Part 19 (1/2)
These are mostly small animals of, with few exceptions, nocturnal habits.
Their chief characteristic lies in their pointed dent.i.tion, which enable them to pierce and crush the hard-sh.e.l.led insects on which they feed. The skull is elongated, the bones of the face and jaw especially, and those of the latter are comparatively weak. Before we come to the teeth we may notice some other peculiarities of this order.
The limbs are short, feet five-toed and plantigrade, with the entire sole placed on the ground in running, and these animals are all possessed of clavicles which in the next order are but rudimentary; in this respect they legitimately follow the Bats. The mammae are placed under the abdomen, and are more than two. None of them (except _Tupaia_) have a caec.u.m (this genus has been most exhaustively described in all its osteological details by Dr. J. Anderson: see his 'Anatomical and Zoological Researches'); the snout is usually prolonged and mobile. The dent.i.tion is eccentric, and not always easy to determine; some have long incisors in front, followed by other incisors along the sides of their narrow jaws and canines, all shorter than the molars; others have large separated canines, between which are placed small incisors. In Blyth's additions to Cuvier he states that ”in this group we are led to identify the canine tooth as simply the first of the false molars, which in some has two fangs, and, as in the Lemurs, to perceive that the second in the lower jaw is in some more a.n.a.logous in size and character to an ordinary canine than that which follows the incisors. The incisor teeth are never more than six in number, which is the maximum throughout _placental_ mammalia (as opposed by _marsupial_), and in several instances one or two pairs are deficient. (It should be remarked that a single tooth with two fangs is often represented by two separate teeth, each with one fang.) The canines, with the succeeding false molars, are extremely variable, but there are ordinarily three tuberculated molars posterior to the representative of the carnivorous or cutting grinder of the true _Carnivora_.” All the molar teeth are studded with sharp points or cusps; the deciduous teeth are developed and disappear before birth. This order is divided into four families, viz., _Talpidae_ or Moles, _Sorecidae_ or Shrews, _Erinaceidae_ or Hedgehogs, and the _Tupaiadae_, Banxrings or Tree-shrews. Of all these well-defined types are to be found in India, but America and Africa possess various genera which we have not, such as the Condylures (_Condylura_, Illiger), the Shrew-moles (_Scalops_, Cuvier), belonging to _Talpidae_; the Solendons, Desmans, and Chrysochlores to _Sorecidae_; the Sokinahs, Tenrecs and Gymnures to _Erinaceidae_; and the Macroscelles or Elephant-mice of the Cape Colony form another group more allied to _Tupaia_ than the rest. This last family is the most interesting. Anatomically belonging to this order, they externally resemble the squirrels so closely as to have been frequently mistaken for them. The grovelling Mole and creeping Shrew are as unlike the sprightly Tupaia, as it springs from branch to branch, whisking its long bushy tail, as it is possible to conceive. I intend further on to give an ill.u.s.tration of this little animal. The first we have on record concerning it is in the papers relating to Captain Cook's third voyage, which are now in the British Museum, where the animal is described and figured as _Sciurus dissimilis_; it was obtained at Pulo Condore, an island 100 miles from Saigon, in 1780.
Sir T. Stamford Raffles was the next to describe it, which he did under the generic name _Tupaia_--_tupai_ being a Malayan word applied to various squirrel-like small animals--but he was somewhat forestalled in the publication of his papers by MM. Diard and Duvaucel. Dr. Anderson relates how Sir T. Raffles engaged the services of these two naturalists to a.s.sist him in his researches, on the understanding that the whole of the observations and collections were to be the property of the East India Company; but ultimately on this point there arose a disagreement between them, and the paper that was first read before the Asiatic Society of Bengal on the 10th of March, 1820, was drawn up by MM. Diard and Duvaucel, though forwarded by Sir T. Raffles, whose own paper on the subject was not read before the Linnean Society until the 5th of December of that year, nor published till 1821; therefore to the others belongs the credit of first bringing this curious group to notice.
They regarded it in the light of a true Shrew, disguised in the form and habits of a squirrel, and they proposed for it the name _Sorex-Glis_, i.e. Shrew-squirrel (_Glis_ properly means a dormouse, but Linnaeus used it for his rodential group which he termed _Glires_); this was afterwards changed by Desmarest and Giebel to _Gli Sorex_ and _Glisosorex_, which latter stands for one of the generic terms applied to the group. F. Cuvier, objecting to _Tupaia_, proposed _Cladobates_ (signifying branch walkers), and Temminck, also objecting to _Tupaia_, suggested _Hylogale_ (from Gr. _hyla_, forest, and _gale_, a weasel), so now we have four generic names for this one small group. English naturalists have however accepted _Tupaia_; and, as Dr. Anderson fairly remarks, though it is a pity that some definite rules are not laid down for the guidance of naturalists for the acceptance or rejection of terms, still those who reject _Tupaia_ on the ground of its being taken from a savage tongue should be consistent, and refuse all others of similar origin.
He is quite right; but how many we should have to reject if we did so--_Siamanga_ in Quadrumana, _Kerivoula_ in Cheiroptera, _Tupaia_ in Insectivora, _Golunda_ in Rodentia, _Rusa_ in Ruminantia, and others! At the same time these names are wrong; they convey no meaning; and had they a meaning (which only _Kerivoula_ or _Kelivoulha_, i.e. plantain-bat, has) it is not expressed in languages common to all western nations, such as the Latin and Greek.
_Tupaia_ is an unfortunate selection, inasmuch as it does not apply to one type of animal, but reminds me somewhat of the Madras _puchi_, which refers, in a general way, to most creeping insects, known or unknown.
FAMILY TALPIDAE--THE MOLES.
These animals have a small cylindrical body, very short arm attached to a large shoulder-blade, supported by a stout clavicle or collar-bone. The fore-feet are of great breadth, supported by the powerful muscles of the arm; the palm of the foot or hand is directed outwards or backwards, the lower edge being trenchant, with scarcely perceptible fingers armed with long, flat nails, strong and sharp, with which to tear up the ground and shovel the earth aside. The hind feet are small and weak in comparison, with slender claws. The head tapers to a point, the long snout being provided with a little bone which a.s.sists it in rooting, and the cervical muscles are very strong.
The eyes are microscopical, and almost concealed in the fur. At one time it was a popular delusion that the mole was devoid of the power of sight, but this is not the case. The sense of hearing is extremely acute, and the tympanum is large, although externally there is no aural development. The tail is short, the fur set vertically in the skin, whence it is soft and velvety. The bones of the pubis do not join, and the young when produced are large. The mammae are six in number. The jaws are weak, the incisors are six above and eight below.
The canines (false molars?) have two roots. There are four false molars above and three below, and three molars with pointed cusps.
Moles live princ.i.p.ally on earth-worms, snails, and small insects, though they are also said to devour frogs and small birds. They are more common in Europe than in India, where the few known species are only to be found in hilly parts. I have, I think, procured them on the Satpura range some years ago, but I cannot speak positively to the fact at this lapse of time, as I had not then devoted much attention to the smaller mammalia, and it is possible that my supposed moles were a species of shrew.
They are seldom if ever trapped in India, for the simple reason that they are not considered worth trapping, and the destruction of moles in England has long been carried on in the same spirit of ignorance which led farmers, both there and in France, to destroy small birds wholesale, till they did themselves much injury by the multiplication of noxious insects. Moles, instead of being the farmers' foes, are the farmers' friends. Mr. Buckland in his notes to Gilbert White's 'Natural History of Selborne'(Macmillan's _edition de luxe_ of 1876)--says: ”After dinner we went round the sweetstuff and toy booths in the streets, and the vicar, my brother-in-law, the Rev. H. Gordon, of Harting, Petersfield, Hants, introduced me to a merchant of gingerbread nuts who was a great authority on moles. He tends cows for a contractor who keeps a great many of the animals to make concentrated milk for the navy. The moles are of great service; eat up the worms that eat the gra.s.s, and wherever the moles have been afterwards the gra.s.s grows there very luxuriantly. When the moles have eaten all the grubs and the worms in a certain s.p.a.ce, they migrate to another, and repeat their gratuitous work. The gra.s.s where moles have been is always the best for cows.” In another place he says: ”M. Carl Vogt relates an instance of a landed proprietor in France who destroyed every mole upon his property. The next season his fields were ravaged with wire-worms, and his crops totally destroyed. He then purchased moles of his neighbours, and preserved them as his best friends.”
The poor little despised mole has had its part to play in history.
My readers may remember that William the Third's horse is supposed to have put his foot into a mole-pit, and that the king's death was hastened by the unconscious agency of ”the little gentleman in black,” who was so often toasted afterwards by the Jacobites.
_GENUS TALPA_
NO. 122. TALPA MICRURA.
_The Short-tailed Mole_ (_Jerdon's No. 67_).
HABITAT.--The Eastern Himalayan range.
NATIVE NAMES.--_Pariam_, Lepcha; _Biyu-kantyen_, Bhotia (_Jerdon_).
DESCRIPTION.--Velvety black, with a greyish sheen in certain lights; snout nude; eyes apparently wanting. Jerdon says there is no perforation of the integument over the eyes, but this I doubt, and think that by examination with a lens an opening would be discovered, as in the case of the Apennine mole, which M. Savi considered to be quite blind. I hope to have an opportunity of testing this shortly.
The feet are fleshy white, also the tail, which, as its specific name implies, is very small. ”There are three small upper premolars between the quasi-canine tooth and the large scissor-toothed premolar, which is much developed.”
SIZE.--Length, 4-3/4 to 5 inches; head alone, 1-3/4; palm with claws, 7/8 inch; tail, 3/16 of an inch or less.
Jerdon says: ”This mole is not uncommon at Darjeeling, and many of the roads and pathways in the station are intersected by its runs, which often proceed from the base of some mighty oak-tree to that of another. If these runs are broken down or holes made in them they are generally repaired during the night. The moles do not appear to form mole-hills as in Europe.” Jerdon's specimens were dead ones picked up, as the Lepchas do not know how to trap them.
NO. 123. TALPA MACRURA.
_The Long-tailed Mole_ (_Jerdon's No. 68_).