Today’s word of the day is ally, in a continuation of the last three days. Ally can be a noun or a verb, and the verb can be used either transitively or intransitively. The transitive verb means “to unite formally, as by treaty, league, marriage, or the like (usually followed by with or to )” or “to associate or connect by some mutual relationship, as resemblance or friendship” (https://www.dictionary.com/browse/ally). The intransitive verb means “to enter into an alliance” (ibid.). The noun means “a person, group, or nation that is associated with another or others for some common cause or purpose,” or “a person who associates or cooperates with another,” or “a person who advocates for or supports a marginalized or politicized group but is not a member of the group” (ibid.). In biology, it can mean “a plant, animal, or other organism bearing an evolutionary relationship to another, often as a member of the same family” (ibid.).

As with alloy, the pronunciation differs depending upon whether it is used as a verb or a noun. As a verb, it is pronounced /əˈlaɪ/, with the emphasis upon the second syllable. The noun is pronounced /ˈæl aɪ/, with the emphasis on the first syllable and the first vowel pronounced as the vowel in rat.

The verb entered the language in the “late 13c., allien, ‘join in marriage’ (transitive), from Old French alier ‘combine, unite,’ from a differentiated stem of aliier (from Latin alligare ‘bind to, tie to,’ from ad ‘to’ (see ad-) + ligare ‘to bind, bind one thing to another, tie’ (from PIE root *leig- ‘to tie, bind’). The meaning ‘form an alliance, join, associate’ is late 14c (https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=ally). So the verb has an almost identical etymology as alloy. The noun entered the language in the “late 14c., ‘relative, kinsman’ (a sense now obsolete), from ally (v.); mid-15c. in the sense of ‘one united with another by treaty or league’” (ibid.).

I decided to continue my discussion from yesterday by considering the co-evolution of people and dogs.

According to Richard Pallardy, in a November 3, 2021, article for Discover Magazine (https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/dogs-have-co-evolved-with-humans-like-no-other-species), the relationship between humans and dogs predates the agricultural revolution, going back at least 15,000 years and maybe as much as 33,000 years. For comparison, the oldest surviving works of literature, the “Kesh Temple Hymn” and the “Instructions of Shuruppak,” go back 4500 years, less than a third of the time (https://www.history.com/news/what-is-the-oldest-known-piece-of-literature).

The thinking about this co-evolution has been that men began to domesticate wolves, to train them to be obedient and helpful, because wolves were good hunters, but recent research suggests that that thinking is wrong. Recent studies of wolves have shown that “Regardless of how much attention, training and affection are lavished on captive-raised wolf puppies, they remain wolves. They don’t take to training well and are in constant contest with their trainers for dominance” (https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/dogs-have-co-evolved-with-humans-like-no-other-species).

It is also unlikely that hunter-gatherers would have had the time or the patience to work with such wolf pups constantly to make them obedient: “’I don’t know that many hunter gatherers would have had the time or patience to deal with a wolf pup and I don’t know why they would want to,’ says archaeologist Angela Perri of the University of Nevada, Las Vegas” (ibid.).

It turns out that, perhaps, it was the wolves who began the domestication process rather than the humans, that such wolves, finding that they benefitted from living closely to humans and living off the scraps, accustomed themselves over time to living side-by-side. Furthermore, the “relationship may have been reinforced by the innate human attraction to pedomorphic, or infantile, features like wide eyes and shortened faces, seen in wolf puppies and exaggerated in domestic dogs, even in adulthood” (ibid.). If you’re not familiar with the term pedomorphic, or paedomorphic, it has to do with the retention of juvenile characteristics in adults. Those characteristics seem to be, in particular, heads that are larger than would be expected for the body, and eyes that are quite large. Psychological studies have found that most people find large heads and large eyes to be cute or charming or endearing. Think, for example, of puppies, or kittens, or koala bears, or other such creatures. Or think about cartoon figures, especially in anime. Or human babies. I have heard a psychologist say that it is a good thing we find the overly large head and eyes so cute because otherwise we probably would not have survived as a species—babies have no other appealing characteristic.

One type of evidence of the long, long relationship between humans and dogs is dog burials: “The careful interment of dogs predates even the rise of agriculture, poignantly reinforcing the strength of the bond between our species. Anthropological analysis finds that dogs have been accorded human-like burial rites for thousands of years. ‘It’s ubiquitous,’ says Petra Cunningham-Smith, a doctoral candidate at the University of Florida who studies the role of dogs in ancient Mesoamerica. ‘Dog burials are found all over the world’” (ibid.).

Through all these centuries of co-evolution, dogs have not only learned to understand the facial expressions of their humans, but apparently have learned how to use facial expressions to communicate to their humans: “Dogs have actually developed new facial musculature in the domestication process — notably, a muscle responsible for furrowing the brow. The resulting ‘puppy dog’ eyes may have helped to strengthen the caretaking response that probably played into our initial desire to associate with canines. Observations at animal shelters have found that dogs who make an archetypically worried or sad expression are adopted more quickly, indicating a probable selective advantage” (ibid.).

In his article, Pallardy details the power of eye contact between humans and their dogs. He points out research that indicates that it may be women who were more involved in the co-evolution of dogs. He also discusses the question of whether dogs love us or not (I’ll let you read his article to find out). He concludes his article by sharing about the ManyDogs project: “Initiatives like the ManyDogs project, a consortium of researchers, hope to replicate the wide ranging and often contradictory experiments that have sought to explain the dog-human connection.
“’The field is new,’ says Johnston, who contributes to the project. ‘Be patient with us as we try to gather evidence’” (ibid.).

Whatever the research eventually shows, I think it is clear that, among all the non-human animals in God’s creation, dogs are our best allies.

The image today is of a Kerry Blue Terrier, from https://luvmydogs.com/everything-about-your-kerry-blue-terrier/. The webpage says, “The Kerry Blue Terrier is the quintessential working dog. He hails from County Kerry, Ireland, where he was bred to hunt small game and birds, kill rodents, and herd sheep and cattle. Intelligent and brave, he became a cherished pet as well, displaying fierce devotion to his family or pack. While not a particularly well-known dog breed, the Kerry Blue enjoys a dedicated following of fanciers, thanks to his working abilities and loyal companionship.” Sadly, I understand from an owner I spoke with in the UK several years ago that the breed is gradually dying out.