What archetype is the wolf from "To Build A Fire" by Jack London?

The exact number and types of archetypes are not always the same, but there are generally consistencies among the various lists. I linked to a list of character and situation archetypes from Hillsborough Community College, and I picked an archetype from that list.  

The wolf/ dog from "To Build a Fire" would be the "Friendly Beast" archetype. That's the best choice based on the list, but the dog doesn't fit the mold exactly. The description of this archetype is as follows:

An animal companion showing that nature is on the side of the hero.

It is true that the dog is the man's animal companion in the story, but the rest of the description falls apart for me. I've never liked thinking of the man in this story as a hero. He makes dumb decisions that ultimately kill him. That's not heroic. There are times when a hero character dies, but his/ her death is usually sacrificial in nature. The man's death is not sacrificial. Additionally, the story very clearly shows nature is not on the side of the man. Everything about the environment in this story is life threatening. By the end, not even the dog is on the side of the man. The dog very intentionally keeps its distance from the man, and does not offer any kind of life-saving aid.  

He spoke to the dog, calling it to him. But in his voice was a strange note of fear that frightened the animal. It had never known the man to speak in such a tone before. Something was wrong and it sensed danger. It knew not what danger, but somewhere in its brain arose a fear of the man. It flattened its ears at the sound of the man’s voice; its uneasy movements and the liftings of its feet became more noticeable. But it would not come to the man.

So perhaps the "Friendly Beast" archetype isn't really the best fit for the dog. Let's look at a different list. I've linked the "scribendi" list below. This particular list has only five character archetypes. Based on those five, I believe that the dog is the "everyman" character type. The description mentions the everyman is a stand-in for the audience. That works quite well with the dog because he is observing the actions of the man in the same way readers might observe the man. There is a sort of overall detachment with the dog. Additionally, the dog doesn't have an overall moral obligation to the man and the situation. That's why the dog doesn't help the dying man. 

When the man is clearly dead, the dog moves on in search of something or someone else capable of taking better care of him.