it takes up its abode in thickets, in hedge-bottoms, and even in holes in walls. In such situations it passes its days in sleep, for it is, strictly speaking, a nocturnal animal, although on rare occasions it may be seen abroad in the day-time. In similar situations it passes the whole winter in a profound slumber, forming a nest for itself of moss or leaves, sometimes under the smaller growth of woods and gardens, sometimes in a hedge-bank, in the hollows and among the bare roots of trees, and in holes among rocks or in walls. The nest most commonly consists in whole or in part of withered leaves, which appear to be useful in keeping out the wet, and as the innermost leaves are impaled upon the animal’s spines, it retains a thin coat of leaves when turned out of its winter-nest.

As the spring advances, the Hedgehog rouses itself from its long sleep, and proceeds to make up for the enforced abstinence from food which it has undergone for so many weeks. It comes forth in the evening, and runs about pretty quickly, but with a curious shuffling gait, in search of the insects and other small animals which constitute its usual prey. Insects, and particularly Beetles, appear to form the greater part of its diet, and its teeth are admirably adapted for pounding up the hard skins of these creatures. In consequence of their predilection for insect food, great numbers of Hedgehogs are brought to London and other great towns, to be kept in houses for the purpose of destroying the Cockroaches (Blackbeetles, as they are commonly called) which are such disagreeable inmates of most kitchens. In the pursuit of these insects the Hedgehog shows much activity, and Mr. Bell says that he has “seen a Hedgehog, in a London kitchen, push its way beneath a piece of carpet in all directions, and heard it at intervals crushing up the Cockroaches which it met with. In a short time it freed the place of these pests.” Sometimes, however, this consummation is not quite so easily attained, and we have heard of more than one instance in which the first Hedgehog brought into the house as a Beetle-killer actually died of overfeeding, and at least one other had to be procured before the plague of Cockroaches was got rid of.

Besides insects, the Hedgehog feeds on earthworms, slugs, and snails, and in destroying the latter it may certainly be regarded as a friend to the gardener. The consumption of earthworms is performed in a rather curious manner. These animals are seized when they are enjoying the damp freshness of the air out of their holes in summer evenings, and slowly passed into the mouth of their enemy from one end to the other apparently by the simple process of mastication with the molar teeth, the unconsumed portion of the worm being constantly transferred from one side of the mouth to the other, so that both sides of the jaw may come into play. This must be an unpleasant operation for the worm, much as its captor may enjoy it. It is uncertain whether the larger snails are eaten by the Hedgehog, no fragments of their shells having been found in the stomachs of specimens examined, but the smaller species, belonging to the genera Vitrina and Zonitis, certainly form a portion of its diet. Mr. Bell says that “the small Slug, Limax agrestis, is a favourite morsel with the Hedgehog, and is often scratched out and eaten in the summer months when concealed in the day in crevices, or amongst the roots of grass or other close herbage.”

The Hedgehog does not, however, confine itself exclusively to the consumption of invertebrate prey; Frogs and Toads, Mice, and even Snakes, are not exempt from its attacks. Mr. Broderip many years ago published in the “Zoological Journal” an interesting account of an experiment made by Professor Buckland to ascertain how the Hedgehog deals with a prey apparently so formidable as a Snake. He says:—“The Professor procured a common Snake, and also a Hedgehog, and put them into a box together. Whether or not the former recognised its enemy was not apparent; it did not dart from the Hedgehog, but kept creeping gently round the box; the Hedgehog was rolled up, and did not appear to see the Snake. The Professor then laid the Hedgehog on the Snake, with that part of the ball where the head and tail meet downwards, and touching it. The Snake proceeded to crawl; the Hedgehog started, opened slightly, and seeing what was under it, gave the Snake a hard bite, and instantly rolled itself up again. It soon opened a second and again a third time, repeating the bite; and by the third bite the back of the Snake was broken. This done, the Hedgehog stood by the Snake’s side, and passed the whole body of the Snake successively through its jaws, cracking it, and breaking the bones at intervals of half an inch or more, by which operation the Snake was rendered motionless. The Hedgehog then placed itself at the tip of the Snake’s tail, and began to eat upwards, as one would eat a radish, without intermission, but slowly, till half the Snake was devoured. The following morning the remaining half was also completely eaten up.” According to the statements of some observers, the Hedgehog will destroy not only the harmless common Snake, but also the Viper, and Professor Lenz has described in great detail the mode in which the Hedgehog disposes of this formidable antagonist. The strange part of his account is that the Hedgehog pursues the Viper for some time, smelling at it and licking it, and submitting to repeated bites from the venomous reptile before proceeding to extremities. It then kills the Viper by crushing its head, and proceeds to devour it from that end, without showing any signs of being injured by the poison of the Snake. This curious immunity is said to extend also to other poisons, some of which are at least doubtful; but it seems certain that the Hedgehog will devour the ordinary Blister Beetles (Cantharides) without inconvenience, although a very small dose of them would destroy much larger animals. Tschudi, however, has remarked that the acrid liquid secreted by the skin of Toads is disagreeable to the Hedgehog; in eating a Toad he rubs his muzzle on the ground after each bite.

From the narrow point of view of usefulness to man, we may up to this point have a very favourable opinion of the Hedgehog, but he has some other peculiarities which may perhaps be regarded as drawbacks. One of these is his attacking young game, and another his fondness for eggs. One of the editors of Bell’s “British Quadrupeds” mentions an instance of the capture of a young Hare by a Hedgehog. A Hedgehog has also been caught in the act of worrying a young Rook which had fallen from the nest; and the general testimony of sportsmen and gamekeepers is to the effect that no small and young animals will come amiss to the Hedgehog. There is also no doubt that the Hedgehog will feed on the eggs of birds wherever it finds them; and it is even stated that it will make its way into a fowl-house, turn the hen off her eggs, and devour the latter.

The diet of the Hedgehog does not appear to be exclusively of an animal nature; in confinement it will feed readily on soaked bread and on cooked vegetables, and in a natural state it is said to eat the roots of plants and the fruits that fall from the trees in gardens and orchards. Gilbert White says:—“The manner in which they eat the roots of the plantain in my garden is very curious; with their upper mandible, which is much longer than their lower, they bore under the plant, and so eat the root off upwards, leaving the tuft of leaves untouched.” Some writers have believed that the Hedgehog is so fond of fruit as actually to climb the trees, knock off apples and pears, and then throwing itself down upon them so that they may stick to its spines, walk off quietly with its booty to some quiet retreat. According to Ælian, the ancient Greek Hedgehogs played a somewhat similar trick with figs.

With all this, we have not quite done with the diet, real or supposed, of this curious little animal. It is a common belief in most parts of England that the Hedgehogs will visit the Cows during the night and suck their milk, leaving but a scanty supply for the milkmaid in the morning. There seems, however, to be no satisfactory evidence of the commission of this crime.

When disturbed in its excursions the Hedgehog has the habit of rolling itself up into a ball, with the head and legs tucked carefully away under the belly, and the whole exposed surface completely enclosed by the spiny skin of the back. This is effected by the contraction of a most complicated system of cutaneous muscles, the most important of which, called the orbicularis panniculi, forming a broad band encircling the body, draws together the edges of the spiny part of the skin towards the centre of the ventral side of the body, thus forming a sort of prickly bag within which the whole body and limbs of the animal are enclosed. When thus arranged, by the action of the cutaneous muscles the whole of the spines of the upper surface are strongly and firmly erected, making a fence which suffices to protect the Hedgehog from the attacks of nearly all his enemies. Scarcely any Dogs can be found with pluck enough to make a successful attack upon a rolled-up Hedgehog, although it is said that some Dogs and Foxes have a trick by which to get at him, founded on the fact that a jet of water poured into the small aperture within which the head of the animal is concealed will cause him to unroll himself at once. The same power of contraction serves the Hedgehog in good stead in protecting him from other perils. If he finds himself falling down a precipice or from the top of a wall, or down a very steep slope, he immediately makes himself into a ball, and in this form will fall from very considerable heights (eighteen or twenty feet) without receiving the least injury; indeed, Hedgehogs have been observed more than once voluntarily to throw themselves down considerable distances, contracting in this fashion. On reaching the bottom they simply opened themselves, and walked off none the worse for the fall.

The voice of the Hedgehog is a sound intermediate between a grunt and a squeak; Shakespeare, as is well known, calls it “whining.” When kept in houses for destroying insects, it is said frequently to make itself disagreeable by its noise at night. In many places, both in England and on the Continent, the Hedgehog is eaten, but chiefly, it is said, by gipsies and tramps. The mode of cooking adopted, we believe, is roasting the animal in his skin, and the flesh is generally said to be excellent. According to M. Cherblanc, the French gipsies envelop the Hedgehogs in a sort of paste of clay, and then cook them over the fire, turning them from time to time until the clay is quite dry and hard, when the roast is considered to be perfect. This earthen envelope is then broken and removed, carrying the spines with it.

Notwithstanding their formidable armour, the Hedgehogs have other enemies besides man. Dogs will attack them, but not often with success, unless we may believe in their employing the ruse already alluded to, which is also said to have suggested itself to the cunning mind of Reynard. But the Foxes are said to adopt another mode of dealing with their wished-for prey. When they meet with a rolled-up Hedgehog they will, it is said, roll him along till they come to some water, into which they drop the unfortunate little animal, and then seize him during his struggles to escape drowning. On the continent of Europe the Great Horned Owl or Eagle Owl (Bubo maximus) is described as an inveterate enemy of the Hedgehog.

The female Hedgehog goes with young about seven weeks. Before bringing her progeny into the world, she selects some more or less sheltered situation in a hedge-bottom or thicket, or sometimes in a corn-field, in which she constructs a nest of moss and leaves, so well put together, that even when otherwise unprotected, its roof suffices to throw off the rain. The young, which vary in number from three to seven or eight, are, when first born, about three inches long, white, blind, and quite naked, except that they already possess the rudiments of their spines, which are then quite soft and flexible. In about four-and-twenty hours the spines have grown to a length of one-sixth of an inch, and acquired some hardness. The young animals, according to Gilbert White, have little hanging ears, and he adds that “they can in part draw their skin down over their faces, but are not able to contract themselves into a ball.” In about a month the young have acquired nearly the colour of their parents, and are then taken out by the mother to feed, although she still suckles them for a time.

In captivity, if kindly treated, the Hedgehog soon becomes familiar. He takes readily to almost any diet, and, according to Dr. Ball, he will even partake of intoxicating liquors, which, curiously enough, seem to have the effect of making him immediately quite tame, after passing through a period of inebriety, during which his gestures and proceedings have a most ludicrous resemblance to those of a drunken man.

THE LONG-EARED HEDGEHOG.[262]

This species has the ears much larger and the muzzle longer than in the Common Hedgehog, and its legs also are longer and not so stout. The tail is very short. The spines, which are marked with from twenty to twenty-two little furrows, are white at the base, brown in the middle, and yellowish at the tip; the head is covered with hair of a dirty whitish colour; and on each side of the mouth there are four rows of long brown whiskers. This animal is only about two-thirds the size of the European Hedgehog. It is found in the western part of Asiatic Russia, especially about the Caspian, in Tartary, and Siberia. It does not occur in Persia, according to Mr. Blanford, although included by Schmarda in his list of the animals of Mesopotamia. It inhabits the province of Astrakhan, in south Russia, which makes it a European species. Very little is known of the habits of the Long-eared Hedgehog, but from that little it would appear to agree in most, if not all respects, with its European relative.

Several other species of Hedgehogs have been described, the majority of them from the Asiatic continent, reaching even to the district of the Amoor, from which Schrenck described one under the name of Erinaceus amurensis, which is supposed by Mr. Bell to be a variety of the Common Hedgehog. Mr. Blanford describes a peculiar Persian species with large ears and long spines (E. macracanthus). and Mr. Blyth another from Candahar (E. megalotis). Several Indian species are noticed by various authors, and some of these seem to be widely distributed, such as

THE COLLARED HEDGEHOG,[263]

whose range extends from Madras to Candahar and Afghanistan. It is about eight or nine inches long, and has the spines irregularly interwoven, ringed with white and black, with the tips yellow, of simply white and black, or black with a white ring in the middle; the ears, which are tolerably large, and the chin, are white; and the belly and legs pale brown.

Of this, and two other species observed by him in Candahar, Captain Hutton says:—“They are nocturnal, and during the day conceal themselves in holes, or in the tufts of high jungle grass. Their food consists of insects, chiefly of a small Beetle, which is abundant on the sandy tracts of Bhawlpore, and belongs to the genus Blaps. They also feed on Lizards and Snails. When touched they have the habit of suddenly jerking up the back with some force, so as to prick the fingers or mouth of the assailant, and at the same time emitting a blowing sound, not unlike the noise produced when blowing upon a flame with a pair of bellows.” They have as complete a power of rolling themselves into a ball as the European Hedgehog.

One species of the genus, the Concolorous Hedgehog (E. concolor), appears to be peculiar to Asia Minor; others are found in Egypt, Algeria, the Sahara, and other parts of North Africa; and two are recorded from the Cape of Good Hope.

THE BULAU.[264]

We shall find, as we advance with our examination of the Insectivorous Mammals, that the characters presented by these creatures, especially in their anatomical structure, are in many instances so curiously combined that it becomes a matter of considerable difficulty to decide to what particular family a given animal should be referred, the external and structural peculiarities often pointing in two different directions, but generally tending in a remarkable manner in these anomalous forms towards the great family of the Shrews, which may be regarded as the central types of the whole order. This is the case with the Bulau (Gymnura Rafflesii), a curious animal which was originally discovered in Sumatra by Sir Stamford Raffles, and described by him as a Civet, under the name of Viverra gymnura. Vigors and Horsfield in England, and Lesson in France, recognised its distinctness from the Civets, and formed it into a separate genus under the name of Gymnura, designating the species after its discoverer, and this name has been generally adopted, although De Blainville afterwards proposed to call the genus Echinosorex, and to retain Raffles’ specific name.

BULAU.

De Blainville’s name may be taken to express in general terms the peculiar characters of the animal, which is a Hedgehog-like Shrew, or a Shrew-like Hedgehog, the latter being the more correct term. The Bulau, as Professor Gervais says, is “a Hedgehog, with the body, and especially the head, more elongated than in those already described, with flexible hairs, and furnished with a tail which is nearly naked, and as long as the body.” It has also a larger number of teeth, there being forty-four in all, namely, on each side, in each jaw, three incisors, one canine (that in the upper jaw with two roots), and seven premolars and molars which closely resemble those of the true Hedgehogs. On the back few stiff bristles are mingled with the softer hairs, as if to give a sort of indication of the animal’s relationship to the Hedgehogs; but it has no power of rolling itself up into a ball.

1. TENDRAC.     2. TELFAIR’S TENDRAC.     3. TANREC.

[❏
LARGER IMAGE]

The Bulau has a long, round, tapering, scaly tail, almost like that of a Rat, but with a greater number of scattered stiff hairs among the scales. Its head is long, and its muzzle produced into a short proboscis. Its legs are rather short, and its feet, which are adapted to plantigrade progression, are furnished with five toes, each armed with a curved and pointed claw. The general colour of the body and limbs is black or greyish-black, with the head and neck pale or whitish, and with a black streak over each eye; the tail is blackish at the base, whitish at the tip. The length of the Bulau is about twenty-six inches, of which the tail occupies twelve. Besides Sumatra, this curious animal, which may be regarded as a connecting link between the Hedgehogs and the Shrews, has been met with in the peninsula of Malacca, and in Borneo, and the neighbouring island of Sarawak. The specimens from Sarawak and the mainland of Borneo opposite Labuan are said by Dr. Günther to be all white, with only a portion of the longest and strongest hairs on the body black. Of the habits of the Bulau nothing appears to be recorded.

Professor Gill is inclined to place that almost equally curious animal, Hylomys suillus (see [p. 350]), in juxtaposition with the Bulau.

FAMILY V.—CENTETIDÆ, OR TANRECS.

The animals of this family usually have the back more or less armed with fine spines or bristles among the softer hair, the legs short, the feet five-toed, plantigrade, and the tail very short or altogether wanting, except in one anomalous genus. They are all furnished with external ears. The skull is rather elongated, approximately cylindrical, and has no zygomatic arches. The tympanic bone does not form a bubble-like protuberance; and the molar teeth are narrow, and form more or less regular triangular prisms. The number of teeth is variable. The clavicles (collar-bones) are well developed; the two bones of the shank (tibia and fibula) are separate; and the intestine has no cæcum.

With the single exception of the curious genus Solenodon, the position of which was long regarded as very doubtful, but which is now placed in this family, the Centetidæ are confined to the Madagascar region, which bears so many other peculiar types of animals. Their food appears to consist chiefly of worms and insects, but doubtless, like their relations the Hedgehogs, they will seize upon any small animal that comes in their way. The species are not numerous.

THE TANREC.[265]

The Tanrec, or Tangue, which is the best-known species of the family, is entirely destitute of tail. It has a long, pointed muzzle, small ears, and short legs; the five-toed feet are armed with strong claws, and the body is not capable of being contracted into a ball; the angle of the lower jaw is slightly bent inwards; and the teeth are forty in number, there being on each side, in each jaw, three incisors, one canine, three premolars, and three true molars. The canines, both above and below, are of exceedingly large size; those of the lower jaw are received into deep pits in the sides of the intermaxillary bone; while those of the upper jaw project downwards on each side of time lower jaw. These are the characters of the genus Centetes.

DENTITION OF TANREC.

The Tanrec (its figure will be seen in [Plate 11]) measures about fifteen or sixteen inches in length, of which nearly one-third is made up by the elongated head. Its body is covered with a mixture of bristles, hairs, and more or less flexible spines, the latter being especially strong about the nape and sides of the neck, where they measure about one-fifth of an inch in length, and form a sort of crest or collar. The spines are longer and more flexible on the body, where they are mixed with bristles, which prevail especially on the back, and these measure sometimes as much as two inches long. The belly and limbs are clothed with short hair. All these dermal appendages are yellowish, with the middle brown, giving the animal a general tawny colour, which is paler or yellowish on the limbs. The face is brownish and the long whiskers which spring from each side of the muzzle are of a dark brown colour. This is the general coloration of the species, which, however, varies occasionally. The young are said to be brown with yellow longitudinal streaks, which disappear with age.

This animal occurs abundantly not only in Madagascar, but also in the small islands of Nossi-falie, Nossi-bé, and St. Marie, and it has been introduced into Mayotte, Réunion, and the Mauritius. It passes one-half of the year in a state of torpidity, and this not in the hot season, as has been supposed, but in the colder part of the year. About May or June the Tanrecs dig themselves holes, in which they sleep until December, with their heads comfortably tucked away between the hind legs. Their burrows are generally betrayed by the presence of a small heap of earth or moss thrown up at the entrance, and as the animals are at this time very fat, and regarded as great delicacies by the natives of Madagascar and the Creoles of Réunion, they are then pursued with great avidity. Their flesh is said by some people to be preferable to Sucking-pig; but others complain that it has a musky flavour. In Madagascar the inhabitants hunt the Tanrecs with Dogs trained expressly for the purpose.

The number destroyed for food seems to be very great; but the fecundity of the animal is such as to compensate even for this violent persecution. The female is said to produce from twelve to sixteen young at a birth, and she is described as taking the greatest care of her progeny. As soon as the young Tanrecs can run about, she takes them with her in search of food, and will then defend them bravely against every danger, allowing herself to be killed rather than be separated from her family.

The Tanrecs—or Tangues, as they are called by M. Pollen—live chiefly in the mountains, in places covered with mosses, ferns, and bushes. Their food consists principally of earthworms, which they rout out by means of their feet and pointed snouts, using the latter after the fashion of a Pig. Insects also form a part of their diet; and, like the Hedgehog, they are said to feed upon certain fruits and roots. In captivity they will eat raw meat, and are also said to be fond of bananas. Their habits are nocturnal; they sleep nearly all the day, and come forth in full activity only at night.

Several other supposed species of this genus have been described, but only one of them appears to be really distinct, namely, the Streaked Tanrec (C. semispinosus), which is described as about the size of a Mole, and streaked with black and yellow. It also inhabits Madagascar. It forms the genus Hemicentetes of Professor Mivart.

THE TENDRAC.[266]

An animal much more like a Hedgehog than the preceding, having the body covered with spines almost as formidable as those of the Common Hedgehog, and also possessing the power of rolling itself into a ball, is the Tendrac of Madagascar (its figure will be seen in [Plate 11]). It has been formed into a separate genus (Ericulus), distinguished by the above peculiarities, by the presence of only two pairs of incisor teeth in each jaw, by its canine teeth possessing two roots and a second small cusp to the crown, and by its possession of a short tail like that of the Hedgehog. The total number of teeth is thirty-six. The Tendrac is about one-third less than our Common Hedgehog, which it closely resembles in appearance, and in the form of its muzzle, ears, tail, and feet. Its general tint is blackish, its spines being black, with the tips white or reddish. In its habits it resembles the Tanrec.

Telfair’s Tendrac (Echinops Telfairi) is another little Hedgehog-like inhabitant of Madagascar, where, according to Mr. Telfair, its discoverer, it goes by the native name of Sokinah (its figure will be seen in [Plate 11]). In its general characters it closely resembles Ericulus, but has only two premolars on each side in each jaw, and the two intermediate upper incisors are much longer than the others. It is the only known species of its genus. Its length is about five inches; it has a short pointed snout, a very short tail, and ears of moderate size, and rounded; its colour above is brownish, and beneath dingy white, and the upper surface is thickly covered with sharp spines, which are whitish at the base, and chestnut brown at the tips. All the feet are five-toed.

THE RICE TENDRIL.[267]

In 1870, M. Grandidier described a small Tendrac which he had obtained at Ankaye and Antsianak in Madagascar, and which he says inflicts enormous injury upon the rice-crops, by burrowing in the earth, and rooting up the young plants. The native name, “valavou fontsi,” is said to refer to this destructive habit of the animal, and, we presume, has the same meaning as the name given by M. Grandidier to the genus which he established for it.

The Rice Tendrac has the snout produced into a short trunk, at the extremity of which the nostrils are situated. The eyes are very small, and the ears rounded and of moderate size. The teeth are forty in number, as in the Tanrec. The animal is plantigrade; the hind feet have five, and the fore feet four toes, and those of the latter are armed with very strong curved claws, which are doubtless of great service in the burrowing operations alluded to above.

The Rice Tendrac is of a greyish-brown colour. Its tail is short, clothed with long hairs at the base, but naked in the last two thirds, which exhibit a ringed appearance. It must be abundant in Madagascar, but M. Grandidier records nothing of its habits beyond the charge he makes of injury to the rice-crops. This is no doubt effected by the animal when burrowing in pursuit of insects and worms.

THE EARED EARTH SHREW.[268]

The curious series of animals included under the family Centetidæ is united in a remarkable, manner by the intervention of a little creature about the size of a Mouse, discovered in Madagascar, and described by MM. A. Milne-Edwards and Grandidier under the name of Geogale aurita. At the first glance it might be taken for a true Shrew. It has a long head, although the snout is not prolonged, the nostrils open at the sides of the nose; the mouth is large, the ears are of large size, membranous, and naked, and apparently capable of folding up at the will of the animal so as to close the aperture of the ear, and the tail, which is shorter than the body, is covered with a finely-ringed skin, over which are scattered very short brownish hairs. These characters, as is remarked by the describers, give the animal somewhat the aspect of a little Opossum. The teeth are thirty-four in number; there appear to be six incisors in each jaw; the canines are very small, and the molars especially resemble those of Solenodon.

This little animal has the upper part of the body and head rather thinly covered with short greyish hairs, and the lower parts greyish-white. The sides of the muzzle bear long, brownish moustaches. Specimens were obtained in two localities in Madagascar (Mouroundava and Tullear), and in both cases they were found in the ground disturbed by pulling up the posts of a palisade, so that it may be inferred that this species hunts worms and larvæ in the earth, an operation in which the faculty of folding the external ears over their orifice would certainly be useful to it.

THE AGOUTA.[269]

Several years ago (in 1833) Professor Brandt, of St. Petersburg, described a singular animal from St. Domingo, which was particularly interesting, both as being the only known representative of the Insectivorous Mammalia in the tropical regions of America, and also on account of its own extraordinary character. It was an animal of about the size of a small Rabbit, the head and body measuring about a foot in length, but the muzzle was drawn out into a sort of trunk or proboscis, at the sides of which, near the tip, the nostrils were situated; the body terminated behind in a naked, rat-like tail, rather more than eight inches in length; whilst the feet, which were decidedly plantigrade, and each furnished with five toes, had the latter armed with curved, compressed claws of formidable dimensions, especially on the fore feet. The dentition clearly showed the animal to be insectivorous, but its characters were so peculiar that Brandt seems to have regarded it as a sort of intermediate form between the Shrews and the Marsupial Opossums.

Subsequent investigations have shown that, odd as this animal may be, its place is undoubtedly among the true Insectivora; and Professor Peters, of Berlin, by a consideration of its characters, and especially of those of the skeleton, arrived at the conclusion that it is most nearly related to the Tanrecs of Madagascar, widely separated as that land is from the West Indian home of the Agouta.

Professor Brandt established a distinct genus for the reception of the animal described by him, which he called Solenodon paradoxus—the generic name referring to the peculiar channelled structure of the outer incisors in the lower jaw—the specific name to the paradoxical nature of the animal itself. Professor Peters’ interpretation of the dentition, which was long a subject of doubt, is now generally accepted, and according to this, there are in the front of the upper jaw two large, acute incisors, with a smaller one placed a little further back on each side; and in the middle of the lower jaw two very small incisors, with immediately on each side of them one of the large canine-like teeth, with a deep groove or channel on the inner surface, which have already been alluded to. Behind these teeth come in each jaw a canine, four premolars, and three true molars, so that the dental formula, according to this view, is—incisors, 1–2–14, canines, 1–11–1, premolars, 4–44–4, and molars, 3–33–3, making forty teeth in all.

The premaxillary bones extend some little distance in front of the roots of the upper incisor teeth, but the nose itself is prolonged considerably beyond them, forming a long, slender proboscis. The eyes are small, and the ears of moderate size, and rounded; the body is covered with rather stiff hairs, which, however, leave the hinder part, from the root of the tail downwards, almost naked; the tail is long, tapering, and ringed, with a few scattered, very short hairs; the legs are of moderate length, and the feet, all of which have five toes, are nearly naked, or covered only with short hair.

THE AGOUTA.

The Agouta, or Solenodon of St. Domingo, has the face, head, and upper parts brown, becoming blackish behind and on the thighs; the sides of the head and neck lighter brown, with a mixture of red and grey; the belly and feet tawny brown; the breast bright rust colour; and the tail greyish towards the base, and white towards the tip.

Of the habits of this animal, long supposed to be the only species of its genus, nothing is recorded; but its teeth very clearly indicate a carnivorous or insectivorous diet, and its habits, in all probability, resemble those of the following species.

THE ALMIQUI.[270]

In 1838, or nearly five years after the publication of Professor Brandt’s description of the preceding animal, Professor Poey, of Havana, detected the existence of a Solenodon in some of the mountainous parts of the island of Cuba. He identified it with Brandt’s species, and noticed it under the name of Solenodon paradoxus, in his “Natural History of Cuba,” which appeared in 1851. Later, however, Professor Peters, having procured a specimen from Cuba, and compared it with the one from St. Domingo in the museum at St. Petersburg, found that the two animals were quite distinct, and described the Almiqui of Professor Poey under the name of Solenodon cubanus.

The Cuban animal is of nearly the same size as that from St. Domingo, measuring in a straight line from the point of the nose to the root of the tail a little more than eleven inches. Of this the head makes about 4⅔ inches. The stout, scaly tail is 7⅗ inches in length. The hairs of the general surface of the body are very long, and form a sort of cloak for the animal, leaving its hinder part bare in a very singular manner. The colours are rather different in the Cuban species. The whole of the head, the neck, the chest, and the sides of the belly are tawny or yellowish, and the rest of the body, a streak on the nape of the neck, and another in the middle of the belly, are brown or blackish-brown. The legs are clothed with hair like that on the body, but shorter; and the upper surface of the feet has a scanty covering of short hairs which allow the skin to appear through them, and even this ceases towards the extremities of the toes. The teats in both species are situated on the groin.

The Cuban Solenodon is found in the mountains near Trinidad and Bayamo, in the southern and western parts of the island of Cuba. It is a nocturnal animal, coming forth late in the afternoon or in the evening, and amusing itself with various gambols during the night. It appears to be a predaceous animal, and in captivity shows signs of great excitement when a fowl or other animal passes by its cage. According to one observer, it will tear a chicken to pieces in a moment with its strong claws. At sight of a possible prey the long hair of its body stands on end. When sleeping during the day it seeks some corner in which it can stow away its head, and seems then to think that it is in a place of security, for when pursued it takes refuge in a shelter of the same kind, and will remain there until it is captured by seizing its tail. When disturbed in its repose it expresses its displeasure by grunting; and its ordinary voice, which is said to be very penetrating, is described as something between the grunt of a Pig and the cry of a bird. When enjoying itself at night it sometimes hoots like an Owl.

The occurrence of these two animals in the large West Indian islands is an exceedingly remarkable fact in the geographical distribution of animals, when we consider that in the general opinion of zoologists their nearest relations are the Tanrecs of Madagascar, and the Potamogale or River Shrew of some West African rivers. Professor Peters indeed remarks that the circumstance is the less surprising, as a certain type of Iguanidæ, otherwise peculiar to America, is represented in Madagascar, where also are found species belonging to two American genera of Snakes. But this does not explain the phenomenon. Mr. Andrew Murray maintains that the relationship of Solenodon is rather with the Shrews than with the present family, and, in fact, that they are peculiar and gigantic Shrews, which would certainly lessen the difficulty, seeing that there are plenty of Shrews in North America; but his arguments are by no means conclusive. Mr. Wallace, alluding to the occurrence in Europe of fossil remains referred to the Centetidæ, regards this as a case of a type formerly very widely distributed being now broken up, and represented only at or near the two extremities of its greatest range.

FAMILY VI.—POTAMOGALIDÆ.

This family includes only a single species, so that its characters may be indicated as part of the description of the animal itself, namely:—

THE WEST AFRICAN RIVER SHREW.[271]

UPPER JAW OF WEST AFRICAN RIVER SHREW.
(From Transactions, Zool. Soc.)

This was originally described by its discoverer, M. Du Chaillu, as a Carnivore, under the name of Cynogale velox, but as its characters were very doubtful, the name Potamogale, was suggested for it in case of its proving to belong to a distinct genus. The late Dr. Gray described it as a Rodent under the name of Mythomys. Some years later Professor Allman and Professor Barboza du Bocage procured perfect specimens, and proved the animal to belong to the Insectivora, the latter naturalist describing it under the new name of Bayonia velox. Thus within a few years it received no less than three different names.

When the Insectivorous nature of Du Chaillu’s River Shrew was ascertained, it was found to be most nearly allied to the Centetidæ or Tanrecs, with special affinities to the West Indian Solenodons. It is, however, generally regarded as constituting a distinct family, characterised among other things by the less cylindrical skull, the absence of clavicles, the union of the two bones of the shank towards the extremity, the presence of anal glands, and the compressed form of the tail. The teeth, as in the true Tanrecs, are forty in number, but the molars differ considerably in form, as will be seen from the [annexed figures].

LOWER JAW OF WEST AFRICAN
RIVER SHREW.
(From Trans. Zool. Soc.)

This little beast, that has given rise to so much discussion among zoologists, and received so many names, is only a little larger than our common Stoat, measuring about nine inches in length, exclusive of the powerful tail, which is of about the same length. In its appearance it very much reminds one of a miniature Otter, from which, however, it differs considerably in the form of the head, which terminates in a broad flattened muzzle, having its sides furnished with a most luxuriant crop of stiff bristle-like whiskers. The hair of the upper part of the body and limbs is brown and soft, although rather coarse and that of the lower surface yellowish; and the coat consists of two kinds of hairs, namely, an inner coat of very fine short silky hairs, through which longer hairs of a very peculiar structure project. These long hairs are very thin at the bulb, and increase very gradually in thickness for about one-third of their length, when they suddenly contract a little, and then expand into a flat lance-shaped blade, which terminates in a very fine point. This coarser fur covers the whole body, the thick root of the tail, and the upper part of the limbs; the rest of the tail, the under side of the muzzle, and the upper surface of the feet are clothed with short, close hairs. The ears are of moderate size, the eyes very small, and the toes on all the feet five in number, armed with small sharp claws, and without webs, but the second and third toes on the hind feet are united as far as the end of the first phalanx.

The most remarkable peculiarity of the animal is its tail, which presents a most unusual development for an Insectivorous Mammal. Professor Allman says, “It is so thick at its base that the trunk seems uninterruptedly continued into it; but it soon becomes laterally compressed, and then grows gradually thinner and narrower towards the tip.... Its lower edge is rounded, and its upper is continued into a membranous crest about one-eighth of an inch in height, and clothed with the same short, stiff, appressed hairs” as the rest of the tail.

This great development of the tail might of itself convince us that this organ is of great service to its owner, and such, from the account of the habits of the animal given by its discoverer, is evidently the case. M. Du Chaillu says:—“This extraordinary animal is found in the mountains of the interior, or in the hilly country explored by me north and south of the equator. It is found along the water-courses of limpid and clear streams, where fish are abundant. It hides under rocks along these streams, lying in wait for fish. It swims through the water with a rapidity which astonished me; before the fish has time to move it is caught. On account of the rapidity of its movements, I have given it the specific name of velox. The animal returns to land with its prey almost as rapidly as it started from its place of concealment. The great motive power of the animal in the water seems to be in its tail.”

WEST AFRICAN RIVER SHREW. (From the Transactions of the Zoological Society.)

CHAPTER II.
GOLDEN MOLES—MOLES—DESMANS—SHREWS.

General Description of the Golden Mole Family—Their Points of Difference from the True Mole—[THE CAPE GOLDEN MOLE]—Its Varieties—The Family of True Moles—[THE COMMON MOLE]—Described—Distribution—Teeth—Fore-limbs—Breast-bone—Not a Miserable Creature—Extreme Voracity—Diet—His Blindness a Popular Error—A Thirsty Soul—His Fortress—The Roads leading to it—Speed of a Frightened Mole—“Mole-hills”—A-wooing—His Strong Family Affections—His Persecution a Doubtful Benefit—[THE BLIND MOLE]—Several Allied Species—[THE STAR-NOSED MOLE]—Its Snout—[THE COMMON SHREW MOLE]—Other Species in the United States—The Family of Desmans—[THE DESMAN]—Its Otter-like Habits—Its Trunk—[THE PYRENEAN DESMAN]—[THE HAIRY-TAILED MOLE-SHREW]—The Family of Shrews—[THE COMMON SHREW]—Or Shrew-Mouse—Superstitions about it—[DEKAY’S SHREW]—[THE GARDEN SHREW]—[THE TUSCAN SHREW]—[THE RAT-TAILED SHREW]—[THE WATER SHREW]—Essentially Aquatic—Its Prey—Allied Species—[THE TIBETAN WATER SHREW]—[THE TAILLESS SHREW]—Concluding Remarks—Classification—Distribution—Affinities

FAMILY VII.—CHRYSOCHLORIDÆ, OR GOLDEN MOLES.

A FEW species of Insectivora, which, in their general form and habits more or less resemble our Common Moles, but differ from them in several important points of structure, form the family of the Chrysochloridæ, or Golden Moles. They are peculiar to the southern and eastern parts of Africa, ranging from the Cape to the Mozambique Coast.

SKULL OF
GOLDEN MOLE.

DENTITION OF GOLDEN MOLE.

These animals have a cylindrical body, clothed with a fine, close fur, usually exhibiting a metallic lustre which has been compared to that presented by the feathers of some of the most brilliant birds. They have a conical head, short limbs, a very short, almost rudimentary tail, minute eyes, actually covered by the skin, and no external ears. From the form of the body, the texture of the hair, and the structure of the limbs, they are as evidently organised for burrowing underground as the Moles, with which they have generally been associated; but the structure of the mechanism by which their burrowing is effected is so different that, taken in conjunction with certain other characters, it has led modern zoologists to regard the Golden Moles, notwithstanding their scanty numbers, as constituting a perfectly distinct family of the Insectivora.

The skull is shorter, more wedge-shaped, and more elevated at the back than in the true Moles, and the premaxillary bones form a process which is curiously turned outwards (see [figure, p. 365]), but this does not run to the extremity of the snout, which is supported by cartilages. The dentition is very peculiar. The total number of teeth is either thirty-six or forty, one species having two molars less in each jaw than the others; the front upper pair are large and pyramidal in form, presenting some resemblance to the corresponding teeth in the Desmans; these are followed on each side by three minute teeth, and these again by five or six true molars, of prismatic form. In the lower jaw there are two pairs of front teeth, followed on each side by three small pointed teeth (premolars), and by four or five true molars.

STERNUM OF
GOLDEN MOLE.

FORE-FOOT OF
GOLDEN MOLE.
(After Owen.)

The structure of the anterior limb, and of the parts which support it, is peculiar and characteristic, differing materially from that which obtains in the true Moles. In the sternum there are seven similar pieces, which receive the extremities of ribs, and behind these a semi-cartilaginous piece, called the ensiform (or sword-like) appendage. In front of the rib-receiving pieces is a large bone (the manubrium), excavated on each side behind to receive the ends of the collar-bones, and furnished along its lower surface with a ridge serving for the attachment of a part of the powerful muscles by which the fore limbs are moved. The form of this part is very different from that of the corresponding piece in the Mole (see [p. 368]). The form and mode of articulation of the collar-bones (clavicles) is also very different. In the True Moles the clavicle is a short, thick bone, almost resembling the vertebra of a fish; in the Golden Moles it is a longer and more slender bone, of ordinary form, and articulated after an ordinary fashion, both with the sternum and the shoulder-blade. The latter bone is larger than in the Mole, and has a very strong spine, which projects far beyond the articulation of the humerus (arm-bone). The humerus itself is a more slender bone than in the Mole, and more of the ordinary form, although it has a very strong tuberosity near the lower extremity; and one of the carpal bones (the pisiform) is most unusually developed, passing up alongside of the bones of the fore-arm (radius and ulna), until it reaches the humerus. The fore foot is quite different in its construction from that of the Mole. The latter consists of five toes, armed with large flat claws, and forms a shovel-like organ, turned outwards in a peculiar manner. The fore foot of the Golden Mole has only four digits, of which the inner and outer ones (I. and IV. [in figure]) are small, while the second and third toes (II. and III.) are large and armed with very large claws; the claw-joint of the third, especially, being of enormous size, and cleft nearly to its base. With this powerful instrument the Golden Mole digs his way very readily through the ground, using his hind feet, which have five toes, and much resemble those of ordinary Moles, to push him forward in his burrows.

THE CAPE GOLDEN MOLE.[272]

The Cape Golden Mole is about the size of our Common Mole, or a little more than five inches in length. The colour of its fur is brown, but according as the light falls upon it it shows brilliant golden and iridescent green and purple reflections; a patch round the eye and a streak from the eye to the angle of the mouth are yellowish-brown; and the throat has a greenish tinge. The claws are of a light brown colour.

The Golden Mole inhabits the Cape of Good Hope and Caffraria, where it feeds, like our British Mole, upon insects and worms, which it captures by burrowing through the ground. In the settled districts it is as much disliked as the Mole in Europe, on account of the damage which it does in fields and gardens by its subterranean activity. Several South African forms, nearly related to the above, but differing more or less in the colour and texture of the hair, have been described as distinct species by various zoologists; but these are now regarded as mere varieties of Chrysochloris capensis, which has also received the names of aurea and inaurata. Besides these, Dr. Günther has described a species from Caffraria, under the name of C. Trevelyani, which has the fur brownish and not lustrous, and also presents some minor differences of structure. The Blunt-nosed Golden Mole (C. obtusirostris) of Professor Peters, from Mozambique and Caffraria, which has a lustrous coat, has one molar less on each side in each jaw, so that the whole number of teeth is only thirty-six, and hence, and from some peculiarities in the structure of the lower molars, and the absence of a bladder-like enlargement in the temporal fossa, which occurs in the other species, Professor Mivart has placed it in a distinct genus, under the name of Chalcochloris.

FAMILY VIII.—TALPIDÆ, OR MOLES.

The True Moles constitute a very distinct family of Insectivora, characterised more especially by their complete organisation for a subterranean life. They have a more or less cylindrical body, with short limbs, of which the front pair are converted into most powerful digging organs, the construction of which will be noticed in the description of our common British species. The head is small, with the muzzle produced and generally pointed, and the eyes and ears concealed, the former being generally almost covered by a membrane; the skull is elongated, rather flat, with a distinct, thin zygomatic arch; the bones of the shank (tibia and fibula) are united; the wrist has a sickle-shaped bone on the inside, which passes to and helps to support the first digit; and the intestine has no cæcum. The teeth vary somewhat in number.

The Moles usually form a subterranean dwelling which exhibits considerable ingenuity in its construction, and live upon worms, the larvæ of insects, and other small animals which they capture whilst making their way beneath the surface of the ground. They inhabit the northern half of both hemispheres, not a single species being known to occur south of the Equator. The best known species, whose history may serve as a type of that of the family, is

THE COMMON MOLE.[273]

The Common Mole of Great Britain, although an animal not very often seen, is yet so well known as regards its general appearance that we need hardly describe it. It has a plump, nearly cylindrical body, with very short limbs, a short tail, and a long, pointed muzzle. The eyes are so minute as to escape observation; the external ears are wanting; the body is covered with a velvet-like coat of hairs of a black or blackish-brown colour, with more or less of a whitish tinge in certain lights; and the feet, which are naked, are flesh-coloured. The total length of the animal is usually about six inches, of which not more than half an inch is made up by the tail.

COMMON MOLE.

The Common Mole occurs not only in the British Islands, but across the whole of the central and southern parts of the continent of Europe, extending northwards as far as the southern shore of the Baltic and throughout Denmark, thus justifying Shakspere’s allusion to it in “Hamlet.” It also stretches across Central Asia to the confines of China, and according to some writers extends through Persia into India. It is subject to much variation, which may be due to differences of soil or climate. Thus Mr. Bell records Moles “of a deep black colour, of a mouse-grey, dark olive-brown, pied, yellowish-white, and wholly or partially orange;” and mentions specimens from Berne “of the usual dark-colour, but having a well-defined lozenge-shaped patch of orange on the breast.”

DENTITION OF COMMON MOLE.

The Common Mole is the type of the restricted genus Talpa, the species of which are entirely confined to Europe and Asia. In these animals the elongated muzzle projects considerably beyond the opening of the mouth, and contains a pair of long tubular nostrils; it is supported by cartilage, and further strengthened by a small bone at the extreme tip. The teeth with which the jaws are armed are of formidable character, and plainly indicate the predaceous habits of the animal. There are always three true molars on each side in each jaw, and these are armed with several strong points united by ridges, but the number of the other teeth is slightly variable (the total number of teeth ranging between forty and forty-four), and even the determination of their precise nature is somewhat obscure. The dentition of the Common Mole (see [figure]) is now, however, generally regarded as follows: In the upper jaw, on each side, three incisors, one large canine provided with two roots, and four premolars, of which the hindmost is of large size; in the lower jaw, on each side, four incisor-like teeth, the hindmost of which is probably a canine, and four premolars, the foremost of which is very like a canine. The variation in number is caused by the absence of some of the premolars and incisors of the lower jaw.

FORE-LIMBS OF COMMON MOLE.

The structure of the fore-limbs, and the bones supporting them, in the Mole and its allies, is not only to be regarded as their most distinctive character, but also as furnishing a most striking example of the adaptation of means to ends. The Moles are condemned to live almost constantly underground, and their very existence depends on the facility with which they can make their way through the earth. The fore-feet, by means of which they dig, are accordingly converted into strong, broad, shovel-like organs, armed with broad, flat claws. The five toes of which these feet are composed consist each of two short joints and a long one, the latter making nearly half the length of the organ; and these long joints, which support the claws, are cleft at the tip and grooved underneath to receive an internal process of the nail, which serves to add to its strength and firmness. The bones of the wrist are short and firmly packed together, and from the scaphoid bone springs a long curved falciform bone (f [in figure]), which runs from the wrist to the first toe, which it helps materially to stiffen and support. The arm which supports this powerful hand is also of peculiar construction. In the forearm (a) the radius and ulna are distinct, but the acromion (or elbow) process of the latter is very long, and widened at the extremity, giving great power to the action of the limb. The humerus (b) is quite different from anything to be met with elsewhere in the Mammalia, being a short and very stout bone, rendered most irregular in its outline by the development of great crests and processes. It not only articulates with the shoulder-blade, but has a separate surface for the reception of the extremity of the collar-bone (c), which is a short bone resembling the vertebra of a fish. The shoulder-blade (d) is long and narrow, but stout and triangular in its form.

STERNUM OF COMMON MOLE.

The sternum, or breast-bone, upon which all these parts rest, is scarcely less singular in its structure (see [figure]). The body of the sternum consists of four short pieces, which receive the ends of the ribs. Behind these is a slender ensiform process (e), and in front of them a manubrium (m), or presternum, of peculiar form, and quite as long as the whole middle part of the sternum. This part is widened in part of its length, receives a single pair of ribs in its hinder division, has a strong keel for the attachment of the pectoral muscles along its lower surface, and is much thickened at its front extremity, to the sides of which the collar-bones (c) are articulated. By this arrangement the whole fore-limb is thrown forward close to the head, and placed in the most favourable position for facilitating the burrowing operations of the animal, which are effected by bringing forward the fore-feet to the level of the nose, and then separating them and pushing backward, with an action that might almost be styled swimming through the ground. The hind feet, which are much smaller than those just described, are perfectly plantigrade in their structure. They also contain five toes, armed with small sharp claws, and are used only for the purpose of progression.

When we consider the structure of the Mole, and its perfect adaptation to its mode of life, we may agree with Mr. Bell in the belief that although superficial observers may regard it as a miserable creature, such a notion is an absolute mistake. It is true that the Mole, like so many of our own race, is condemned to almost perpetual exertion; but in the case of human beings we find that physical exertion at any rate is of itself so little of an absolute evil that many of our favourite amusements involve no small amount of it, and moral writers are rather fond of dwelling on the pleasure of earning one’s dinner before eating it. Now this is no more than our friend the Mole has to do, so that he can hardly be looked upon as an object either of pity or contempt; and in fact, in his own quiet way, he probably manages to enjoy his life as much as his neighbours. In going about in his subterranean galleries the Mole is constantly engaged in looking out for suitable food, a very large supply of which is necessary for his comfortable existence. M. Geoffroy St. Hilaire says that the appetite of hunger in the Mole is a sort of frenzy, the animal when in view of its prey becoming violently agitated, and throwing itself on its victim as if maddened with rage. Vegetable substances constitute no part of its diet, although it is said sometimes to gnaw the roots of plants in search of the insects and larvæ which feed upon them. Its favourite food consists of earthworms, in pursuit of which it sometimes comes to the surface so eagerly as to throw itself out of its burrow. It is in search of these animals, and especially of the larvæ of various insects which feed upon the roots of grasses and other plants, that the Mole makes its most superficial galleries.

The Mole appears not to be particular in its tastes in the matter of food, and will readily make a meal upon animals much larger and higher in the scale of organisation than those above mentioned, should they happen to come in its way. Mice, small birds, Lizards, and Frogs, if placed within its reach, it will seize and hold with the ferocity and tenacity of a thoroughbred Bull-dog, and even weaker individuals of its own species are killed and devoured. According to M. Geoffroy, in attacking birds it makes use of a good deal of stratagem to get unobserved within reach of its prey, and then by a sudden and violent attack seizes the bird by the belly, tears it open with its powerful claws, and thrusts its muzzle among the unfortunate creature’s entrails, with every appearance of intense enjoyment. M. Flourens gives a similar account of its proceedings. Professor Lenz also describes the voracity of the Mole, and its determined mode of destroying larger animals than one would suppose it capable of managing. A Mole in his possession destroyed and devoured, in the course of twenty-four hours, a large Slowworm, a large Snail, two Chrysalids, and a Snake about thirty-two inches long. Of the reptiles he left nothing but the skin and the bones.

It is probably by the sense of smell chiefly that the Mole is guided in its search for prey. Brehm found that when he had got a Mole buried in some earth in a box, and placed a few fragments of chopped meat on the surface, in a few minutes the earth rose, the muzzle of the Mole appeared, and the meat was devoured. The sense of sight is perhaps in general of little use to the animal; but there are times in its life when to see is an advantage; and time-honoured as the belief may be, there is no doubt that the supposition that the Mole is blind is merely a popular error. It has indeed long been known to naturalists not only that the Mole had eyes, but that these were sufficiently open to enable him to see, and at one time considerable obloquy was heaped upon the memory of Aristotle for having given origin to a statement to the contrary. It would appear, however, that Aristotle’s statement was approximately correct with respect to the southern European species upon which his observations were probably made, and the error was that of those naturalists who applied the assertions of the Greek philosopher to a different animal.

Like other great gormandisers, the Mole is an exceedingly thirsty creature. “Where a colony of Moles exists,” says Mr. Bell, “a run is always made towards the nearest ditch or pond;” and the same writer states, on the authority of Mr. Jackson, an intelligent Mole-catcher, that where water cannot conveniently be reached, “the animal sinks deep, perpendicular shafts, at the bottom of which water is always found, to which the Mole has easy access. Sometimes, also according to the observations of Mr. Jackson, these wells are full to the brim.” These statements are confirmed by a German Mole-catcher, cited by Brehm.

We have already seen that the essential conditions of the Mole’s life consist in continual burrowing. Hence, not unnaturally, the animal shows a marked preference for light soils, and through these he makes his way with remarkable ease and rapidity. Oken says of a Mole, which he kept for six months, that when put into a box of sand, it would make its way through the sand almost as quickly as a fish through the water. In its natural mode of life, however, it by no means confines itself to such vagarious proceedings, but constructs a most complex habitation, which is formed with wonderful art.

MOLE’S FORTRESS.

Each Mole has his own encampment, frequently entirely separate from those of his fellows, but sometimes the animals evince a rather more sociable disposition, and condescend to make use of a common passage. But in his encampment, each Mole always has his own dwelling, which has been, not inappropriately, styled his fortress, and this certainly displays great ingenuity and skill in its design and construction (see [figure]). It is formed under a hillock of earth, in a situation which affords some protection to the little domicile. Its roof is a firm dome, the earth composing it being pressed into a solid mass by the Mole while excavating the internal passages and chambers. Beneath this there are two circular galleries, one above the other, the lower one considerably larger than the upper, with which it communicates by five nearly equi-distant passages, running slantingly upwards. Within the lower circular gallery is situated the actual dwelling-place or chamber, to which access is obtained by three passages descending from the upper gallery, so that when within his house the Mole has to go both up and down stairs to reach his bedroom. But the chamber has another issue by a passage which at first descends for a short distance, and then rises again to lead into the high road running to and from the fortress, which is always single; and, on the other hand, the lower and larger gallery gives off about nine other passages, which either terminate at a short distance from the fortress, or, after making a detour, return into the high road. So cautious is the Mole, that the apertures of these passages are said seldom to be made opposite to those which lead from the lower to the upper circular gallery. With these arrangements it must be confessed that the Mole has provided admirably for being “not at home” to unwelcome visitors.

The same caution that prompts the Mole to the formation of so complicated a castle leads him to take equal care in the construction of the road leading into it. This usually runs in a direct line from one end of the animal’s camping-ground to the other, and forms a highway by which he can go quickly about his business. It is large enough to enable him to pass through it easily, but in making it he is careful not to throw out the earth as he does in his ordinary runs, and the whole passage appears to be chiefly formed by compression of the earth by the little engineer. By his constant passing to and fro, its walls become singularly smooth and compact. Occasionally a Mole will form two or more high roads leading from his fortress, probably when supplies fall short and it is necessary to open up new ground; and sometimes several Moles share the same highway, perhaps in localities where worms and grubs are peculiarly fat and abundant. But in the latter case, as there is not room in the little tunnel for one Mole to pass another, if two of them meet by accident one must give way or retire into a side alley, otherwise a violent combat ensues, when the weaker is ruthlessly killed and devoured. The road varies in its depth from the surface according to the nature of the soil and other circumstances; in safe localities it is usually at a depth of four or five inches.

It is through this well-beaten path that the Mole goes out to his hunting-grounds, and by it also that he is obliged to return. The Mole-catchers are well aware of this peculiarity in the habits of the animal, and one of their most successful devices for its capture consists in placing traps in the course of the high road at a time when the Mole is sure to be out on a foraging expedition, so as to intercept him on his way home. The rapidity of its motion along the high road, especially when alarmed, was demonstrated by an amusing experiment shown to M. Geoffroy St. Hilaire by M. Le Court. The latter, having ascertained the direction of a Mole’s road, and found that the animal was hunting at its furthest extremity, placed all along the line at certain distances pieces of straw, passing one end of each into the little tunnel, and attaching little paper flags to the other. He then inserted a horn close to the extremity of the tunnel, and, blowing into it, produced a frightful noise, upon hearing which the Mole naturally made the best of his way home to his fortress, indicating his progress by throwing off the little flags as he passed the successive straws. It was estimated that the speed of the frightened animal was equal to that of a Horse at full trot.

The extreme voracity of the Mole has already been mentioned, but it may be urged in his excuse that the hard labour he has to perform renders a considerable amount of good nourishment absolutely essential to him. Mr. Bell says that his activity in search of food is principally in the morning and evening, and that he sleeps the greater part of the day. In seeking his food, the course adopted by him in making his highway would not answer: he must now dig through the ground to see what it contains, and in doing this he is of course embarrassed by the loose stuff that he dislodges. To get rid of this he makes his way to the surface from time to time, breaks through, and pushes the troublesome rubbish out with his nose, producing those well-known “Mole-hills” of loose earth which so commonly betray his progress in our fields and meadows. The depth at which the Mole works in his hunting-grounds depends very much upon circumstances. In light and newly-worked soils, after rain, when the earthworms especially come to the surface, the Mole will travel along in a sort of shallow trench in pursuit of his prey. In winter we have the reverse of this picture, for then the Moles are compelled to go far down in pursuit of the worms, which have been driven from the surface by the frost.

It must not be supposed, however, that eating and sleeping make up the whole life-history of the Mole. Very early in the year a time comes when he feels strange emotions stirring within him, and then he goes off gallantly, in his velvet coat, in search of a partner in his lonely encampment. That he will not be allowed to bring home his bride without many an appeal to his weapons is almost a matter of necessity, for by some singular dispensation the number of male Moles is very much greater than that of the opposite sex, a disproportion which, as might be expected, gives rise to a good deal of jealousy and its natural consequences among such fierce and untamed spirits. As the male goes on his wooing he makes numerous but very shallow tracks in all directions. These have received the elegant name of traces d’amour from the French naturalists. The lady having been found, the next business is to secure possession of her, and this is attended with considerable difficulties, both from the impertinent intrusion of other males, and from a tendency on the part of the lady herself to run away from the proffered happiness. The intending bridegroom must have rather a hard time of it. But at length the bride’s coyness and the assiduities of rivals are got rid of, and the pair settle down to inhabit for a time the same encampment, and to bring up their little family. It would appear that the affection of the male for his mate continues to be of a very warm kind, at least M. Le Court states that he several times found a female caught in a trap with the male lying dead beside her. The possession of strong family affections by the Mole would seem further to be proved by an observation communicated to M. Le Court, according to which, when the Mole’s nest is invaded by a sudden flood, both parents may be seen struggling bravely, and risking their own lives to save their young, and mutually assisting and protecting each other while thus engaged.

The period of gestation in the Mole does not appear to be very accurately known, but it is supposed to be about two months. The young are brought forth earlier or later, according to the season, but most commonly in April. There are generally four or five, but sometimes only three, and occasionally six or even seven in a litter. They are produced in a nest lined with grass, fine roots, dried leaves, and similar materials collected in a sort of chamber, which is formed by the enlargement of the point of junction of three or four of the ordinary passages, always separate from the fortress, and often at a considerable distance from it. Only a single brood is produced in the year.

We have devoted so much space to the natural history of the Mole because, whilst it is really the most interesting, from this point of view, of all our British Mammals, there is no other which is exposed to such constant and severe persecution. In all parts of the country we find professional Mole-catchers, who make it their business to ascertain the habits of the animals, and taking advantage of this knowledge, capture them in great numbers. We shall not attempt to describe the various contrivances used to effect these massacres. It will suffice to state that the principle on which most of them are worked is the insertion into the ascertained run of the Mole of a trap of some kind, which catches him as he is passing. The grounds upon which this war of extermination is waged against the Mole are chiefly the mischiefs which it causes by means of its runs and burrows in fields and pastures; but it may be questioned whether the Mole does not more than compensate for any damage thus produced by the destruction of many insects and other noxious animals.

THE BLIND MOLE.[274]

We have already mentioned a southern European species which may have given origin to Aristotle’s statements as to the blindness of the Mole. This is an inhabitant of Italy, Dalmatia, and Greece, and is said to occur rarely in the south of France, in Switzerland, and in some other parts of Europe. It closely resembles the common species, but has the eyes covered by a membrane pierced only by a minute hole, so that the animal’s sole visual consciousness must be limited to a mere perception of light. Its fur is of a deep greyish-black colour; and it differs chiefly from the common European Mole in having the middle upper incisor teeth larger than the rest. In its general habits the Blind Mole agrees with our British species, but it is said to make its runs less extensive and nearer to the surface. Its nest also is said to be made in the chamber within the fortress.

Besides these, several nearly allied species of True Moles are found in northern India, chiefly among the hills, such as the Short-tailed Mole (Talpa micrura), in which the tail is exceedingly short, the Long-tailed Mole (T. macrura), and the White-tailed Mole (T. leucura). The first-named species inhabits Nepaul and Darjeling, and at the latter place, according to Mr. Jerdon, it is not uncommon, and many of the roads and pathways are intersected by its runs, which often proceed from the base of one great oak-tree to that of another. If the runs are broken into they are generally repaired during the night, and no Mole-hills are thrown up like those of the European Mole. The White-tailed Mole differs from the other species in having only three premolars on each side in each jaw, making forty teeth in all. Upon this ground Mr. Gill establishes the genus Parascaptor for it.

Still further east, in Japan, we find the Woogura Mole (Talpa woogura), which resembles the European Mole in general form and habits, but has the fur of a dingy tawny colour, and the nose unusually produced. In this species there are two incisors less in the lower jaw than in T. europæa, and M. Pomel forms for it the genus Mogera.

The Abbé Armand David, during his travels in Chinese Mongolia, discovered a Mole closely resembling the European species in its general appearance and characters, which has been called the Musky Mole (Scaptochirus moschatus). It was found, however, to possess one premolar less on each side in each jaw than the True Moles (Talpa); and from certain peculiarities in the form of the teeth M. Milne-Edwards infers that the animal is less exclusively insectivorous than the Common Mole. It is remarkable for the strong musky odour which it diffuses. The Musky Mole has fur even softer than that of the European Mole, of a bright greyish-brown colour with a tawny tinge, and presenting a brilliant lustre. The muzzle is shorter than in the European Mole, and no trace either of ears or eyes can be detected externally. The tail is nearly naked, but almost concealed in the hairs of the body. Nothing seems to have been ascertained about the habits of this animal.

The Scaptonyx (Scaptonyx fusicaudatus) is another of the curious Eastern forms which so remarkably unite to each other different types of these small Mammals. In its external characters it resembles Urotrichus, but it has the dentition of the genus Talpa, and the nostrils are not elongated into a proboscis. Its length is about two inches and a half, and the length of its tail about one inch and two-fifths. The fur is thick and soft, and the hairs are blue-black at the base, with a brownish tint towards the tip. The single specimen described was obtained on the borders of Kokonoor and Setchouan, but nothing is recorded of its habits.

THE STAR-NOSED MOLE.[275]

Besides the Eastern forms to which we have just referred, there are a few American species of this family, which differ rather more decidedly from the ordinary Moles. Perhaps the most remarkable of them is the Star-nosed Mole, an inhabitant of Canada and the United States, extending from South Carolina to Hudson’s Bay, and stretching right across the continent, from ocean to ocean.

The most striking characteristic of this animal, which constitutes the genus Condylura, is the presence at the extremity of its elongated nose of a sort of fringe of about twenty long fleshy processes, forming a regular star, having the nostrils towards its centre. The names Rhinaster and Astromycter, both meaning “Star-nose,” have been given to the genus by different writers. The name Condylura is founded on a mistake, the tail having been supposed to have a knob or knot. The tail is nearly as long as the body, the general appearance of which is mole-like, but the shoulders are stouter and heavier in proportion to the hind-quarters than in our Common Mole, although the digging hands are hardly so powerful. The last phalanges of the fingers are not cleft, as in the Mole. The skull is elongated, and the jaws contain in all forty-four teeth—namely, besides canines, three incisors, four premolars, and three true molars on each side in each jaw. The arrangement of the teeth in the long jaws is rather peculiar. In the upper jaw the two middle and the two outer incisors are of large size, and the latter are quite like canines; between them is a third minute tooth on each side. The true canine is very small; the first three premolars are thin and sharp, and the fourth much larger than the rest. In the lower jaw we find four projecting incisors, and behind the outer ones on each side a much smaller one, followed at an interval by a small canine with two roots. The eyes are very minute, and there are no external ears.

SIDE VIEW OF SNOUT OF
STAR-NOSED MOLE.

FRONT VIEW OF SNOUT
OF STAR-NOSED MOLE.

This curious little animal, which measures about five inches in length, and has a tail about three inches long, is of a brownish-black colour, a little paler beneath, but appearing in certain lights perfectly black throughout. The naked, or nearly naked parts, such as the nose, with its singular appendages, and the feet, are generally of a flesh-colour, the tips of the fringes and of the claws being, in fact, quite rosy. The tail is well covered with hair.

The Star-nosed Mole, like the other members of its family, lives beneath the surface of the ground, where it is able to burrow rapidly in soft earth. It prefers the vicinity of brooks or swampy places. The galleries do not run so near the surface as those of the Common Shrew Mole of America. The nest is composed of dried grass, and placed in an excavation made under some protective object, such as a stump or the root of a tree. The young show scarcely any trace of the nasal appendages. The precise use of these curious organs in the adult does not seem to be ascertained; probably they aid as sensory organs in the discovery of the worms and larvæ of insects on which the creature feeds.

THE COMMON SHREW MOLE.[276]

The Shrew Mole, which is often called simply the Mole in the United States, is another very widely-distributed species in North America, throughout the whole eastern part of which it is found abundantly. Like the other species of its genus, which inhabit the territories farther west, the Common Shrew Mole has an elongated, slender snout, which is cut off obliquely at the end, so that the nostrils, which are situated in this sloping surface, are turned forwards and upwards, and are not visible from below; a short and nearly naked tail; and only thirty-six teeth, which present the following characters:—In the upper jaw there are on each side three incisors, of which the foremost is very large and pyramidal, whilst the other two are very small; then four compressed teeth, gradually increasing in size, of which the first may be regarded as a canine and the rest as premolars; and beyond these three large, true molars, each having the crown furnished with strong cusps, and distinctly divided into two parts. The lower jaw has only four instead of six incisors, and these are nearly horizontal, and the two inner ones are much smaller than the outer; these are followed immediately by three simple, gradually increasing teeth, regarded as premolars; and these again by three large true molars. According to this interpretation there are no lower canines. The feet are like those of the Mole, but the toes of the hind feet are webbed.

Two other species of Scalops are found in the western parts of the United States. One of them, the Prairie Mole, or the Silvery Shrew Mole (S. argentatus), which is about seven inches long, and has the hairs annulated with white and lead colour, giving it a silvery appearance, inhabits the western prairies, advancing as far to the eastward as Ohio and Michigan; the other, the Texan Shrew Mole (S. latimanus), which is still larger, and has the fore feet broader than in any other species, and the black hair longer, thinner, and slightly crisped, is a native of Mexico and Texas.

Two other Shrew Moles have been formed into a distinct genus (Scapanus) by M. Pomel. They resemble the preceding in general characters, but agree with the Star-nosed Mole in having forty-four teeth. These are Brewer’s Shrew Mole (Scapanus Brewerii), a black species, about six inches long, which inhabits the eastern United States, and is supposed to have given the foundation for the reports of the existence of the Common Mole in North America; and the Oregon Mole (Scapanus Townsendii), a considerably larger species, which is said to extend all along the Pacific coast, from California to 47° 10′ N. lat. In their habits these animals seem to agree closely with the Star-nosed Mole. The western species occurs abundantly in the banks of rivers.

FAMILY IX.—MYOGALIDÆ.—THE DESMANS.

Some very curious and interesting animals, placed with the Shrews by some zoologists, and with the Moles by others, may, perhaps, for our purpose, be best placed as a distinct family. The Desmans are, in fact, Shrew-like animals, with some important points of resemblance to the Moles. Thus, the teeth in the true Desmans are forty-four in number, and the large upper front incisor is pyramidal, and rather resembles that of some Moles than that of the Shrews; the general character of the skull is Mole-like, especially the presence of a slender zygomatic arch, which does not exist in the Shrews; the shoulder-blade is long, narrow, and strong, the collar-bone short and stout, and the front portion of the sternum is slightly keeled. Many other slight osteological peculiarities point to an alliance with the Moles; but on the other hand, Shrew-like characters are not wanting, and the general structure of the body and limbs is that of the Shrews, the tail being well developed, and the limbs all formed for walking. In the true Desmans the hind limbs are considerably larger than the fore-limbs, and all the feet are palmated, or have their toes united by webs.

THE DESMAN.[277]

The Desman in general form resembles a big Rat, but with a long snout formed by the nostrils, which are produced in a tubular form, and united in the middle, producing a regular trunk, provided with muscles which enable it to be turned in various directions, and employed as an organ of touch. The tail is compressed, scaly, and nearly naked.

In the arrangement of the teeth we see a considerable resemblance to the Shrew Moles. Thus, in the upper jaw we have the same gigantic front incisors, larger here than in any other species, and these are followed on each side by a series of seven teeth, gradually increasing in size, the first of which is an incisor, the second a canine, and the remaining five premolars. In the lower jaw, there are four projecting incisors, the outer much larger than the inner ones, as in the Shrew Moles, then, on each side we have six gradually enlarging teeth, a canine, and five premolars. The true molars are three in number on each side in both jaws. They are broad, powerful teeth, with strong acute tubercles, and crowns divided transversely into two parts. The eyes are small, and there are no visible ears.

Another peculiarity of these animals is the presence, under the root of the tail, of a large gland, which secretes a substance of a strong musky odour, whence they are sometimes called Musk Shrews. This gland is composed of from twenty to forty lobes, each having a dilated upper part, and a narrow lower portion, and containing in their walls a great number of small secreting sacs.

DENTITION OF DESMAN.

The Desman, or Wychuchol of the Russians, is an inhabitant of Southern Russia, where it lives in the banks of streams and pools, in the region between the Don and the Volga. It is also said to occur in some parts of south-western Asia. Its body is about ten inches long, and its tail measures about seven inches and a half. The latter organ is narrowed at the root, and then nearly cylindrical for some distance, and finally compressed from near the middle to the extremity, thus forming a most powerful swimming organ, by means of which, aided by the broad webbed feet, the Desman makes its way through the water with great rapidity. The surface of the tail is scaly, with a scanty sprinkling of short hairs, and with a great number of small follicles, which secrete a greasy material.

The body of the Desman is covered with a dense fur, composed of a thick coat of fine downy hairs next the skin, and of longer smooth hairs, which form the outermost coat. It is reddish-brown on the back, ashy-grey on the belly, and shows a silvery lustre in certain lights. The feet are naked and scaly above, and fringed with hairs at the sides. At the eye, and over the auditory aperture, there are whitish spots.

In its habits the Desman is described as greatly resembling an Otter on a small scale. It lives by preference about standing waters and slow streams, especially when these, as is so commonly the case in Russia, are confined by steep banks of considerable height. In these banks it makes its residence, which is something like that of the Otter, consisting of a passage running obliquely upwards from below the surface of the water, often to a length of twenty feet or more, and then terminating in a sort of fortress-chamber, three or four feet above the water level. But this retreat is only occupied by the animal as a resting place; the greater part of its time, both in summer and winter, being passed in the water. Here it disports itself with an agility of which its rather heavy and clumsy figure would hardly appear to give promise; swimming and diving readily, making its way among the water-plants, and seeking constantly for the animals which constitute its food. These are chiefly leeches, worms, and aquatic mollusca and larvæ of insects, but in all probability no small aquatic animal would come greatly amiss. The curious movable trunk with which the animal is endowed is brought actively into play during the search for provisions. It is turned and twisted in various directions, touching the various objects that come in the way, and is used to feel about for prey, which it is said to seize and convey to the neighbouring mouth after the same fashion as the trunk of an elephant. The animal is said frequently to put its trunk into its mouth, and then to cry like a duck; when irritated or threatened, it hisses, and tries to bite. The Desman is supposed to produce more than one litter in the course of the year. It is pursued for the sake of its skin, which somewhat resembles that of the Beaver and Ondatra in its qualities; and great numbers are taken by means of nets, especially in the autumn. Its flesh is uneatable, on account of its strong musky flavour, which is communicated even to that of the carnivorous fishes, such as the Pike, which, being less nice in their tastes, do not object to an occasional Desman.

THE PYRENEAN DESMAN.[278]

The only other species of Desman is found in the small streams of the Pyrenees both in France and Spain, where it lives after the same fashion as its Russian relative, but is said to feed principally upon trout. It is much smaller than the preceding species, being only ten or eleven inches in total length, nearly one-half of which is occupied by the long tail. The fur is chestnut-brown on the back, greyish-brown on the sides, and silvery grey on the belly; the upper lip bears some pectinated whiskers, the sides of the trunk are covered with white and the fore-feet with brownish hairs; while the hind-feet are naked and scaly. This animal also diffuses a strong musky odour.

THE HAIRY-TAILED MOLE-SHREW.[279]

Besides the true Desmans this group is considered to include two or three singular little creatures which lead directly towards the true Moles. One of these is a Japanese species, discovered by Professor Siebold, and described by Professor Temminck under the name of Urotrichus talpoides, which we may call the Hairy-tailed Mole-Shrew. It differs from the Desmans, and agrees with the true Shrews in having only two incisor teeth in the lower jaw. There are thirty-eight teeth in all. It is about the size of the common Water Shrew, with the nose greatly elongated, not into a flexible proboscis, but into a snout with the nostrils placed at the sides of the tip; the tail is about an inch long, stout, scaly, and covered with long hairs, which form a tuft; the fur is brown and velvety, and the snout and feet flesh-coloured, and nearly naked.

This animal is common at elevations of from 1,000 to 1,200 feet in the mountains of the southern and eastern parts of Japan, but becomes more rare towards the north. In its habits it resembles the Moles, digging out galleries in the earth, but going down deeper, and rarely if ever forming heaps of loose earth at the surface.

A nearly allied species, Gibbs’ Mole Shrew (Urotrichus Gibbsii), is found in North America.

Another species, leading more towards the Shrews, was discovered in eastern Tibet by the Abbé David, and described by M. A. Milne-Edwards under the name of Uropsilus soricipes, or the Shrew-footed Uropsile. The general characters of the animal are very like those of Urotrichus, but it has one premolar less on each side in each jaw, making the total number of teeth only thirty-four. The tail is naked and scaly; and the fur is of a slate-colour, with a slight brownish tinge.

FAMILY X.—SORICIDÆ, OR THE SHREWS.

A great number of small mouse-like and rat-like animals, presenting shades of character which render their classification almost insuperably difficult, constitute the family of the Shrews, which, as we have already stated, may be regarded as representing the generalised or central idea of the Insectivorous Mammal. On all sides the other families include anomalous species, and the characters which distinguish these from their immediate fellows generally tend in the direction of the Shrews.

In these creatures we find a mouse-like body, terminated in front by a small head, with a long pointed muzzle, and behind by a nearly naked, scaly tail of variable length. The eyes are small, as also are generally the ears; the limbs are short, and nearly equal in size; the skull is long and narrow, and has on each side of its base a space not filled up with bone; the teeth are from twenty-eight to thirty-two in number, and the middle incisors in both jaws are very large; the skull has no zygomatic arch or tympanic bony bubble; the bones of the shank (tibia and fibula) are united; and the intestine has no cæcum. On the sides of the body or at the root of the tail the Shrews possess peculiar glands, which secrete a fluid of strong odour, serving no doubt to protect them from many enemies.

The Shrews are distributed over all parts of the Old World and in North America. They live generally on the ground, although some take freely to the water, and they feed upon worms, insects, and other small animals such as they can overcome. The difficulty of classifying these animals to which we have already alluded has led to their being divided into an infinity of generic groups, of which we shall endeavour to illustrate those which are now most generally accepted.

THE COMMON SHREW.[280]

The Common Shrew, or Shrew-mouse, as it is often called, may be noticed first, as being the species most likely to be met with by our readers, in England at any rate. It is one of the species for which the Linnæan generic name Sorex has been retained, the group as restricted including Shrews with from thirty to thirty-two teeth, there being four or five premolars in the upper and only two in the lower jaw; with a basal tubercle to the upper inner incisors; with ears of moderate size directed backwards, a long tail, and the feet not fringed with hairs.

1. PIGMY SHREW.   2. COMMON SHREW.   3 AND 4. WATER SHREW.

[❏
LARGER IMAGE]

Our Common Shrew is a pretty little mouse-like creature (its figure will be seen in [Plate 12]), measuring about two inches and three-quarters in length, with a tail rather more than an inch and a half long. Its fur is generally of a reddish-grey colour above, and greyish beneath; but the colour varies considerably, being sometimes blackish or chestnut above, and tinged with yellow beneath. The fore teeth are of a rich brown colour. The tail is four-sided,[281] with the angles rounded off, and is nearly of equal thickness throughout; it is covered with short, close, stiffish hairs. Mr. Bell states that the Shrew sometimes occurs spotted with white, and that he possesses one specimen “which is beautifully pied, having a broad white band over the loins, which extends all round the animal.”

DENTITION OF
COMMON SHREW.

The food of the Common Shrew consists chiefly of insects and worms, but it also eats the smaller mollusca, and even the common Slug (Limax agrestis), according to Mr. Bell, who says that he has not only found the remains of that animal in its stomach, but has also fed it upon slugs in confinement. Like its ally, the Mole, it is very pugnacious, and two Shrews rarely come together without a battle, when the weaker one is killed and eaten. The breeding season of the Shrew is in the spring, when the female makes a comfortable nest of soft dry herbage in some convenient hole in the ground, and there brings forth from five to seven young ones. Their increase is checked to a certain extent by natural enemies. Thus, the Mole is said to kill and eat them when they come in his way; and Cats, Weasels, Owls, and some other animals, will also kill them; and some at least do not disdain to make a meal upon them. The Barn Owl especially seems to make great havoc among the Shrews.

All sorts of evil qualities were attributed to the Shrew by our ancestors, some of which are still believed in. One old writer says that the Shrew-mouse is “a kind of Field-mouse of the bigness of a Rat and colour of a Weasel, very mischievous to cattel; which, going over a beast’s back, will make it lame in the chine; and the bite of it causes the beast to swell at the heart and die.” The running of a Shrew over the leg of a beast was generally believed to cause the latter great pain, and to produce lameness. The proper cure for these imaginary ills was on a par with the mischief; the remedy was the application to the part affected of a branch or twig of a shrew-ash, which, says Gilbert White, “was made thus: into the body of the tree a deep hole was bored with an auger, and a poor devoted Shrew-mouse was thrust in alive, and plugged in, no doubt with several quaint incantations since forgotten.”

There is one circumstance in the natural history of the Shrew that must have struck everybody, although it is still entirely unexplained. This is the death of great numbers of these animals in autumn without any apparent cause. Residents in the country will know that at that season Shrews may be seen lying dead on almost every footpath; in fact, the observation is so general as to have given rise to another superstition, namely, that a Shrew cannot cross a public path without paying the penalty of death. The individuals thus found dead are of both sexes, and of various ages.

The Common Shrew occurs not only in the British Islands, but also over the whole continent of Europe, from Sweden and Russia to the shores of the Mediterranean.

The Lesser Shrew (Sorex pygmæus, whose figure will be seen in [Plate 12]) is a second British species nearly allied to the preceding, but smaller, measuring rather less than two inches in length, and with a proportionately longer tail. The lower parts of the body are also whiter. It is the smallest of British Mammals.[282]

DEKAY’S SHREW.[283]

Some small species of American Shrews agree with the restricted genus Sorex in the number of teeth, but have no lobe at the base of the upper incisors; the external ear is small, turned forward, and the tail short, usually not longer than the head. These form the genus Blarina.

Dekay’s Shrew is about four inches and a half long, and the tail about an inch. Its fur is of a rusty yellow-grey colour above, paler beneath; the nose and feet are reddish-brown, and the front incisors black. From Dr. Bachman’s description it would appear that this animal burrows rather deeply in the ground, after the fashion of the Mole. It is found in the northern United States.

THE GARDEN SHREW.[284]

A very considerable number of Shrews, distributed in all parts of the Old World, and including two or three well-known European species, have been formed into the genus Crocidura, which in its turn has been divided again and again by means of characters generally of very slight importance.

The Crociduræ have from twenty-eight to thirty teeth, all white, or with white tips; the lower incisors are not toothed; the teeth between the incisors and the molars in the upper jaw gradually decrease in size; and the tail is covered with short hairs, among which there are a good many longer ones.

The Garden Shrew (Crocidura aranea) is a small species, usually measuring a little over four inches in total length, of which the tail occupies about an inch and a third. It has twenty-eight teeth which are all white. The fur is of a mouse-grey colour, shading off into whitish ash on the lower surface; the feet are light ashy, with the toes flesh-coloured, as is also the tip of the snout; and the ears, which are well exposed, are ash-coloured above and whitish below. The fur occasionally has a reddish-brown tinge; and, as in the Common Shrew, specimens spotted with white, and even albinos, sometimes occur. This is a common species almost all over Europe, but does not occur in Sweden or in the British Islands. It lives in woods and plantations, in the fields and in gardens, and in the winter approaches close to the houses, sheltering itself under stones and other objects, and sometimes even entering stables and other outbuildings. Like the other species, it feeds upon insects, worms, and other small animals, and like them also it has the reputation of injuring domestic animals by walking over them.

The Tuscan Shrew (Crocidura etrusca) is another well-known European species, but its distribution is much more limited than that of the Garden Shrew. It is found generally in the extreme south of Europe, from France to the Black Sea, and also in the north of Africa, but does not appear to extend north of the Alps. Like the Garden Shrew, it frequents gardens, and not unfrequently comes into houses and outbuildings. In the open country it selects dry and warm situations.

The total length of the Tuscan Shrew is from two inches and a half to two inches and three-quarters, and as the tail is nearly an inch long, the head and body may measure little more than an inch and a half. It is the smallest of living Mammals. The teeth are thirty in number. The colour of the fur is ashy with a reddish tinge above, light ashy beneath; the tail is clothed with short hairs, and with a series of rings of longer white hairs; and the ears are of moderate size, projecting distinctly from the fur. In its habits it agrees with the other species.

THE RAT-TAILED SHREW.[285]

Amongst a number of Indian species, some of which are of doubtful distinctness, we may notice one which seems to be widely distributed in the East, and well known in India and elsewhere, under the name of the Musk Shrew, or Musk Rat. It is usually of a dark brown or even blackish colour above, and much paler beneath, but it varies considerably in this respect, and thus has probably given origin to several so-called species. The ears are of considerable size, and the tail, which is about three-fourths the length of the body, is thickened towards the root—a character of the sub-genus Pachyura. The animal is about six inches long. It is a very common Indian species, and frequents houses at night, hunting round the rooms in search of the Cockroaches and other insects which abound there. From time to time it utters a sharp, shrill cry. Its musky odour is exceedingly strong, and is said to impregnate everything that the animal passes over; in fact, the popular belief in India is that in running over a bottle of wine or beer, it is capable of infecting the contents! This, however, is rather more than doubtful. Mr. Jerdon distinguishes two species—an Indian one which he calls Sorex cœrulescens, which is usually of a bluish ash colour, and a somewhat smaller species, chiefly inhabiting Further India and China, to which he gives the Linnæan name of Sorex murinus. If they are distinct, it is probably to the latter that Mr. Swinhoe refers in his notes on Chinese Mammals under the name the “Musk Rat.” He says that it is found throughout China, Formosa, and Hainan, in houses in large towns, being carried about in junks with the cargo. It has an unpleasant musky odour, and makes a peculiar chattering noise, which sounds like the chinking of money, and, he adds, often disturbed him in his room at night. Such a sound heard in the dark in a strange place would certainly be rather alarming to any one who had money to lose.

RAT-TAILED SHREW.

The “Musk Rat” of Ceylon is a reddish species, described by Kelaart as Sorex kandianus, and by Mr. Jerdon as S. serpentarius. It is rather smaller than the preceding, but takes its place in the houses of Ceylon and Southern India, and renders itself equally offensive by its strong musky odour.

Several other Indian species are referred to Crocidura, one of which, C. Perroteti, is said to be even smaller than the Tuscan Shrew. Others occur in Africa, in Egypt, Mozambique, and Madagascar, and in the neighbourhood of the Cape.

THE WATER SHREW.[286]

Our British Water Shrew is the type of a distinct genus, all the species of which appear to haunt the margins of water. They have thirty teeth, all of which are tipped with brown or red. The upper front teeth are large and curved, and have a basal cusp behind; the lower ones are nearly horizontal, and have a single tubercle and no notch at the tip. Behind these teeth there are on each side in the upper jaw four small teeth, the last of which is very minute; and in the lower jaw two small teeth. The molars are four on each side in the upper, and three in the lower jaw. The snout is pointed, and furnished with very long whiskers; the eyes small; the ears of moderate size, and valvular; and the feet and lower surface of the tail fringed with stiff hairs.

Our Water Shrew (its figure will be seen in [Plate 12]), which measures about three inches and one-third in length, and has a tail rather more than two inches long, is generally nearly black on the upper surface and white beneath, the colours being usually separated by a distinct line of demarcation. The hairs fringing the feet and the lower surface of the tail are white. There is, however, considerable variation in the colour of different specimens, some of which have been described as distinct species. One especially, in which the whole of the fur is of a black colour, has been called the Oared Shrew (Sorex ciliatus or remifer), but the existence of intermediate steps has led to the recognition of the identity of even this with the Common Water Shew. Mr. Bell is of opinion that the differences of coloration depend on the season and the age of the specimen. The tail is slender, four-sided, and compressed towards the tip. The Water Shrew is distributed over the whole continent of Europe, as far north as the shores of the Baltic. It is found in many localities in England and in Scotland, but is not known to occur in Ireland.

The Water Shrew is one of the prettiest of our British Mammals. Its movements, especially in the water, are very agile; and although, from its swimming by alternate strokes of its hind feet, its course is of a somewhat wriggling character, the peculiar mode in which it flattens its body so as to show a narrow white border on each side, and the silvery lustre of the coat of air-bubbles which adheres to its back, give it a very elegant appearance when thus engaged. It is found chiefly about the rivulets of mountainous and hilly countries, generally showing a preference for those quieter parts where the water flows smoothly over a sandy bottom, but it will also make its way through more broken water, in shallow parts full of stones. Clear water seems to be the great desideratum, and if this can be secured the Water Shrew will put up with a lake or pond. It is not, however, absolutely confined to the water-side, but will at times wander about the fields, sheltering itself under haycocks, and other heaps of dried plants, and even making its way into houses, barns, and outbuildings.

Nevertheless, as may be judged from the fringed tail and feet, it is essentially an aquatic animal, and its regular habitation seems to be always constructed in the immediate vicinity of water. Here the Water Shrew burrows into the soft ground of the bank, and forms a subterranean dwelling, usually with several openings, one of which is situated beneath the surface of the water, to give the little creature an opportunity of slipping quietly and unperceived into or out of its house. Its food is principally obtained in the water, and consists of aquatic insects, worms, mollusca, and crustacea, which it snaps up in its rapid fittings to and fro. In Bell’s “British Quadrupeds” the pursuit of the Freshwater Shrimp (Gammarus pulex) in a shallow but rapid streamlet by the Water Shrew is described. The little animal was seen busily pushing about among the stones at the bottom of the water, sometimes poking its nose under them, sometimes turning them over in a fashion which might be thought beyond its strength. The result was the same in either case; the Shrew captured some small article of food, with which it made off to the side of the stream, where it was heard crunching the crustaceans between its teeth.

Besides this small prey, the Water Shrew is said by Continental writers to attack almost any small animal that comes in its way—frogs, fishes, and even small birds and quadrupeds are described as among its victims. It is also said to feed on the spawn of fishes, and, according to Brehm’s testimony, will even destroy large fish, such as Carp, by eating out their eyes and brains. Carrion and dead animals will also furnish it with a meal. One of Mr. Bell’s editors gives a striking instance of this. A steel rat-trap had been set, and in the morning contained a large Rat, “on which was perched a small black object, which proved on closer approach to be a Water Shrew. The Rat was dead, and the Shrew was devouring it. Although the slender snout and projecting and comparatively weak teeth of the Shrew were but ill adapted, one would have thought, for devouring prey of the size of a full-grown Rat, yet the animal had succeeded in making a small hole through the skin, and this it was most energetically employed, by means of both teeth and claws, in enlarging. So ferocious were its actions, that it might very properly be said to be fighting the Rat; and so intent was it on its work as to suffer itself to be captured by the observer, who laid the loading-rod of his gun across its back.”

The breeding season begins in April or May, when the courtship of the little creatures commences by a persevering pursuit of his intended partner by the male. The lady exhibits a becoming coyness, leading her suitor a long chase through the water; but while thus engaged both parties keep the main chance in view, and seize everything eatable that comes in their way. The young are brought forth in a chamber in the bank, and are from five to seven or eight in number.

A nearly allied, but larger species, the Himalayan Water Shrew (Crossopus himalaicus), occurs in the streams of the Himalayas. Mr. Jerdon, who obtained it from the Little Rungeet River at Darjeling, describes it as five or six inches long, dark brown or blackish above, paler beneath, and with a bunch of hairs at the tip of the tail. It was said to kill small fish, tadpoles, aquatic insects, &c. Another species (C. platycephalus) inhabits Japan.

The Marsh Shrew (Sorex palustris), of North America, has bean referred to this genus by some authors; but it has a long slender, cylindrical tail, with a pencil of hairs at the tip, and Professor Baird refers it to the genus Sorex. The teeth are the same in number as in Crossopus, and likewise have their tips reddish-brown. This species inhabits the northern parts of North America up to Hudson’s Bay Territory.

THE TIBETAN WATER SHREW.[287]

This is another of the Mammals for the knowledge of which we are indebted to the Abbé David, and it is one of the most curious species of this family, presenting a combination of characters peculiar to itself with those of the True Shrews and the Desmans. “Its head and skull,” says M. A. Milne-Edwards, “refer this animal to the Soricidæ, whilst its palmated feet and compressed tail indicate close affinities with the Myogalidæ; but the sucking discs with which the lower surfaces of its feet are furnished belong to itself alone, and nothing of the same kind is to be found in the allied groups.”

In some respects the Tibetan species is allied to the European Water Shrew, but it has only twenty-eight instead of thirty teeth, namely, incisors, 3–31–1, canines, 1–11–1, molars, 4–44–4; the skull is flattened; the body robust, and supported on short limbs; the muzzle short, broad, and conical, with large whiskers at the sides, and the nostrils opening laterally near the extremity; the eyes exceedingly small; and the ears entirely concealed by the hair and quite destitute of a conch. The tail is stout, longer than the body, quadrangular at the base, then triangular, and finally flattened at the sides; and the feet are large and broadly palmated, so as to form vigorous swimming organs, very closely resembling those of the Desmans. As in the latter animals, the feet are fringed with stiff hairs of peculiar construction; but the nails, which in the Desmans are strong, are here small and weak. The sucking discs, already mentioned as peculiar to this animal, are certainly among its most remarkable characteristics. They occur upon the feet of both pairs, and consist of large pads, depressed in the middle to form cups, which are doubtless of service to the animal in its aquatic mode of life.

The Tibetan Water Shrew is rather a large species, measuring, when adult, nearly eight inches in total length, more than half of which, however, is occupied by the tail. It is thus much larger than the British Water Shrew. Its body is covered with hair of two kinds. Close to the skin is a very thick soft down of a slaty grey colour, through which pass numerous longer hairs, which are grey at the base and white at the extremity, causing the animal to vary considerably in appearance, according as these longer hairs are raised or laid flat. The lower parts of the body are white.

In its compressed tail and largely webbed feet this Shrew possesses most admirable instruments for progression in the water; in fact, it must be regarded as the most thoroughly aquatic of all the family of the Shrews. According to its discoverer, it lives habitually on the banks of the impetuous torrents which descend from the mountains of Moupin in Tibet; and notwithstanding the rapidity of these streams, it swims and dives in them with the greatest facility, chasing the small fishes which constitute its principal food. Although not uncommon in its native region, its activity in the water renders its capture exceedingly difficult. In order to procure specimens, it is necessary to divert the course of a stream, and then pursue the animals into the holes in which they take refuge.

THE TAILLESS SHREW.[288]

Another curious little Mammal, brought from Tibet by the Abbé David, is described by M. A. Milne-Edwards as forming a distinct genus, under the name of Anurosorex, or the Tailless Shrew. It has only twenty-six teeth in all, namely, incisors, 2–21–1, canines, 1–11–1, and molars, 4–44–4. The tail is remarkably short, scarcely passing beyond the hairs of the body, slender, slightly flattened, of the same thickness throughout, and covered with small scales, from between which project a few very short hairs. The general form of the body is mole-like, the head is large, the muzzle conical, flesh-coloured, having the nostrils on each side near its extremity, and furnished with long whiskers. The eyes are scarcely perceptible, and the ears are entirely concealed beneath the hairs. The feet are short and scaly, whence the name given to the species, and the fore-feet are broader and stronger than the hind-feet, thus furnishing all additional indication of affinity to the Moles.

This species was found abundantly both in the Plains and mountains of Setchouan and Tibet, where it lives in burrows which it digs in the earth. Its total length is little more than four inches, and its fur, which is very silky and thick, is of a grey colour with a greenish brown tinge. The feet are whitish and the nails white.

---

In the preceding sketch of the Insectivorous order of Mammals, we have followed in general the classification proposed by Professor Mivart, and slightly modified by Mr. Gill. The following summary of the arrangement will be useful for reference:—

SUB-ORDER I.—DERMOPTERA.

Family 1. GALEOPITHECIDÆ.

Genus—Galeopithecus.

SUB-ORDER II.—INSECTIVORA VERA.

Family 2. TUPAIDÆ.

Genera—Tupaia, Ptilocereus, Hylomys.

Family 3. MACROSCELIDÆ.

Genera—Macroscelides, Petrodromus. Rhynchocyon.

Family 4. ERINACEIDÆ.

Genera—Erinaceus, Gymnura.

Family 5. CENTETIDÆ.

Genera—Centetes, Hemicentetes, Ericulus, Echinops, Oryzorictes, Solenodon.

Family 6. POTAMOGALIDÆ.

Genus—Potamogale.

Family 7. CHRYSOCHLORIDÆ.

Genera—Chrysochloris, Chalcochloris.

Family 8. TALPIDÆ.

Genera—Talpa, Parascaptor, Mogera, Scaptochirus, Scaptonyx, Condylura, Scalops, Scapanus.

Family 9. MYOGALIDÆ.

Genera—Myogale, Urotrichus, Uropsilus.

Family 10. SORICIDÆ.

Genera—Sorex, Blarina, Crocidura, Crossopus, Nectogale, Anurosorex.

Only in one respect have we thought it desirable to depart from Professor Mivart’s system, namely, in raising the Desmans (Myogalidæ) to the rank of a distinct family. This course was adopted for the sake of simplicity in the classification, as the combination of characters presented by those animals places them so remarkably between the Moles and the Shrews, that from a zoological point of view they cannot satisfactorily be referred to either.

One thing that will strike the reader at once is the great number of family types, for the most part strongly characterised, that can be distinguished in so small an order. Mr. Wallace estimates the total number of species of Insectivora at 135, and of these about 65, or nearly one-half, belong to the single family of the Shrews, leaving about 70 species for all the other families; and of these 34 species, or again nearly one-half, are referred to the two widely distributed groups the Hedgehogs and the Moles.

Considering these facts, and the clear differentiation of most of the forms, notwithstanding the existence of those types already alluded to, which in several of the families seem to lead towards the Soricidæ, we can hardly avoid agreeing with Mr. Wallace in regarding the existing Insectivora as “the detached fragments of a much more extensive group of animals, now almost extinct,” a view which is strongly corroborated by the geographical distribution of the animals.

Curiously enough several of the smaller and more peculiar families are limited much in the same way as the Pteropine Bats and Lemurs, chiefly to the countries surrounding the great Indian ocean, beneath which, as we have already stated, the hypothetical continent of Lemuria is very probably submerged. The Galeopithecidæ and Tupaiidæ are almost confined to the Malayan region, and the Centetidæ (with the exception of the anomalous genus Solenodon) are peculiar to Madagascar; the Macroscelididæ have their home on the eastern coast of Africa, except a single species which occurs in the northern part of that continent; the Chrysochloridæ are exclusively South African; and the curious Potamogale inhabits some of the West African rivers. Thus, except in the case of Solenodon, the whole of these groups are now represented solely within the region inhabited by the Pteropine Bats. Does this point to a “Lemurian” origin, or at any rate to a great former development in the Lemurian land, of the Insectivorous Mammalia?

Of the more widely distributed families, the Erinaceidæ occur chiefly in the northern temperate regions of the Eastern hemisphere, stretching away continuously from Europe and the North African deserts, through Asia Minor and Persia, and across Central Asia to the Pacific Coast, whilst one or two species occur in South Africa, and one very aberrant form, the Bulau (Gymnura), is found in the Malayan region, along with the Bangsrings, to which it is allied through the genus Hylomys. The true Moles and the Shrews occur in the northern parts of both hemispheres, and the latter family, indeed, is represented in all parts of the world except South America and the Australian region. The Desmans, which stand in so peculiar a position between the Shrews and the Moles, present a curious instance of what has been called “discontinuous distribution,” the two nearly allied species being found only in two localities, separated from each other by the whole breadth of the European continent. The entire absence of Insectivora from the South American continent, and the presence of the Solenodons, which seem to be most nearly related to the Centetidæ of Madagascar, in Cuba and St. Domingo, are further remarkable facts in the geographical distribution of these animals. Scarcely less singular is the distribution of the two species of Urotrichus, one of which occurs in Japan, and the other on the Pacific coast of North America.

The evidence derived from the fossil remains of Insectivora, as to the former history of the order, in its bearing upon the present geographical distribution of its members, is very inconclusive; but the principal facts to be gathered from it is that from Miocene times to the present day the representatives of the order in different localities, so far as these are known, have generally belonged to the same types, and no undoubted remains of Insectivora are known from earlier formations than the Miocene. At one time, indeed, some of the beautiful Mammalian fossils of the Stonesfield slate (Lower Oolite) of Oxfordshire were regarded as probably representing Insectivora, but their Marsupial character is now generally recognised; and this is the case also with the Dromotherium from the Trias of North Carolina, which was at one time believed to carry the present order so far back in time.

Species of the existing genera Erinaceus, Sorex, Myogale, and Talpa, and of several nearly-allied extinct genera, have been determined from Miocene and subsequent deposits in various parts of Europe, and especially from the lacustrine beds of the Auvergne; and in North America also a few species have been found and referred to genera for the most part almost identical with those still living on that continent. In some instances even the Miocene species appear to be nearly identical with those now inhabiting the same regions.

The principal apparent exceptions to this rule are to be found in a fossil species from the Miocene of the Auvergne, described by M. Pomel under the name of Echinogale Laurillardii (Centetidæ), and two forms described by Hermann von Meyer, as forming a new genus (Oxygomphius), allied to the Bangsrings, from the Tertiary basin of Weisenau, in Southern Germany. But the true position of these fossils is, to say the least of it, exceedingly doubtful; and this is still more strikingly the case with the Eocene American genus Omomys supposed to be an animal allied to the Hedgehogs and the Bangsrings, but which Professor Leidy himself, in describing it, compares with nearly all the types of true Insectivora and with the Opossums.

This last comparison leads us, perhaps, towards the origin of the Insectivora. In the East, the Bangsrings, and notably the beautiful little Ptilocerque, and the curious genus Hylomys, which, again, seems to unite the Bangsrings with the Hedgehogs through the anomalous genus Gymnura, present manifest relationships with the Phalangers, some of which abound in the islands further to the east. From these animals to the true Shrews, many of which abound in the east, is no great step. On the other hand, we have already seen that Brandt recognised Opossum-like characters in his Solenodon, but it must be confessed that these are almost exclusively external. Professor Leidy describes, besides Omomys above referred to, some other fossils from the Eocene of Wyoming, which he seems to regard as Insectivorous in habit, but Marsupial in structure; and the Stonesfield Mammals, although plainly Marsupial, have Insectivorous tendencies, so that the derivation of the type Insectivora from the Marsupials, or at all events the near affinity of the two orders, perhaps at several points of contact, may be looked upon as established.

In the other direction the affinities of the order would seem to be through the Shrews, Hedgehogs, and Centetidæ with the Carnivora, towards which also the curious West African Potamogale seems clearly to point. The Bangsrings, again, show some traces of an affinity to the Lemurs; and Galeopithecus seems almost to constitute a central point of alliances, uniting the Insectivora with the Lemurs and Bats, and further exhibiting, as Mr. Wallace thinks, certain peculiarities which smack strongly of direct Marsupial relations. The relationship of the Insectivora to the Rodentia can hardly be regarded as a true affinity, although the analogies between different types in the two orders are among the most striking phenomena of the kind with which we are acquainted. The type of the Mice and Rats is reproduced by the Shrews, the Squirrels by the Bangsrings, the Porcupines by the Hedgehogs and Tanrecs, the Jerboas by the Jumping Shrews, and the Ondatra by the Desmans; whilst even the highly specialised Moles are reflected among the Rodents by the various species of Mole-Rats. But none of these resemblances indicate affinity, and the Rodent type may be regarded as differentiated from the old probably Marsupial ancestral forms quite independently of the Insectivora.

W. S. DALLAS.

PRINTED BY CASSELL & COMPANY, LIMITED, LA BELLE SAUVAGE, LONDON, E.C.

---

FOOTNOTES:

[1] πλατύς, flat or broad; ῥινές, nostrils.

[2] κατά, downwards; ῥινές, nostrils.

[3] Ἄνθρωπος, man; μορφή, form or shape.

[4] The back edge of the hard, bony palate, with which the soft palate and uvula are continuous, forms a wide concave notch, whilst that of man projects in the centre of the notch.

[5] The tongue has the same kind of papillæ, or slight projections of its surface, as in man; some called fungiform are seen at the tip, and on the surface generally, and others more or less cup-shaped. These last are found at the back, and are not arranged in any definite shape or order.

[6] The Gibbons have no air sacs.

[7] See [page 16].

[8] Troglodytes Tschiégo (Duvernoy); Troglodytes calvus (Du Chaillu).

[9] Troglodytes Koolo-Kamba (Du Chaillu); Troglodytes Aubryi (Gratiolet and Alix).

[10] Koolo is the cry, and Kambe means “to say.”

[11] Troglodytes niger.

[12] This interesting animal died in 1876.

[13] They have several muscular peculiarities. Thus the great muscle of the hind part of the loins (sacro lumbalis) is vast and fleshy in man, but it is reduced to very small proportions in the great Apes. The great oblique muscle of the body is not attached to the hip, and the muscles of the buttocks are reduced excessively in the Apes. All this renders their erect position difficult and not usual. The motions of the shoulder and arms are assisted by extra muscles; one stretches from the sixth neck-vertebra to the first rib, another reaches from the outer part of the collar-bone to the neck in front, to the bone under the tongue (hyoid bone), and a third from the collar-bone to the side of the first vertebra. The small muscle of the chest (pectoralis minor) reaches to the capsule which surrounds the shoulder-joint. There is an extra muscle, which reaches from the back to the elbow, and which allows the animals, when hanging by one hand, to turn and twist the body slightly. The metacarpal bone of the little finger has a special muscle, which tends to enlarge the grasp of the hand. The great Apes have, however, an imperfect or deficient proper flexor to the thumb, and the extensor of the first joint of the thumb is wanting. The ill-developed “calf” has not its two great muscles combined in the one tendo Achillis, as in man, and the muscles of the foot are so arranged that they permit of much more independent motion than those of man have.

[14] Simia satyrus. Simia morio.

[15] The Transversus pedis.

[16] A muscle, called the accessory flexor of the toes, is absent in the Orangs, and one termed scansorius, or climber, exists on the outside of the hip and the joint of the thigh.

[17] * Is the intermediate bone.

[18] Hylobates.

[19] Hylobates syndactylus.

[20] The abductor of the third joint of the second finger. The thumb counts as the first finger.

[21] Hylobates lar.

[22] Hylobates hoolook.

[23] Hylobates pileatus.

[24] Hylobates agilis.

[25] Cynomorpha.

[26] Semnopithecus melalophus.

[27] Semnopithecus maurus.

[28] Semnopithecus nasalis.

[29] Semnopithecus entellus.

[30] Semnopithecus frontatus.

[31] Semnopithecus rubicundus.

[32] Semnopithecus nemæus.

[33] Semnopithecus nigripes.

[34] Semnopithecus Nestor.

[35] Semnopithecus ursinus.

[36] The kinds of Monkeys included in this genus have a very wide geographical range. Mr. Wallace states that a species has been seen at an altitude of 11,000 feet in the Himalayas; and Semnopithecus roxellana, which resembles a young Semnopithecus nasalis, occurs in Eastern Tibet (about lat. 30° N.) in the highest forests. Elsewhere, they extend over the forest land of the Oriental region of natural history.

[37] Thumbless Monkeys.

[38] Colobos guereza.

[39] Cercopithecus.

[40] Cercopithecus Diana.

[41] Cercopithecus Mona.

[42] Cercopithecus petaurista.

[43] Cercopithecus talapoin.

[44] Cercopithecus callitrichus.

[45] Cercopithecus erythrogaster.

[46] Cercopithecus ruber.

[47] Cercopithecus æthiope.

[48] In the Cercopitheci the skull has a large brain-case, and that part on which the brain and cerebellum rest is concave or pitted on the petrosal bone, and on each side of the crista galli in the fore part of the skull. In general there is a laryngeal pouch. The first premolar is like that of the Semnopitheci. The other anatomical peculiarities of these and of the Semnopitheci will be found in the description of the Macaques and Baboons.

[49] Macacus, or Inuus.

[50] A name of the Roman divinity Faunus.

[51] Macacus cynomolgus.

[52] Macacus cyclopis.

[53] Macacus radiatus.

[54] Macacus rhesus.

[55] Macacus maurus.

[56] Macacus brunneus.

[57] Macacus nemestrinus.

[58] Macacus sylvanus, or Inuus ecaudatus.

[59] Macacus silenus.

[60] Cynocephalus.

[61] Cynocephalus hamadryas.

[62] Cynocephalus gelada.

[63] Cynocephalus porcarius.

[64] Cynocephalus sphinx.

[65] Cynocephalus anubis.

[66] Cynocephalus papio.

[67] Cynocephalus mormon.

[68] The Acromio-trachelian. It does not exist in the Chimpanzees.

[69] Cynocephalus leucophæus.

[70] Cynocephalus niger.

[71] Some zoologists make a new genus (Cynopithecus) of the Black Asiatic Baboons. We demur.

[72] The Siamang is included in this genus.

[73] This spelling is preferable to “Colobus.”

[74] Some zoologists separate the Talapoin Monkey, and place it in a genus by itself; and the Mangabeys are sometimes included in a genus Cercocebus.

[75] The Gelada is included by some in a genus Theropithecus, from its nostrils opening high up; and the Black Baboon is placed in a genus Cynopithecus. These are all inadvisable complications.

[76] Platyrrhini.

[77] Mycetes.

[78] Mycetes chrysum.

[79] Mycetes villosus.

[80] Lagothrix.

[81] Lagothrix olivaceus.

[82] Ateles.

[83] κρίκος, a ring; εἶδος, shape.

[84] Ateles paniscus.

[85] Ateles sub-pentadactylus.

[86] Ateles variegatus.

[87] Ateles cucullatus.

[88] Cebus.

[89] Cebus albifrons.

[90] Cebus fatuelius.

[91] Cebus capuchinus.

[92] This genus is sometimes divided into two—Callithrix and Chrysothrix.

[93] Callithrix sciurea.

[94] It appears to be a long-backed little thing, and this is not because it has more rib-bearing back-bones than the Monkeys of the Old World; on the contrary, they usually number only eleven. As regards the skeleton, the hips appear to be weakly joined on to the spine and to each other by one bone, instead of there being a long and strong sacrum to unite them. The breast-bone has only four pieces between the upper one (or the manubrium), and the cartilage at the lower end.

[95] Callithrix lugens.

[96] Callithrix discolor.

[97] Nyctipithecus trivirgatus.

[98] Nyctipithecus rufipes.

[99] Nyctipithecus oseryi.

[100] Pithecia.

[101] Pithecia Satanas.

[102] Pithecia hirsuta.

[103] Pithecia monachus.

[104] Pithecia, or Brachyurus calvus.

[105] Pithecia melanocephala.

[106] Pithecia leucocephala.

[107] Arctopithecini.

[108] Hapale.

[109] Hapale Jacchus.

[110] Hapale humeralifer.

[111] Midas.

[112] Midas ursulus.

[113] Midas Devillii.

[114] Midas rosalia.

[115] An exception must be made in favour of the “Histoire Physique, Naturelle et Politique de Madagascar,” of M. Alfred Grandidier.

[116] Indris diadema.

[117] Indris laniger.

[118] Indris brevicaudatus.

[119] This classification is not that adopted by comparative anatomists, but rather by zoologists.

[120] Lemur albifrons.

[121] Lemur mayottensis.

[122] Lemur mongoz.

[123] Lemur varius.

[124] Lemur niger.

[125] χείρ (hand), γαλῆ (weasel).

[126] Cheirogale furcifer.

[127] Cheirogale Coquerellii.

[128] Cheirogale nain.

[129] Galago.

[130] Galago Demidoffii and Galago murinus.

[131] Galago senegalensis.

[132] Galago sennaariensis.

[133] Galago maholi.

[134] This species, which intervenes between the Maholi and Grand Galago, we have already figured and described (see [pp. 215], [216]).

[135] Galago crassicaudatus (Geoffroy).

[136] Galago Monteiri (Bartlett).

[137] Perodicticus potto.

[138] A very surprising term, as it applies to a Lemuroid.

[139] Arctocebus calabarensis.

[140] Nycticebus.

[141] Loris, or Stenops gracilis.

[142] Tarsius spectrum (Geoffroy).

[143] Cheiromys Madagascariensis.

[144] The formula of the milk set is—I. 42, C.20, M. 22 = 12. That of the permanent set is—I. 22, C. 00, P. M. 20, M. 66 = 18. Professor Peters of Berlin moreover states his having found in a very early stage of development in the Aye-Aye, rudimentary teeth yielding a milk dentition—I. 62, C. 20, M. 62 = 18.

[145] The simplicity of this classification is its great merit. The student will, however, find many other genera mentioned in books or placed before the specific names in museums. Thus, the beautiful Lemuroids in the British Museum of our genus Indris are called Propithecus, when the animals have tails, and the genus Lemur is termed Varecia. The genus Galago includes the animals called by some zoologists Otolicnus and Otogale, &c.

[146] Pteropus medius.

[147] Colonel Sykes states that he had met with individuals more than fourteen inches long.

[148] Pteropus edulis.

[149] Pteropus nicobaricus, jubatus, dasymallus, and griseus.

[150] Pteropus poliocephalus.

[151] Pteropus Gouldii.

[152] Pteropus vulgaris.

[153] Cynonycteris ægyptiaca.

[154] Cynonycteris collaris.

[155] Cynonycteris amplexicaudata.

[156] Cynopterus marginatus.

[157] Epomophorus Whitii.

[158] Hypsignathus monstrosus.

[159] Harpyia cephalotes.

[160] Cephalotes Peronii.

[161] Macroglossus minimus.

[162] Melonycteris melanops.

[163] Notopteris Macdonaldii.

[164] Rhinolophus luctus, Phyllorhina armiger, Nycticejus luteus (=Scotophilus Temminckii), Miniopterus blepotis, and Vespertilio Blythii.

[165] Rhinolophus ferrum-equinum.

[166] To this lobe the name of “antitragus” has been given.

[167] Rhinolophus hipposideros.

[168] Besides the two species found in Britain, two others inhabit southern Europe, the Levant, and Northern Africa, namely, Rhinolophus euryale and R. Blasii, the latter often described under the name of R. clivosus. Both these species are nearly allied to the English Horseshoe Bats.

[169] Rhinolophus luctus.

[170] The commonest of the numerous Eastern species of the genus are Pearson’s Horseshoe Bat (R. Pearsonii), which has a very large nose-leaf and greatly developed ear lobes, and is found throughout the lofty hill-countries from the Himalayas to the mountains of Burmah and China; Roux’s Horseshoe Bat (R. affinis), which varies in colour from orange-brown to greyish-brown, and is found among the hills all over India, and in Ceylon, Burmah, Java, Sumatra, and Borneo; and the Dwarf Horseshoe Bat (R. minor), only about one inch and three-quarters in length, which occurs in Burmah, Yunnan, Java, Sumatra, Borneo, and Japan. Several varieties of the last two species have been described as distinct forms.

[171] Rhinolophus megaphyllus.

[172] Rhinonycteris aurantia.

[173] Phyllorhina armigera.

[174] Other common Eastern species are the Masked Leaf Bat (Phyllorhina larrata), which occurs in Bengal, Further India, Siam, and Java; the Bicolorous Leaf Bat (P. bicolor), which inhabits India, China, and many of the Eastern islands; and the Indian Horseshoe Bat (P. speoris), an abundant form in Central and Southern India and in Ceylon, and which has also been met with in Burmah. A single species (P. taitiensis) has been described from Tahiti. It is very nearly related to the last-named Indian form, if not merely a variety of it. A single species (P. cerrina) also inhabits North Australia, where it has been met with at Cape York, and in sandstone caverns in Albany Island. It is about two inches long; above, tawny-brown, darker on the face, head, and shoulders; below, paler, with a grey tinge on the belly. Several species of the genus inhabit the warmer parts of Africa, and one of these (P. tridens), a small species, only two inches in length, an inhabitant of Egypt and Nubia, has the posterior nose-leaf divided into three teeth towards the forehead, a character which it displays in common with an Indian species (P. Stoiiczkana), and another from Amboyna and Batchian, of still more diminutive proportions. A distinct genus (Asellia) has been proposed for the reception of these Bats. The largest species of the genus comes from Guinea and the Gold Coast, on the west coast of Africa. It is nearly five inches in length, and has received the name of Phyllorhina gigas. It is associated with two or three smaller species, and two or three others occur in Southern and Eastern Africa.

[175] Triænops persicus.

[176] This character is of special importance here, as serving to distinguish the Megaderms from the species of another family of Leaf-nosed Bats belonging to the second principal group of Microchiroptera.

[177] Megaderma lyra.

[178] See also some general remarks on the supposed carnivorous propensities of the Rhinolophidæ, [p. 281].

[179] Megaderma frons.

[180] Nycteris thebaica.

[181] Other described African species are N. capensis (Smith); N. macrotis (Dobson); N. hispida (Schreber); and N. grandis (Peters). The only species found out of Africa is the Javanese Desert Bat (N. javanica).

[182] Plecotus auritus.

[183] Synotus barbastellus.

[184] Corynorhinus macrotis.

[185] Nyctophilus Geoffroyi.

[186] Vesperugo pipistrellus.

[187] A name derived from the Italian equivalent of the word “Bat.”

[188] Mr. R. McLachlan, F.R.S., mentioned to the present writer an instance which fell within his own experience of the dislodgment of a Bat from beneath a large piece of bark which was torn from a tree by an entomologist in search of Beetles or larvæ. When the bark was detached, the Bat fell, but the entomologist, being unprepared probably for such large game, omitted to secure it, and the species was not ascertained.

[189] Vesperugo noctula.

[190] Vesperugo serotinus.

[191] Vesperugo discolor.

[192] Vesperugo abramus.

[193] Vesperugo pachypus.

[194] Another Eastern species, furnished with pads on the thumbs and feet, is the Club-footed Bat (V. tylopus), from Northern Borneo, which is distinguished from the above by the presence of two pre-molars on each side in the upper jaw. A small African species, the Dwarf Club-footed Bat (V. nanus), is similarly provided.

[195] Scotophilus Temminckii.

[196] Scotophilus Welwitschii.

[197] Chalinolobus tuberculatus.

[198] Vespertilio murinus.

[199] Vespertilio Nattereri.

[200] Vespertilio Daubentonii.

[201] Vespertilio mystacinus.

[202] Other European species are Bechstein’s Bat (Vespertilio Bechsteinii), which has occurred in the New Forest; the Marsh Bat (Vespertilio dasycneme), which inhabits the Altai Mountains, and in Europe extends, according to Mr. Dobson, from Russia to England; Capaccini’s Bat (V. Capaccinii), an inhabitant of Italy, with which specimens from the Philippine Islands and Japan have been identified; and the Notched-eared Bat (V. emarginatus), found in Central and Southern Europe, and extending eastward into Persia.

[203] Vespertilio formosus.

[204] Kerivoula picta.

[205] Harpiocephalus harpia.

[206] Atalapha novæboracensis.

[207] Other recorded species of this genus are: A. intermedia, from Mexico, A. Pfeifferi, from Cuba, A. Frantzii, from Brazil and Costa Rica, A. varia, from Peru and Chili, A. paltescens, from Venezuela, and A. Grayi, from Chili, all with molars 5–55–5; and A. egregia, from Brazil, A. Ega, from Brazil, and A. caudata, from Pernambuco and Chili, with molars 4–45–5. A. Grayi has been said to occur at Juan da Fuca, in North America, and in the Sandwich Islands.

[208] Miniopterus Schreibersii.

[209] Other recorded species are Miniopterus tristis, from the Philippine Islands, and M. australis, from the Loyalty Islands.

[210] Thyroptera tricolor.

[211] Mr. Dobson’s paper above referred to (“Proceedings of the Zoological Society,” 1876, p. 526) contains some interesting particulars as to the occurrence of adhesive organs in Bats and other Mammals.

[212] A second species, Thyroptera albiventer, has been described by Mr. Tomes from the vicinity of the Rio Napo, near Quito. It is rather larger than the preceding, and of a reddish-brown colour above, with the lower parts pure white.

[213] Natalus stramineus.

[214] Furipterus horrens.

[215] Saccopteryx bilineata.

[216] In one species, Saccopteryx plicata, from Costa Rica, of which Professor Peters makes his genus Balantiopteryx, the sac is placed in the middle of the shoulder membrane. In this species, also, the facial part of the skull is inflated on each side. In S. canina and its allies the sac is in the margin of the membrane. These form the genus Peropteryx of Professor Peters.

[217] Other described species of the genus are Saccopteryx canina, from Brazil, Guiana, Venezuela, and Guatemala; S. leptura, from Surinam; S. villosa, from Brazil; S. Kappleri, and S. leucoptera, from Surinam; S. brevirostris, from Brazil; and S. plicata, from Costa Rica. Rhynchonycteris naso, the Sharp-nosed Bat, is allied to these, but distinguished especially by its very pointed snout. It inhabits Brazil, Surinam, and Guiana.

[218] Emballonura monticola.

[219] Other known species are Emballonura nigrescens, from Amboyna, Ternate, and Australia; and E. semicaudata, an inhabitant of the Samoa, Fiji, and Pelew Islands. An allied African species is Colëura afra, which, however, presents some characters indicating a relationship to the American Saccopteryx.

[220] Taphozous perforatus.

[221] Other described species of the genus are:—Taphozous longimanus, with a large throat-sac in the male, found in India, Ceylon, and Burmah; T. melanopagon, with no throat-pouch, but usually with a small black beard under the chin (see [figure above]), an inhabitant of India, Penang, Burmah, Cochin China, Java, and the Philippine Islands; T. Theobaldi, from Tenasserim; T. australis, from Australia and New Guinea; T. mauritianus, with white wings, from tropical Africa, Madagascar, and the Mascarene Islands; T. saccolaimus, from India and the larger Eastern islands; T. affinis, from Labuan; and T. Peli, from tropical Africa. The Valve-tailed Bat (Diclidurus albus), a native of Brazil, is remarkable for its whitish colour, and especially for the presence of a curious horny case, composed of two parts, which covers the extremity of the tail, and is attached to the upper surface of the interfemoral membrane.

[222] Rhinopoma microphyllum.

[223] Rhinopoma Lepsianum (Peters), is another African species. It inhabits the banks of the Blue Nile.

[224] Noctilio leporinus.

[225] The White-bellied Hare-lipped Bat (N. albiventris) is also an inhabitant of South America.

[226] Nyctinomus Cestonii.

[227] Nyctinomus tragatus (Dobson), from Continental India, is a nearly allied species, as also Nyctinomus plicatus, an inhabitant of India, Sumatra, Java, and Borneo.

[228] Nyctinomus brasiliensis.

[229] In a paper on the group Molossi, Mr. Dobson distinguishes in all twenty-one species of the genus Nyctinomus, mostly inhabitants of the Eastern hemisphere. Three species besides the one above described are found in America.

[230] Molossus nasutus.

[231] Mr. Dobson (Proceedings of the Zoological Society, 1876) describes nine species of Molossus, all from tropical America.

[232] Chiromeles torquatus.

[233] Mystacina tuberculata.

[234] Mormops Blainvillii.

[235] Chilonycteris Macleayii.

[236] Phyllostoma hastatum.

[237] Vampryus spectrum.

[238] Macrotus Waterhousii.

[239] Other known species are Macrotus californicus and M. mexicanus, the native countries of which are indicated in their specific names.

[240] Glossophaga soricina.

[241] Monophyllus Redmanii.

[242] Phyllonycteris Sezekornii.

[243] Poey’s Leaf Bat (Phyllonycteris Poeyi) is a second species inhabiting Cuba.

[244] The rest of the species forming the group Glossophaga have three premolars on each side in each jaw, and the inner upper incisors smaller than the outer ones. The lower incisors are more or less deciduous, and sometimes altogether wanting in the adult. Lonchoglossa caudifera has a well-developed zygomatic arch, and the interfemoral membrane, tail, and spurs very short. It is from Western Brazil and Surinam. The tail in this species is liable to be withdrawn, or lost in preparing the skin of the animal, and hence it has been described under the rather contradictory names of caudifera and ecaudata, and a distinct genus (Anura) was established upon the apparently tailless specimens. In Glossonycterus lasiopyga the zygomatic arch is deficient, and the tail is wanting; the spurs and interfemoral membrane are very short, and the latter is covered with hair. It is an inhabitant of Mexico. Chœronycteris mexicana, from Mexico, and C. minor, from Surinam, have a well-developed interfemoral membrane enclosing a very short tail. The anterior molars are very narrow, and the first upper premolar is deciduous.

[245] Stenoderma perspicillatum.

[246] Stenoderma jamaicense.

[247] Two other species of Stenoderms are referred to Artibeus by Professor Peters, namely, his A. fallax, and A. concolor, both from Surinam. Both these have five molar teeth in the upper jaw, the preceding species having only four on each side. Three other species forming the sub-genus Dermanura, with only four molars on each side of both jaws, are Artibeus cinereus and quadrivittatus, from South America, and A. toltecum, from Mexico. Phyllops albomaculatus, from Cuba and Jamaica, and P. personatus, from Brazil, have five molars on each side in both jaws, and the palate is deeply cut out between the molars. In Vampyrops lineatus and vittatus, both South American species, the number of molars is also five, but the palate is not so deeply cut. The typical species of the genus Stenoderma, S. rufum, resembles this, but has only four molars on each side in each jaw, as described by Geoffroy, but this may be due to the youth of the specimen. Pygoderma bilabiatum and Ametrida centurio also have only four molars on each side, and the hindmost of these is very small. In the latter the face is much flattened. Chiroderma villosum and pusillum, on the contrary, have the fourth or hindmost molar larger than any of the rest, and are further characterised by a broad fissure which runs up from the aperture of the nose to the space between the orbits. Sturnira lilium and chiliensis have five molars on each side, and no interfemoral membrane. The former is from Brazil and Paraguay, the latter from Chili. Brachyphylla cavernarum, a curious Bat from caves in the islands of St. Vincent and Cuba, which is also said to occur in South Carolina, has an oval nose-leaf surrounded behind by a pit, a triangular fissure in the lower lip, and a rudimentary tail; and the singular genus Centurio, including two species (C. senex and McMurtrii), found in the West Indies and Central America, has a big, Bull-dog-like head and a flat face covered with naked cutaneous leaves. The teeth in Centurio resemble those of the Spectacled Stenoderm. There is no tail, and the wing-membranes display peculiar translucent patches.

[248] Desmodus rufus.

[249] According to Professor Gervais; some zoologists make the number of incisors in the first dentition six. The first teeth differ entirely in character from those of the adult animal.

[250] The wound is, in fact, very much like that which many of our readers must occasionally have inflicted on themselves in shaving; and those who are experienced in such matters will know how long it takes to stop the bleeding thus produced.

[251] There is sometimes a difficulty in distinguishing between canines and premolars, and it will be seen, hereafter, that in some cases the canines are supposed to be wanting; but no Insectivore possesses two chisel-like, constantly-growing incisors in each jaw, separated by a long interval from the molars, as in the Rodents, or Gnawing Mammals.

[252] Galeopithecus volans.

[253] Tupaia tana.

[254] Tupaia ferruginea.

[255] Ptilocercus Lowii.

[256] Hylomys suillus.

[257] Macroscelides typicus.

[258] Macroscelides Rozeti.

[259] Petrodromus tetradactylus.

[260] Rhynchocyon Cernei.

[261] Erinaceus europæus.

[262] Erinaceus auritus.

[263] Erinaceus collaris.

[264] Gymnura Rafflesii.

[265] Centetes ecaudatus.

[266] Ericulus spinosus.

[267] Oryzorictes hova.

[268] Geogale aurita.

[269] Solenodon paradoxus.

[270] Solenodon cubanus.

[271] Potamogale velox.

[272] Chrysochloris capensis.

[273] Talpa europæa.

[274] Talpa cæca.

[275] Condylura cristata.

[276] Scalops aquaticus.

[277] Myogale moschata.

[278] Myogale pyrenaica.

[279] Urotrichus talpoides.

[280] Sorex vulgaris.

[281] Hence the species was called S. tetragonurus, by Hermann.

[282] Two or three other Old World species belong to this group, among which may be mentioned the Alpine Shrew (S. alpinus), which appears to range from the Alps to India; and the Blackish Shrew (S. nigrescens), a very common species in Sikkim and Nepaul. At Darjeling Mr. Jerdon found many specimens lying dead in the roads without apparent injury. Several allied species also inhabit North America, such as Forster’s Shrew (S. Forsterii), the Long-nosed Shrew (S. longirostris), &c.

[283] Blarina Dekayi.

[284] Crocidura aranea.

[285] Crocidura myosura.

[286] Crossopus fodiens.

[287] Nectogaie ciegans.

[288] Anurosorex squamipes.