Talk:let the cat out of the bag

Supposed to come from the same etymology as "pig in a poke" The practice of selling meat animals in a sack, with an unfortunate buyer being duped by the substitution of a non-edible animal such as a cat. I can't find a definitive source, and I would seriously doubt at any point in antiquity buyers were expected to buy piglets sight unseen, or that there would ever be cause to confine a piglet to a burlap sack and thus risk suffocation, and for buyers to purchase an alleged piglet sight unseen without verification. But that seems to be the most common folk etymology. Can anyone confirm the validity of this highly dubious "likely" source practice? 65.29.47.55 08:35, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

I have to say it doesn't sound very plausible either. A long time ago, I'm sure I heard an alternative origin - sounds plausible but is complete hearsay on my part. In seafaring history, a common form of punishment was flogging. The tool for this was a piece of 3 strand naval rope which unravelled to 3 strands, each of which unravelled to 3 strands - so 9 in total. The ends were then bound to stop further unravelling. The result was known as the "cat o' nine tails" - and was (according to the story as I heard it) normally kept in a bag. If something happened which would justify a flogging, and someone let on who was responsible - they were said to have "let the cat out of the bag" by identifying the culprit. Or similarly, if someone knew who was guilty, they would be told to keep quiet with "don't let the cat out of the bag" - since if they kept quiet, no-one would get flogged and so the cat would stay in it's bag. As I say, complete hearsay but plausible - more plausible than the origin given IMO.