At the Naturalists' Congress in Wiesbaden in 1887, kittens with only
stumps of tails were exhibited, and they were said to have inherited
this peculiarity from their mother, whose tail, it was asserted, had
been accidentally amputated. The newspapers reported that the case
excited great interest, and biologists of the standing of Rudolf
Virchow declared it to be noteworthy, and regarded it as a proof, if
all the details of it were correct. From many sides similar cases were
brought forward, intended to prove that the amputation of the tail
in cats and dogs could give rise to hereditary degeneration of this
part; even students' fencing-scars were said to have been occasionally
transmitted to their sons (happily not to the daughters); a mutilated
or torn ear-lobe in the mother was said to have given rise to deformity
of the ear in a son; an injury to a father's eye was said to have
caused complete degeneration of the eyes in his children; and deformity
of a father's thumb, due to frostbite, was said to have produced
misshapen thumbs in the children and grandchildren. A multitude of
cases of this kind are to be found in the older textbooks of physiology
by Burdach, and above all by Blumenbach, and the majority have no
more than an anecdotal value, for they are not only related without
any adequate guarantee, but even without the details indispensable to
criticism.
As far back as the eighteenth century the great philosopher Kant, and
in our own day the anatomist Wilhelm His, gave their verdict decidedly
against such allegations, and absolutely denied any inheritance of
mutilations; and now, after a decade or more of lively debate over
the pros and cons, combined with detailed anatomical investigations,
careful testing of individual cases, and experiment, we are in a
position to give a decided negative and say _there is no inheritance of
mutilations_.
Let me briefly explain how this result has been reached.
In the first place, the assertion that congenital stump-tails in dogs
and cats depended on inherited mutilation proved to be unfounded. In
none of the cases of stump-tails brought forward could it even be
proved that the tail of the relevant parent had been torn or cut off,
much less that the occurrence, in parents or grandparents, of short
tails from internal causes was excluded. At the same time anatomical
investigation of such stump-tails as occur in cats in the Isle of Man,
and in many Japanese cats, and are frequently found in the most diverse
breeds of dogs, showed that these had, in their structure, nothing
in common with the remains of a tail that had been cut off, but were
spontaneous degenerations of the whole tail, and are thus deformed
tails, not shortened ones (Bonnet).
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account