Sorry, stuffy nose....  Good question about ferret origins.  Do I think they
originated with European polecats rather than Steppe Polecats or an extinct
polecat?  HA!  I refuse to answer on the grounds that i may incriminate
myself.  ;-)
 
Actually, with reference to the close-breeding post, it doesn't matter which
polecat the ferret came from, because the modern domesticated ferret is not
like any other polecat, so the assumption can be made that whatever polecat
was the originator, the domesticate is different.  I simply meant that
normally during domestication, animals are often closely interbred to
preserve desirable traits.
 
Back to the question at hand.  In terms of all available evidence, I
believe the European polecat is PROBABLY the ancestor of the domesticated
ferret.  In terms of hard scientific evidence, I believe the ancestor of
the domesticated ferret is unproven.  In terms of political garbage (CA,
etc), I believe the ancestor of the domesticated ferret is extinct (tricky
answer--could mean any polecat variety, including past forms of European
polecats...)
 
I've been thinking hard about the "African polecat" stuff, and have come up
with three thoughts (That's ALL I have...go ahead and make a wise-crack!).
First, the African polecat is an extinct species that once actually existed.
Second, the African polecat is a common name applied to animals traded in
from the North African region, and are actually something else, such as
descendents of European polecats.  Third, the ferret was never in Africa,
and those old guys were stupid.  Any case is actually moot, because no hard
evidence exists to prove the domesticated ferret developed out of any extant
animal.  (Besides, the old guys were just as smart as we are; they just had
less information at hand.  While many "ferret historians" allude to the
third idea, I reject it as egocentricism--they wouldn't have said "Africa"
if there wasn't something to it.)
 
Pop quiz for all you archaeology buffs.  Name the group that actively traded
throughout the Mediterranean between 500-100 BC (very rough dates), extended
trade up the Spanish coast, and had a large city in North Africa.  This
group actively traded food grains, and cats are not known to have been used
as ratters on ships of this period.  It is probable that this group used
ferrets for rat control, and brought them into Spain--hence the idea of an
African origin.  But again, where did the ferret come from?
 
IMHO, I think the ferret came out of the Eurasia region, and was traded down
towards the Med.  Much of that region has a recent history which precludes
scientific archaeology, and the evidence may still be underground or hidding
in old boxes.  That is, if it can be identified, and as a person well versed
in the problems of faunal identification, I have serious doubts unless
skulls are preserved.
 
Currently, the strongest evidence is genetic; only the European polecat
comes close, and on that basis, many scientists, including the International
Committee on Nomenclature, have identified the ferret as a descendent of
that creature.  And on that basis, I have no real argument, although the
possiblity exists that the ferret originated from a closely related extinct
species.  My argument is how the nomenclature is applied to domesticates.
As an evolutionist, I have to say (when looking at the end result) natural
selection and human selection are analogs of each other.  They work the same
way.  Which means, the domesticated ferret has "evolved" from the European
polecat.  They are no longer the same.  This is demonstrated in some species
(cat, dog), ignored in others (pig, ferret), and not even thought about in
some (horse, cow).  Unless the rules are the same for all, unethical people
with political agendas (listening, CA?) will subvert scientific nomenclature
to "prove" their arguments (The dog and cat are DIFFERENT species than the
wolf or wild cat; the ferret is the SAME species as the European polecat and
should be banned...)
 
Consider this.  Imagine a line of 10,000 animals.  Each animal represents a
generation (any three in a row would be grandparent-parent-child), so you
are looking at 10,000 generations.  If you could only see a few animals at a
time as you walked down the line, you would never notice any change taking
place between the beasties.  Clearly, the animals form a spectrum of
morphology--and never do you find distinct species existing between
generations.  Yet the first and last generations may well be different
species; they may not be able to reproduce, they may even have different
numbers of chromosomes.  Where would you draw the line?  The same thing
occurs over space as well as time--as you walk from one side of the US to
the other, the change is so gradual, the differences are not noticed.  Yet
the animals from the different coasts may not be able to breed with each
other, and are considered separate species, even though they really form a
continuum.  And that's the problem with classifying ferrets.  Are they far
enough down the line or geographically separate enough to be a different
species, and how do we know without clear knowledge of the ancestor species?
Don't you love biology?  Aren't species concepts fun?  Don't you wish you'd
looked for internet porn?
 
Hope this helps; best I can do in less than 125 lines.
 
Bob and the 13 Phylogenetic Pherrets
 
PS...oh, yeah.  A clue:  Phone for an aged cart in Lybia. Give up?
Carthage is the city, the group are the Phoenicians.
[Posted in FML issue 1474]