F E L I S C A TU S
T H E E U R O P E A N W IL D CAT.
FELIS CATUS, Linn. Syst. Nat. (1776) vol. i. p. 6— Exl. Syst. Reg. Anim. (1777) p. 518. sp. 12.— Gmel. Syst. Nat. (1788) voL i. pt. 1, p. 80.
sp. 6.—Pall. Zoog. Rosso-Asiat. (18 1 1 ) vol. i. p . 2ö— Fisch. Zoogn. (1814) p. 225. sp. 11— Desm. Nouv. D ie t Hist. Nat. (1816)
p. 115.—Desm. Mamm. (18 2 0 ) p. 232. no. 366, pi. 95; figs. 1-3, pi. 96. figs. 1-3.—Cuv. Ossem. Foss. (1825) vol. iv. p. 437.—Jard. Nat.
Libr. vol. xvi. p. 248, pi. xxix— Temm. Mon. Mamm. (1827) vol. i. p. 126.—Less. Man. Mamm. (1 8 2 7 ) p. 188. sp. 500.—Fisch. Syn.
Mamm. (1829) p. 207. sp. 22.—Jenyns, Man. Brit. Vert. Anim. (1835) p. 14. sp. 13.—Bell, Hist. Brit. Quad. (1 8 3 7 ) p. 177— Blainv.
Ostéog. (1839 -6 4 ) vol. ii. Atl. pi. ix— Less. Compì. Buff. (18 3 9 ) vol. 4 . p. 410— Keyserl. & Bias. Wirbelth. Europ. (1840) p. 61—
Id. Natur. Säugeth. Deutsch, p. 162.—Less. Nouv. Tab. Règn. Anim. (1 8 4 2 ) p. 53. sp. 531— Gray, Cat. Mamm. Brit. Mus. (1842)
p. 44.—Nils. Scand. Faun., Mamm. (1 8 4 6 ) p. 120— Gerv. Hist. Nat. Mamm. (1 8 5 5 ) p. 87— Loche, Cat. Mamm. Algér. (1858) p. 9.
sp. 17— Severtz. Rev. Mag. Zool. (1 8 5 8 ) p . 385— Clerm. Quad. Eur. (18 5 9 ) p. 67— Dawk. & Sand. Brit. Pleist. Mamm. Palseont. Soc.
Lond. (18 6 6 ) p. 183, fossil— Gray, Proc. Zool. Söc. (18 6 7 ) pp. 274, 874— Id. Cat. Cam. Mamm. (18 6 9 ) p. 33. sp. 33— Giebel, Landw.
Zool. (1 8 6 9 ) p. 43.—Leidig, Wiirttemb. Jahresh. (18 7 1 ) p. 202.—Danf. & Alston, Proc. Zool. Soc. (1877) p. 272.
FELTS SYLVESTRIS, Schreb. Säugeth. (1778) Th. iii. p. 397, tab. evi.
COMMON WILD CAT, Penn. Hist. Quad. (1 7 9 3 > p , 295. sp. 195— Biiigl. Brit. Quad. (1809) p. 138. no. 11.
H a b . Great Britain. I r e l a n d ? Western Europe generally, where extensive forests exist. Northern Asia. Asia Minor
( D a n f o r d ) .
D a n f o r d obtained a male and a female of this Cat among the rocks near Zebil, in Asia Minor, at an elevation of 3000-4000
feet. According to the natives, they are not uncommon. They appear to subsist upon a species of mouse (Mus mystacinus),
fourteen of which were found in the stomach of one of these Cats. The skins of the Asia Minor specimens had the groundcolour
a clearer grey, and the markings of the flanks more broken into distinct spots than is seen in European examples;
but I could discern nothing about them to indicate a form needing to be separated from the European Wild Cat.
Felis catus, in many localities, is becoming scarcer every year, and is . gradually disappearing from some in which, not
long since, it was not uncommon. Various are the causes that have effected this ; probably the chief one is the
constant persecution to which the animal has been subjected, as this species has but few friends, and uo quarter is
shown when it is met with in the forest. Bell, in his ‘History of British Quadrupeds,’ states that this Wild Cat is
possessed of great strength, and is very fierce, and to be obliged to encounter it is a matter not unattended with danger,
especially if the creature is wounded. The female is rather smaller than the male. She constructs her nest in the hollow
of a tree or in a cleft of the rocks, and, as related by Sir William Jardine, has even been known to make use of the nest of
some large bird. The litter consists of four or five young. It is said that individuals from Russia and Northern China
are of larger size than those from southern countries, and the fur is held in great esteem. My friend the late E. R.
Alston sent me the following account of the distribution of this species in the British Islands :—“ I t is always difficult
to determine the range of the Wild Cat, as it is so constantly confounded with domestic Cats run wild; but it appears
to have been anciently widely distributed throughout Britain. Fossil remains have been found in various localities,'as
in brick-earth, in Essex, and in Kent’s Hole, Devonshire (Owen, Brit. Foss. Mamm. p. 172). It still seems to linger in
some of the more secluded parts of the north and west of England, and in Wales. One weighing 9 lb., taken on the
estate of Bulk, Lancashire, is recorded in the ‘ Zoologist ’ for 1849, p. 3408. Mr. J. W. Jones stated, in the ‘ Field of 3rd
Jan. 1863, that a Wild Cat of 11 lb. was trapped in Montgomeryshire in Dec. 1864 (Zoologist, 1865, p. 9431).
‘ Rusticus,’ of Godalming, asserts in his ‘ Letters,’ that ‘ a real genuine Wild Cat ’ was taken near that place; but
the fact seems to require confirmation. In Scotland it appears never to have been an inhabitant of any of the islands,
although it is mentioned in Pennant’s ‘ Tour ’ as a native of Arran (cf. Bryce’s Geology of Arran, p. 313); and, so
far as I am aware, it is now completely extirpated in all the counties south of the Forth and Clyde. North of that
line it is still not unfrequent in some of the wilder mountainous districts, the most southern limit of its range having till
lately been the shores of Loch Lomond, where, however, it has been exterminated within the last ten years. Mr.
Macgillivray considered it to be most abundant in the counties of Perth, Aberdeen, and Argyle (Nat. Libr. vol. xvii. p. 194);