Part 12 (2/2)

As natural curiosities in the animal kingdom, the Armadilloes do not yield to any of the four-footed creatures, and an account of their habits, would s.p.a.ce permit, could not be otherwise than extremely interesting. They are exclusively inhabitants of America; but many species, both in North and South America, are found far beyond the limits of the torrid zone. There are a great many species known--and these are of all sizes--from that of an ordinary rat, to the Giant Tatou, which sometimes attains the enormous dimensions of a moderate sized sheep! It may be mentioned that they are subdivided into a number of genera, as the sloths, etcetera; and here, again, without any very sufficient reason, since they all possess the scaly armour--from which the name armadillo is derived--and their habits are nearly identical.

They dwell in burrows, which they make for themselves; in fact, they are more than ordinarily clever at excavating, and have been blamed for carrying their tunnels into graveyards, and feeding upon the bodies there deposited! Of some of the species this charge is but too true; and one would think that an animal of such habit would be regarded with disgust. On the contrary, the flesh of the armadillo is in much esteem as an article of food, both among the white colonists and the natives, and men and dogs are employed in many parts of South America to procure it for the table. Several species of armadilloes possess the power of clueing themselves up, _a la hedgehog_, and thus presenting an impenetrable front to the attacks of an enemy; while others want this power, but, in its stead, can flatten their bodies along the ground, in such a way that neither dog nor jaguar can set tooth upon anything softer than their scales, and these are as impenetrable as if they were plates of steel.

The more noted species are known by different names--as the Tatou Poyou, the Giant Tatou, the Peba, the Pichiciago, the Pichey, the Hairy Tatou, the Mataco, the Apara, and such like designations.

It may be added, that the armadilloes dwell in districts very dissimilar. According to the species, they inhabit low marshes, thick forests, or dry open hills; and several kinds are indigenous to the high table-lands of the Andes.

Their usual food consists of fruits, legumes, and roots; but they are nearly all omnivorous, and will eat carrion whenever it falls in their way.

To this group belong two very singular animals, that have only of late years become known. These are the Mullingong--better known as the Ornithoryncus--and the Echidna, or Ant-eating Hedgehog. Both are natives of what may be termed the new world of Australasia.

To give an account of the peculiar conformation or appearance of the mullingong would require many pages, and only the artist can convey any idea of what the creature is like. Suffice it to say, that it is a sort of triangular cross between a bird, a quadruped, and a fish; having the bill of a duck, the hair, skin, and legs of a quadruped, and the aquatic habits of a fish, or rather of a seal. In general appearance it is, perhaps, more like to a beaver than to any other animal. It dwells upon the banks of rivers, lakes, or marshes, burrows in the ground like a badger, swims and dives well, and feeds chiefly on aquatic insects.

The echidna is altogether a different sort of creature, both in appearance and habits. It is, in reality, an ant-eater, with the body of a porcupine, having a long slender snout and an extensile tongue, just like that of other ant-eaters. It burrows in the ground, where it can remain for a long period without food, and it is supposed to issue forth only during the season of the rains. It also possesses the power of rolling itself into a ball, like the hedgehog--hence its name among the colonists of Ant-eating Hedgehog; but by far the most appropriate appellation for it is the Porcupine Ant-eater, since in general appearance it is exceedingly like several species of porcupines.

The Porcupines and Hedgehogs, though usually cla.s.sed elsewhere, on account of their teeth, their food, and a few other reasons not very natural, should certainly stand in this group of odd animals; and here let us place them. We have not s.p.a.ce to say much about either of them; and can only remark of the porcupines, that there are nearly a dozen known species inhabiting different parts of the world--as usual, separated into a great number of genera. Europe, Asia, Africa, the Asiatic Islands, North and South America, all have their porcupines-- some of them entirely covered with quills, others with hair intermingled with the spines, and still others on which the spinous processes are so small as to be scarcely perceptible, yet all partaking of the habits and character of the true porcupines. It may be further remarked, that the American porcupines are tree-climbers, and feed upon twigs and bark; in fact, lead a life very much resembling that of the sloths.

The Hedgehogs, about which so much has been said, should also go with this group, though it is usual to place them among carnivorous animals.

Of hedgehogs there are also several species, and they are found in most countries of Europe, and in many parts of Asia and Africa. No true hedgehog has yet been discovered in North or South America, but they have their representatives there in other species of worm-eating animals.

It would not be proper to conclude these sketches without remarking, that there are still a few other odd animals which we have not an opportunity of introducing here. As an instance, we may mention the little Daman, or Hyrax, a native of Africa and Asia Minor, and of which there are two or three distinct species. This is the animal over which Mr Frederic Cuvier, and other learned anatomists, have raised such a paean of triumph--having discovered that, notwithstanding its great resemblance to a rabbit, the little creature was, in reality, a _rhinoceros_!

M. Cuvier and his followers seem to have omitted the reflection that this wonderful discovery very naturally suggests. Putting it interrogatively, we may ask, How is it that the hyrax, whose ”anatomical structure proves it to be a rhinoceros,” is _not_ a rhinoceros in habits, appearance, nor, in fact, in anything but the shape of its bones?

If, then, we were to take osteology for our guide, I fear we should often arrive at very erroneous conclusions; and were the little hyrax an extinct animal, and not known to us by actual observation, we should be led by anatomical theorists to ascribe to the timid creature a very different set of manners from what it has got.

Despite anatomic theories, then, we shall continue to regard the hyrax-- the coney of the Scriptures--as a _rabbit, and not a rhinoceros_!

FINIS.

<script>