Talk:Cat burning

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Animal rights This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animal rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of animal rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Animal rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Animal rightsTemplate:WikiProject Animal rightsAnimal rights articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

This is awfully far fetched- I know people did some weird stuff for entertainment before TV was invented, but this is ridiculous. 67.54.188.27 (talk) 12:19, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

According to the references, this is an actual event. Remember (talk) 17:38, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notability check anyone? Kortoso (talk) 00:05, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This article makes some really broad claims based on a small number of sources, several of which are questionable. The Golden Bough has been widely critisized since its publication for speculation, assumptions, and innaccuracies, and I don't think the majority of historians would consider this a reliable source, especially not one that forms a huge part of the article. It looks like this book by Robert Darnton has also been criticized for "simplistic assumptions." I'm not saying these are entirely worthless, but for an article to make these kind of claims, there should be more varied and reputable sources. Also, "the Middle Ages until the 1800's" is extremely broad, and I don't see any references to events that took place earlier than the 1600s, which is not the Middle Ages by any usual measurement of the period. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.69.135.4 (talk) 01:15, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a blog post so it can't be used as a source for the article on its own, but it articulates a lot of the problems I have with this article and the way it's presented. Thoughts? https://talesoftimesforgotten.com/2019/11/05/were-cats-really-killed-en-masse-during-the-middle-ages/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.69.135.4 (talk) 02:03, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am also skeptical. A lot of weird things cruel to animals were really done in the past, and I don't really doubt that cats were burned at some point in their very long history with humans, but the article's confusion of early modern times with medieval ones doesn't invite confidence. There's lots of weird myths about medieval ignorance/superstition/barbarism still circulating.

Also, the article lead says "Western and Central Europe" but all the quotes refer to places in France.

So - even assuming the sources are correctly represented, and also that this isn't another historical myth - they don't seem to support the idea that this was a practice widespread across Europe from the Middle Ages to the 19th century. Rather they seem to describe it as a uniquely French practice, and the dates given are only 17th and 18th century. The connection to witch trials, if genuine, also suggests it's not really medieval. Vultur~enwiki (talk) 16:20, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have time to try to track down the contemporary primary sources mentioned here, but it might be a fruitful starting place: https://alphahistory.com/pastpeculiar/1677-londoners-burn-live-cats-wicker-pope/ Sti11w4ter (talk) 17:39, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That is a non-French example, but 1677 is *definitely* not medieval. That is very much Early Modern - post-English Renaissance, even post-Restoration.

That article also describes it as mostly French, with occasional extension to England, and the French cases cited are 1500s and 1600s.

Again, I'm not doubting that cats were burned at some point, but the description of it as a widespread medieval custom in Western and Central Europe seems very unsupported. Mostly France/occasionally English is way narrower than all of Western Europe, much less Western and Central.

And there are still zero actually *medieval* occurrences mentioned. Vultur~enwiki (talk) 00:03, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is no correct reference about such an "entertainment" specifically in Paris, France.

There are many references about cat being tortured or killed for many reasons in various regions of the world at various moment of the year, during different eras. However, there is no Historical source stating there was such tradition in Paris, France.

Eventually, the only sentence that is valid in this article is the last one about medieval times. One could also add common practices about unwanted cats in the country-side, but that would still cover more countries than France only. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Psadm (talk • contribs) 14:29, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a source describing that this in fact that this occured in Paris, France. Remember (talk) 17:39, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I still see some incoherences. The link you have added talks about late 14th century, while the article says 17th century. All references have been written during the 20th century, and there is no reference about contemporary reports, such as description, decreet abolishing the practice or anything in this sense. The reason I marked this article as having a neutrality problem is because of the affirmative tone about a practice that has only been reported by foreign (compared to the country it took place) historian scholars, several centuries after the alleged fact, with no original (contemporary to the alleged facts) source cited anywhere. IMHO, the introduction sentence should be changed to reflect this instead of directly affirming it as a fact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Psadm (talk • contribs) 10:04, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why is there a link to an article on the Neutron electric dipole moment? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.2.160.50 (talk) 10:22, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What I have written here is irrelevant. Due to recent personal experiences I've been a bit rash here. Move along. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.59.78.7 (talk) 04:53, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The use "zoosadism" in this article was just flat-out wrong, and I've removed. Zoosadism is an individual sexual kink, and has nothing to do with mass-level folk practices that are cruel to animals (cat burning, bullfighting, whatever).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  22:31, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

 – There is no hyphen in the title any longer.

Why is the title "Cat-burning" instead of "Cat burning"? Kaldari (talk) 18:40, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The bit about Gregory IX supposedly sanctioning or encouraging cat burning is part of an urban legend about the Catholic Church causing the Black Death through killing cats. The bull Vox in Rama says nothing about killing cats, and claims that it does have already been removed from the Wiki pages on both Gregory and the bull itself. Innocent VIII and the Malleus Maleficarum are also connected to cat-burning more in pop culture than in attested history, and the dates of those two don’t match those of the instances of burning in the article. Finally, the lump of text in History was uncited save for a brief mention of Alexander Bushkov, who is not a “famous historian” but rather a fiction and pop-history writer with extremely

@Ergative rlt: I see that you took a big chunk out of this article. While it doesn't make a huge difference to me either way, a big part of the "uncited" part you took out seems to directly reference being from a specific book. Could it not have just been given an inline <ref> tag instead of being deleted? jp×g 20:51, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The “specific book” is by a crackpot non-historian and falls under

WP:FRINGE.. The IP editor is also very clearly tring to use this article to promote Orthodoxy and denigrate Catholicism. Ergative rlt (talk) 20:27, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

You have not disputed the quotes or hid the "History" section, which you consider controversial. I would not argue with this and looked for other sources in English or quotes from documents of Roman church leaders. Instead, you posted a statement that "all countries in Europe" took part in this. You either have very bad with geography and do not know that half of Europe is Orthodox Russia, or you simply defend your point of view without any sources and grounds, trying to whitewash Catholics and shift the blame of some peoples to others. Do you understand that this is not constructive and is POV vandalism? 217.19.208.104 (talk) 05:58, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Let's start with the fact that this editor, Ergative rlt, blatantly lies, accusing "throughout Europe", without citing any even illusory sources (although the fact is that in Orthodox countries cats were held in high esteem, and not persecuted). After that, there can be no confidence in his actions. 217.19.208.104 (talk) 06:15, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any source for the claim that the Catholic Church sanctioned cat burning? Even if all of the other claims were true that the church associated cats with Satan, that wouldn't mean that the Church or any popes sanctioned the practice. I also cannot find the alleged quote from Malleus Maleficarum at the reference listed. Makes me skeptical that any of this article related to religion is reliable. Jlanef (talk) 18:30, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously, it's quote of the text (Part II. Qn. 1. Ch. 9) translation, which is in this work: The Malleus Maleficarum Revised, Heinrich Kramer, James Sprenger, 2019; p. 128 217.19.208.99 (talk) 10:16, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The first reference claims that Orthodox believe that cats are the only animal allowed in the sanctuary of temples and a key part of Monastic Life, but there is no source. Can anyone find one? Also, does this apply to Byzantine Rite Catholics?

There are a lot of such sources, although mostly in Russian: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 etc. It is enough to visit any large enough Orthodox monastery at least once to be convinced of this, so I can confirm this personally. Although this is not indicated anywhere in the canons or rules of church life, it is a very ancient tradition.

I don’t know about the Catholics of the Byzantine rite. Judging by the general traditional intolerance of the Catholic Church towards cats, the attitude should be appropriate. 217.19.208.99 (talk) 09:59, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]