Judging by old photographs, in Malta, pets seem to have been more common with the British colonisers than among the indigenous inhabitants.
A previous feature had hinted how Brits often had household pets included in their photos. The locals would do that too, only less frequently. Some Maltese dog owners actually took their pet to posh studios for expensive solo portraits.
Cats prove as systematically absent from photos of British servicemen and their families in the island as they are from Maltese households. Another noticeable difference refers to monkeys, apes and lemurs – relatively common with the expat British community, but entirely unfindable in local homes.
I am no expert at identifying canine breeds, but it appears Maltese owners cherished equally mongrels and pure pedigrees. Dogs assert their presence equally with both British and Maltese ethnicities, saving one major difference. In photos of members of the armed forces or settlers, dogs are mascots and pets, while in front of the Maltese camera, dogs often act as the appendix of hunters. Do dogs kept for hunting qualify as pets?
Horses and ponies appear more ambivalent. Kaless and karozzin equines act as functional beasts of burden, sometimes overworked and ill-treated. Racing horses often bond with their jockeys. More pets would be horses or ponies who leisurely trot pulling a sulky, at one with the owner, both enjoying the ride.
Pet-owning has taken a drastic turn over the past few years.
To ensure everyone knows how high you have climbed the bogan scale, it is essential to post on Facebook a photo of you holding a tiger cub, a puma or a cheetah.
That encourages everyone to acknowledge you’ve really made it.
All images from the author’s present or past collections.