Part 9

When he finds them, if still on scent, he should cheer, and call every dog by name as often as possible, varying the intonations of his voice. If the hare has made for the mountains, he should encourage them with Εὖα κύνες, εὖα ὦ κύνες: but if they have over-shot the scent, he should call them back—_Hark back, dogs! hark back!_—οὐ πάλιν, οὐ πάλιν ὦ κύνες: when brought back to the scent, he should draw around, making many casts, (κύκλους,[326]) even up to the line of the nets, encouraging the dogs till they again pick up the scent—αἱ δὲ διαῤῥιπτοῦσαι τὰς οὐρὰς, καὶ ἑαυταῖς ἐμπίπτουσαι, καὶ πολλὰ ὑπερπηδῶσαι, καὶ ἐπανακλαγγάνουσαι, ἐπαναίρουσαι τὰς κεφαλὰς, εἰσβλέπουσαι εἰς τὸν κυνηγέτην, ἐπιγνωρίζουσαι ἀληθῆ εἶναι ἤδη ταῦτα, ὑφ’ αὑτῶν ἀναστήσουσι τὸν λαγὼ, καὶ ἐπιᾶσι κεκλαγγυῖαι—starting off again at full cry.

[Sidenote: Xenophon de Venatione. c. +vi.+]

[Sidenote: J. Sarisberiensis Policrat. L. +i.+ c. +iv.+]

The watchman at the nets gives a particular shout, significant of the hare’s capture in the ἄρκυς, or her escape by going beyond, or stopping short. If she be taken, they try for another; if not, they continue the pursuit of the same. Weary at length with their day’s work, the huntsman must himself, towards evening, assist the pack in searching out the poor tired hare at her quat, (κατακλίνεται γὰρ ἐν μικρῷ τὸ θηρίον, καὶ οὐκ ἀνίσταται ὑπὸ κόπου καὶ φόβου,) and bring them forward with encouragement; “cheering the meek dogs much, the eager ones little, the intermediate moderately,” till they kill her κατὰ πόδας, at force, or drive her into the nets: and thus at last will the huntsman become master of the hare—“infelicem bestiolam lepusculum timidum tanto fortassè prædabitur apparatu.”

Oppian’s instructions on hare-hunting, contained in a few verses at the latter end of his fourth Cynegetic, are of little interest. Hares should never be chased up hill, as their shape is particularly adapted for it, and they avail themselves of the advantage whenever they can get to a rising ground:

[Sidenote: Oppian. Cyneg. L. +iv.+ 428.]

αὐτίκα γὰρ σκύλακάς τε καὶ ἀνέρας ἀθρήσαντες πρὸς λόφον ἰθύουσιν, ἐπεὶ μάλα γινώσκουσιν ὅττι πάροιθεν ἔασιν ὀλιζότεροι πόδες αὐτοῖς. κ. τ. λ.

[Sidenote: De Naturâ Animal. L. +xiii.+ c. 14.]

Beaten roads should be avoided by huntsmen, and ploughed lands preferred for sport. Ælian has left us an animated description of the hare’s shifts and prowess in avoiding her pursuers, and the contempt with which she looks down, οἷον ἀπὸ σκοπιᾶς, on their fruitless efforts to overtake her.

[Sidenote: De Venatione c. +ix.+]

[Sidenote: Ejusdem c. +x.+]

[Sidenote: Apuleii Met. L. +viii.+ p. 512.]

The stag-hunt is treated of by Xenophon, in his ninth chapter, with snares, traps, &c. Indian dogs are here preferred, for their size, strength, speed, and courage. But as his name-sake has written on the same variety of chase with Celtic hounds and Scythian horses, I pass on to the boar-hunt, in which the former is diffuse—too diffuse for more than a bare reference. Indian and Locrian hounds are selected from the pugnacious class, and Cretan and Spartan from the sagacious, to assist the sportsman in his attack of the wild boar. The latter hound appears to be employed, on this occasion, as a lime-dog, or inductor, to find out the lair of the beast. Purse-nets, javelins, προβόλια, and ποδοστράβαι, are in request. “Jamque apud frondosum tumulum,” says Apuleius, in a vivid, but somewhat wordy sketch, “ramorumque densis tegminibus umbrosum, prospectu vestigatorum obseptis campis, canes venationis indagini generosæ, mandato, cubili residentes invaderent bestias, immittuntur: statimque solertis disciplinæ memores partitæ totos præcingunt aditus: tacitâque priùs servatâ mussitatione, signo sibi repentino reddito, latratibus fervidis dissonisque miscent omnia”—“aper immanis atque invisitatus exsurgit,” &c.

[Sidenote: Ovid. Metam. L. +viii.+]

[Sidenote: Horat. Od. L. +ii.+ +i.+ 6.]

Ovid’s Calydonian boar-hunt, with the “lecta manus juvenum” of Meleager’s confederacy, will occur to the classical reader, and farther illustrate this perilous species of chase;[327] which, with others yet more dangerous, described by Xenophon in the 11th chapter of his Manual, and by Oppian in his fourth Cynegetic, constitute examples of the _bellica Venatio_, “periculosæ plenum opus aleæ,” so emblematic of actual war.

The Athenian is very brief on the subject of lion, pard, lynx, panther, and bear-hunting. These ferocious brutes are commonly etaken by stratagem; rarely, if ever, at force. Oppian is more diffuse, amplifying the lion-chase with the Libyan, Indian, and Æthiopian practices for capturing the king of beasts.

As a splendid specimen of poetical talent in this too much neglected author, (for he richly deserves the character bestowed on his works by J. C. Scaliger, C. Barthius, and other eminent scholars,) I select, from the latter part of the same book, the following extract—a description of an Armenian bear-hunt. The bear is found with the limehound of the country, the nets, snares, and μήρινθος ἐΰστροφος are set, and the din of pursuit commences:

[Sidenote: Oppian. Cyneg. L. +iv.+ 398.]

σάλπιγξ μὲν κελάδησε πελώριον· ἡ δέ τε λόχμης ὀξὺ λέληκε θοροῦσα, καὶ ὀξὺ δέδορκε λακοῦσα. αἰζηοὶ δ’ ἐπόρουσαν ἀολλέες, ἐκ δ’ ἑκάτερθεν ἀντία θηρὸς ἰᾶσι φαλαγγηδὸν κλονέοντες. ἡ δ’ ὅμαδον προλιποῦσα καὶ ἀνέρας, ἰθὺς ὀρούει γυμνὸν ὅπου λεύσσει πεδίον πολύ· κεῖθεν ἔπειτα ἑξείης κατὰ νῶτον ἐγειρόμενος λόχος ἀνδρῶν κλαγγηδὸν παταγεῦσιν, ἐπ’ ὀφρύα μηρίνθοιο σευόμενοι καὶ δεῖμα πολύχροον· ἡ δέ τ’ ἀνιγρὴ ἀμφίβολος μάλα πάμπαν ἀτυζομένη πεφόρηται. πάντα δ’ ὁμοῦ δείδοικε, λόχον, κτύπον, αὐλὸν, ἀϋτὴν, δειμαλέην μήρινθον, ἐπεὶ κελάδοντος ἀήτεω ταινίαι τ’ ἐφύπερθε διηέριαι κραδάουσι, κινύμεναι πτέρυγές τε λιγήϊα συρίζουσιν οὕνεκα παπταίνουσα κατ’ ἄρκυας ἀντίον ἕρπει· ἐν δ’ ἔπεσεν λινέοισι λόχοις. κ. τ. λ.

But farewell the detail of these savage chases![328]—

[Sidenote: The Chace. B. +ii.+]

The king of brutes In broken roarings breathes his last, the bear Grumbles in death; nor can his spotted skin, Though sleek it shine, with varied beauties gay, Save the proud pard from unrelenting fate!

[Sidenote: Xenophon de Venatione c. +i.+]

The most lively and striking picture of classic Venation, _in genere_, which I have met with in the Latin language, is contained in one of Seneca’s tragedies; which, let them be the productions of whom they may, contain much brilliant descriptive poetry. The whole arrangement of the field is admirably given in the Hippolytus. The duties of the δικτυαγωγὸς, ἰχνευτὴς, κυναγωγὸς, ἀρκυωρὸς, and λινόπτης, are successively detailed in the prologue, spoken by this rigid paragon of chastity himself, (σωφροσύνῃ καὶ ὁσιότητι μακαρισθεὶς,) in the character of Magister Venationis.

[Sidenote: Senecæ Hippolyt. Act. +i.+ sc. 1.]

“Ite umbrosas cingite sylvas, Summaque montis juga Cecropii, Celeri plantâ lustrate vagi Quæ saxosa loca Parnethi Subjecta jacent; et quæ Thriasiis Vallibus amnis rapidâ currens Verberat undâ: scandite colles Semper canos nive Riphæâ. Hàc hàc alii, quà nemus altâ Texitur alno; quà prata jacent, Quæ roriferâ mulcens aurâ Zephyrus vernas evocat herbas,” &c.

says the son of Theseus to his attendant huntsmen—describing the local scenery of different parts of Attica, most abundant in game—and allotting them their respective stations and duties, with the _mute_ limehounds, (“canibus tacitis,”) the _noisy_ pack, and divers implements of the sylvan chase:[329]

dum lux dubia est; Dum signa pedum roscida tellus Impressa tenet, alius raras Cervice gravi portare plagas, Alius teretes properet laqueos. Picta rubenti linea pinnâ Vano cludat terrore feras, Tibi libretur missile lethum. Tu grave, dextrâ lævâque simul, Robur lato dirige ferro. Tu præcipites clamore feras Subsessor ages: tu jam victor Curvo solves viscera cultro.

[Sidenote: Oppian. Cyneg L. +i.+ 367.]

So much for the furniture of the chase, its inventors, and practice, by way of introduction to our triple classification of the Canes Venatici of the classic ages. We will now proceed, οἶμον ἐπὶ σκυλάκων.

CLASS I.

In the first class of the triple division—_quibus est audacia præceps_, or _gravioribus aptæ morsibus_—are included all the canes _pugnaces_ or _bellicosi_—pugnacious dogs of war.

The Mede, Celt, Ser or Indian, Albanian, Iberian, Lycaonian or Arcadian, Hyrcanian, Locrian, Libyan, Egyptian, Pannonian, Magnesian, Molossian, Briton, Athamanian, Acarnanian, and a few others nearly allied.

CLASS II.

In the second class of Canes Venatici, under the title of _nare sagaces_, are placed all keen-nosed dogs of scent.

The Spartan, Cretan, Carian, Etolian or Calydonian, Metagon, Belgian, Gelonian, Umbrian, Tuscan, Armenian, Petronius, Agassæus or Briton, Segusian, and others of inferior note.

CLASS III.

In the third class, entitled _pedibus celeres_, those dogs alone are comprehended, which ran on sight of their game, as the Vertragus, and possibly the Sicamber: of the latter, however, I know nothing beyond the meagre allusion of Gratius to his speed, and the apparent distinction made between him and the Vertraha, in the Cynegeticon of this poet:

[Sidenote: Gratii Cyneg. vs. 201.]

Petronios (sic fama) canes, volucresque Sicambros, Et pictam maculâ Vertraham delige falsâ.

[Sidenote: Strabo L. +vii.+]

Janus Vlitius considers the Sicambrian to be the Gallo-Belgic hound of more modern days, and identical with the Ovidian canis Gallicus: but the latter is more probably the Vertraha of Gratius, the οὐέρτραγος of the younger Xenophon. The Sicambrian people, strictly speaking, were Germans, and not Belgians; as they dwelt on the eastern, or Germanic side of the Rhine.

[Sidenote: Cynographia Curiosa c. +ii.+ 12.]

On first comparing the different types of the Oppianic Canes Venatici with those of the Latin Cynegetica, I was misled by the authority of annotators to an admission that the type, so particularly described by the Greek poet in his first book, μηκεδανὸν κρατερὸν δέμας, κ. τ. λ. vs. 401. ad vs. 412. was of the sagacious hound, the Petronian or such-like. But this interpretation, in addition to the want of resemblance of the picture to the supposed original, implies, in a notorious copyist of his predecessors’ labours and a keen observer of natural history, the entire omission of the swiftest of the canine tribe, the canis Gallicus or Vertragus; which, if known by fame in the age of Gratius, alluded to by him in his Cynegeticon, accurately portrayed by Ovid as to his style of running, and subsequently, and more minutely, by the younger Xenophon, could not, under any balance of probabilities, have been lost to the sporting world, between the time of Arrian and that at which Nemesian flourished:—by the latter of whom the greyhound is most beautifully depicted, and the mode of initiating greyhound puppies in the hare-course detailed with the hand of a master. I am, therefore, on more mature reflection, inclined to consider the passage referred to descriptive of the greyhound type, the third class of ancient hounds, the family of _pedibus celeres_.[330] That Rittershusius makes no allusion to such a resemblance, does not surprise me; for, by pointing out a supposed defect of the picture, compared with a sketch of Gratius, this learned and laborious commentator proves that he was not aware of the variety of dog intended to be delineated by his author—perhaps himself unacquainted with its type in nature. The very feature of the δολίχοσκιος οὐρὴ, condemned by this editor as burthensome to Canes _cursores_, with a preference of the “cauda brevis” of Gratius, (suited to the Canes _bellicosi_ alone,) is so remarkable and useful an additament to the greyhound’s form, that, instead of burthening, it essentially assists him as a Canis _cursor_, (“ad conversiones in cursu reciproco regendas,”) and much strengthens the resemblance of the Oppianic picture to its Celtic prototype in Arrian.

[Sidenote: Oppian. Cyneg. L. +i.+ 413.]

[Sidenote: Ejusdem vs. 467.]

The conclusion of this sketch is followed by that of the Canis _pugnax_ or _bellicosus_ of the first class, hereafter cited, θοῦροι δ’ αὖθ’ ἕτεροι, κ. τ. λ.; and this again by the amusing and lively picture of the keen-scented beagle or hare-hound—σκυλάκων γένος ἄλκιμον ἰχνευτήρων, κ. τ. λ.—the representative of which is taken from Britain, and constitutes, according to my theory, Oppian’s specimen (rather a sorry one, it must be allowed) of the second class of Canes Venatici, termed _nare sagaces_. Are we not, then, allowed to conclude that the same tripartite distinction of Canes Venatici was acknowledged by the Cilician poet, as we have already traced in the more systematic authorities cited?[331] The latter did not escape the notice of the learned writer of the Venatio Novantiqua, himself an experienced and ardent sportsman; but he has not corroborated the earlier classification of others with the more recent evidence of the poet of Anazarbus—indeed, he seems to view the Oppianic hound (Cyn. +i.+ 401.) as _sagaci-celer_, and the Vertragus as unknown both to Pollux and Oppian.

The Cilician gives a decided preference to those canine tribes which are specifically pure in their breed—φῦλα μονόφυλα—and enumerates, without any attempt at classification, all the tribes known to him, under their geographical appellations:[332]

[Sidenote: Oppian. Cyneg. L. +i.+ 367.]

Παίονες, Αὐσόνιοι, Κᾶρες, Θρήϊκες, Ἴβηρες, Ἀρκάδες, Ἀργεῖοι, Λακεδαιμόνιοι, Τεγεῆται, Σαυρομάται, Κελτοὶ, Κρῆτες, Μάγνητες, Ἐπειοὶ, ὅσσοι τ’ Αἰγύπτοιο πολυψαμάθοισιν ἐπ’ ὄχθαις βουκολίων οὖροι, Λοκροὶ, χαροποί τε Μολοσσοί.

[Sidenote: Hist. Animal L. +ix.+ c. +i.+]

But if the kennel-master acted on the principles laid down by this poet, and his Latin predecessor, Gratius, and crossed his pack with irreconcilable varieties out of different families, belonging to different countries, (and that he did so we have evidence in the irregular and ill-disciplined muster-roll of Ovid,) although the names on Oppian’s file might remain, the animals must have been so changed by the “superinduction of opposite qualities,” that a genuine breed of any one variety must have been most rare. To this general amalgamation of heterogeneous forms and qualities in the canine race, must be attributed the custom of applying the terms Molossian and Spartan to the Canes _bellicosi_ and Canes _sagaces_ respectively, _gregatim_—the dogs of Epirus and Sparta being held the best of their several classes.[333] And, for the same reason, a true Molossian or Spartan of pure blood must have fallen to the lot of few of Dian’s worshippers. Aristotle speaks with praise of the Spartan and Molossian cross,[334] but awards the highest price in the Spartan kennel to the purest blood: and Themistius, in his first oration, states it as an acknowledged rule in breeding, that the kennel be supplied from bitches of the purest and most unadulterated blood.

Even after the introduction of the Vertragus, and the commixture of his breed with the older varieties of sporting dogs—

[Sidenote: P. Angelii Bargæi L. +v.+]

et unà Præcipites pedibus catulos habuêre sagaces,—

the names derived from Sparta and Molosse were still kept up, and prostituted in many instances on most degenerate brutes.

[Sidenote: Spelmanni Glossar. p. 113.]

With regard to the original geographical distribution of the three varieties of _bellicosi_, _sagaces_, and _celeres_, and of their respective chases,[335] the most prevalent opinion of continental writers, who have devoted their attention to the Cynegetica of Greece and Rome, is that the last mentioned originally came from Gaul, the sagacious from Greece, and the bellicose from Asia. War-dogs of pure blood are nearly extinct in the British islands, and are becoming more rare on the continent of Europe; being much crossed with the sagacious and swift-footed tribes. Vlitius, himself a Dutchman, naturally espouses the Belgic origin of the Belgic, or, more correctly speaking, the Celtic dog. Spelman, on the contrary, claims him for the honour of Britain; and, in addition, we have always deemed some sorts of _bellicosi_ and _sagaces_ indigenous of this country. Mr. Whitaker, in his History of Manchester, gives to the ancient Britons the old English hound, or talbot, as the parent stock of the celebrated sagacious hounds of our island: and it is found, by experience, that this dog degenerates in every other part of the world—a strong presumptive proof of his being indigenous of Britain. The earliest record of the greyhound allots him to Gallia; and we have no hesitation in considering him of Celtic origin, notwithstanding the offensive disclaimer of Savary of Caen—

[Sidenote: Venationis Cervinæ Leges. L. +i.+]

Gallos non hæc infamia tangit.

No exclusive national claim can be made for the pugnacious tribe, almost every nation of antiquity having had its particular variety; of which none surpassed the Britannus and Molossus, natives of regions remote from each other, unconnected, probably, in their lineage, and united alone in untameable ferocity of character.

[Sidenote: Certaine Illustrations of the Cynegeticall Poem, &c. p. 34.]

The translator of Gratius, after enumerating the various sorts of the British hound, greyhound, and mastiff, (which he calls “_indigena_, or native of England,”) observes:—“all these dogs have deserved to be famous in adjacent and remote countries, whither they are sent for great rarities, and ambitiously sought for by their lords and princes, although only the fighting dogs seem to have been known to the antient authors: and perhaps in that age hunting was not so much cultivated by our own countrymen.”

CANES VENATICI. +Class I.+

CANES BELLICOSI +or+ PUGNACES.

[Sidenote: Gratii Halieut. vs. 98.]

_Quibus est audacia præceps._

The type of this class is given by Gratius in the following lines, which must be taken as a general description, requiring some latitude in its application to individuals:[336]

[Sidenote: Gratii Cyneg. vs. 269.]

Sint celsi vultus, sint hirtæ frontibus aures, Os magnum, et patulis agitatos morsibus ignes Spirent, adstricti succingant ilia ventres, Cauda brevis, longumque latus, discretaque collo Cæsaries, non pexa nimis, non frigoris illa Impatiens: validis tum surgat pectus ab armis, Quod magnos capiat motus, magnisque supersit. Effuge, qui latâ pandit vestigia planlâ, Mollis in officio, siccis ego dura lacertis Crura velim, et solidos hæc in certamina calces.

By its side we may place its counterpart in Greek;—for, notwithstanding the Oppianic sketch has been appropriated by Bodinus to the Albanese, it certainly may be viewed in a broader light, as a picture in outline of the whole pugnacious family, without reference to individuals:

[Sidenote: Oppian. Cyneg. L. +i.+ 413.]

θοῦροι δ’ αὖθ’ ἕτεροι, τοῖσιν μενεδήϊος ἀλκὴ, ὅσσοι καὶ ταύροισιν ἐπέχραον ἠϋγενείοις, καὶ σύας ὑβριστῆρας ἐπαΐξαντες ὄλεσσαν ὅσσοι μηδὲ λέοντας ἑοὺς τρείουσιν ἄνακτας, ζατρεφέες, πρώνεσσιν ἐοικότες ἀκρολόφοισι. σιμότεροι μὲν ἔασι προσώπατα, δεινὰ δ’ ὕπερθε νεύει ἐπισκυνίοισι μεσόφρυα, καὶ πυρόεντες ὀφθαλμοὶ χαροπῇσιν ὑποστίλβοντες ὀπωπαῖς· ῥινὸς ἅπας λάσιος, κρατερὸν δέμας, εὐρέα νῶτα· κραιπνοὶ δ’ οὐ τελέθουσιν, ἀτὰρ μένος ἔνδοθι πολλὸν καὶ σθένος ἄφραστον, κραδίη καὶ θυμὸς ἀναιδής.

The introduction of a third, more recent portrait, will be justified by the chaste Latinity of Peter Angelio, and the faithful accuracy of his pen:

[Sidenote: P. Angelii Bargæi Cyneg. L. +v.+]

Ille tibi ingentes tauros aggressus, et ursos Sistat, et imposito fugientes vulnere tardet: Cui summæ pendent aures, cui laxa supernè Labra fluant, cui vultus atrox, cui maxima cervix, Obtusumque caput, pressumque ante omnia rostrum: Præterea magnique pedes, unguesque recurvi: Molle solum, sublime femen, suppressior alvus: Ipsaque rectorum longa internodia crurum: Spina duplex, pingues lumbi, color helvus,[337] honestum Pectus: et è patulis efflet qui naribus ignem, Latratu quoties sylvas implevit, et amplo Pectore conceptas subitus decurrit ad iras. Tum verò splendent oculi, collumque tumescit, Et caudam crebrò villosa in terga retorquet.

The quarry of these savage hounds consisted of animals more ferocious than their assailants—such as

[Sidenote: Gratii Halieut. vs. 73.]

Trahit in præceps non sana ferocia mentis.

Following the order of the poetical manual, to which we are indebted for our first-cited outline of the race, the Mede and Celt arrest our earliest attention, followed by the Ser, Lycaonian, Hyrcanian, Briton, Molossian, and others:

[Sidenote: Gratii Cyneg. vs. 155.]

——magna indocilis dat prælia Medus, Magnaque diversos extollit gloria Celtas.[338]

The Persian appears to have been a connecting link between the pugnacious and sagacious classes, though his neighbours of Media and Hyrcania were a purely savage breed. The Persian was a mongrel variety—

[Sidenote: Ejusd. vs. 158.]

Perses in utroque paratus.

[Sidenote: De Naturâ Animal. L. +iii.+ c. +ii.+]

The character of the “indocilis Medus” we may infer from Ælian’s description, already cited, of the men and horses of the country—which at the conclusion he also extends to the dogs—ταῦτά τοι καὶ περὶ τῶν κυνῶν ἔπεισι νοεῖν μοι. The latter were fierce, impetuous, and of great size.

There is evidently no connexion between the Celtæ of Gratius and κύνες Κελτικαὶ of Arrian, though deriving their name from the same source, and seemingly of the same country. The former were originally perhaps the only varieties of the canine species inmates of the kennels of Gaul,

[Sidenote: Savary Venat. Cervin. Leges. L. +i.+]

Gallia cùm pridem coleret devota Dianam,

the sagacious and swift-footed hounds being subsequently admitted therein;—but not until the older mode of hunting ferocious animals with savage dogs had fallen into disrepute, from the superior attraction of the improved style; or into disuse, from the gradual extirpation of beasts of prey. As the latter disappeared, or were driven into remote fastnesses, we may suppose the more timid and fugacious creatures supplied their place; and, multiplying in the ratio of the others’ diminution, afforded abundant quarry to the Vertragus, and the archetype of the _chien courant_ of modern France.

How beautifully are the more innoxious sports of sylvan life, and superior claims of the hare and deer hunt, touched by Ovid in the fable of Venus and Adonis. The goddess of love turns huntress:

[Sidenote: Ovid. Metam. L. +x.+ 537.]

Per juga, per sylvas, dumosaque saxa vagatur Nuda genu, vestem ritu succincta Dianæ: Hortaturque canes; tutæque animalia prædæ, Aut pronos lepores, aut celsum in cornua cervum, Aut agitat damas; à fortibus abstinet apris. Raptoresque lupos, armatosque unguibus ursos Vitat, et armenti saturatos cæde leones. Te quoque, ut hos timeas (si quid prodesse monendo Possit) Adoni, monet. ‘Fortisque fugacibus esto,’ Inquit; ‘in audaces non est audacia tuta. Parce meo, juvenis, temerarius esse perîclo. Neve feras, quibus arma dedit natura, lacesse; Stet mihi ne magno tua gloria. Non movet ætas, Nec facies, nec quæ Venerem movêre, leones Setigerosque sues, oculosque animosque ferarum. Fulmen habent acres in aduncis dentibus apri; Impetus est fulvis et vasta leonibus ira.’

No wonder that the Celtic people by degrees discontinued the warlike chase, fraught with innumerable perils, and substituted the harmless pursuit of fugacious quarry, with keen-scented and swift-footed hounds, according to the injunctions of the meretricious queen to her disobedient “sweete boy;”