|
|
Post by Bolushi on Jul 8, 2023 6:38:35 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by grippingwhiteness on Jul 8, 2023 7:55:18 GMT
Welcome to the club, Ling... Sorry but I'm going to have to deny this invitation, sorry I mean, AT LEAST you actually HAVE a club here. I'm stuck liking sharks and prehistoric animals... although I guess I have myself to blame for liking those animals. I can fix that, do you have discord? |
|
|
|
Post by grippingwhiteness on Jul 8, 2023 8:03:20 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by grippingwhiteness on Jul 8, 2023 8:35:11 GMT
"The great" GR CH BUCK 7XW ROM 2X SDJ DOY  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2023 9:56:54 GMT
Sorry but I'm going to have to deny this invitation, sorry I mean, AT LEAST you actually HAVE a club here. I'm stuck liking sharks and prehistoric animals... although I guess I have myself to blame for liking those animals. I can fix that, do you have discord? I'm not keen on changing my animal preferences, but yes, I do have discord. |
|
|
|
Post by grippingwhiteness on Jul 8, 2023 12:39:42 GMT
I can fix that, do you have discord? I'm not keen on changing my animal preferences, but yes, I do have discord. Saying that because there's a mammalia branch server called bioaquatica where all aquatic animals especially sharks are discussed. If you're interested AndresVida#8004 |
|
|
|
Post by Hardcastle on Jul 8, 2023 13:00:40 GMT
1890 - 1900+s Great Dane pictures, looks like they were slightly shorter and heavier in built back then, weren't they? View AttachmentView AttachmentView AttachmentView AttachmentView AttachmentView AttachmentSometimes from Great Dane historical pictures of that time (which is basically the 1890-1930 range) I have noticed there are two variants of the breed, the tall and lean ones and the shorter and stockier ones. I've also found paintings that trace back way further than these pictures, probably 1750 -1850 range, which depicts Great Dane ONLY in the shorter and stockier bauplan, such as - View AttachmentView AttachmentView AttachmentView AttachmentView AttachmentIs this vague difference due to perhaps different roles? Like taller and leaner ones were used for dog racing while stockier ones where used as boarhounds? My guess is that originally Great Danes were all bred to be only and exclusively boarhounds, true catchdogs in their own manner. To be what they were they had to develop the robust boarhound bauplan to be able to go mouth to mouth with large game and struggle with their limbs implanted on the ground like columns. Something may have changed with the start of 1900s, maybe some Great Danes got introduced in the dog racing world and by consequence they were since they selectively bred, perhaps even by crossing them with greyhounds, to perform well in dog racing. The result would have been them adapting the taller and lankier built we know of. This is just my impression by the way, and I'm not totally sure about that either. Just because they may been crossed with greyhounds (my pure speculation) for dog racing doesn't mean they couldn't perform well as catchdogs, they would absolutely. Just like a lankier dogal can lug on a boar as if it was a dogo argentino. I've been waiting till I had enough time to respond to this properly, this is one of those topics I can dive very very very deep on, but I'll try not to go crazy. Even these old paintings are still kind of "new" and many from after the ancestors of the great dane had retired from working as boarhounds. The great dane didn't get recognised as a purebreed until 1887, but even before that, for hundreds of years in fact, some aristocrats who were "enthusiasts" of european boarhounds were breeding them just to keep as pets around the "court" or estate or whatever, and they were already breeding them for size at this point. This started for some lineages as early as the 1500s/1600s. At this time no one distinguished between german or belgian or dutch or english or spanish boarhounds, they were all just boarhounds, and you can see they were all basically similar- Germany mid 1600s  Spain mid 1600s-  Spain late 1600s-  England early 1600s-  England mid 1500s-  England 1600s-  Belgium early 1600s-  Netherlands early 1600s-  France 1775 (first mention of "great dane" on record)-  All of the above dogs are actually pets bred to be pets, even way back then. Even way back then some people had taken in boarhounds and started breeding them to be "chamber hounds", to sleep in the bedrooms of rich children and deter kidnappers, and also be paraded around at parties near dwarfs for a laugh. Not just the Great Dane Descends from these dogs, the English mastiff does too. In fact the English dog up there with the children is a great great great """" grandfather to all english mastiffs that live today. At one point, in the 1600s and 1700s, great danes and english mastiffs were the same and both looked like great danes. But all the dogs above DESCEND from boar hounds. Actual working boarhounds. THOSE dogs varied, because they weren't bred for looks, they were bred to work. Back then they were "mongrel pig dogs", so you had tall ones, short ones, skinny ones, thick ones, hairy ones, smooth ones, etc etc etc. Because they were just rugged working dogs made by crossing buthcher's alaunts with greyhounds or foxhounds with bandogs and deerhounds, or bulldogs with wolfhounds or whatever.        Scattered among these rag tag mongrel working dogs you see the odd individual that is kind of an impressive looking "boar hound", like a mix between tall celtic hound and a broad-mouthed alano. Those were of course the striking ones that would be favoured when artistocrats started keeping "chamber hounds", but they have this "mongrel pig dog" origin. The chamber hounds emerged from this soup of working dogs. The variety in their phenotype would get less and less over the centuries, until today we have the two distinctive breeds in the great dane and the english mastiff, two very different "takes" on the idea (the great dane definitely more faithful to the original, at least it is still kind of an athlete). But in truth both have been separated from their original purpose for a long time. With colonialism and settling new wild lands they'd bring boarhounds and wolfhounds and bulldogs and etc all back to life. In Europe the real working varieties were already dying out in the 1500s/1600s and being replaced by the trendy new sport of using firearms and gun dogs. More and more it was just these relic "chamber hounds" that were the only trace remaining of the old boarhounds, and meanwhile bulldogs were becoming very very small and compact for bloodsports and dog fighting and the actual "bandogge" was becoming a thing of the past as well. The colonies had vast wilderness and lots of big game and they kept the old european hunting style and old european dogs alive by using the old style of performance breeding where you readily cross different types and work hard and cull the soft ones and etc, caring only about performance and not looks. By the 1800s all the best dogs were to be found in India, Sri Lanka, South East Asia, Africa, Australia, North America, Latin America, etc etc, because that is where the work was still being done and the performance breeding was still cutthroat and serious. Now a lot of those cultures have died out as well, and all are at risk of dying out, and when they do you lose the real dogs, and just get these "mascotts" that kind of hint at dogs that used to exist. Sometimes kind of accurately like the great dane, but you run the risk of completely losing the memory like we see with english mastiffs and english bulldogs. To keep the real thing you need to keep the work. That's why a bull arab is actually a better representative of a european boarhound than a real "blue blood" european boarhound like a great dane. Even though the bull arab was "invented" in the 1970s. When you look at the old hunting paintings you can see lots of "bull arabs", few "great danes", and zero "english mastiffs". Ditto for old bull baiting artworks. Lots of apbts and sbts (even though the paintings pre-date those breeds), no "english bulldogs". The "real thing" only exists with the actual work. You can't "preserve" dogs without the work. That is where the kennel club world made a major critical error. They thought you could preserve the blood "pure" and that would preserve the animal as is. But it doesn't work, and didn't work. They had to focus on preserving the work, but they didn't. Some breeds have held together nicely. Like in that very very very old hunting painting above, you can see a deerhound and it is still the same thing today. That is why I like the deerhound as a breed. |
|
|
|
Post by grippingwhiteness on Jul 8, 2023 13:12:55 GMT
Fox Control with Patterdales  Here's another Patterdale  Wheaten Bull Grey . As I said my interest for these type of dogs is increasing constantly in the late days.  Now a very interesting cross. American Bulldog x American Staghound.    |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2023 13:21:42 GMT
I'm not keen on changing my animal preferences, but yes, I do have discord. Saying that because there's a mammalia branch server called bioaquatica where all aquatic animals especially sharks are discussed. If you're interested AndresVida#8004 I sent a friend request. |
|
|
|
Post by Hardcastle on Jul 8, 2023 14:01:30 GMT
A lot of people struggle with the idea that mongrels pre-date the purebreeds. That purebreeds descend from mongrels. It runs contrary to common sense, don't you need purebreeds to make mongrels in the first place? This is true, but those "purebreed" "ingredients" that originally went in to making the working mongrels, were land races from deep in antiquity. Maybe 500 BC was the last time they were really separated from one another. Back then the different "tribes" of people were separated and each had their own distinctive dog adapted to their way of life. In Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome whenever they talked about dogs they still talked about them belonging to a certain people. There was no "sheep dog" or "cattle dog" or "fox hound" or whatever. Instead you had the dog of the Medians, the dog of the Hyrcanians, the dog of the Geloni, the dog of the celts, the dog of the britons, etc etc. You can look back on the texts and figure out what kind of dog each clan of people had, based on what we now know about different types of dog, but the Romans and Greeks and Persians and etc didn't really think of it like that. They just thought of it like "the dog of the hyrcanians is good to leave out with sheep, for it will defend them from the wild beasts" (now we understand they had LGDS), "the dog of the umbrians is masterful at tracking wild beasts, but then flees from facing them" (we now understand the umbrians had scenthounds, etc etc). There were simply a variety of "races" of dog, each group of people just had one dog, and then when the greeks and persians and especially the romans began absorbing multiple cultures, then they'd end up having multiple dogs of different kinds, and then they quickly realised very early on you get the best results by crossing them together. Roman poet Grattius wrote around the first century AD- Cynegeticon by Grattius"Metagon" and "metagontes" were not widely used words, but most scholars agree based on the context (and to me it is quite clear) it means "crossbreed" or "mongrel". He is basically saying crossing the different dogs can get the best of both worlds and make better hunting dogs. The ONLY possible exception is if you want to chase very very fast game, then you should stick mostly to pure sighthounds (of the Petronian, Sycambrian or Vetraha). He says of these 3 the petronian is the best finder when animals hide, but unfortunately is also the noisiest. This implies the me the Scyambrian and Vetreha were legit full sighthounds, while the petronian was likely a more rustic primal versatile sighthound leaning back towards a pariah, one that used it's nose and ears but also bayed. Perhaps like an ibizan hound or Cirneco Dell Etna. What is most interesting about all this, is it is still true. For very very very fast game like hare and antelope you have to avoid going crazy with the cross-breeding, because only sighthounds can consistently keep up, but for boar and deer and etc you get better results and "all the glory" crossing different types of dogs together. Those are the best dogs. As true now as it was then. And this is back when we have real "land races", "pure" types belonging to different tribes. You can go through all the tribes in Cynegeticon and be like "oh they had a scenthound, oh they had an LGD, oh they had a pariah, they had a sighthound, they had a bulldog" etc etc. Each group just had one dog. Empires merged all these different cultures together, and that is when crossbreeding started. Since then, very recently, "breeds" have emerged, and they come from taking some variant of mongrel working dog and claiming it is pure and then breeding it pure and also breeding it for no reason and not working it. So breeds are very new. Landraces are ancient, and then "performance mongrels" were made from them starting way way back AD. Today serious dog work still produces performance mongrels sometimes by using new purebreeds and basically re-fashioning them back into working dogs. The ingredients are still all in there and just need to be unlocked. |
|
|
|
Post by Hardcastle on Jul 8, 2023 14:55:34 GMT
Roman poet Grattius wrote around the first century AD- Cynegeticon by Grattius"Metagon" and "metagontes" were not widely used words, but most scholars agree based on the context (and to me it is quite clear) it means "crossbreed" or "mongrel". He is basically saying crossing the different dogs can get the best of both worlds and make better hunting dogs. The ONLY possible exception is if you want to chase very very fast game, then you should stick mostly to pure sighthounds (of the Petronian, Sycambrian or Vetraha). He says of these 3 the petronian is the best finder when animals hide, but unfortunately is also the noisiest. This implies the me the Scyambrian and Vetreha were legit full sighthounds, while the petronian was likely a more rustic primal versatile sighthound leaning back towards a pariah, one that used it's nose and ears but also bayed. Perhaps like an ibizan hound or Cirneco Dell Etna. I just want to correct myself here. I just had an epiphany while doing a deep dive investigation. The "petronian" wasn't a sighthound, it was actually a harrier, a small fast foxhound from gaul (aka france) used for hare. This is what is difficult about interpretting the old texts, they don't even recognise the different types of dog. Each dog is its own individual entity, so they would freely group a harrier in with sighthounds just because they all hunt hare. Also many of the place names are no longer used. BTW the vertraha was likely a celtic deerhound (the "yellow spots" likely brindle dappling), it was the celtic word for greyhound. The sycambrian a hungarian greyhound or Magyar Agar. It can be very difficult to figure these things out, in fact all the historians who have interpretted this text I think have failed to even recognise many of the place names, let alone the dogs being talked about. Sometimes they aren't even named after a country but "a principality" or the side of a river or something. In another piece of ancient literature I have read India was also famous for its sighthounds at this time, which would have likely been the Kanni. Even though India has many many many sighthound breeds, the Kanni (aka chippiparai) is the one which accompanies the older ethnic groups and seems to be the original native sighthound. |
|
|
|
Post by grippingwhiteness on Jul 8, 2023 17:11:22 GMT
A lot of people struggle with the idea that mongrels pre-date the purebreeds. That purebreeds descend from mongrels. It runs contrary to common sense, don't you need purebreeds to make mongrels in the first place? This is true, but those "purebreed" "ingredients" that originally went in to making the working mongrels, were land races from deep in antiquity. Maybe 500 BC was the last time they were really separated from one another. Back then the different "tribes" of people were separated and each had their own distinctive dog adapted to their way of life. In Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome whenever they talked about dogs they still talked about them belonging to a certain people. There was no "sheep dog" or "cattle dog" or "fox hound" or whatever. Instead you had the dog of the Medians, the dog of the Hyrcanians, the dog of the Geloni, the dog of the celts, the dog of the britons, etc etc. You can look back on the texts and figure out what kind of dog each clan of people had, based on what we now know about different types of dog, but the Romans and Greeks and Persians and etc didn't really think of it like that. They just thought of it like "the dog of the hyrcanians is good to leave out with sheep, for it will defend them from the wild beasts" (now we understand they had LGDS), "the dog of the umbrians is masterful at tracking wild beasts, but then flees from facing them" (we now understand the umbrians had scenthounds, etc etc). There were simply a variety of "races" of dog, each group of people just had one dog, and then when the greeks and persians and especially the romans began absorbing multiple cultures, then they'd end up having multiple dogs of different kinds, and then they quickly realised very early on you get the best results by crossing them together. Roman poet Grattius wrote around the first century AD- Cynegeticon by Grattius"Metagon" and "metagontes" were not widely used words, but most scholars agree based on the context (and to me it is quite clear) it means "crossbreed" or "mongrel". He is basically saying crossing the different dogs can get the best of both worlds and make better hunting dogs. The ONLY possible exception is if you want to chase very very fast game, then you should stick mostly to pure sighthounds (of the Petronian, Sycambrian or Vetraha). He says of these 3 the petronian is the best finder when animals hide, but unfortunately is also the noisiest. This implies the me the Scyambrian and Vetreha were legit full sighthounds, while the petronian was likely a more rustic primal versatile sighthound leaning back towards a pariah, one that used it's nose and ears but also bayed. Perhaps like an ibizan hound or Cirneco Dell Etna. What is most interesting about all this, is it is still true. For very very very fast game like hare and antelope you have to avoid going crazy with the cross-breeding, because only sighthounds can consistently keep up, but for boar and deer and etc you get better results and "all the glory" crossing different types of dogs together. Those are the best dogs. As true now as it was then. And this is back when we have real "land races", "pure" types belonging to different tribes. You can go through all the tribes in Cynegeticon and be like "oh they had a scenthound, oh they had an LGD, oh they had a pariah, they had a sighthound, they had a bulldog" etc etc. Each group just had one dog. Empires merged all these different cultures together, and that is when crossbreeding started. Since then, very recently, "breeds" have emerged, and they come from taking some variant of mongrel working dog and claiming it is pure and then breeding it pure and also breeding it for no reason and not working it. So breeds are very new. Landraces are ancient, and then "performance mongrels" were made from them starting way way back AD. Today serious dog work still produces performance mongrels sometimes by using new purebreeds and basically re-fashioning them back into working dogs. The ingredients are still all in there and just need to be unlocked. Purebreeds are long story short the mix of other breeds. The standard of a purebreed is just crossing this mix of other breeds with another dog that has the same origins without other dogs added in the genepool. But who actually cares about the pureness of a breed. Function is what matters |
|
|
|
Post by Bolushi on Jul 8, 2023 20:08:25 GMT
And some Harlequin Dane. Those are NQ Bullhounds. American Bulldog x Staghound x Harlequin Dane. |
|
|
|
Post by Hardcastle on Jul 8, 2023 20:19:21 GMT
And some Harlequin Dane. Those are NQ Bullhounds. American Bulldog x Staghound x Harlequin Dane. Oh... I was hoping they were legitimately american. I have a pic or two of some dogo x american staghounds from texas, somewhere... |
|
|
|
Post by Bolushi on Jul 8, 2023 20:28:53 GMT
And some Harlequin Dane. Those are NQ Bullhounds. American Bulldog x Staghound x Harlequin Dane. Oh... I was hoping they were legitimately american. I have a pic or two of some dogo x american staghounds from texas, somewhere... Should've gotten the hint from the dogs not being covered head to toe in steel force-absorbent armor. |
|
