“There were here also many cages made of stout beams, in some of which there were lions (pumas); in others, tigers (jaguars); in others, ounces; in others, wolves; nor was there any animal on four legs that was not there.  They had for their rations deer and other animals of the chase.  There were also kept in large jars or tanks, snakes, alligators, and lizards.  In another court there were cages containing every kind of birds of prey, such as vultures, a dozen sorts of falcons and hawks, eagles, and owls.  The large eagles received turkeys for their food.  Our Spaniards were astonished at seeing such a diversity of birds and beasts; nor did they find it pleasant to hear the hissing of the poisonous snakes, the roaring of the lions, the shrill cries of the wolves, nor the groans of the other animals given to them for food.”

[Peru.]—­Garcilasso de la Vega (Commentaries Reales, v. 10), the son of a Spanish conqueror by an Indian princess, born and bred in Peru, writes:—­

“All the strange birds and beasts which the chiefs presented to the Inca were kept at court, both for grandeur and also to please the Indians who presented them.  When I came to Cuzco, I remember there were some remains of places where they kept these creatures.  One was the serpent conservatory, and another where they kept the pumas, jaguars, and bears.”

[Syria and Greece.]—­I could have said something on Solomon’s apes and peacocks, and could have quoted at length the magnificent order given by Alexander the Great (Pliny, Nat.  Hist., viii. 16) towards supplying material for Aristotle’s studies in natural history; but enough has been said to prove what I maintained, namely, that numerous cases occur, year after year, and age after age, in which every animal of note is captured and its capabilities of domestication unconsciously tested.

I would accept in a more stringent sense than it was probably intended to bear, the text of St. James, who wrote at a time when a vast variety and multitude of animals were constantly being forwarded to Rome and to Antioch for amphitheatrical shows.  He says (James iii. 7), “Every kind of beasts, and of birds, and of serpents, and of things in the sea, is tamed, and hath been tamed of mankind.”

I conclude from what I have stated that there is no animal worthy of domestication that has not frequently been captured, and might ages ago have established itself as a domestic breed, had it not been deficient in certain necessary particulars which I shall proceed to discuss.  These are numerous and so stringent as to leave no ground for wonder that out of the vast abundance of the animal creation, only a few varieties of a few species should have become the companions of man.

It by no means follows that because a savage cares to take home a young fawn to amuse himself, his family, and his friends, that he will always continue to feed or to look after it.  Such attention would require a steadiness of purpose foreign to the ordinary character of a savage.  But herein lie two shrewd tests of the eventual destiny of the animal as a domestic species.