Animals in the trenches...........

[dfaulder]

This is surreal; presumably I should also conclude that cats were kept on Farms to supplement the rations of farm labourers?

[At Home Dad]

I'll carry on, thanks.

I dont see it as silly, I see it as a small piece of developing research. Nice to see

the manner in which research is treated here: dismissed out of hand and called

variously 'crazy', 'ludicrous', and now being told to 'shut up' etc.

I didn't realise I'd unearth the GWF Moggy Mafia, Feline Fundamentalists and Cat Cabal

As said a few posts back, I'm now seeking descriptions of cat eating by some men.

Who knows if any unheard memories or anecdotes survive? I'm certain you dont

know for sure that there aren't any anecdotes waiting to come to light. There's plenty

of anecdotes showing it still happened after Ww1, so why would it stop during?

The fact that none have yet arrived does not mean it didn't happen. On the balance of

probablilities it most likely did. Somewhere. By Some. Of course there is no evidence

of 'scale'. That's why I suggested the title subtext to be changed to "eaten or not".

However, this is as good a place as any to discuss any issue regarding 'Cats In The

Trenches' and I'm quite happy to keep the discussion here. The thread can always

be locked, I guess, or deleted, but that'd be against the spirit of research.

I could follow your argument style and ask you to provide me evidence that cat meat

was never eaten. I think you'll have the same 'lack of evidence' that I do. Unless there

was a Kings Reg against it or a War Office memo to the effect that Englishmen dont

eat cat

Again, on the balance of probabilities, at some time, some men most likely happily ate some cat, somewhere.

If the thread now annoys you, leave it and refrain from comment.

If you wish to see Simian Soldiers or Cats In Hats, post them

If you can prove to me that cat was never eaten anywhere in Ww1, prove it

I'll carry on seeking the anecdotes, rather than give up and presume they dont exist.

I believe my case can hold water, whereas collective statements that "it simply flatly never happened" do not

kind regards

[Jim Clay]

Sorry to change the tone somewhat, and not to divert the discussion

in any way but there was a popular music hall hit, pre-War, entitled

Meat! Meat! by Fred Earle. The joke of the song, which must have been

quite common on the streets at the time, was that the meat sold on his

barrow was actually cat meat...

...There's a short sample of the song here

AHD

The posted sample is too brief to determine whether there's any justification for your assertion that the song is about selling cat flesh for human consumption - rather than, as many (most?) would think, selling horse or other flesh for consumption by cats. Do you have a transcription of the song? Or some further information to support your assertion?

[Dragon]

Recently we visited a relative born in 1925 and he began to reminisce about life when he was a child growing up in the East End of London. He talked about the Cat Meat Man, who travelled the streets selling meat for people to feed to their cats. He used to leave it on the windowledge. This was a particularly poor area and people couldn't afford to buy human food and then give it to the cat. From what the relative said, I have little doubt that in extremis, the people ate the meat intended for the cat. They did not set to and cook the cat. The cat had work to do in keeping homes and businesses free of rodents.

This relative is perfectly alert with excellent recall. He is a published historian and author, formerly a lecturer in history at university level. I have no reason to suspect that he was confused about what the Cat Meat Man was selling.

I thought the original point of Caryl's thread was to question the newspaper caption that cats were not unnerved by shellfire. I see no references to cutesy 'cats in hats' and I think it's patronising to insinuate that Caryl just wanted winsome images of fluffy felines.

Gwyn

[At Home Dad]

Hallo Jim

No, although I enjoy it I havent transcribed the song.

My assertion was more an observation that the common joke

of the time was that the meat sold on the barrow was cat meat.

In the areas where meat was sold on barrows, not all

people had the luxury of being able to afford to buy some

to feed a cat with meat, preferring to let it fend for itself.

Also, the common barrow cry was "Meat!" and not "Meat For Your Cats!"

The meat on the barrow was for human consumption and the joke was

that it was catmeat, which at that time some people ate and a few of those

probably actually enjoyed or preferred.

very best regards

The posted sample is too brief to determine whether there's any justification for your assertion that the song is about selling cat flesh for human consumption - rather than, as many (most?) would think, selling horse or other flesh for consumption by cats. Do you have a transcription of the song? Or some further information to support your assertion?

Hallo David.

You could possibly conclude that. I wouldn't know, as I wasn't raised on a farm

or in countryside and dont know the cultural ways of the agricultral society. But,

if anyone was to eat cat, I would imagine some farm labourers in 1914 wouldn't

bat an eyelid if they had gone without hot food or fresh meat for a some time.

In fact, the poem quoted earlier on refers to kittens becoming sausages.

Which part of the discussion is surreal? Rather an odd choice of word.

It might not be to everyone's palate but that shouldn't limit the disussion.

Best to you

David Faulder wrote "This is surreal; presumably I should also conclude that cats were kept on Farms to supplement the rations of farm labourers?"

My case, a mix of probability and plausibility, is pretty well outlined now.

'Lack of Evidence' is not 'No Evidence'...

I'm happy to move on - to organised cat fights

Any anecdotes, anyone? Was there an ultimate BEF Cat Champion?

Was the punishment more severe for gambling on a cat fight than on

cards or other games of chance?

[Dragon]

According to someone who was there and actually saw the Cat Meat Man (which I assume you weren't and didn't), the meat was intended to feed the cat. It was very cheap, probably because it consisted of all sorts of unthinkables left over from abattoirs.

According to someone who grew up as a farmer's daughter after the war (my mother, actually), the men who worked on the farm were provided with good, wholesome meals and often accommodation particularly if peripatetic. What sort of work would the employer get out of cold, hungry, malnourished, resentful men? This wasn't Dickens or the workhouse. Men were paid to do a good job and it was often heavy manual work. Food wasn't in shortage if you had hens, pigs, cows and so on and the farm would sell or give food to the neighbouring families. The farm cats ate well too.

"Lack of Evidence is not 'No Evidence'." Ok, so I haven't personally seen white rabbits running down holes clutching pocket watches but because Lewis Carroll imagined they might, they probably do. Fine.

Gwyn

[CarylW]

I'll carry on, thanks.

I dont see it as silly, I see it as a small piece of developing research. Nice to see

the manner in which research is treated here: dismissed out of hand and called

variously 'crazy', 'ludicrous', and now being told to 'shut up' etc. .................................snipped

If the thread now annoys you, leave it and refrain from comment.

If you wish to see Simian Soldiers or Cats In Hats, post them

If you can prove to me that cat was never eaten anywhere in Ww1, prove it

I'll carry on seeking the anecdotes, rather than give up and presume they dont exist.

I believe my case can hold water, whereas collective statements that "it simply flatly never happened" do not

kind regards

You can also add 'utter and total bollox' to your list because that's how I earlier described your inane ramblings (there is another one for you)

Why on earth should I change the title of this thread to accommodate your ludicrous theory that British soldiers kept cats in the trenches in order to eat them? The thread title is a perfectly valid one. It has nothing to do with monkeys in hats, how very patronising (or have you been checking out my posts elsewhere and noticed I posted asking about an original WW1 photo I found of a regimental monkey mascot? As if this is all that I'm interested in!)

I was sceptical about cats being indifferent to shellfire, hence the title and now I'm not because other members posted items from valid sources in a sane manner proving I was wrong. There you are, I learned something and as I said earlier, I am always willing to learn. Shame you don't appear to be, and shame you have not as yet shown any proof to back up your theory despite multiple requests that you do so

The subject of cats or any other animal in trenches, wild, tamed or otherwise is often mentioned in official histories and books written by respected military historians. They also feature in letters home, diaries and first hand accounts. The respected military historian and author Richard van Emden has a book coming out in the autumn about wildlife in the trenches - cats are included in this, as J Banning posted earlier. Just because it is a subject that you prefer to ridicule does not mean it should not be discussed here

You also seem to be under the impression that the trenches were wholly occupied by starving, malnourished and barbaric men instead of the mix of men from all social levels

.

I've noticed that you seem to have changed tack and instead of clinging on and endlessly repeating the theory that British soldiers kept cats in the trenches in order to eat them you are now desperately flailing about looking for an anecdote, any anecdote that 'some cat was eaten somewhere'

Why on earth should members who find your posts annoying leave the thread and refrain from posting? And why on earth should this thread be closed because you don't approve of the title or the earlier content?

Caryl

[Dragon]

I dont see it as silly, I see it as a small piece of developing research. ...

As said a few posts back, I'm now seeking descriptions of cat eating by some men.

I know! Why don't you expose your research interest by making a new thread in which you can seek descriptions of cat eating? Or organised cat fighting, even. Let the forum as a whole see it and contribute. That way it will be listed as a new topic. It would be a shame if you missed out on useful evidence because your research questions won't show up in VNC.

Go on. Don't be shy.

Gwyn

[Jim Clay]

Mayhew's 'London Labour and The London Poor', published in the 1840s, was a massive survey of the occupations and lives of the less privileged members of London society. Google brings up these statistics from Mayhew relating to street sellers of meat and of pet meat:

Meat sellers -

Pet meat sellers -

The meat man and the pet meat man were occupiers of the same streets, selling totally different products, sometimes to the same people. AHD suggests that the common joke

of the time was that the meat sold on the meat man's barrow was cat meat. AHD, don't you think that that was a joke? That the jesters were suggesting that the meat man was selling horse meat and other items deemed unfit for human consumption?

EDIT: The brief snippet of the song you posted includes reference to kids ragging the meat man with 'Puss puss' jeers. To me this would confirm my suggestion above. Don't you think so?

No one has told you to shut up, AHD. Though your reference to those who have expressed bemusement by your theory as "GWF Moggy Mafia, Feline Fundamentalists and Cat Cabal" is particularly insulting and deserving of a resounding "Give it a rest fer gawd's sake".

[Dragon]

common joke of the time was that the meat sold on the meat man's barrow was cat meat

... in the way that we might joke that a particular cafe was selling stew made from Kit-e-Kat, I suppose. It doesn't mean that it was.

Fascinating snippets, Jim.

[Kate Wills]

Dear At Home Dad,

Last night, having commented that this thread had veered away from Caryl's original purpose, I suggested you begin a separate thread to explore your theories.

I am now making a formal request that you do so.

A link can be added to this thread.

Thankyou in anticipation

Kate

[wainfleet]

And I would like to mention that I'm scared by this talk:

[Nickmetcalfe]

Afghanistan 2010 - plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose....

[At Home Dad]

Hallo Kate

I will, of course, consider a new thread. Once I see that you

are equally as public to other members to remind them that:

Respect for your fellow member

You will not use profane language.

You will not post messages that are in any way racist, sexist, abusive or obscene.

You will respect the right of others to express their opinion.

As far as I'm aware, this thread is specifically about "Cats In The Trenches" in general.

very best to you

[Jim Clay]

As far as I'm aware, this thread is specifically about "Cats In The Trenches" in general.

I don't think it was.

Cats in the trenches........... ...show a curious indifference to shellfire (allegedly!)

[Kate Wills]

Dear AHD,

Thankyou for your reply. Unfortunately I had to edit my post by emboldening the text as it was in danger of being lost under subsequent poistings.

Yes, of course I agree that all aspects of repect for fellow members should be followed at all times, and I trust everyone who has expressed dissatisfaction at the turn of events will abide by Forum etiquette.

In this case, we have diverged from the general core subject matter to something more specific which deserves a separate thread, not least to distance ourselves from some of the anger expressed here. A "hijack" has been suggested, and while I'm sure this was never your purpose, it would be practical to start afresh.

It is your theory, and your call, but if we wish to seek evidence of cats being eaten during WW1, the general concensus is that a separate thread is required, and one where any diversion from the stated purpose may be addressed in a similar mannner.

With best wishes

Kate

[At Home Dad]

Hallo Jim

Thanks for the input and the trouble to lookup

Yes, "the jesters were suggesting that the meat man was selling horse

meat and other items deemed unfit for human consumption", correct.

And, going further, there were most likely meat sellers who did sell cat

meat for human consumption, either as a fraud or under the counter to

the very poor.

Cat meat was sold as a fraud of rabbit, as you know. It was sometimes

known as Australian Rabbit and the last vestiges of the tradition are held

by the fact that, still today, rabbit must be sold with the head on, to stop the

fraud returning.

I was told to "put up or shut up" a few posts back, cant remember by who

and I do sincerly apologise if I've offended any creed of Fundamentists or

branch of mafiosi.

I'm happy to give it a rest, Jim. It's the others who should stop poking me

and requiring me to defend my simple statement of belief.

I wont be bullied on this, but some people here are behaving as

if I'd suggested a kind of Meowschwitz at Etaples or something.

I stand by what I now hold as an opinion:

It is both plausible and possible that within the whole total of men in the BEF,

there was at least one man, who at some time, somewhere on the Western

Front ate a cat during the 1914 -1918 Great War.

I'm sorry if it tarnishes some people's ideals of saintly soldiers, but the statement above is correct.

The detractors state:

"Definiatively, Never, Ever, on the whole of the Western Front,

did any member of the BEF ever eat a cat. It never could happen

nor did it ever happen and in fact they would eat worse things than

cat before eating cat."

I prefer to keep the open mind. If you have to eat something

worse than cat, it means you've already eaten the cat

All the best to you

[At Home Dad]

Dear AHD,

Hallo Kate

<< Yes, of course I agree that all aspects of repect for fellow members should be followed at all times, and I trust everyone who has expressed dissatisfaction at the turn of events will abide by Forum etiquette.

>> a late reminder, but still a reminder, thank you

<< In this case, we have diverged from the general core subject matter to something more specific which deserves a separate thread,

>> I'm pretty much done. My argument has been set out and backed up and I now hold an opinion.

<< not least to distance ourselves from some of the anger expressed here.

>> I missed that bit. I saw people who told me in no uncertain terms that

they wouldn't comment further on my opinion and yet did, and did it with a

potty mouth in some cases.

<< A "hijack" has been suggested

>> Is the PM system working again, or do you have to be indignant and go off forum?

I think I recall my opening post stating that it was not in any way intended as a threadjack,

but the conversation and I might add, the thread, has evolved and it's not all one way traffic

<< it would be practical to start afresh.

>> a waste of bandwidth surely, for the third cat thread in a week? All my argument

is here on this thread, no need to continually repeat my defense elsewhere.

<< It is your theory

>> Opinion

<< and your call, but if we wish to seek evidence of cats being eaten during WW1, the general concensus is that a separate thread is required, and one where any diversion from the stated purpose may be addressed in a similar mannner.

>> I'll post a lookup request later on the proper forum. Some here believe that not once was a cat was ever eaten 1914-1918, I think otherwise.

I shall respond if poked on this thread, even if it's simply to say "I refer my honourable friend to the reply I gave some moments ago"

All the very best to you

[AlanCurragh]

Meowschwitz

Now that really is offensive

[Kate Wills]

<< A "hijack" has been suggested

>> Is the PM system working again, or do you have to be indignant and go off forum?

I think I recall my opening post stating that it was not in any way intended as a threadjack,

AHD,

You advised those who were unhappy with the thread to refrain from comment. One of those who expressed dissatisfaction was the thread starter. It is unfair to shoo anyone away who wishes to engage in debate, least of all the thread starter.

The pm system is currently unavailable, which necessitated my message here; however "hijack" has been used to describe events on this thread elsewhere on the Forum. You state at post#77 that you are happy to continue debating the point here. Others, including the thread starter, do not share that view, and for reasons already stated, a separate thread devoted to your "developing research" into cat eating, with a title of your choice, would be welcome.

[CarylW]

I think it is best to close this topic, I'm sure we have all heard enough.

Thanks to all who contributed postings here answering my original query.

The poster interested in "developing research" into cat eating", can start his own thread on that subject as suggested

And I profusely apologise for calling his theory/now opinion that 'British soldiers kept cats in trenches in order to eat them' as "Utter and total bollox"

Caryl

[AlanCurragh]

Caryl has now re-opened the thread - but please can I ask for no comments on this thread on the subject of the eating of cat meat during wartime. Any such comments will be deleted.

Thanks

Alan

[truthergw]

With a plentiful supply, ready to hand, is there much mention of eating horsemeat? I would assume that in France and Belgium this would have seemed like a godsend for the soldiers and civilians. Was it rationed or regulated officially? Horse meat shops traded in UK but were frowned upon in certain circles. They re-appeared in WW2 but again, were considered to be on a par with whalemeat. Just about better than nothing for some but not acceptable for many. I'd have thought that hens or pigeons for the table could have been kept in fairly cramped situations.

[paulgranger]

There's an interesting diversion here into the extent of animal husbandry and agriculture carried out by the Army itself on the Western Front. Obviously much of the food came in from the UK or was bought in France, but I have seen photographs of 'smallholdings' being run by military units, though clearly these were static units. There's also the pleasure that individuals may have taken in keeping allotments ( I'm thinking of Albert Ball) I wonder how many of those there were?

[John_Hartley]

Caryl has now re-opened the thread - but please can I ask for no comments on this thread on the subject of the eating of cat meat during wartime. Any such comments will be deleted.

Alan

Perhaps Caryl or yourself could now give a steer as to what direction the discussion should now take. The original point seems well answered and then we still have the "other matter" on view.

John