origin of the true wild cat (_Felis catus_, Linn.), which,
following the analogies of the _Felinae_ generally, are almost
exclusively native to countries warmer than our own. It is true
that occasionally varieties of the _Felinae_ do breed in our
caravans and menageries, where artificial warmth is kept up to
represent something like a tropical temperature; but the
circumstance is too rare to ground any opinion on of their ever
having been indigenous here--at least, since our part of the
globe has cooled down to its present temperature. It is,
therefore, more than probable that both the wild and the tame cat
have been derived from some other extra-European source or
sources. We say source or sources, for such admission begets
another difficulty not easily got over, which is this, that if
both of these grimalkins own one common root, in which variety
was it that the very marked differences between them have taken
place? Most sportsmen, we believe, suspect that they own one
common origin, and some naturalists also do the same, contending
that the differences observable between them are attributable
solely to the long-continued action of external agencies, which
had modified the various organs to meet the varied necessities of
the animals. The wild cat, according to this theory, having to
contend with powerful enemies, expanded in general dimensions;
its limbs, particularly, became massive; and its long and strong
claws, with the powerful muscular mechanism which operated on
them, fitted it for a life of predacity. Thus its increased size
enabled it to stand some time before any other dogs than
high-bred foxhounds, and even before them also, in any place but
the direct open ground. There exist, however, in direct
contradiction to this opinion, certain specialities proper to the
wild, and certain other to the domestic cat, besides the simple
expansion of bulk, which sufficiently disprove their identity. It
will be seen that a remarkable difference exists between the
tails of the two animals; that of the domestic being, as is well
known, long, and tapering elegantly to a point, whereas that of
the wild cat is seen to be broad, and to terminate abruptly in a
blunt or rounded extremity. Linnaeus and Buffon having both of
them confounded these two species into one, have contributed much
to propagate this error, which affords us another opportunity of
adding to the many we have taken of remarking on the vast
importance of comparative anatomy, which enables us to draw just
distinctions between animals that might otherwise erroneously be
adjudged to be dependent on external agencies, etc. Nor need we
rest here, for what doubt can be entertained on the subject when
we point at the remarkable difference between the intestines of
the two? _Those of the domestic are nine times the length of its
body_, whereas, in the _wild cat_, they are little more than
_three times as long as the body_."
The food of the wild cat is said to consist of animals, and in the
opinion of some, fish should be added. Why not also birds' eggs? Cats
are particularly fond of the latter. In the event of their finding and
destroying a nest, they invariably eat the eggs, and generally the
shells.
Much has been written as to the aptitude of the domestic cat at catching
fish. If this be so, are fish necessarily a part of the food of the
native wild cat? Numerous instances are adduced of our "household cat"
plunging into water in pursuit of and capture of fish. Although I have
spent much time in watching cats that were roaming beside streams and
about ponds, there has never been even an attempt at "fishing." Frogs
they will take and kill, often greedily devouring the small ones. Yet
doubtless they will hunt, catch, and eat fish, for the fact has become
proverbial.
[Illustration: WILD CAT, BRITISH MUSEUM.]
A writer in "Menageries" states: "There is no doubt that wild cats will
seize on fish, and the passionate longing of the domestic cat after this
food is an evidence of the natural desire. We have seen a cat overcome
her natural reluctance to wet her feet, and take an eel out of a pail of
water." Dr. Darwin alludes to this propensity: "Mr. Leonard, a very
intelligent friend of mine, saw a cat catch a trout by darting on it in
deep, clear water, at the Mill, Wexford, near Lichfield. The cat
belonged to Mr. Stanley, who had often seen it catch fish."
Cases have also been known of cats catching fish in shallow water,
springing on them from the banks of streams and ponds; but I take this
as not _the habit_ of the domestic cat, though it is not unusual.
Gray, in a poem, tells of a cat's death through drowning, while
attempting to take gold-fish from a vase filled with water.
Of Dr. Samuel Johnson it is related, that his cat having fallen sick and
refused all food, he became aware that cats are fond of fish. With this
knowledge before him he went to the fishmonger's and bought an oyster
for the sick creature, wrapped it in paper and brought the appetising
morsel home. The cat relished the dainty food, and the Doctor was seen
going on the same kindly errand every day until his suffering feline
friend was restored to health.
Still this is no proof that the _wild_ cat, in a pure state of nature,
feeds on fish. Again, it is nothing unusual for domestic cats to catch
and eat cockroaches, crickets, cockchafers, also large and small moths,
but not so all. In domesticity some are almost omnivorous. But is the
wild cat? Taking its anatomical structure into consideration, there is
doubtless a wide distinction, both as regards food and habit.
In Daniel's "Rural Sports," A.D. 1813, the wild cat is stated to be "now
scarce in England, inhabiting the mountainous and woody parts. Mr.
Pennant describes it as _four_ times the size of the house cat, but the
head larger, that it multiplies as fast, and may be called the British
_tiger_, being the fiercest and most destructive beast we have. When
only wounded with shot they will attack the person who injured them, and
often have strength enough to be no despicable enemy."
Through the kind courtesy of that painstaking, excellent, observant, and
eminent naturalist, Mr. J. E. Harting, I am enabled to reprint a portion
of his lecture on the origin of the domestic cat, and which afterwards
appeared in _The Field_. Although many of the statements are known to
naturalists, still I prefer giving them in the order in which they are
so skilfully arranged, presenting, as they do, a very garland of facts
connected with the British wild cat (_Felis catus_) up to the present,
and which I deem valuable from many points of view, but the more
particularly as a record of an animal once abundant in England, where it
has now apparently almost, if not quite, ceased to exist.
"In England in former days, the wild cat was included amongst the beasts
of chase, and is often mentioned in royal grants giving liberty to
inclose forest land and licence to hunt there (extracts from several
such grants will be found in the _Zoologist_ for 1878, p. 251, and 1880,
p. 251). Nor was it for diversion alone that the wild cat was hunted.
Its fur was much used as trimming for dresses, and in this way was worn
even by nuns at one time. Thus, in Archbishop Corboyle's 'Canons,' anno
1127, it is ordained 'that no abbess or nun use more costly apparel than
such as is made of lambs' or _cats'_ skins,' and as no other part of the
animal but the skin was of any use here, it grew into a proverb that
'You can have nothing of a cat but her skin.'
"The wild cat is believed to be now extinct, not only in England and
Wales, but in a great part of the south of Scotland. About five years
ago a Scottish naturalist resident in Stirlingshire (Mr. J. A. Harvie
Brown) took a great deal of trouble, by means of printed circulars
addressed to the principal landowners throughout Scotland and the Isles,
to ascertain the existing haunts of the wild cat in that part of the
United Kingdom. The result of his inquiries, embodying some very
interesting information, was published in the _Zoologist_ for January,
1881. The replies which he received indicated pretty clearly, although
perhaps unexpectedly, that there are now no wild cats in Scotland south
of a line drawn from Oban on the west coast up the Brander Pass to
Dalmally, and thence following the borders of Perthshire to the junction
of the three counties of Perth, Forfar and Aberdeen, northward to
Tomintoul, and so to the city of Inverness. We are assured that it is
only to the northward and westward of this line that the animal still
keeps a footing in suitable localities, finding its principal shelter
in the great deer forests. Thus we see that the wild cat is being
gradually driven northward before advancing civilisation and the
increased supervision of moors and forests. Just as the reindeer in the
twelfth century was driven northward from England and found its last
home in Caithness, and as the wolf followed it a few centuries later, so
we may expect one day that the wild cat will come to be numbered amongst
the 'extinct British animals.'
"A recent writer in the new edition of the 'Encyclopaedia Britannica'
(art. _Cat_) expresses the opinion that the wild cat still exists in
Wales and in the north of England, but gives no proof of its recent
occurrence there. From time to time we see reports in the newspapers to
the effect that a wild cat has been shot or trapped in some
out-of-the-way part of the country; but it usually turns out to be a
large example of the domestic cat, coloured like the wild form. It is
remarkable that when cats in England are allowed to return to a feral
state, their offspring, in the course of generations, show a tendency to
revert to the wild type of the country; partly, no doubt, in consequence
of former interbreeding with the wild species when the latter was common
throughout all the wooded portions of the country, and partly because
the light-coloured varieties of escaped cats, being more readily seen
and destroyed, are gradually eliminated, while the darker wild type is
perpetuated. The great increase in size observable in the offspring of
escaped domestic cats is no doubt due to continuous living on
freshly-killed, warm-blooded animals, and to the greater use of the
muscles which their new mode of life requires. In this way I think we
may account for the size and appearance of the so-called 'wild cats'
which are from time to time reported south of the Tweed.
"Perhaps the last genuine wild cat seen in England was the one shot by
Lord Ravensworth at Eslington, Northumberland, in 1853;[A] although so
recently as March, 1883, a cat was shot in Bullington Wood,
Lincolnshire, which in point of size, colour, and markings was said to
be quite indistinguishable from the wild _Felis catus_. Bullington Wood
is one of an almost continuous chain of great woodlands, extending from
Mid-Lincolnshire to near Peterborough. Much of the district has never
been preserved for game, and keepers are few and far between; hence the
wild animals have enjoyed an almost complete immunity from persecution.
Cats are known to have bred in these woods in a wild state for
generations, and there is no improbability that the cat in question may
have descended directly from the old British wild cat. Under all the
circumstances, however, it seems more likely to be a case of reversion
under favourable conditions from the domestic to the wild type.
[A] "Trans. Tyneside Nat. Field Club," 1864, vol. vi. p. 123.
"In Ireland, strange to say, notwithstanding reports to the contrary,
all endeavours to find a genuine wild cat have failed, the so-called
'wild cat' of the natives proving to be the 'marten cat,' a very
different animal.
"We thus come back to the question with which we started, namely, the
question of origin of the domestic cat; and the conclusion, I think, at
which we must arrive is, that although _Felis catus_ has contributed to
the formation of the existing race of domestic cats, it is not the sole
ancestor. Several wild species of Egyptian and Indian origin having been
ages ago reclaimed, the interbreeding of their offspring and crossing
with other wild species in the countries to which they have been at
various times exported, has resulted in the gradual production of the
many varieties, so different in shape and colour, with which we are now
familiar."
Before quitting the subject, I would point to the fact that when the
domestic cat takes to the woods and becomes wild, it becomes much
larger, stronger, and changes in colour; and there can be little doubt
that during the centuries of the existence of the cat in England there
must have been numberless crosses and intercrosses, both with regard to
the _males_ of the domestic cat as with wild _females_, and _vice
versa_; yet the curious fact remains that the wild cat still retains its
peculiar colouring and form, as is shown by the skins preserved in the
British Museum and elsewhere.
Mr. Darwin, in his "Voyage of the Beagle," 1845 (p. 120), in his notes
of the first colonists of La Plata, A.D. 1535, says, among other animals
that he saw was "the common cat altered into a _large_ and _fierce_
animal, inhabiting the rocky hills," etc.
Another point on which I wish to give my impressions is the act of the
cat in what is termed "sharpening its claws." Mr. Darwin notes certain
trees where the jaguars "_sharpen their claws_," and mentions the scars
were of different ages; he also thought they did this "_to tear off the
horny points_." This, I believe, is the received opinion among
naturalists; but I differ _entirely_ from this view of the practice. It
is a fact, however, and worthy of notice, that all cats do so, even the
domestic cat. I had _one_ of the legs of a kitchen table entirely torn
to pieces by my cats; and after much observation I came to the
conclusion that it has nothing whatever to do with _sharpening_ the
claws, but is done to stretch the muscles and tendons of the feet so
that they work readily and strongly, as the retraction of the claws for
lengthened periods must tend to contract the tendons used for the
purpose of extending or retracting; therefore the cats fix the points of
their claws in something soft, and bear downwards with the whole weight
of the body, simply to stretch and, by use, to strengthen the ligatures
that pull the claws forward. It is also to be noted that even the
domestic cat goes to one particular place or tree to insert the claws
and drag forward the muscles--perhaps even in the leather of an
arm-chair, a costly practice. Why one object is always selected is that
they may not betray their presence by numerous marks in the
neighbourhood, if wild, to other animals or their enemies. I have
mentioned this to my brother, John Jenner Weir, F.L.S., and he concurs
with me throughout.
I find in Strutt's "Sports and Pastimes" that of the names applied to
companies of animals in the Middle Ages, several are still in use,
though many have become obsolete; and also a few of the beasts have
ceased to exist in a wild state. Some were very curious, such as a
_skulk_ of foxes, a _cete_ of badgers, a _huske_ or _down_ of hares, a
_nest_ of rabbits, and a _clowder of cats_, and a _kindle of young
cats_. Now cats are said to _kitten_, and rabbits _kindle_.
The following shows the value of the cat nearly a thousand years ago; it
is to be found in Bewick's "Quadrupeds": "In the time of Hoel the Good,
King of Wales, who died in the year 948, laws were made as well to
preserve as to fix the different prices of animals; among which the cat
is included, as being at that period of great importance, on account of
its scarcity and utility.
"The price of a kitten, before it could see, was fixed at one penny;
till proof could be given of its having caught a mouse, twopence; after
which it was rated at fourpence, which was a great sum in those days,
when the value of specie was extremely high. It was likewise required
that it should be perfect in its sense of hearing and seeing, should be
a good mouser, have its claws whole, and, if a female, be a careful
nurse. If it failed in any of these good qualities, the seller was to
forfeit to the buyer a third part of its value. If any one should steal
or kill a cat that guarded the Prince's granary, he was either to
forfeit a milch ewe, her fleece and lamb, or as much wheat as when
poured on the cat suspended by its feet (its head touching the floor),
would form a heap high enough to cover the tip of the former." Bewick
remarks: "Hence we may conclude that cats were not originally natives of
these islands, and from the great care taken to improve the breed of
this prolific creature, we may suppose were but little known at that
period."
I scarcely think this the right conclusion, the English wild cat being
anatomically different. In Hone's popular works it is stated that "Cats
are supposed to have been brought into England from the island of Cyprus
by some foreign merchants, who came hither for tin." Mr. Hone further
says: "Wild cats were kept by our ancient kings for hunting. The
officers who had charge of these cats seem to have had appointments of
equal consequence with the masters of the king's hounds; they were
called _Catatores_."
Beaumont and Fletcher in _The Scornful Lady_ allude to the hunting of
cats in the line,
"Bring out the _cat-hounds_, I'll make you take a tree."
But although large and ferocious, the wild cat was not considered a
match for some of the lesser animals, for in Salmon's "English
Physician," 1693, we read that "The weasel is an enemy to ravens, crows,
and _cats_, and although cats may sometimes set upon them, yet they can
scarcely overcome them."
Nevertheless, we find in Daniel's "Rural Sports," 1813, that "_Wild
cats_ formerly were an object of _sport_ to huntsmen. Thus, Gerard
Camvile, 6 John, had special licence to hunt the hare, fox, and wild
cat, throughout all the King's _forests_; and 23 Henry III., Earl
Warren, by giving Simon de Pierpont a _goshawk_, obtained leave to hunt
the buck, doe, hart, hind, hare, fox, goat, _cat_, or any other wild
beast, in certain lands of Simon's. But it was not for diversion alone
that this animal was pursued; for the _skin_ was much used by the nuns
in their habits, as a _fur_."
Still it appears from Mr. Charles Darwin's "Voyage of the Beagle," that
tastes vary. "Doctor Shaw was laughed at for stating the flesh of the
lion is in great esteem, having no small affinity with veal, both in the
colour, taste, and flavour. Such certainly is the case with the puma.
The Guachos differ in their opinion whether the jaguar is good eating;
but were unanimous in saying the _cat_ is _excellent_."
It is also stated that the Chinese fatten and eat cats with considerable
relish; but of this I can obtain no reliable information, some of my
friends from China not having heard of the custom, if such it is.
Again referring to the skin of the cat, _vide_ Strutt: "In the
thirty-seventh year of the reign of Edward III., it was decreed, after
enumerating the various kinds of cloth that were to be worn by the
nobles, knights, dames, and others, that (Article 2) tradesmen,
artificers, and men in office, called yeomen, their wives and children,
shall wear no kind of furs excepting those of lambs, of rabbits, of
_cats_, and of foxes." Further: "No man, unless he be possessed of the
yearly value of forty shillings, shall wear any furs but black and white
lambs' skins." Lambs' and cats' skins were equivalent in value and
order.
In the twenty-second year of this monarch's reign, all the former
statutes "against excess in apparel" were repealed.
My old friend Fairholt, in his useful work on costume, says of the
Middle Ages: "The peasants wore cat skins, badger skins, etc."
One of the reasons why the skin of cats was used on cloaks and other
garments for trimming, being that it showed humility in dress, and not
by way of affectation or vanity, but for warmth and comfort, it being of
the lowest value of any, with the exception of lambs' skin and badgers';
and adopted by some priests as well as nuns, when wishing to impress
others with their deep sense of humility in all things, even to their
wearing-apparel. The proof of which Strutt's "Habits of the
Anglo-Normans," _circa_ twelfth century, fully illustrates:
"William of Malmesbury, speaking of Wulfstan, Bishop of Worcester,
assures us that he avoided all appearance of pride and ostentation in
his dress, and though he was very wealthy, he never used any furs finer
than lambs' skin for the lining of his garments. Being blamed for such
needless humility by Geoffrey, Bishop of Constans, who told him that 'He
not only could afford, but even ought to wear those of sables, of
beavers, or of foxes,' he replied: 'It may indeed be proper for you
politicians, skilful in the affairs of the world, to adorn yourselves in
the skins of such cunning animals; but for me, who am a plain man, and
not subject to change my opinion, the skins of lambs are quite
sufficient.' 'If,' returned his opponent, 'the finer furs are
unpleasant, you might at least make use of those of the cat.' 'Believe
me,' answered the facetious prelate, 'the lamb of God is much oftener
sung in the Church than the cat of God.' This witty retort put Geoffrey
to the blush, and threw the whole company into a violent fit of
laughter."
Of a very different character was the usage of the cat at clerical
festivals. In Mill's "History of the Crusades," one reads with some
degree of horror that "In the Middle Ages the cat was a very important
personage in religious festivals. At Aix, in Provence, on the festival
of the Corpus Christi, the finest he-cat of the country, wrapped like a
child in swaddling clothes, was exhibited in a magnificent shrine to
public admiration. Every knee was bent, every hand strewed flowers or
poured incense; and pussy was treated in all respects as the god of the
day. On the festival, however, of St. John (June 24), the poor cat's
fate was reversed. A number of cats were put in a wicker basket, and
thrown alive into the midst of a large fire, kindled in the public
square by the bishop and his clergy. Hymns and anthems were sung, and
processions were made by the priests and people in honour of the
sacrifice."
While the foregoing was about being printed, Mr. Edward Hamilton, M.D.,
writing to _The Field_, May 11th, 1889, gives information of a wild cat
being shot in Inverness-shire. I therefore insert the paragraph, as
every record of so scarce an animal is of importance and value,
especially when it is descriptive. He states: "A fine specimen of the
wild cat (_Felis sylvestris_) was sent to me on May 3rd, trapped in
Inverness-shire on the Ben Nevis range. It was too much decomposed to
exhibit. Its dimensions were: from nose to base of tail, 1 foot 11
inches; length of tail, 1 foot; height at shoulder, 1 foot 2 inches; the
length of small intestine, 1 foot 8-1/2 inches; and the large intestine, 1
foot 1 inch." It will be seen by these measurements that the animal was
not so large as some that have been taken, though excelling in size many
of the domestic varieties.
CONCERNING CATS.
CAT.--Irish, _Cat_; French, _Chat_; Dutch, _Kat_; Danish, _Kat_;
Swedish, _Katt_; German, _Katti_ or _Katze_; Latin, _Catus_; Italian,
_Gatto_; Portuguese and Spanish, _Gato_; Polish, _Kot_; Russian, _Kots_;
Turkish, _Keti_; Welsh, _Cath_; Cornish, _Kath_; Basque, _Catua_;
Armenian, _Gaz_ or _Katz_. In Armenic, _Kitta_, or _Kaita_, is a male
cat.
_Abram cat._--This I first thought simply meant a male cat; but I find
in Nares, "Abram" is the corruption of "auburn," so, no doubt, a red or
sandy tabby cat is intended.
_A Wheen cat, a Queen cat (Catus femina)._--"Queen" was used by the
Saxons to signify the female sex, in that "queen fugol" was used for
"hen fowl." Farmers in Kent and Sussex used also to call heifers "little
queens."
_Carl cat._--A boar or he-cat, from the old Saxon carle or karle, a
male, and cat.
_Cat._--It was used to denote "Liberty." No animal is more impatient of
restriction or confinement, nor yet _seeming_ to bear it with more
resignation. The Romans made their goddess of Liberty holding a cup in
one hand and a broken sceptre in the other, with a cat lying at her
feet. Among the goddesses, Diana is said to have assumed the form of a
cat. The Egyptians worshipped the cat as an emblem of the moon, not only
because it was more active after sunset, but from the dilation and
contraction of its orb, symbolical of the waxing and waning of the night
goddess. But Bailey, in his dictionary, says cats see best as the sun
approaches, and that their eyesight decays as it goes down in the
evening. Yet, "on this account," says Mr. Thiselton Dyer, in his
"English Folk-lore," "it was so highly esteemed as to receive
sacrifices, and even to have stately temples erected to its honour.
Whenever a cat died, Brand tells us, all the family shaved their
eyebrows; and Diodorus Siculus relates that a Roman happening
accidentally to kill a cat, the mob immediately gathered round the house
where he was, and neither the entreaties of some principal men by the
king, nor the fear of the Romans, with whom the Egyptians were then
negotiating a peace, could save the man's life. In so much esteem also
was it held, that on the death of its owner the favourite cat, or even
kitten, was sacrificed, embalmed, and placed in the same sarcophagus."
Some few years ago, Mr. E. Long, R.A., exhibited at the Royal Academy a
very fine picture of Egyptians idol-making, idol worshippers and
sellers; the lines from Juvenal being descriptive:
"All know what monsters Egypt venerates;
It worships crocodiles, or it adores
The snake-gorged ibis; and sacred ape
Graven in gold is seen ...Whole cities pray
To _cats_ and fishes, or the dog invoke."
_Cat._--A metal tripod for holding a plate or Dutch oven before the
fire. So called because, in whatever position it is placed, it is
supported by the spokes; as it is said a cat will always light on its
feet, so the plate-holder will stand firmly in any position. These old
brass appliances have now gone out of use and are seldom seen, the new
mode of "handing round" not requiring them. Another reason, doubtless,
is the lowness of the fire compared with the stove of former years,
which was high up in the bygone "parlour grate."