Why did Europeans not widely domesticate foxes?
$begingroup$
So I've been thinking for a while about making a story in a world where… well dogs and cats aren't as common and instead are more of a regional domesticated animal, replaced in (mostly Northwestern) Europe by foxes (and also possibly in America — probably only North tho — racoons). Also I'm toying with the idea of throwing otters in there but they've genuinely been used like in Bangladesh and all for fishing, so I'm just gonna extend that along the coast.
My question is: how come it never took that foxes would be hunting companions/pest control in Europe? Doing research I found that recent studies show sign of Bronze Age domestic foxes (more info, more bloc of text too) and I know that there is a Russian/Soviet scientist that tamed and started domesticating foxes in the past 60 years (and I hate that they have to have floppy ears and all cause… they look adorable but so close to dogs, my compelling fiction! x) ). The issue is that foxes eat rodents, hunt rabbits and also have a varied diet that includes fruits. So
- they could take care of rodents messing with stocks of grains just like or even better than cats
- they could be used in areas where large mammals are not as common and hunting rabbits is more durable/profitable
- they could also be fed an alternate diet that doesn't take away too much from the rare meat in early civilisations.
So does anyone know of any real block that would make my world having domesticated foxes as the n°1 pet in Europe an issue? That is the aim. Have foxes as the main domesticated animal in Europe. This would be in a world with a long timeline. An alternate history, probably starting at least around the 11th century AD and up to the 1st century BC. Although I was hoping for a setting in an alternate modern world, there is the possibility this would be set in a more Middle Ages type civilisation. So essentially I'm looking for a way to have foxes be the main domesticated animal in Europe in 5,000 to 1,000 years in ways that would be realistic in our world, or a substantiated explanation of why it is not possible.
Thank you!
fauna science domestication
$endgroup$
|
show 6 more comments
$begingroup$
So I've been thinking for a while about making a story in a world where… well dogs and cats aren't as common and instead are more of a regional domesticated animal, replaced in (mostly Northwestern) Europe by foxes (and also possibly in America — probably only North tho — racoons). Also I'm toying with the idea of throwing otters in there but they've genuinely been used like in Bangladesh and all for fishing, so I'm just gonna extend that along the coast.
My question is: how come it never took that foxes would be hunting companions/pest control in Europe? Doing research I found that recent studies show sign of Bronze Age domestic foxes (more info, more bloc of text too) and I know that there is a Russian/Soviet scientist that tamed and started domesticating foxes in the past 60 years (and I hate that they have to have floppy ears and all cause… they look adorable but so close to dogs, my compelling fiction! x) ). The issue is that foxes eat rodents, hunt rabbits and also have a varied diet that includes fruits. So
- they could take care of rodents messing with stocks of grains just like or even better than cats
- they could be used in areas where large mammals are not as common and hunting rabbits is more durable/profitable
- they could also be fed an alternate diet that doesn't take away too much from the rare meat in early civilisations.
So does anyone know of any real block that would make my world having domesticated foxes as the n°1 pet in Europe an issue? That is the aim. Have foxes as the main domesticated animal in Europe. This would be in a world with a long timeline. An alternate history, probably starting at least around the 11th century AD and up to the 1st century BC. Although I was hoping for a setting in an alternate modern world, there is the possibility this would be set in a more Middle Ages type civilisation. So essentially I'm looking for a way to have foxes be the main domesticated animal in Europe in 5,000 to 1,000 years in ways that would be realistic in our world, or a substantiated explanation of why it is not possible.
Thank you!
fauna science domestication
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
This doesn't appear to be a worldbuilding question. The help center explains that questions must be specific and answerable (probably check!), must include context (missing), must include restrictions/requirements (missing), and should include research (check!). VTC OT:NAW until Q is improved. Let me know when you're done and I'll retract my vote.
$endgroup$
– JBH
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
Actually, and I don't have any sources for this, but I've heard that cats were not brought on for rodent control. Turns out dogs were better at that as well.
$endgroup$
– Muuski
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
europe had domesticated ferrets for pest control. they hunted rabbits with them.
$endgroup$
– John
5 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
Two things nobody mentioned yet: 1. They stink and they leave stinky runny poops everywhere, and 2. They are nocturnal and scream really loud all night and it sounds like someone getting murdered.
$endgroup$
– Alistair Buxton
3 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@Nierninwa Sorry, I should have been clearer. That was directed at people VTC. There have been several other domestication questions lately that have stayed open so I see no reason why yours should be closed for not being about WB. I voted to keep it open.
$endgroup$
– Cyn
2 hours ago
|
show 6 more comments
$begingroup$
So I've been thinking for a while about making a story in a world where… well dogs and cats aren't as common and instead are more of a regional domesticated animal, replaced in (mostly Northwestern) Europe by foxes (and also possibly in America — probably only North tho — racoons). Also I'm toying with the idea of throwing otters in there but they've genuinely been used like in Bangladesh and all for fishing, so I'm just gonna extend that along the coast.
My question is: how come it never took that foxes would be hunting companions/pest control in Europe? Doing research I found that recent studies show sign of Bronze Age domestic foxes (more info, more bloc of text too) and I know that there is a Russian/Soviet scientist that tamed and started domesticating foxes in the past 60 years (and I hate that they have to have floppy ears and all cause… they look adorable but so close to dogs, my compelling fiction! x) ). The issue is that foxes eat rodents, hunt rabbits and also have a varied diet that includes fruits. So
- they could take care of rodents messing with stocks of grains just like or even better than cats
- they could be used in areas where large mammals are not as common and hunting rabbits is more durable/profitable
- they could also be fed an alternate diet that doesn't take away too much from the rare meat in early civilisations.
So does anyone know of any real block that would make my world having domesticated foxes as the n°1 pet in Europe an issue? That is the aim. Have foxes as the main domesticated animal in Europe. This would be in a world with a long timeline. An alternate history, probably starting at least around the 11th century AD and up to the 1st century BC. Although I was hoping for a setting in an alternate modern world, there is the possibility this would be set in a more Middle Ages type civilisation. So essentially I'm looking for a way to have foxes be the main domesticated animal in Europe in 5,000 to 1,000 years in ways that would be realistic in our world, or a substantiated explanation of why it is not possible.
Thank you!
fauna science domestication
$endgroup$
So I've been thinking for a while about making a story in a world where… well dogs and cats aren't as common and instead are more of a regional domesticated animal, replaced in (mostly Northwestern) Europe by foxes (and also possibly in America — probably only North tho — racoons). Also I'm toying with the idea of throwing otters in there but they've genuinely been used like in Bangladesh and all for fishing, so I'm just gonna extend that along the coast.
My question is: how come it never took that foxes would be hunting companions/pest control in Europe? Doing research I found that recent studies show sign of Bronze Age domestic foxes (more info, more bloc of text too) and I know that there is a Russian/Soviet scientist that tamed and started domesticating foxes in the past 60 years (and I hate that they have to have floppy ears and all cause… they look adorable but so close to dogs, my compelling fiction! x) ). The issue is that foxes eat rodents, hunt rabbits and also have a varied diet that includes fruits. So
- they could take care of rodents messing with stocks of grains just like or even better than cats
- they could be used in areas where large mammals are not as common and hunting rabbits is more durable/profitable
- they could also be fed an alternate diet that doesn't take away too much from the rare meat in early civilisations.
So does anyone know of any real block that would make my world having domesticated foxes as the n°1 pet in Europe an issue? That is the aim. Have foxes as the main domesticated animal in Europe. This would be in a world with a long timeline. An alternate history, probably starting at least around the 11th century AD and up to the 1st century BC. Although I was hoping for a setting in an alternate modern world, there is the possibility this would be set in a more Middle Ages type civilisation. So essentially I'm looking for a way to have foxes be the main domesticated animal in Europe in 5,000 to 1,000 years in ways that would be realistic in our world, or a substantiated explanation of why it is not possible.
Thank you!
fauna science domestication
fauna science domestication
edited 2 hours ago
Nierninwa
asked 6 hours ago
NierninwaNierninwa
996
996
$begingroup$
This doesn't appear to be a worldbuilding question. The help center explains that questions must be specific and answerable (probably check!), must include context (missing), must include restrictions/requirements (missing), and should include research (check!). VTC OT:NAW until Q is improved. Let me know when you're done and I'll retract my vote.
$endgroup$
– JBH
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
Actually, and I don't have any sources for this, but I've heard that cats were not brought on for rodent control. Turns out dogs were better at that as well.
$endgroup$
– Muuski
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
europe had domesticated ferrets for pest control. they hunted rabbits with them.
$endgroup$
– John
5 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
Two things nobody mentioned yet: 1. They stink and they leave stinky runny poops everywhere, and 2. They are nocturnal and scream really loud all night and it sounds like someone getting murdered.
$endgroup$
– Alistair Buxton
3 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@Nierninwa Sorry, I should have been clearer. That was directed at people VTC. There have been several other domestication questions lately that have stayed open so I see no reason why yours should be closed for not being about WB. I voted to keep it open.
$endgroup$
– Cyn
2 hours ago
|
show 6 more comments
$begingroup$
This doesn't appear to be a worldbuilding question. The help center explains that questions must be specific and answerable (probably check!), must include context (missing), must include restrictions/requirements (missing), and should include research (check!). VTC OT:NAW until Q is improved. Let me know when you're done and I'll retract my vote.
$endgroup$
– JBH
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
Actually, and I don't have any sources for this, but I've heard that cats were not brought on for rodent control. Turns out dogs were better at that as well.
$endgroup$
– Muuski
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
europe had domesticated ferrets for pest control. they hunted rabbits with them.
$endgroup$
– John
5 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
Two things nobody mentioned yet: 1. They stink and they leave stinky runny poops everywhere, and 2. They are nocturnal and scream really loud all night and it sounds like someone getting murdered.
$endgroup$
– Alistair Buxton
3 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@Nierninwa Sorry, I should have been clearer. That was directed at people VTC. There have been several other domestication questions lately that have stayed open so I see no reason why yours should be closed for not being about WB. I voted to keep it open.
$endgroup$
– Cyn
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
This doesn't appear to be a worldbuilding question. The help center explains that questions must be specific and answerable (probably check!), must include context (missing), must include restrictions/requirements (missing), and should include research (check!). VTC OT:NAW until Q is improved. Let me know when you're done and I'll retract my vote.
$endgroup$
– JBH
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
This doesn't appear to be a worldbuilding question. The help center explains that questions must be specific and answerable (probably check!), must include context (missing), must include restrictions/requirements (missing), and should include research (check!). VTC OT:NAW until Q is improved. Let me know when you're done and I'll retract my vote.
$endgroup$
– JBH
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
Actually, and I don't have any sources for this, but I've heard that cats were not brought on for rodent control. Turns out dogs were better at that as well.
$endgroup$
– Muuski
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Actually, and I don't have any sources for this, but I've heard that cats were not brought on for rodent control. Turns out dogs were better at that as well.
$endgroup$
– Muuski
5 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
europe had domesticated ferrets for pest control. they hunted rabbits with them.
$endgroup$
– John
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
europe had domesticated ferrets for pest control. they hunted rabbits with them.
$endgroup$
– John
5 hours ago
2
2
$begingroup$
Two things nobody mentioned yet: 1. They stink and they leave stinky runny poops everywhere, and 2. They are nocturnal and scream really loud all night and it sounds like someone getting murdered.
$endgroup$
– Alistair Buxton
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Two things nobody mentioned yet: 1. They stink and they leave stinky runny poops everywhere, and 2. They are nocturnal and scream really loud all night and it sounds like someone getting murdered.
$endgroup$
– Alistair Buxton
3 hours ago
2
2
$begingroup$
@Nierninwa Sorry, I should have been clearer. That was directed at people VTC. There have been several other domestication questions lately that have stayed open so I see no reason why yours should be closed for not being about WB. I voted to keep it open.
$endgroup$
– Cyn
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Nierninwa Sorry, I should have been clearer. That was directed at people VTC. There have been several other domestication questions lately that have stayed open so I see no reason why yours should be closed for not being about WB. I voted to keep it open.
$endgroup$
– Cyn
2 hours ago
|
show 6 more comments
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Dogs are descended from wolves. The first domesticated dogs were likely wolves.
There are several reasons it would make more sense to domesticate wolves than foxes.
Wolves generally hunt in packs, foxes generally hunt solo
Early humans would have seen the social behavior and realized the pack was similar to their own tribe. It wouldn't be too long before a human decided to take some wolf pups and see if he could integrate them.
Wolves are bigger than foxes
Wolves tend to be larger than foxes and are higher on the food chain. You don't want your dog getting picked off by predators. Both in time invested and emotional attachment losing a trained animal is a big deal, so early humans would pick something reasonably high on the food chain to lessen the chance.
NOTE: There are larger predators such as tigers, but they are more difficult to train, and one mistake will likely lead to life-long injury or death.
Selective Breeding
Domesticated wolf pups would have been selectively bred to be loyal, strong, and obedient. The most violent wolf pups would be put down, and other undesirable traits would be bred out, and desirable traits would be amplified. After a few generations, the new dogs from these pedigrees would be much more valuable than even a new litter of undomesticated wolf-pups due to specialization. There would be no reason to start from 0 with a fox when you have bred dogs capable of producing litters of puppies for you.
NOTE: In modern times, some dogs such as Chihuahuas are prized because of their small size and acuity to living indoors. The breed was recognized in 1903.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
The first domesticated dogs were likely wolves My understanding is that dogs split from wolves (as a species) well before they were domesticated, which suggests that humans were specifically attracted to dog-like characteristics and not wolf-like characteristics (and as wolves are predators feared by humans, it makes little sense for them to be adopted as humans, IMO).
$endgroup$
– StephenG
5 hours ago
4
$begingroup$
@StephenG, dogs didn't split from wolves at all. There is no clear consensus whether they are a separate species, but as far as ability to interbreed is the main criterion they are not, as some dog breeds are being interbred with wild wolves.
$endgroup$
– Jan Hudec
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
I understand how foxes might not be better than wolf-descended dogs for hunting, although assuming a dire environment with few large mammals and mainly small prey like rabbits, the dietary requirements of foxes might make them advantageous, but as a replacement for cats before cats were brought to Europe, it would have made sense.
$endgroup$
– Nierninwa
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
As your research correctly found out, foxes can be domesticated.
The main reason why foxes were not domesticated by early humans who instead preferred wolves might be that the latter are more social than foxes.
While wolves live in packs, normally foxes live in pairs or families. So, while for a human is doable to take the role of pack leader, it is a bit more cumbersome to take the role of mating partner.
Of course, since your world is fictional, if your foxes are pack animals, they might be domesticated as well.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
But why did they prefer cats? Though I suppose the answer is quite obviously they didn't—cats probably just moved in on their own and humans noticed there's fewer rodents around if they let them.
$endgroup$
– Jan Hudec
5 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
I think you should go more into your research about humans as pack leader vs mating partner. I think explorations of the issue would be best suited to mime / interpretive dance.
$endgroup$
– Willk
4 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@JanHudec There is a lot of evidence that cats domesticated themselves.
$endgroup$
– jaxad0127
4 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
There are 3 routes to animals being domesticated.
The commensal route where animals gained something from humans without being a burden or danger. For example animals that feed on food scraps or other animals that were attracted to human encampments. Later these animals would be integrated in human life and selective breeding would truly start. This is the route that gave us dogs and cats.
The prey route. Where humans captured, confined and bred animals for food. This is the route that gave us sheep and various breeds of cattle.
The directed route. This is where humans made a conscious decision to try and domesticate an animal for a specific purpose. This is the route that gave us domesticated horses.
The Russian fox experiment shows that foxes do hold the traits that allow them to be domesticated (as opposed to animals that humans have tried and failed to domesticate, like zebras).
In a pre-historic Europe where wolves were not around, or at least very scarce, then I think it is actually likely that foxes would of taken the commensal role that wolves took historically. Foxes will quite happily scavenge for food near humans, this is why we are seeing more and more foxes living in cities.
In a pre-historic Europe where wolves were around though, wolves would have defended their food supply from other animals such as foxes. Wolves won't normally bother with foxes as they are not direct competitors for prey, but they will attack them if foxes try to feed off their kills.
This likely eliminated the commensal route for foxes. The directed route would mean being domesticated much later, and some human having a reason to do so that couldn't be easier fulfilled with dogs.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Pre-historic Europe had wolves very early on though, so I understand that this would be an obstacle for fox domestication. However, dogs do not hunt rodents and foxes could fill that role. They do roam cities and probably would have (and did) still remain near human settlements back in the bronze age. Additionally, when agriculture appeared, grain stores drew rodents and these would have been easy prey for foxes. And we have evidence domestication begun. Can you think of a reason it did not "take"?
$endgroup$
– Nierninwa
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Nierninwa Reading through the article about domesticated foxes in the original question, I don't believe it shows evidence of domestication. Domestication would be shown in skull size and teeth. Neither are mentioned. Don't mistake taming animals with domesticating them. If foxes weren't domesticated by the point humans moved away from hunting gathering, then foxes likely became pests by stealing from food stores and hunting domesticated prey animals. At that point they are no longer commensal animals.
$endgroup$
– K Mo
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Wolves work very well as hunting companions because they are social, have high endurance so they can keep up with human hunting parties, and they target big game like humans.
Foxes aren't social, do not go for prey bigger than themselves, and have moderate endurance. They would not make good hunting companions.
I think you're closer to the mark with cats. Animals that loiter around people enough to be noticed reducing rodent populations, and someone to make the connection to this being good for grain supplies.
You're also on the money for using them to hunt rabbits too (historically this was done with dog breeds like terriers and dachshunds). If wolves are not domesticated for any reason (or even if they are domesticated, but not bred into forms suitable for rabbiting), this would leave that niche open for foxes.
So, what we want really is:
- No wolves domesticated (preferable)
- Abundance of small game that is at least moderately difficult for people to hunt
- Chance
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
What troubles me still is the fact that foxes were probably domesticated or at least tamed at some point but then this was lost. The original idea was, I believe, to replace cats with foxes. Then over months of not actually working on the world and just thinking about it from time to time, I kinda lost track. Some people mentioned ferrets for hunting rabbits and their ability to enter rabbit holes. But yes, dogs specifically bread for rabbit hunts had to have been a rather late development. Would you say with larger game available along with the small game this would still be possible?
$endgroup$
– Nierninwa
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Foxes would not be useful for hunting they are too small, in fact europe later made a sport out of hunting foxes with dogs.
Domesticating foxes was done in the modern age with modern techniques and knowledge. Domestication is a lot easier when you know how to do it and have large food surpluses to support such endeavors. Animals domesticated in antiquity had to be useful from day one or be a toy for the fabulously wealthy. The bronze age claim is not good evidence, burial with game animals was common and foxes as pests often raided human food stores.
Lastly they didn't need them, the europeans already had animals for hunting (dogs) and pest control, (cats and ferrets). the latter were useful for hunting rabbits as they could chase them down their holes something foxes would not be able to do.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Bronze age domestic cats in Europe outside Greece?
$endgroup$
– AlexP
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
The OP does not specify bronze age, cats were widespread in europe before the fall of rome.
$endgroup$
– John
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Thank you for reminding me foxes can't actually follow rabbits down their holes. However, I disagree with your claim that cats were "widespread" in Europe before the fall of Rome. Vikings took them on their ships but they were not nearly "widespread" as for the domestication, bone analysis showed domesticated diets and humans caring for old foxes' injuries. Additionally, the only bones found other than foxes were goats, cows and dogs. Wouldn't foxes have been useful in what was clearly pastoral societies back in the bronze age against rodents?
$endgroup$
– Nierninwa
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
the vikings picked cats up from Britain, so they were pretty widespread, my comment about raiding human food stores would cover that since only one fox showed isotope matching. would they have been useful is not a good argument for them actually being used. yes there bones were included but game animals like bear, deer, and fowl are included in other sites so an animal did not have to be domesticated to be buried. the injury thing is also inconclusive care is observed in pair bonded foxes.
$endgroup$
– John
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
I'm not saying it can't be true but the evidence is spotty at best.
$endgroup$
– John
53 mins ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "579"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f144550%2fwhy-did-europeans-not-widely-domesticate-foxes%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Dogs are descended from wolves. The first domesticated dogs were likely wolves.
There are several reasons it would make more sense to domesticate wolves than foxes.
Wolves generally hunt in packs, foxes generally hunt solo
Early humans would have seen the social behavior and realized the pack was similar to their own tribe. It wouldn't be too long before a human decided to take some wolf pups and see if he could integrate them.
Wolves are bigger than foxes
Wolves tend to be larger than foxes and are higher on the food chain. You don't want your dog getting picked off by predators. Both in time invested and emotional attachment losing a trained animal is a big deal, so early humans would pick something reasonably high on the food chain to lessen the chance.
NOTE: There are larger predators such as tigers, but they are more difficult to train, and one mistake will likely lead to life-long injury or death.
Selective Breeding
Domesticated wolf pups would have been selectively bred to be loyal, strong, and obedient. The most violent wolf pups would be put down, and other undesirable traits would be bred out, and desirable traits would be amplified. After a few generations, the new dogs from these pedigrees would be much more valuable than even a new litter of undomesticated wolf-pups due to specialization. There would be no reason to start from 0 with a fox when you have bred dogs capable of producing litters of puppies for you.
NOTE: In modern times, some dogs such as Chihuahuas are prized because of their small size and acuity to living indoors. The breed was recognized in 1903.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
The first domesticated dogs were likely wolves My understanding is that dogs split from wolves (as a species) well before they were domesticated, which suggests that humans were specifically attracted to dog-like characteristics and not wolf-like characteristics (and as wolves are predators feared by humans, it makes little sense for them to be adopted as humans, IMO).
$endgroup$
– StephenG
5 hours ago
4
$begingroup$
@StephenG, dogs didn't split from wolves at all. There is no clear consensus whether they are a separate species, but as far as ability to interbreed is the main criterion they are not, as some dog breeds are being interbred with wild wolves.
$endgroup$
– Jan Hudec
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
I understand how foxes might not be better than wolf-descended dogs for hunting, although assuming a dire environment with few large mammals and mainly small prey like rabbits, the dietary requirements of foxes might make them advantageous, but as a replacement for cats before cats were brought to Europe, it would have made sense.
$endgroup$
– Nierninwa
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Dogs are descended from wolves. The first domesticated dogs were likely wolves.
There are several reasons it would make more sense to domesticate wolves than foxes.
Wolves generally hunt in packs, foxes generally hunt solo
Early humans would have seen the social behavior and realized the pack was similar to their own tribe. It wouldn't be too long before a human decided to take some wolf pups and see if he could integrate them.
Wolves are bigger than foxes
Wolves tend to be larger than foxes and are higher on the food chain. You don't want your dog getting picked off by predators. Both in time invested and emotional attachment losing a trained animal is a big deal, so early humans would pick something reasonably high on the food chain to lessen the chance.
NOTE: There are larger predators such as tigers, but they are more difficult to train, and one mistake will likely lead to life-long injury or death.
Selective Breeding
Domesticated wolf pups would have been selectively bred to be loyal, strong, and obedient. The most violent wolf pups would be put down, and other undesirable traits would be bred out, and desirable traits would be amplified. After a few generations, the new dogs from these pedigrees would be much more valuable than even a new litter of undomesticated wolf-pups due to specialization. There would be no reason to start from 0 with a fox when you have bred dogs capable of producing litters of puppies for you.
NOTE: In modern times, some dogs such as Chihuahuas are prized because of their small size and acuity to living indoors. The breed was recognized in 1903.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
The first domesticated dogs were likely wolves My understanding is that dogs split from wolves (as a species) well before they were domesticated, which suggests that humans were specifically attracted to dog-like characteristics and not wolf-like characteristics (and as wolves are predators feared by humans, it makes little sense for them to be adopted as humans, IMO).
$endgroup$
– StephenG
5 hours ago
4
$begingroup$
@StephenG, dogs didn't split from wolves at all. There is no clear consensus whether they are a separate species, but as far as ability to interbreed is the main criterion they are not, as some dog breeds are being interbred with wild wolves.
$endgroup$
– Jan Hudec
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
I understand how foxes might not be better than wolf-descended dogs for hunting, although assuming a dire environment with few large mammals and mainly small prey like rabbits, the dietary requirements of foxes might make them advantageous, but as a replacement for cats before cats were brought to Europe, it would have made sense.
$endgroup$
– Nierninwa
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Dogs are descended from wolves. The first domesticated dogs were likely wolves.
There are several reasons it would make more sense to domesticate wolves than foxes.
Wolves generally hunt in packs, foxes generally hunt solo
Early humans would have seen the social behavior and realized the pack was similar to their own tribe. It wouldn't be too long before a human decided to take some wolf pups and see if he could integrate them.
Wolves are bigger than foxes
Wolves tend to be larger than foxes and are higher on the food chain. You don't want your dog getting picked off by predators. Both in time invested and emotional attachment losing a trained animal is a big deal, so early humans would pick something reasonably high on the food chain to lessen the chance.
NOTE: There are larger predators such as tigers, but they are more difficult to train, and one mistake will likely lead to life-long injury or death.
Selective Breeding
Domesticated wolf pups would have been selectively bred to be loyal, strong, and obedient. The most violent wolf pups would be put down, and other undesirable traits would be bred out, and desirable traits would be amplified. After a few generations, the new dogs from these pedigrees would be much more valuable than even a new litter of undomesticated wolf-pups due to specialization. There would be no reason to start from 0 with a fox when you have bred dogs capable of producing litters of puppies for you.
NOTE: In modern times, some dogs such as Chihuahuas are prized because of their small size and acuity to living indoors. The breed was recognized in 1903.
$endgroup$
Dogs are descended from wolves. The first domesticated dogs were likely wolves.
There are several reasons it would make more sense to domesticate wolves than foxes.
Wolves generally hunt in packs, foxes generally hunt solo
Early humans would have seen the social behavior and realized the pack was similar to their own tribe. It wouldn't be too long before a human decided to take some wolf pups and see if he could integrate them.
Wolves are bigger than foxes
Wolves tend to be larger than foxes and are higher on the food chain. You don't want your dog getting picked off by predators. Both in time invested and emotional attachment losing a trained animal is a big deal, so early humans would pick something reasonably high on the food chain to lessen the chance.
NOTE: There are larger predators such as tigers, but they are more difficult to train, and one mistake will likely lead to life-long injury or death.
Selective Breeding
Domesticated wolf pups would have been selectively bred to be loyal, strong, and obedient. The most violent wolf pups would be put down, and other undesirable traits would be bred out, and desirable traits would be amplified. After a few generations, the new dogs from these pedigrees would be much more valuable than even a new litter of undomesticated wolf-pups due to specialization. There would be no reason to start from 0 with a fox when you have bred dogs capable of producing litters of puppies for you.
NOTE: In modern times, some dogs such as Chihuahuas are prized because of their small size and acuity to living indoors. The breed was recognized in 1903.
edited 2 hours ago
Brythan
21.1k74286
21.1k74286
answered 6 hours ago
sevensevenssevensevens
8468
8468
$begingroup$
The first domesticated dogs were likely wolves My understanding is that dogs split from wolves (as a species) well before they were domesticated, which suggests that humans were specifically attracted to dog-like characteristics and not wolf-like characteristics (and as wolves are predators feared by humans, it makes little sense for them to be adopted as humans, IMO).
$endgroup$
– StephenG
5 hours ago
4
$begingroup$
@StephenG, dogs didn't split from wolves at all. There is no clear consensus whether they are a separate species, but as far as ability to interbreed is the main criterion they are not, as some dog breeds are being interbred with wild wolves.
$endgroup$
– Jan Hudec
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
I understand how foxes might not be better than wolf-descended dogs for hunting, although assuming a dire environment with few large mammals and mainly small prey like rabbits, the dietary requirements of foxes might make them advantageous, but as a replacement for cats before cats were brought to Europe, it would have made sense.
$endgroup$
– Nierninwa
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The first domesticated dogs were likely wolves My understanding is that dogs split from wolves (as a species) well before they were domesticated, which suggests that humans were specifically attracted to dog-like characteristics and not wolf-like characteristics (and as wolves are predators feared by humans, it makes little sense for them to be adopted as humans, IMO).
$endgroup$
– StephenG
5 hours ago
4
$begingroup$
@StephenG, dogs didn't split from wolves at all. There is no clear consensus whether they are a separate species, but as far as ability to interbreed is the main criterion they are not, as some dog breeds are being interbred with wild wolves.
$endgroup$
– Jan Hudec
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
I understand how foxes might not be better than wolf-descended dogs for hunting, although assuming a dire environment with few large mammals and mainly small prey like rabbits, the dietary requirements of foxes might make them advantageous, but as a replacement for cats before cats were brought to Europe, it would have made sense.
$endgroup$
– Nierninwa
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
The first domesticated dogs were likely wolves My understanding is that dogs split from wolves (as a species) well before they were domesticated, which suggests that humans were specifically attracted to dog-like characteristics and not wolf-like characteristics (and as wolves are predators feared by humans, it makes little sense for them to be adopted as humans, IMO).
$endgroup$
– StephenG
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
The first domesticated dogs were likely wolves My understanding is that dogs split from wolves (as a species) well before they were domesticated, which suggests that humans were specifically attracted to dog-like characteristics and not wolf-like characteristics (and as wolves are predators feared by humans, it makes little sense for them to be adopted as humans, IMO).
$endgroup$
– StephenG
5 hours ago
4
4
$begingroup$
@StephenG, dogs didn't split from wolves at all. There is no clear consensus whether they are a separate species, but as far as ability to interbreed is the main criterion they are not, as some dog breeds are being interbred with wild wolves.
$endgroup$
– Jan Hudec
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@StephenG, dogs didn't split from wolves at all. There is no clear consensus whether they are a separate species, but as far as ability to interbreed is the main criterion they are not, as some dog breeds are being interbred with wild wolves.
$endgroup$
– Jan Hudec
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
I understand how foxes might not be better than wolf-descended dogs for hunting, although assuming a dire environment with few large mammals and mainly small prey like rabbits, the dietary requirements of foxes might make them advantageous, but as a replacement for cats before cats were brought to Europe, it would have made sense.
$endgroup$
– Nierninwa
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
I understand how foxes might not be better than wolf-descended dogs for hunting, although assuming a dire environment with few large mammals and mainly small prey like rabbits, the dietary requirements of foxes might make them advantageous, but as a replacement for cats before cats were brought to Europe, it would have made sense.
$endgroup$
– Nierninwa
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
As your research correctly found out, foxes can be domesticated.
The main reason why foxes were not domesticated by early humans who instead preferred wolves might be that the latter are more social than foxes.
While wolves live in packs, normally foxes live in pairs or families. So, while for a human is doable to take the role of pack leader, it is a bit more cumbersome to take the role of mating partner.
Of course, since your world is fictional, if your foxes are pack animals, they might be domesticated as well.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
But why did they prefer cats? Though I suppose the answer is quite obviously they didn't—cats probably just moved in on their own and humans noticed there's fewer rodents around if they let them.
$endgroup$
– Jan Hudec
5 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
I think you should go more into your research about humans as pack leader vs mating partner. I think explorations of the issue would be best suited to mime / interpretive dance.
$endgroup$
– Willk
4 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@JanHudec There is a lot of evidence that cats domesticated themselves.
$endgroup$
– jaxad0127
4 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
As your research correctly found out, foxes can be domesticated.
The main reason why foxes were not domesticated by early humans who instead preferred wolves might be that the latter are more social than foxes.
While wolves live in packs, normally foxes live in pairs or families. So, while for a human is doable to take the role of pack leader, it is a bit more cumbersome to take the role of mating partner.
Of course, since your world is fictional, if your foxes are pack animals, they might be domesticated as well.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
But why did they prefer cats? Though I suppose the answer is quite obviously they didn't—cats probably just moved in on their own and humans noticed there's fewer rodents around if they let them.
$endgroup$
– Jan Hudec
5 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
I think you should go more into your research about humans as pack leader vs mating partner. I think explorations of the issue would be best suited to mime / interpretive dance.
$endgroup$
– Willk
4 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@JanHudec There is a lot of evidence that cats domesticated themselves.
$endgroup$
– jaxad0127
4 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
As your research correctly found out, foxes can be domesticated.
The main reason why foxes were not domesticated by early humans who instead preferred wolves might be that the latter are more social than foxes.
While wolves live in packs, normally foxes live in pairs or families. So, while for a human is doable to take the role of pack leader, it is a bit more cumbersome to take the role of mating partner.
Of course, since your world is fictional, if your foxes are pack animals, they might be domesticated as well.
$endgroup$
As your research correctly found out, foxes can be domesticated.
The main reason why foxes were not domesticated by early humans who instead preferred wolves might be that the latter are more social than foxes.
While wolves live in packs, normally foxes live in pairs or families. So, while for a human is doable to take the role of pack leader, it is a bit more cumbersome to take the role of mating partner.
Of course, since your world is fictional, if your foxes are pack animals, they might be domesticated as well.
answered 6 hours ago
L.Dutch♦L.Dutch
92.4k29213443
92.4k29213443
1
$begingroup$
But why did they prefer cats? Though I suppose the answer is quite obviously they didn't—cats probably just moved in on their own and humans noticed there's fewer rodents around if they let them.
$endgroup$
– Jan Hudec
5 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
I think you should go more into your research about humans as pack leader vs mating partner. I think explorations of the issue would be best suited to mime / interpretive dance.
$endgroup$
– Willk
4 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@JanHudec There is a lot of evidence that cats domesticated themselves.
$endgroup$
– jaxad0127
4 hours ago
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
But why did they prefer cats? Though I suppose the answer is quite obviously they didn't—cats probably just moved in on their own and humans noticed there's fewer rodents around if they let them.
$endgroup$
– Jan Hudec
5 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
I think you should go more into your research about humans as pack leader vs mating partner. I think explorations of the issue would be best suited to mime / interpretive dance.
$endgroup$
– Willk
4 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@JanHudec There is a lot of evidence that cats domesticated themselves.
$endgroup$
– jaxad0127
4 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
But why did they prefer cats? Though I suppose the answer is quite obviously they didn't—cats probably just moved in on their own and humans noticed there's fewer rodents around if they let them.
$endgroup$
– Jan Hudec
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
But why did they prefer cats? Though I suppose the answer is quite obviously they didn't—cats probably just moved in on their own and humans noticed there's fewer rodents around if they let them.
$endgroup$
– Jan Hudec
5 hours ago
3
3
$begingroup$
I think you should go more into your research about humans as pack leader vs mating partner. I think explorations of the issue would be best suited to mime / interpretive dance.
$endgroup$
– Willk
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
I think you should go more into your research about humans as pack leader vs mating partner. I think explorations of the issue would be best suited to mime / interpretive dance.
$endgroup$
– Willk
4 hours ago
2
2
$begingroup$
@JanHudec There is a lot of evidence that cats domesticated themselves.
$endgroup$
– jaxad0127
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@JanHudec There is a lot of evidence that cats domesticated themselves.
$endgroup$
– jaxad0127
4 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
There are 3 routes to animals being domesticated.
The commensal route where animals gained something from humans without being a burden or danger. For example animals that feed on food scraps or other animals that were attracted to human encampments. Later these animals would be integrated in human life and selective breeding would truly start. This is the route that gave us dogs and cats.
The prey route. Where humans captured, confined and bred animals for food. This is the route that gave us sheep and various breeds of cattle.
The directed route. This is where humans made a conscious decision to try and domesticate an animal for a specific purpose. This is the route that gave us domesticated horses.
The Russian fox experiment shows that foxes do hold the traits that allow them to be domesticated (as opposed to animals that humans have tried and failed to domesticate, like zebras).
In a pre-historic Europe where wolves were not around, or at least very scarce, then I think it is actually likely that foxes would of taken the commensal role that wolves took historically. Foxes will quite happily scavenge for food near humans, this is why we are seeing more and more foxes living in cities.
In a pre-historic Europe where wolves were around though, wolves would have defended their food supply from other animals such as foxes. Wolves won't normally bother with foxes as they are not direct competitors for prey, but they will attack them if foxes try to feed off their kills.
This likely eliminated the commensal route for foxes. The directed route would mean being domesticated much later, and some human having a reason to do so that couldn't be easier fulfilled with dogs.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Pre-historic Europe had wolves very early on though, so I understand that this would be an obstacle for fox domestication. However, dogs do not hunt rodents and foxes could fill that role. They do roam cities and probably would have (and did) still remain near human settlements back in the bronze age. Additionally, when agriculture appeared, grain stores drew rodents and these would have been easy prey for foxes. And we have evidence domestication begun. Can you think of a reason it did not "take"?
$endgroup$
– Nierninwa
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Nierninwa Reading through the article about domesticated foxes in the original question, I don't believe it shows evidence of domestication. Domestication would be shown in skull size and teeth. Neither are mentioned. Don't mistake taming animals with domesticating them. If foxes weren't domesticated by the point humans moved away from hunting gathering, then foxes likely became pests by stealing from food stores and hunting domesticated prey animals. At that point they are no longer commensal animals.
$endgroup$
– K Mo
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
There are 3 routes to animals being domesticated.
The commensal route where animals gained something from humans without being a burden or danger. For example animals that feed on food scraps or other animals that were attracted to human encampments. Later these animals would be integrated in human life and selective breeding would truly start. This is the route that gave us dogs and cats.
The prey route. Where humans captured, confined and bred animals for food. This is the route that gave us sheep and various breeds of cattle.
The directed route. This is where humans made a conscious decision to try and domesticate an animal for a specific purpose. This is the route that gave us domesticated horses.
The Russian fox experiment shows that foxes do hold the traits that allow them to be domesticated (as opposed to animals that humans have tried and failed to domesticate, like zebras).
In a pre-historic Europe where wolves were not around, or at least very scarce, then I think it is actually likely that foxes would of taken the commensal role that wolves took historically. Foxes will quite happily scavenge for food near humans, this is why we are seeing more and more foxes living in cities.
In a pre-historic Europe where wolves were around though, wolves would have defended their food supply from other animals such as foxes. Wolves won't normally bother with foxes as they are not direct competitors for prey, but they will attack them if foxes try to feed off their kills.
This likely eliminated the commensal route for foxes. The directed route would mean being domesticated much later, and some human having a reason to do so that couldn't be easier fulfilled with dogs.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Pre-historic Europe had wolves very early on though, so I understand that this would be an obstacle for fox domestication. However, dogs do not hunt rodents and foxes could fill that role. They do roam cities and probably would have (and did) still remain near human settlements back in the bronze age. Additionally, when agriculture appeared, grain stores drew rodents and these would have been easy prey for foxes. And we have evidence domestication begun. Can you think of a reason it did not "take"?
$endgroup$
– Nierninwa
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Nierninwa Reading through the article about domesticated foxes in the original question, I don't believe it shows evidence of domestication. Domestication would be shown in skull size and teeth. Neither are mentioned. Don't mistake taming animals with domesticating them. If foxes weren't domesticated by the point humans moved away from hunting gathering, then foxes likely became pests by stealing from food stores and hunting domesticated prey animals. At that point they are no longer commensal animals.
$endgroup$
– K Mo
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
There are 3 routes to animals being domesticated.
The commensal route where animals gained something from humans without being a burden or danger. For example animals that feed on food scraps or other animals that were attracted to human encampments. Later these animals would be integrated in human life and selective breeding would truly start. This is the route that gave us dogs and cats.
The prey route. Where humans captured, confined and bred animals for food. This is the route that gave us sheep and various breeds of cattle.
The directed route. This is where humans made a conscious decision to try and domesticate an animal for a specific purpose. This is the route that gave us domesticated horses.
The Russian fox experiment shows that foxes do hold the traits that allow them to be domesticated (as opposed to animals that humans have tried and failed to domesticate, like zebras).
In a pre-historic Europe where wolves were not around, or at least very scarce, then I think it is actually likely that foxes would of taken the commensal role that wolves took historically. Foxes will quite happily scavenge for food near humans, this is why we are seeing more and more foxes living in cities.
In a pre-historic Europe where wolves were around though, wolves would have defended their food supply from other animals such as foxes. Wolves won't normally bother with foxes as they are not direct competitors for prey, but they will attack them if foxes try to feed off their kills.
This likely eliminated the commensal route for foxes. The directed route would mean being domesticated much later, and some human having a reason to do so that couldn't be easier fulfilled with dogs.
$endgroup$
There are 3 routes to animals being domesticated.
The commensal route where animals gained something from humans without being a burden or danger. For example animals that feed on food scraps or other animals that were attracted to human encampments. Later these animals would be integrated in human life and selective breeding would truly start. This is the route that gave us dogs and cats.
The prey route. Where humans captured, confined and bred animals for food. This is the route that gave us sheep and various breeds of cattle.
The directed route. This is where humans made a conscious decision to try and domesticate an animal for a specific purpose. This is the route that gave us domesticated horses.
The Russian fox experiment shows that foxes do hold the traits that allow them to be domesticated (as opposed to animals that humans have tried and failed to domesticate, like zebras).
In a pre-historic Europe where wolves were not around, or at least very scarce, then I think it is actually likely that foxes would of taken the commensal role that wolves took historically. Foxes will quite happily scavenge for food near humans, this is why we are seeing more and more foxes living in cities.
In a pre-historic Europe where wolves were around though, wolves would have defended their food supply from other animals such as foxes. Wolves won't normally bother with foxes as they are not direct competitors for prey, but they will attack them if foxes try to feed off their kills.
This likely eliminated the commensal route for foxes. The directed route would mean being domesticated much later, and some human having a reason to do so that couldn't be easier fulfilled with dogs.
edited 2 hours ago
Brythan
21.1k74286
21.1k74286
answered 3 hours ago
K MoK Mo
2,534514
2,534514
$begingroup$
Pre-historic Europe had wolves very early on though, so I understand that this would be an obstacle for fox domestication. However, dogs do not hunt rodents and foxes could fill that role. They do roam cities and probably would have (and did) still remain near human settlements back in the bronze age. Additionally, when agriculture appeared, grain stores drew rodents and these would have been easy prey for foxes. And we have evidence domestication begun. Can you think of a reason it did not "take"?
$endgroup$
– Nierninwa
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Nierninwa Reading through the article about domesticated foxes in the original question, I don't believe it shows evidence of domestication. Domestication would be shown in skull size and teeth. Neither are mentioned. Don't mistake taming animals with domesticating them. If foxes weren't domesticated by the point humans moved away from hunting gathering, then foxes likely became pests by stealing from food stores and hunting domesticated prey animals. At that point they are no longer commensal animals.
$endgroup$
– K Mo
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Pre-historic Europe had wolves very early on though, so I understand that this would be an obstacle for fox domestication. However, dogs do not hunt rodents and foxes could fill that role. They do roam cities and probably would have (and did) still remain near human settlements back in the bronze age. Additionally, when agriculture appeared, grain stores drew rodents and these would have been easy prey for foxes. And we have evidence domestication begun. Can you think of a reason it did not "take"?
$endgroup$
– Nierninwa
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Nierninwa Reading through the article about domesticated foxes in the original question, I don't believe it shows evidence of domestication. Domestication would be shown in skull size and teeth. Neither are mentioned. Don't mistake taming animals with domesticating them. If foxes weren't domesticated by the point humans moved away from hunting gathering, then foxes likely became pests by stealing from food stores and hunting domesticated prey animals. At that point they are no longer commensal animals.
$endgroup$
– K Mo
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Pre-historic Europe had wolves very early on though, so I understand that this would be an obstacle for fox domestication. However, dogs do not hunt rodents and foxes could fill that role. They do roam cities and probably would have (and did) still remain near human settlements back in the bronze age. Additionally, when agriculture appeared, grain stores drew rodents and these would have been easy prey for foxes. And we have evidence domestication begun. Can you think of a reason it did not "take"?
$endgroup$
– Nierninwa
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Pre-historic Europe had wolves very early on though, so I understand that this would be an obstacle for fox domestication. However, dogs do not hunt rodents and foxes could fill that role. They do roam cities and probably would have (and did) still remain near human settlements back in the bronze age. Additionally, when agriculture appeared, grain stores drew rodents and these would have been easy prey for foxes. And we have evidence domestication begun. Can you think of a reason it did not "take"?
$endgroup$
– Nierninwa
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Nierninwa Reading through the article about domesticated foxes in the original question, I don't believe it shows evidence of domestication. Domestication would be shown in skull size and teeth. Neither are mentioned. Don't mistake taming animals with domesticating them. If foxes weren't domesticated by the point humans moved away from hunting gathering, then foxes likely became pests by stealing from food stores and hunting domesticated prey animals. At that point they are no longer commensal animals.
$endgroup$
– K Mo
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Nierninwa Reading through the article about domesticated foxes in the original question, I don't believe it shows evidence of domestication. Domestication would be shown in skull size and teeth. Neither are mentioned. Don't mistake taming animals with domesticating them. If foxes weren't domesticated by the point humans moved away from hunting gathering, then foxes likely became pests by stealing from food stores and hunting domesticated prey animals. At that point they are no longer commensal animals.
$endgroup$
– K Mo
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Wolves work very well as hunting companions because they are social, have high endurance so they can keep up with human hunting parties, and they target big game like humans.
Foxes aren't social, do not go for prey bigger than themselves, and have moderate endurance. They would not make good hunting companions.
I think you're closer to the mark with cats. Animals that loiter around people enough to be noticed reducing rodent populations, and someone to make the connection to this being good for grain supplies.
You're also on the money for using them to hunt rabbits too (historically this was done with dog breeds like terriers and dachshunds). If wolves are not domesticated for any reason (or even if they are domesticated, but not bred into forms suitable for rabbiting), this would leave that niche open for foxes.
So, what we want really is:
- No wolves domesticated (preferable)
- Abundance of small game that is at least moderately difficult for people to hunt
- Chance
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
What troubles me still is the fact that foxes were probably domesticated or at least tamed at some point but then this was lost. The original idea was, I believe, to replace cats with foxes. Then over months of not actually working on the world and just thinking about it from time to time, I kinda lost track. Some people mentioned ferrets for hunting rabbits and their ability to enter rabbit holes. But yes, dogs specifically bread for rabbit hunts had to have been a rather late development. Would you say with larger game available along with the small game this would still be possible?
$endgroup$
– Nierninwa
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Wolves work very well as hunting companions because they are social, have high endurance so they can keep up with human hunting parties, and they target big game like humans.
Foxes aren't social, do not go for prey bigger than themselves, and have moderate endurance. They would not make good hunting companions.
I think you're closer to the mark with cats. Animals that loiter around people enough to be noticed reducing rodent populations, and someone to make the connection to this being good for grain supplies.
You're also on the money for using them to hunt rabbits too (historically this was done with dog breeds like terriers and dachshunds). If wolves are not domesticated for any reason (or even if they are domesticated, but not bred into forms suitable for rabbiting), this would leave that niche open for foxes.
So, what we want really is:
- No wolves domesticated (preferable)
- Abundance of small game that is at least moderately difficult for people to hunt
- Chance
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
What troubles me still is the fact that foxes were probably domesticated or at least tamed at some point but then this was lost. The original idea was, I believe, to replace cats with foxes. Then over months of not actually working on the world and just thinking about it from time to time, I kinda lost track. Some people mentioned ferrets for hunting rabbits and their ability to enter rabbit holes. But yes, dogs specifically bread for rabbit hunts had to have been a rather late development. Would you say with larger game available along with the small game this would still be possible?
$endgroup$
– Nierninwa
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Wolves work very well as hunting companions because they are social, have high endurance so they can keep up with human hunting parties, and they target big game like humans.
Foxes aren't social, do not go for prey bigger than themselves, and have moderate endurance. They would not make good hunting companions.
I think you're closer to the mark with cats. Animals that loiter around people enough to be noticed reducing rodent populations, and someone to make the connection to this being good for grain supplies.
You're also on the money for using them to hunt rabbits too (historically this was done with dog breeds like terriers and dachshunds). If wolves are not domesticated for any reason (or even if they are domesticated, but not bred into forms suitable for rabbiting), this would leave that niche open for foxes.
So, what we want really is:
- No wolves domesticated (preferable)
- Abundance of small game that is at least moderately difficult for people to hunt
- Chance
$endgroup$
Wolves work very well as hunting companions because they are social, have high endurance so they can keep up with human hunting parties, and they target big game like humans.
Foxes aren't social, do not go for prey bigger than themselves, and have moderate endurance. They would not make good hunting companions.
I think you're closer to the mark with cats. Animals that loiter around people enough to be noticed reducing rodent populations, and someone to make the connection to this being good for grain supplies.
You're also on the money for using them to hunt rabbits too (historically this was done with dog breeds like terriers and dachshunds). If wolves are not domesticated for any reason (or even if they are domesticated, but not bred into forms suitable for rabbiting), this would leave that niche open for foxes.
So, what we want really is:
- No wolves domesticated (preferable)
- Abundance of small game that is at least moderately difficult for people to hunt
- Chance
answered 5 hours ago
YnneadwraithYnneadwraith
5,95111730
5,95111730
$begingroup$
What troubles me still is the fact that foxes were probably domesticated or at least tamed at some point but then this was lost. The original idea was, I believe, to replace cats with foxes. Then over months of not actually working on the world and just thinking about it from time to time, I kinda lost track. Some people mentioned ferrets for hunting rabbits and their ability to enter rabbit holes. But yes, dogs specifically bread for rabbit hunts had to have been a rather late development. Would you say with larger game available along with the small game this would still be possible?
$endgroup$
– Nierninwa
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
What troubles me still is the fact that foxes were probably domesticated or at least tamed at some point but then this was lost. The original idea was, I believe, to replace cats with foxes. Then over months of not actually working on the world and just thinking about it from time to time, I kinda lost track. Some people mentioned ferrets for hunting rabbits and their ability to enter rabbit holes. But yes, dogs specifically bread for rabbit hunts had to have been a rather late development. Would you say with larger game available along with the small game this would still be possible?
$endgroup$
– Nierninwa
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
What troubles me still is the fact that foxes were probably domesticated or at least tamed at some point but then this was lost. The original idea was, I believe, to replace cats with foxes. Then over months of not actually working on the world and just thinking about it from time to time, I kinda lost track. Some people mentioned ferrets for hunting rabbits and their ability to enter rabbit holes. But yes, dogs specifically bread for rabbit hunts had to have been a rather late development. Would you say with larger game available along with the small game this would still be possible?
$endgroup$
– Nierninwa
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
What troubles me still is the fact that foxes were probably domesticated or at least tamed at some point but then this was lost. The original idea was, I believe, to replace cats with foxes. Then over months of not actually working on the world and just thinking about it from time to time, I kinda lost track. Some people mentioned ferrets for hunting rabbits and their ability to enter rabbit holes. But yes, dogs specifically bread for rabbit hunts had to have been a rather late development. Would you say with larger game available along with the small game this would still be possible?
$endgroup$
– Nierninwa
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Foxes would not be useful for hunting they are too small, in fact europe later made a sport out of hunting foxes with dogs.
Domesticating foxes was done in the modern age with modern techniques and knowledge. Domestication is a lot easier when you know how to do it and have large food surpluses to support such endeavors. Animals domesticated in antiquity had to be useful from day one or be a toy for the fabulously wealthy. The bronze age claim is not good evidence, burial with game animals was common and foxes as pests often raided human food stores.
Lastly they didn't need them, the europeans already had animals for hunting (dogs) and pest control, (cats and ferrets). the latter were useful for hunting rabbits as they could chase them down their holes something foxes would not be able to do.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Bronze age domestic cats in Europe outside Greece?
$endgroup$
– AlexP
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
The OP does not specify bronze age, cats were widespread in europe before the fall of rome.
$endgroup$
– John
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Thank you for reminding me foxes can't actually follow rabbits down their holes. However, I disagree with your claim that cats were "widespread" in Europe before the fall of Rome. Vikings took them on their ships but they were not nearly "widespread" as for the domestication, bone analysis showed domesticated diets and humans caring for old foxes' injuries. Additionally, the only bones found other than foxes were goats, cows and dogs. Wouldn't foxes have been useful in what was clearly pastoral societies back in the bronze age against rodents?
$endgroup$
– Nierninwa
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
the vikings picked cats up from Britain, so they were pretty widespread, my comment about raiding human food stores would cover that since only one fox showed isotope matching. would they have been useful is not a good argument for them actually being used. yes there bones were included but game animals like bear, deer, and fowl are included in other sites so an animal did not have to be domesticated to be buried. the injury thing is also inconclusive care is observed in pair bonded foxes.
$endgroup$
– John
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
I'm not saying it can't be true but the evidence is spotty at best.
$endgroup$
– John
53 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Foxes would not be useful for hunting they are too small, in fact europe later made a sport out of hunting foxes with dogs.
Domesticating foxes was done in the modern age with modern techniques and knowledge. Domestication is a lot easier when you know how to do it and have large food surpluses to support such endeavors. Animals domesticated in antiquity had to be useful from day one or be a toy for the fabulously wealthy. The bronze age claim is not good evidence, burial with game animals was common and foxes as pests often raided human food stores.
Lastly they didn't need them, the europeans already had animals for hunting (dogs) and pest control, (cats and ferrets). the latter were useful for hunting rabbits as they could chase them down their holes something foxes would not be able to do.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Bronze age domestic cats in Europe outside Greece?
$endgroup$
– AlexP
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
The OP does not specify bronze age, cats were widespread in europe before the fall of rome.
$endgroup$
– John
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Thank you for reminding me foxes can't actually follow rabbits down their holes. However, I disagree with your claim that cats were "widespread" in Europe before the fall of Rome. Vikings took them on their ships but they were not nearly "widespread" as for the domestication, bone analysis showed domesticated diets and humans caring for old foxes' injuries. Additionally, the only bones found other than foxes were goats, cows and dogs. Wouldn't foxes have been useful in what was clearly pastoral societies back in the bronze age against rodents?
$endgroup$
– Nierninwa
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
the vikings picked cats up from Britain, so they were pretty widespread, my comment about raiding human food stores would cover that since only one fox showed isotope matching. would they have been useful is not a good argument for them actually being used. yes there bones were included but game animals like bear, deer, and fowl are included in other sites so an animal did not have to be domesticated to be buried. the injury thing is also inconclusive care is observed in pair bonded foxes.
$endgroup$
– John
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
I'm not saying it can't be true but the evidence is spotty at best.
$endgroup$
– John
53 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Foxes would not be useful for hunting they are too small, in fact europe later made a sport out of hunting foxes with dogs.
Domesticating foxes was done in the modern age with modern techniques and knowledge. Domestication is a lot easier when you know how to do it and have large food surpluses to support such endeavors. Animals domesticated in antiquity had to be useful from day one or be a toy for the fabulously wealthy. The bronze age claim is not good evidence, burial with game animals was common and foxes as pests often raided human food stores.
Lastly they didn't need them, the europeans already had animals for hunting (dogs) and pest control, (cats and ferrets). the latter were useful for hunting rabbits as they could chase them down their holes something foxes would not be able to do.
$endgroup$
Foxes would not be useful for hunting they are too small, in fact europe later made a sport out of hunting foxes with dogs.
Domesticating foxes was done in the modern age with modern techniques and knowledge. Domestication is a lot easier when you know how to do it and have large food surpluses to support such endeavors. Animals domesticated in antiquity had to be useful from day one or be a toy for the fabulously wealthy. The bronze age claim is not good evidence, burial with game animals was common and foxes as pests often raided human food stores.
Lastly they didn't need them, the europeans already had animals for hunting (dogs) and pest control, (cats and ferrets). the latter were useful for hunting rabbits as they could chase them down their holes something foxes would not be able to do.
answered 5 hours ago
JohnJohn
36.5k1048122
36.5k1048122
$begingroup$
Bronze age domestic cats in Europe outside Greece?
$endgroup$
– AlexP
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
The OP does not specify bronze age, cats were widespread in europe before the fall of rome.
$endgroup$
– John
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Thank you for reminding me foxes can't actually follow rabbits down their holes. However, I disagree with your claim that cats were "widespread" in Europe before the fall of Rome. Vikings took them on their ships but they were not nearly "widespread" as for the domestication, bone analysis showed domesticated diets and humans caring for old foxes' injuries. Additionally, the only bones found other than foxes were goats, cows and dogs. Wouldn't foxes have been useful in what was clearly pastoral societies back in the bronze age against rodents?
$endgroup$
– Nierninwa
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
the vikings picked cats up from Britain, so they were pretty widespread, my comment about raiding human food stores would cover that since only one fox showed isotope matching. would they have been useful is not a good argument for them actually being used. yes there bones were included but game animals like bear, deer, and fowl are included in other sites so an animal did not have to be domesticated to be buried. the injury thing is also inconclusive care is observed in pair bonded foxes.
$endgroup$
– John
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
I'm not saying it can't be true but the evidence is spotty at best.
$endgroup$
– John
53 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Bronze age domestic cats in Europe outside Greece?
$endgroup$
– AlexP
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
The OP does not specify bronze age, cats were widespread in europe before the fall of rome.
$endgroup$
– John
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Thank you for reminding me foxes can't actually follow rabbits down their holes. However, I disagree with your claim that cats were "widespread" in Europe before the fall of Rome. Vikings took them on their ships but they were not nearly "widespread" as for the domestication, bone analysis showed domesticated diets and humans caring for old foxes' injuries. Additionally, the only bones found other than foxes were goats, cows and dogs. Wouldn't foxes have been useful in what was clearly pastoral societies back in the bronze age against rodents?
$endgroup$
– Nierninwa
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
the vikings picked cats up from Britain, so they were pretty widespread, my comment about raiding human food stores would cover that since only one fox showed isotope matching. would they have been useful is not a good argument for them actually being used. yes there bones were included but game animals like bear, deer, and fowl are included in other sites so an animal did not have to be domesticated to be buried. the injury thing is also inconclusive care is observed in pair bonded foxes.
$endgroup$
– John
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
I'm not saying it can't be true but the evidence is spotty at best.
$endgroup$
– John
53 mins ago
$begingroup$
Bronze age domestic cats in Europe outside Greece?
$endgroup$
– AlexP
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Bronze age domestic cats in Europe outside Greece?
$endgroup$
– AlexP
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
The OP does not specify bronze age, cats were widespread in europe before the fall of rome.
$endgroup$
– John
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
The OP does not specify bronze age, cats were widespread in europe before the fall of rome.
$endgroup$
– John
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
Thank you for reminding me foxes can't actually follow rabbits down their holes. However, I disagree with your claim that cats were "widespread" in Europe before the fall of Rome. Vikings took them on their ships but they were not nearly "widespread" as for the domestication, bone analysis showed domesticated diets and humans caring for old foxes' injuries. Additionally, the only bones found other than foxes were goats, cows and dogs. Wouldn't foxes have been useful in what was clearly pastoral societies back in the bronze age against rodents?
$endgroup$
– Nierninwa
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Thank you for reminding me foxes can't actually follow rabbits down their holes. However, I disagree with your claim that cats were "widespread" in Europe before the fall of Rome. Vikings took them on their ships but they were not nearly "widespread" as for the domestication, bone analysis showed domesticated diets and humans caring for old foxes' injuries. Additionally, the only bones found other than foxes were goats, cows and dogs. Wouldn't foxes have been useful in what was clearly pastoral societies back in the bronze age against rodents?
$endgroup$
– Nierninwa
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
the vikings picked cats up from Britain, so they were pretty widespread, my comment about raiding human food stores would cover that since only one fox showed isotope matching. would they have been useful is not a good argument for them actually being used. yes there bones were included but game animals like bear, deer, and fowl are included in other sites so an animal did not have to be domesticated to be buried. the injury thing is also inconclusive care is observed in pair bonded foxes.
$endgroup$
– John
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
the vikings picked cats up from Britain, so they were pretty widespread, my comment about raiding human food stores would cover that since only one fox showed isotope matching. would they have been useful is not a good argument for them actually being used. yes there bones were included but game animals like bear, deer, and fowl are included in other sites so an animal did not have to be domesticated to be buried. the injury thing is also inconclusive care is observed in pair bonded foxes.
$endgroup$
– John
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
I'm not saying it can't be true but the evidence is spotty at best.
$endgroup$
– John
53 mins ago
$begingroup$
I'm not saying it can't be true but the evidence is spotty at best.
$endgroup$
– John
53 mins ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Worldbuilding Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f144550%2fwhy-did-europeans-not-widely-domesticate-foxes%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
This doesn't appear to be a worldbuilding question. The help center explains that questions must be specific and answerable (probably check!), must include context (missing), must include restrictions/requirements (missing), and should include research (check!). VTC OT:NAW until Q is improved. Let me know when you're done and I'll retract my vote.
$endgroup$
– JBH
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
Actually, and I don't have any sources for this, but I've heard that cats were not brought on for rodent control. Turns out dogs were better at that as well.
$endgroup$
– Muuski
5 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
europe had domesticated ferrets for pest control. they hunted rabbits with them.
$endgroup$
– John
5 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
Two things nobody mentioned yet: 1. They stink and they leave stinky runny poops everywhere, and 2. They are nocturnal and scream really loud all night and it sounds like someone getting murdered.
$endgroup$
– Alistair Buxton
3 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@Nierninwa Sorry, I should have been clearer. That was directed at people VTC. There have been several other domestication questions lately that have stayed open so I see no reason why yours should be closed for not being about WB. I voted to keep it open.
$endgroup$
– Cyn
2 hours ago