The Eurasian Lynx ( Lynx Lynx ) in early modern Scotland

• Published in: Archives of Natural History
• Main Author: Raye, L.
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: Edinburgh University Press 2017
• Subjects: Agricultural and Biological Sciences (miscellaneous); History; Anthropology; Sibbald; Lynx; Lynx lynx lynx
• Online Access: http://dx.doi.org/10.3366/anh.2017.0452; https://www.euppublishing.com/doi/full-xml/10.3366/anh.2017.0452

Gessner's Historia animalium preserves scholarly opinions from naturalists and humanists from across sixteenth-century Europe. One such view comes from Bonarus of Balice, south-east Poland. Bonarus attests that although the Eurasian Lynx (Lynx Lynx) is common throughout central and eastern Europe, the best skins come from Sweden and, surprisingly, Scotland. After exploring evidence about who Bonarus was and why he might have written to Gessner, this essay builds up two possible explanations for Bonarus's opinion that Lynx populations were present in sixteenth-century Scotland: Either, native populations of European Lynxes may have still been present in Scotland in the sixteenth century; British Lynx remains have been dated to the sixth century. The Lynx could possibly have survived longer without being noticed in records if it was customarily called a “cat”, like other large felids. However, other than Bonarus's attestation, there is only tentative positive evidence consistent with this interpretation; most importantly the ambiguous testimony of Robert Sibbald in 1684. Or, Scotland may have “tricked” Bonarus by importing and then re-exporting fine, exotic furs. There is evidence that Scotland had a major fur industry. Eurasian Lynx fur had a high status. Furs were commonly re-exported in the fourteenth century. Scots merchants often imported high-status furs like Lynx into Poland in the sixteenth century, suggesting that Bonarus had the highest possible chance of seeing Scottish-fashioned Lynx furs. This essay argues that, on balance of the evidence, the second interpretation is the stronger of the two, although the first is also possible.