Post by Hardcastle on Jul 10, 2023 17:47:53 GMT
Just a thread for collecting excerpts about dogs from historical literature, and then trying to interpret, analyse, speculate, etc on what they were trying to say (because they often don't know themselves) and what kind of dogs they were talking about.
I'll kick it off with an oft-quoted classic-
Cynegeticon by Grattius
Cynegeticon is a pretty long "poem" about hunting that gives really interesting insight into the hunting scene of Ancient Rome around the time of Jesus Christ (Grattius lived between 63 BC and 14 AD) and with a lot of reference to Ancient Greece as well.
It is often quoted by dog scholars and historians, but often only partially quoted, and I think it is most interesting in its entirety- at least the dog section in its entirety. That gives important context. The dog section makes up the bulk of it, but I will cut out the part about illnesses and problems dogs can have and how to treat them, so we can just focus on the "dog diversity" aspect and a little bit on how to choose good dogs and raise them (also cutting out the stuff about nets and weapons before he talks about dogs - note all can be read above). I aim to go line by line and give my interpretation/analysis.
This is an interesting way to introduce dogs. Hunting clearly revolves around dogs totally at this point in time, and it is even implied that the Romans spread around conquering exotic lands and exotic people in large part to acquire new dogs. It is "why they traverse these wide rounds" rather than just stay where they are. Of course in reality they were also acquiring women and slaves and treasures and alternative technologies etc, but dogs were clearly a massive part of that.
This shows that at this time the different dog types were known as each coming from a different place of origin. Later on the "english" (or whatever, just an example) would have terriers and bulldogs and retrievers and spaniels and scenthounds and sighthounds and etc etc etc, all in one place, which were all "English". But at this time that was an alien or very very new concept, and they retained the mentality that each place just has their own type of dog. 1 dog.IE- These guys over here were scenthound guys, those guys over there are LGD guys, and the guys on the other side of the river were sighthound guys etc etc.
This shouldn't come as a surprise, because it still kind of holds up that a sub-culture of dog-guys are usually focussed on only one kind of dogging. Even in a country with multiple brands of dogging the spaniel guys aren't mixing with the terrier guys, they're different sub-cultures. Well historically they were different cultures from different lands. They've since all mixed and mingled up, but this wasn't how it was in the beginning before empires. Before empires each group of people just had "a dog" each, and grattius goes on to talk about each notable dog/dog culture known to Romans between 63 bc and 14 AD. I'll do my best to figure out who the people were (place names have changed a lot since then) and what the dog was.
Medians
The Medes lived around the South-Western Corner of the Caspian Sea, in what is now technically north-western Iran, just south-east of what is now Armenia. The Median Empire was long dead by 63 BC, in fact the Median Empire fell in 549 BC, but in Ancient Greece and Rome they still called SOME Iranians "Medes". Specifically those in the area I described. Even though Ancient Persia (parthia, at the time) encompassed a huge range (includeing Medes), they didn't call all persians persians or parthians, ONLY those down in southern Iran near the coast of the Arabian Gulf were called Persians (and those specific persians and their dogs get a mention later). The median dog is simply described as undisciplined, and a great fighter. That's not a lot to go on, however "undisciplined" does hint at it being a primitive dog. There's a chance it is POSSIBLY a rustic primitive LGD (and the more rustic the less "concrete" that job description), the sarabi aka "Persian Mastiff" as good a candidate as any other.
Alternatively, and I have a hunch this might be more true because it seems to be grouped with the celtic hunting dog (and LGDs seem to be "packaged" later), it may be an extinct tall sighthound which actually has been referenced among "the assyrians" in some other pieces of history. This dog may be lost to the sands of history totally. A relative of the saluki but huge like a wolfhound, possibly.
Celtic
A lot of people reading this have interpreted celtic to mean "Irish/scottish" and then concluded this referred to a wolfhound/deerhound type of dog. It's funny that they are wrong, and I think accidentally right. They weren't talking about Ireland/Scotland, instead people living in a stretch across Northern France, Belgium and Southern Germany, BUT at this time I think they were largely the same as people in Ireland/Britain and had the same basic type of dog. A hairy wolfhound/deerhound type of dog dominated basically all of north western Europe at this time, until you got up to spitz breeds in the arctic circle where Romans didn't even know about. After Roman influence they would get smooth coated infusion up in the germanic/celtic region, but before that they just all had wolfhounds/deerhounds up there, and that was it. So I think this "celtic dog" mentioned here probably WAS a scottish deerhound, basically, but one that lived in Germany at the time.
Geloni
The Geloni were a tribe who lived north of the black sea in what is now Ukraine. Specifically in the valley of the Vorskla river. With its wise instincts and distaste for combat, I'd speculate it was either a primitive pariah or possibly a herding dog. The Geloni were pastoralists and graziers. We could even be looking at the ancestor of the german shepherd, since we already know that the whole region where continental herders NOW claim as their birthplace, was totally dominated by deerhounds. Continental herders moved in since, why not from Ukraine? Continental herder fans might get mad because they are described as kind of "wussy" here, but it is possible and likely they have been mixed since to make them more combative. Maybe they were leaning a little more like collies back then. There's an emphasis on how smart these dogs are, which makes me think harder. In addition the Geloni apparently lived alongside other people, in the same valley, called the Budini. The Budini were known as "poor" relative to the Gelonians who were known to be well resourced and comfortable due to their agricultural prowess. The gelonians were able to stay in one place and build forts while the Budini had to move around hunting beavers and etc and living in forests, I think this could be a clue that the Geloni had a "secret weapon" of very good herding dogs and the budini probably just had primitive hunting dogs. Just a thought.
Persian
The Persian, as mentioned, refers to a people/dog that lived way down near the persian/Arabian Gulf. It is kind of odd to mention the Persian and Geloni in the same breath and it makes me think there must be some kind of resemblance between those 2 dogs, even though there's no connection between the people. So I start thinking about possible candidates and I think Grattius may be referring to something like the canaan dog.
It is "quick in both respects" of fighting and intelligence. Maybe the scrappy canaan pariah which looks a lot like a herding dog, and did some herding, could kind of make sense? Not sure.
Chinese
I think Chinese dogs were Bankhar. "Unmanageable ferocity" because they are basically wild animals and untrainable, which I guess Grattius noticed in, no doubt very limited, interactions. They are very very primitive, no one takes care of them, they don't need to behave themselves or be good with people. They live as pariahs and then double as "guards" for human settlements. Even though it was a long time ago, "Civilised" romans were accustomed to much more manageable dogs more well adapted to live closer to people.
Lycaonians
Lycaonian is Turkey/anatolia.
Again we see dogs (chinese and Lycaonian, in this instance) bunched together, possibly implying some kind of similarity. I think we are just hearing about the Kangal here. Very "big in limb", that makes sense. The "easy temper" might not seem to match perfectly. I mean sometimes they are chill though. I definitely lean kangal for this dog.
Hyrcanian
Note they are carrying on from the Bankhar and Kangal and moving into the next dog smoothly like it is probably along the same lines, and with the description and location... now they are talking about the central asian shepherd/alabai. I have no doubt. Hyrcania is north-East Iran going up into Turkmenistan.
When they say "Tiger", they mean it, as the Caspian Tiger occupied the Hyrcanian forest at this time.
However, what is also evident is there is a lot of mythology surrounding the life of the alabai. This goes hand in hand with the fact that it lives out among the livestock and so the people aren't even really aware of what it gets up to. He seems to think the CAOs are actually mating with tigers, and eating cows. He doesn't know shit, and why would he? He just knows they live out among the beasts and tigers and get up to who knows what, and that is true, as rustic LGDs.
This whole "section" on LGDs I feel is kind of speculative, I don't think he can wrap his head around the idea some dogs aren't hunting dogs. It is too alien a concept to the author, and as is the case with LGDs he doesn't have much "hands on experience" with them, because no one does. They do their stuff out alone, unsupervised and largely unassisted. Intuitively he can sense a commonality between the bankhar, Kangal and alabai, which is why he bunched them, but I don't think he knows that much about them and as independently working dogs I think most people didn't.
Umbrian
Umbria is central italy, and umbrian dogs; assuredly by the description and location, are scenthounds. Grattius is repeatedly baffled by the way dogs so good at tracking are then cowards that won't fight, but today we understand this about scenthounds. It is built into them to be cautious, have strong self preservation and make a lot of noise. That means they can stay safe and be found after following a trail so far away from the humans. They are like primitive GPS trackers you can put on wild animals and then follow your ears to go find it. Obviously grattius though is more impressed with dogs that are courageous and bite. As he continues...
Morini
Morini is basically the coast of Northern France, and in the mind of the average Roman- the western-most edge of "celt" country. Already a wild savage region, but Grattius says "what if you go beyond even there", and cross the "strait of morini" which is today "the english channel". This is the most "far away" location to him. Britain I mean. And it is getting him a bit excited.
Briton
It seems the dogs of Britain impressed Rome a great deal. This is actually mentioned a few times in independent sources. What isn't made clear exactly is what kind of dog we are talking about, and everything from bulldogs to mastiffs to terriers has been speculated based on this passage. I have no real doubt we are still talking about a celtic hound, the britons were still celts, and I suspect had a straggly wolfhound/deerhound type of dog at this time. BUT one which was pretty damn hardcore. The celtic dog earlier was spoken of very highly as deserving of glory, the British dog I would suggest was just a regional variant of the celtic dog, but crucially perhaps very brave, hard luggers to the max and useful in war. This gets it grouped with other gripping dogs;
Molossian
Athamania
Azorus
Pherae
Arcarnanian
These are all locations/people found in northwest Greece, south of Albania. The dogs from these places are being grouped together and described as behaving the same and being the same- Rushing silently in to battle with unwavering courage, and sure enough, this location at that time was occupied by tribes connected to "the Alans". The same "alans" who also went to Spain, and took with them their "alanos" which gave rise to the "alaunts"- aka the gripping dogs. So there were these tribes in greece which were really Alans with Alanos, and they were- The molossi, the Athamanians, the Azorus, the Pherae and the Arcarnanians. All had broad mouthed muscular gripping dogs for seizing big game. The molossian would become the most famous one, but as Grattius describes there were a few tribes in the same area with similar dogs that had similar characteristics.
People have tried to hijack the term "molosser" and paint the molossian of history as an LGD, but it is clearly not true when you really dig into this literature and pay attention to the more subtle clues. It was definitely unmistakably a catch dog like the alano espanol.
What is interesting is the dog of the britons was so brave and tough and useful in war and etc, that it was considered to be similar to these Greek Alanos in many ways. It was just mocked for being "ugly", I believe because it was probably wire coated, but it was otherwise praised for its combative prowess (and again, this isn't the only source material to do so - there's another where they were shipped to be used in the arena and did well- will try and find that later and add it to this hopefully ongoing thread). It makes me wonder if the Britons hadn't already mixed their celtic deerhounds with alano gripping dogs at this stage in history, and grattius just didn't know about that "heritage"? He's clearly determined to put the british dog with the gripping dogs, at least in courage and function. His intuition may be on to something. It SHOULD have been a celtic dog, the britons were celtic and should have had a celtic deerhound type just like the gauls and other celts, but theirs in particular (at least on the south east coast of britain) packed extra punch for combat, which I think probably indicates some mixing with gripping dog already had taken place. Possibly by way of Sarmatian migrations earlier, or some proto-scythian group with broad-mouthed gripping dogs. I strongly suspect from this and other clues that the britons had a dog that was probably a mixture of celtic deerhound with scythian or proto-scythian alano, while the more familiar celts in northern france(gaul) and southern germany had something more like a deerhound.
Aetolian
A different part of greece, south of where the gripping dog tribes lived, the Aetolians fairly unambiguously kept scenthounds by this description. They are described as good and determined scenthounds (his description could easily be describing modern plotthounds), but Grattius finds scenthounds in general frustrating (and I can relate) due to the way they are noisy and he also hints at them possibly being "fearful".
Here Grattius talks about purposefully crossing different types of dog. Mostly dogs he has already talked about. In fact, even the ones which are newly mentioned, are referring to ones he has already mentioned.
"Gallic" was interchangeable at this point with "celt", and "calydonia" is "aetolian". Calydon is in the Aetolian region of Greece. He just expects the reader to understand that, he is just mentioning them again with a different name. Like if I said "the english sure do like to drink tea", and then later on said "yep, those brits love their tea". I'm not talking about two different people, it is the English both times and I'm just mixing it up. Here he does the same.
Ultimately he speaks of Umbrian x gallic - that (I believe) is scenthound x deerhound. Gelonian x Hyrcanian; herder x cao, and Calydonia x molossis, is scenthound x gripping dog.
Basically talking about hybrid vigour here, the benefits of crossing different types of dog. "Nature is kind to them" and they (often) get the best of both parents and lose flaws.
This is important to understand, for context purposes, that before now he was talking about big-game. Using different styles of dog, but with big game in mind. Now he wants to focus in on hunting fast game like hare and antelope.
Petronian
It's hard to say what they mean by petronian. It could mean Petra, an ancient settlement in Jordan near Israel, there IS also a "Patras" in Greece, BUT I think it is actually referring to Marseille, on the southern Coast of France. That is where the very influential at the time "Petronius", came from, and he was so influential his fashion styling was named after him, and so maybe also by then his birthplace was named after him. OR it could be some other location totally lost in translation over time.
If it is Southern France... it could be 1 of two different things. It could be referring to a fast scenthound designed for hares, like a "harrier", or it could be referring to an extinct variant of mediterranean sighthound. France doesn't really have sighthounds, they are very scenthound oriented, but scattered around the mediterranean sea there are some "relic" primitive sighthounds with prick ears, good noses and good speed who hunt leporids a lot. Likewise if it was Jordan in the middle east I'd suggest it was the same. Againt these relic sighthounds scatter all around the mediterranean. He is grouping this petronian dog with other sighthounds, so I'm compelled to PROBABLY lean with a primitive sighthound. I'm talking similar to the ibizan hound, Pharoah hound, Cirneco D'ell Etna, etc.
Sycambrian
Sycambria refers to what is now Hungary, and it is interesting for him to mention Hungary of all places as a go-to for sighthounds. They still notably have the Magyar Agar, the hungarian greyhound, which I always just assumed was an english greyhound that found itself marooned over in Hungary in the last 150 years or so. I could be way off. Hungary might instead be a key place of origin for PART of the english greyhound's story. It seems the "sycambrians" were killing it with sighthounds way back then. The magyar agar may actually be the ancestor of the english greyhound, in effect. At least in part. Remember at this time the "briton" dog was more noteworthy for its prowess as a warrior than a speedster.
Vertraha
Unlike the rest so far, apparently Vertraha isn't a place, instead it is thought to come from "Vertragus", a celtic word that possibly means greyhound. Which would imply, when written in Latin by a Roman Poet, that he is speaking of a celtic greyhound. Which is interesting because it implies celts may have been an exception and already had a couple different types of dogs, but on the other hand the "celts" were many different tribes. So I think this is just the deerhound type of the celts getting a second mention because the topic of hare and antelope came up and they are good for that too (on top of the boars and wolves and what have you). No doubt celtic hounds were already a popular hunting tool among the Romans, they call them vetraha to nod to their celtic origin. The yellow spots are perhaps the golden dapples through a rough brindle coat. Or white with fawn spots/patches may have been a common coloration at the time too.
It's also worth pointing out that historians/scholars really can't agree on what kind of dog vertraha (and all variations) meant, the speculations range from tiny italian greyhound lap dogs up through greyhounds, to greyhound x molosser to just molosser. Here's a historian discussion about this very topic-
![]()
Despite this confusion, Grattius makes it clear to me, as someone familiar with types of dogs and their limitations, he is definitely talking about a very very fast sighthound. Indeed one of only few dogs known to Rome at the time that could actually run down a hare or antelope. So definitely a sighthound of at least deerhound level speed and probably even faster.
Perhaps the British cousin of the Vertraha was indeed mixed with "molosser" or proto-molosser. That seems true based on their description, but the vertraha described by grattius is definitely a pure sighthound. In fact it is singled out as especially fast even when compared to the Sycambrian and Petronian, which are likely other sighthounds. I think this is a sighthound "section" of sorts in Grattius' musings.
He has basically gone through; large hunting hounds, Herder/spitz/pariah, LGD, Scenthound, Gripping dogs, back on to scenthounds briefly just to contrast them with gripping dogs, and then on to sighthounds. In that somewhat random order, but that is my interpretation.
Metagon / Metagonte means mix-breed, and he seems to be saying the petronian is pretty good for hunting hare and antelope with its versatility and combination of speed and finding ability, but (a bit like scenthounds) they frustrate him because they bark and spook prey, if they could just keep a lid on that they'd be as good as mixed-breeds, which are implied as the true masters of versatile elite hunting ability. He is saying the "honour" is "now" held by the mixed-breeds, like people have figured out they are the best hunting dogs. And they're the best despite having no distinct home or pedigree. Its interesting because it holds up. For versatility, being balanced and good with speed, AND scent, AND fighting ability, it is hard to go past primitive dogs, UNTIL you start crossing specialised types together. Then they are better than primitive dogs. PARTICULARLY in regards to their courage and commitment to the hunt. A fact then, a fact now.
A lot to unpack here- Sparta and Crete (both to the far south of Greece, Crete and island off the southern coast) apparently both use "metagons" aka mongrels, at this time, and according to Grattius try to claim them as either their native dogs, or possibly their invention (unclear).
Grattius believes however the real origin of a metagon is recorded in legend, pre-dating the spartan and Cretan usage of such dogs, and that they were originally used by a legendary figure named "Hagnon" from Boeotia (Central Greece, closer to Athens) who Grattius seems to believe basically invented hunting with dogs by hunting with a single mongrel "Glympic" (nearby location) dog. Again, according to a legend.
It is likely, IMO, that neither story is true. It is not uncommon in old cultures for there to be a story about a famous guy from not THAT long ago inventing something that is actually way way way older. In some stone age cultures they might say that a tribal chief who lived maybe 100 years ago invented "thunder" or something like that. Hagnon lived about 300 years prior to Grattius, but clearly was being given way too much credit, likely due to having a big impact on Greek Society. It is just a common folly of poor records.
Equally the spartans or cretans claiming Mongrel performance bred hunting dogs are their native dog or their idea is also likely not true. Taking credit for things is something proud patriotic cultures often do as well.
What is clear above all is "metagons", mongrels aka crossbred dogs, are already prized above all as the best hunting dogs. So much so that people are disputing who should take credit.
Again, it is only when chasing the absolute fastest game that you might be wise to stick to a pure sycambrian, Vertraha or Petronian hound, likely the known sighthounds of the time. Other than that, "Metagons" or crossbreeds are ideal. This is STILL true, which is pretty interesting.
I'll try and gradually work through all the historical texts I can find, may even interpret artworks here as well as it all would fall under "Canine Classicism". Classicism is like history but more about analysing and interpreting "clues" from source material, whether literature or artwork or whatever, rather than learning from "Historians".
So yeah feel free to post any old dog stuff or share your thoughts.
I'll kick it off with an oft-quoted classic-
Cynegeticon by Grattius
Cynegeticon is a pretty long "poem" about hunting that gives really interesting insight into the hunting scene of Ancient Rome around the time of Jesus Christ (Grattius lived between 63 BC and 14 AD) and with a lot of reference to Ancient Greece as well.
It is often quoted by dog scholars and historians, but often only partially quoted, and I think it is most interesting in its entirety- at least the dog section in its entirety. That gives important context. The dog section makes up the bulk of it, but I will cut out the part about illnesses and problems dogs can have and how to treat them, so we can just focus on the "dog diversity" aspect and a little bit on how to choose good dogs and raise them (also cutting out the stuff about nets and weapons before he talks about dogs - note all can be read above). I aim to go line by line and give my interpretation/analysis.
But why do we traverse these wide rounds amidst small details? The foremost care is that of dogs; no other care comes before that throughout the whole system of hunting, whether you energetically pursue the untamed quarry with bare force or use skill to manage the conflict.
This is an interesting way to introduce dogs. Hunting clearly revolves around dogs totally at this point in time, and it is even implied that the Romans spread around conquering exotic lands and exotic people in large part to acquire new dogs. It is "why they traverse these wide rounds" rather than just stay where they are. Of course in reality they were also acquiring women and slaves and treasures and alternative technologies etc, but dogs were clearly a massive part of that.
Dogs belong to a thousand lands and they each have characteristics derived from their origin;
This shows that at this time the different dog types were known as each coming from a different place of origin. Later on the "english" (or whatever, just an example) would have terriers and bulldogs and retrievers and spaniels and scenthounds and sighthounds and etc etc etc, all in one place, which were all "English". But at this time that was an alien or very very new concept, and they retained the mentality that each place just has their own type of dog. 1 dog.IE- These guys over here were scenthound guys, those guys over there are LGD guys, and the guys on the other side of the river were sighthound guys etc etc.
This shouldn't come as a surprise, because it still kind of holds up that a sub-culture of dog-guys are usually focussed on only one kind of dogging. Even in a country with multiple brands of dogging the spaniel guys aren't mixing with the terrier guys, they're different sub-cultures. Well historically they were different cultures from different lands. They've since all mixed and mingled up, but this wasn't how it was in the beginning before empires. Before empires each group of people just had "a dog" each, and grattius goes on to talk about each notable dog/dog culture known to Romans between 63 bc and 14 AD. I'll do my best to figure out who the people were (place names have changed a lot since then) and what the dog was.
The Median dog, though undisciplined, is a great fighter, and great glory exalts the far-distant Celtic dogs.
Medians
The Medes lived around the South-Western Corner of the Caspian Sea, in what is now technically north-western Iran, just south-east of what is now Armenia. The Median Empire was long dead by 63 BC, in fact the Median Empire fell in 549 BC, but in Ancient Greece and Rome they still called SOME Iranians "Medes". Specifically those in the area I described. Even though Ancient Persia (parthia, at the time) encompassed a huge range (includeing Medes), they didn't call all persians persians or parthians, ONLY those down in southern Iran near the coast of the Arabian Gulf were called Persians (and those specific persians and their dogs get a mention later). The median dog is simply described as undisciplined, and a great fighter. That's not a lot to go on, however "undisciplined" does hint at it being a primitive dog. There's a chance it is POSSIBLY a rustic primitive LGD (and the more rustic the less "concrete" that job description), the sarabi aka "Persian Mastiff" as good a candidate as any other.
Alternatively, and I have a hunch this might be more true because it seems to be grouped with the celtic hunting dog (and LGDs seem to be "packaged" later), it may be an extinct tall sighthound which actually has been referenced among "the assyrians" in some other pieces of history. This dog may be lost to the sands of history totally. A relative of the saluki but huge like a wolfhound, possibly.
Celtic
A lot of people reading this have interpreted celtic to mean "Irish/scottish" and then concluded this referred to a wolfhound/deerhound type of dog. It's funny that they are wrong, and I think accidentally right. They weren't talking about Ireland/Scotland, instead people living in a stretch across Northern France, Belgium and Southern Germany, BUT at this time I think they were largely the same as people in Ireland/Britain and had the same basic type of dog. A hairy wolfhound/deerhound type of dog dominated basically all of north western Europe at this time, until you got up to spitz breeds in the arctic circle where Romans didn't even know about. After Roman influence they would get smooth coated infusion up in the germanic/celtic region, but before that they just all had wolfhounds/deerhounds up there, and that was it. So I think this "celtic dog" mentioned here probably WAS a scottish deerhound, basically, but one that lived in Germany at the time.
Those of the Geloni, on the other hand, shirk at combat and dislike fighting, but they have wise instincts: the Persian is quick in both respects.
Geloni
The Geloni were a tribe who lived north of the black sea in what is now Ukraine. Specifically in the valley of the Vorskla river. With its wise instincts and distaste for combat, I'd speculate it was either a primitive pariah or possibly a herding dog. The Geloni were pastoralists and graziers. We could even be looking at the ancestor of the german shepherd, since we already know that the whole region where continental herders NOW claim as their birthplace, was totally dominated by deerhounds. Continental herders moved in since, why not from Ukraine? Continental herder fans might get mad because they are described as kind of "wussy" here, but it is possible and likely they have been mixed since to make them more combative. Maybe they were leaning a little more like collies back then. There's an emphasis on how smart these dogs are, which makes me think harder. In addition the Geloni apparently lived alongside other people, in the same valley, called the Budini. The Budini were known as "poor" relative to the Gelonians who were known to be well resourced and comfortable due to their agricultural prowess. The gelonians were able to stay in one place and build forts while the Budini had to move around hunting beavers and etc and living in forests, I think this could be a clue that the Geloni had a "secret weapon" of very good herding dogs and the budini probably just had primitive hunting dogs. Just a thought.
Persian
The Persian, as mentioned, refers to a people/dog that lived way down near the persian/Arabian Gulf. It is kind of odd to mention the Persian and Geloni in the same breath and it makes me think there must be some kind of resemblance between those 2 dogs, even though there's no connection between the people. So I start thinking about possible candidates and I think Grattius may be referring to something like the canaan dog.
It is "quick in both respects" of fighting and intelligence. Maybe the scrappy canaan pariah which looks a lot like a herding dog, and did some herding, could kind of make sense? Not sure.
Some rear Chinese dogs, a breed of unmanageable ferocity; but the Lycaonians, on the other hand, are easy-tempered and big in limb.
Chinese
I think Chinese dogs were Bankhar. "Unmanageable ferocity" because they are basically wild animals and untrainable, which I guess Grattius noticed in, no doubt very limited, interactions. They are very very primitive, no one takes care of them, they don't need to behave themselves or be good with people. They live as pariahs and then double as "guards" for human settlements. Even though it was a long time ago, "Civilised" romans were accustomed to much more manageable dogs more well adapted to live closer to people.
Lycaonians
Lycaonian is Turkey/anatolia.
Again we see dogs (chinese and Lycaonian, in this instance) bunched together, possibly implying some kind of similarity. I think we are just hearing about the Kangal here. Very "big in limb", that makes sense. The "easy temper" might not seem to match perfectly. I mean sometimes they are chill though. I definitely lean kangal for this dog.
The Hyrcanian dog, however, is not content with all the energy belonging to his stock: the females of their own will seek unions with wild beasts in the woods: Venus grants them meetings and joins them in the alliance of love. Then the savage paramour wanders safely amid the pens of tame cattle, and the bitch, freely daring to approach the formidable tiger, produces offspring of nobler blood. The whelp, however, has headlong courage: you will find him a‑hunting in the very yard and growing at the expense of much of the cattle's blood. Still you should rear him: whatever enormities he has placed to his charge at home, he will obliterate them as a mighty combatant on gaining the forest.
Hyrcanian
Note they are carrying on from the Bankhar and Kangal and moving into the next dog smoothly like it is probably along the same lines, and with the description and location... now they are talking about the central asian shepherd/alabai. I have no doubt. Hyrcania is north-East Iran going up into Turkmenistan.
When they say "Tiger", they mean it, as the Caspian Tiger occupied the Hyrcanian forest at this time.
However, what is also evident is there is a lot of mythology surrounding the life of the alabai. This goes hand in hand with the fact that it lives out among the livestock and so the people aren't even really aware of what it gets up to. He seems to think the CAOs are actually mating with tigers, and eating cows. He doesn't know shit, and why would he? He just knows they live out among the beasts and tigers and get up to who knows what, and that is true, as rustic LGDs.
This whole "section" on LGDs I feel is kind of speculative, I don't think he can wrap his head around the idea some dogs aren't hunting dogs. It is too alien a concept to the author, and as is the case with LGDs he doesn't have much "hands on experience" with them, because no one does. They do their stuff out alone, unsupervised and largely unassisted. Intuitively he can sense a commonality between the bankhar, Kangal and alabai, which is why he bunched them, but I don't think he knows that much about them and as independently working dogs I think most people didn't.
But that same Umbrian dog which has tracked wild beasts flees from facing them. Would that with his fidelity and shrewdness in scent he could have corresponding courage and corresponding will-power in the conflict!
Umbrian
Umbria is central italy, and umbrian dogs; assuredly by the description and location, are scenthounds. Grattius is repeatedly baffled by the way dogs so good at tracking are then cowards that won't fight, but today we understand this about scenthounds. It is built into them to be cautious, have strong self preservation and make a lot of noise. That means they can stay safe and be found after following a trail so far away from the humans. They are like primitive GPS trackers you can put on wild animals and then follow your ears to go find it. Obviously grattius though is more impressed with dogs that are courageous and bite. As he continues...
What if you visit the straits of the Morini, tide-swept by a wayward sea, and choose to penetrate even among the Britons? O how great your reward, how great your gain beyond any outlays! If you are not bent on looks and deceptive graces (this is the one defect of the British whelps), at any rate when serious work has come, when bravery must be shown, and the impetuous War-god calls in the utmost hazard, then you could not admire the renowned Molossians so much. With these last cunning Athamania compares her breeds; as also do Azorus, Pherae and the furtive Acarnanian: just as the men of Acarnania steal secretly into battle, so does the bitch surprise her foes without a sound.
Morini
Morini is basically the coast of Northern France, and in the mind of the average Roman- the western-most edge of "celt" country. Already a wild savage region, but Grattius says "what if you go beyond even there", and cross the "strait of morini" which is today "the english channel". This is the most "far away" location to him. Britain I mean. And it is getting him a bit excited.
Briton
It seems the dogs of Britain impressed Rome a great deal. This is actually mentioned a few times in independent sources. What isn't made clear exactly is what kind of dog we are talking about, and everything from bulldogs to mastiffs to terriers has been speculated based on this passage. I have no real doubt we are still talking about a celtic hound, the britons were still celts, and I suspect had a straggly wolfhound/deerhound type of dog at this time. BUT one which was pretty damn hardcore. The celtic dog earlier was spoken of very highly as deserving of glory, the British dog I would suggest was just a regional variant of the celtic dog, but crucially perhaps very brave, hard luggers to the max and useful in war. This gets it grouped with other gripping dogs;
Molossian
Athamania
Azorus
Pherae
Arcarnanian
These are all locations/people found in northwest Greece, south of Albania. The dogs from these places are being grouped together and described as behaving the same and being the same- Rushing silently in to battle with unwavering courage, and sure enough, this location at that time was occupied by tribes connected to "the Alans". The same "alans" who also went to Spain, and took with them their "alanos" which gave rise to the "alaunts"- aka the gripping dogs. So there were these tribes in greece which were really Alans with Alanos, and they were- The molossi, the Athamanians, the Azorus, the Pherae and the Arcarnanians. All had broad mouthed muscular gripping dogs for seizing big game. The molossian would become the most famous one, but as Grattius describes there were a few tribes in the same area with similar dogs that had similar characteristics.
People have tried to hijack the term "molosser" and paint the molossian of history as an LGD, but it is clearly not true when you really dig into this literature and pay attention to the more subtle clues. It was definitely unmistakably a catch dog like the alano espanol.
What is interesting is the dog of the britons was so brave and tough and useful in war and etc, that it was considered to be similar to these Greek Alanos in many ways. It was just mocked for being "ugly", I believe because it was probably wire coated, but it was otherwise praised for its combative prowess (and again, this isn't the only source material to do so - there's another where they were shipped to be used in the arena and did well- will try and find that later and add it to this hopefully ongoing thread). It makes me wonder if the Britons hadn't already mixed their celtic deerhounds with alano gripping dogs at this stage in history, and grattius just didn't know about that "heritage"? He's clearly determined to put the british dog with the gripping dogs, at least in courage and function. His intuition may be on to something. It SHOULD have been a celtic dog, the britons were celtic and should have had a celtic deerhound type just like the gauls and other celts, but theirs in particular (at least on the south east coast of britain) packed extra punch for combat, which I think probably indicates some mixing with gripping dog already had taken place. Possibly by way of Sarmatian migrations earlier, or some proto-scythian group with broad-mouthed gripping dogs. I strongly suspect from this and other clues that the britons had a dog that was probably a mixture of celtic deerhound with scythian or proto-scythian alano, while the more familiar celts in northern france(gaul) and southern germany had something more like a deerhound.
But any bitch of Aetolian pedigree rouses with her yelps the boars which she does not yet see — a mischievous service, whether it is that fear makes these savage sounds break out or excessive eagerness speeds on uselessly. And yet you must not despise that breed as useless in all the accomplishments of the chase; they are marvellously quick, marvellously efficient in scent; besides, there is no toil to which they yield defeated.
Aetolian
A different part of greece, south of where the gripping dog tribes lived, the Aetolians fairly unambiguously kept scenthounds by this description. They are described as good and determined scenthounds (his description could easily be describing modern plotthounds), but Grattius finds scenthounds in general frustrating (and I can relate) due to the way they are noisy and he also hints at them possibly being "fearful".
Consequently, I shall cross the advantages of different breeds:— one day an Umbrian mother will give to the unskilled Gallic pups a smart disposition: puppies of a Gelonian mother have drawn spirit from a Hyrcanian sire; and Calydonia, good only at pointless barking, will lose the defect when improved by a sire from Molossis.
Here Grattius talks about purposefully crossing different types of dog. Mostly dogs he has already talked about. In fact, even the ones which are newly mentioned, are referring to ones he has already mentioned.
"Gallic" was interchangeable at this point with "celt", and "calydonia" is "aetolian". Calydon is in the Aetolian region of Greece. He just expects the reader to understand that, he is just mentioning them again with a different name. Like if I said "the english sure do like to drink tea", and then later on said "yep, those brits love their tea". I'm not talking about two different people, it is the English both times and I'm just mixing it up. Here he does the same.
Ultimately he speaks of Umbrian x gallic - that (I believe) is scenthound x deerhound. Gelonian x Hyrcanian; herder x cao, and Calydonia x molossis, is scenthound x gripping dog.
In truth, the offspring cull the best from all the excellence of the parents, and kindly nature attends them.
Basically talking about hybrid vigour here, the benefits of crossing different types of dog. "Nature is kind to them" and they (often) get the best of both parents and lose flaws.
But if in any wise a light sort of hunting captivates you,
This is important to understand, for context purposes, that before now he was talking about big-game. Using different styles of dog, but with big game in mind. Now he wants to focus in on hunting fast game like hare and antelope.
if your taste is to hunt the timid antelope or to follow the intricate tracks of the smaller hare, then you should choose Petronian dogs (such is their reputation) and swift Sycambrians and the Vertraha coloured with yellow spots — swifter than thought or a winged bird it runs, pressing hard on the beasts it has found, though less likely to find them when they lie hidden; this last is the well-assured glory of the Petronians. If only the latter could restrain their transports until the completion of their sport, if they could affect not to be aware of their prey and approach without barking, they would be assured all the honour which you dogs of the metagon breed now hold: as it is, in the forest ineffectual spirit means loss. But you metagontes have no ignoble pedigree or home.
Petronian
It's hard to say what they mean by petronian. It could mean Petra, an ancient settlement in Jordan near Israel, there IS also a "Patras" in Greece, BUT I think it is actually referring to Marseille, on the southern Coast of France. That is where the very influential at the time "Petronius", came from, and he was so influential his fashion styling was named after him, and so maybe also by then his birthplace was named after him. OR it could be some other location totally lost in translation over time.
If it is Southern France... it could be 1 of two different things. It could be referring to a fast scenthound designed for hares, like a "harrier", or it could be referring to an extinct variant of mediterranean sighthound. France doesn't really have sighthounds, they are very scenthound oriented, but scattered around the mediterranean sea there are some "relic" primitive sighthounds with prick ears, good noses and good speed who hunt leporids a lot. Likewise if it was Jordan in the middle east I'd suggest it was the same. Againt these relic sighthounds scatter all around the mediterranean. He is grouping this petronian dog with other sighthounds, so I'm compelled to PROBABLY lean with a primitive sighthound. I'm talking similar to the ibizan hound, Pharoah hound, Cirneco D'ell Etna, etc.
Sycambrian
Sycambria refers to what is now Hungary, and it is interesting for him to mention Hungary of all places as a go-to for sighthounds. They still notably have the Magyar Agar, the hungarian greyhound, which I always just assumed was an english greyhound that found itself marooned over in Hungary in the last 150 years or so. I could be way off. Hungary might instead be a key place of origin for PART of the english greyhound's story. It seems the "sycambrians" were killing it with sighthounds way back then. The magyar agar may actually be the ancestor of the english greyhound, in effect. At least in part. Remember at this time the "briton" dog was more noteworthy for its prowess as a warrior than a speedster.
Vertraha
Unlike the rest so far, apparently Vertraha isn't a place, instead it is thought to come from "Vertragus", a celtic word that possibly means greyhound. Which would imply, when written in Latin by a Roman Poet, that he is speaking of a celtic greyhound. Which is interesting because it implies celts may have been an exception and already had a couple different types of dogs, but on the other hand the "celts" were many different tribes. So I think this is just the deerhound type of the celts getting a second mention because the topic of hare and antelope came up and they are good for that too (on top of the boars and wolves and what have you). No doubt celtic hounds were already a popular hunting tool among the Romans, they call them vetraha to nod to their celtic origin. The yellow spots are perhaps the golden dapples through a rough brindle coat. Or white with fawn spots/patches may have been a common coloration at the time too.
It's also worth pointing out that historians/scholars really can't agree on what kind of dog vertraha (and all variations) meant, the speculations range from tiny italian greyhound lap dogs up through greyhounds, to greyhound x molosser to just molosser. Here's a historian discussion about this very topic-
Despite this confusion, Grattius makes it clear to me, as someone familiar with types of dogs and their limitations, he is definitely talking about a very very fast sighthound. Indeed one of only few dogs known to Rome at the time that could actually run down a hare or antelope. So definitely a sighthound of at least deerhound level speed and probably even faster.
Perhaps the British cousin of the Vertraha was indeed mixed with "molosser" or proto-molosser. That seems true based on their description, but the vertraha described by grattius is definitely a pure sighthound. In fact it is singled out as especially fast even when compared to the Sycambrian and Petronian, which are likely other sighthounds. I think this is a sighthound "section" of sorts in Grattius' musings.
He has basically gone through; large hunting hounds, Herder/spitz/pariah, LGD, Scenthound, Gripping dogs, back on to scenthounds briefly just to contrast them with gripping dogs, and then on to sighthounds. In that somewhat random order, but that is my interpretation.
If only the latter could restrain their transports until the completion of their sport, if they could affect not to be aware of their prey and approach without barking, they would be assured all the honour which you dogs of the metagon breed now hold: as it is, in the forest ineffectual spirit means loss. But you metagontes have no ignoble pedigree or home
Metagon / Metagonte means mix-breed, and he seems to be saying the petronian is pretty good for hunting hare and antelope with its versatility and combination of speed and finding ability, but (a bit like scenthounds) they frustrate him because they bark and spook prey, if they could just keep a lid on that they'd be as good as mixed-breeds, which are implied as the true masters of versatile elite hunting ability. He is saying the "honour" is "now" held by the mixed-breeds, like people have figured out they are the best hunting dogs. And they're the best despite having no distinct home or pedigree. Its interesting because it holds up. For versatility, being balanced and good with speed, AND scent, AND fighting ability, it is hard to go past primitive dogs, UNTIL you start crossing specialised types together. Then they are better than primitive dogs. PARTICULARLY in regards to their courage and commitment to the hunt. A fact then, a fact now.
Sparta, by common report, and Crete alike claim you as their own nurslings. But, Glympic hound, you were the first to wear leash on high-poised neck and he that followed you in the forest was the Boeotian Hagnon, Hagnon son of Astylos, Hagnon, to whom our abundant gratitude shall bear witness as pre-eminent in our practice of the chase. He saw where the easier road lay to a calling as yet nervously timorous and owing to its newness scarce established: he brought together no band of followers or implements in long array: his single metagon was taken as his guard, as the high promise of the longed-for spoil; it roams across the fields which are the haunts of beasts, over the wells and through the lurking-places frequented by them. 'Tis the work of early dawn then, while the dog is picking out the trail as yet unspoiled by another animal's scent, if there is any confusion of tracks in that place whereby he is thrown off, he runs an outside course in a wider circle and, at last discovering beyond mistake the footprints coming out, pounces on the track like the fourfold team, the pride of Thessaly, which is launched forth on the Corinthian race-course, stirred by ancestral glory and by hopes covetous of the first prize. But lest loss be the outcome of excessive zeal, the dog's duties are regulated: he must not assail his foe with barking; he must not seize on some trivial prey or on signs of a nearer catch and so blindly lose the fruit of his first activities. When, however, better fortune already attends the outlay of toil, and the sought-for lair of the wild beasts is near, he must both know his enemies are hidden and prove this by signs: either he shows his new-won pleasure by lightly wagging the tail, or, digging in his own footprints with the nails of his paws, he gnaws the soil and sniffs the air with nostril raised high. And yet to prevent the first signs from misleading the dog in his keenness, the hunter bids him run all about the inner space encircled by rough ground and nose the paths by which the beasts come and go; then, if it happens that the first expectation has failed him in the place, he turns again to his task in wide coursings; but, if the scent was right, he will make for the first trail again as the quarry has not crossed the circle. Therefore, when full success has arrived with its proper issue, the dog must come as a comrade to share the prey and must recognise his own reward: thus let it be a delight to have given ungrudging service to the work.
A lot to unpack here- Sparta and Crete (both to the far south of Greece, Crete and island off the southern coast) apparently both use "metagons" aka mongrels, at this time, and according to Grattius try to claim them as either their native dogs, or possibly their invention (unclear).
Grattius believes however the real origin of a metagon is recorded in legend, pre-dating the spartan and Cretan usage of such dogs, and that they were originally used by a legendary figure named "Hagnon" from Boeotia (Central Greece, closer to Athens) who Grattius seems to believe basically invented hunting with dogs by hunting with a single mongrel "Glympic" (nearby location) dog. Again, according to a legend.
It is likely, IMO, that neither story is true. It is not uncommon in old cultures for there to be a story about a famous guy from not THAT long ago inventing something that is actually way way way older. In some stone age cultures they might say that a tribal chief who lived maybe 100 years ago invented "thunder" or something like that. Hagnon lived about 300 years prior to Grattius, but clearly was being given way too much credit, likely due to having a big impact on Greek Society. It is just a common folly of poor records.
Equally the spartans or cretans claiming Mongrel performance bred hunting dogs are their native dog or their idea is also likely not true. Taking credit for things is something proud patriotic cultures often do as well.
What is clear above all is "metagons", mongrels aka crossbred dogs, are already prized above all as the best hunting dogs. So much so that people are disputing who should take credit.
Again, it is only when chasing the absolute fastest game that you might be wise to stick to a pure sycambrian, Vertraha or Petronian hound, likely the known sighthounds of the time. Other than that, "Metagons" or crossbreeds are ideal. This is STILL true, which is pretty interesting.
I'll try and gradually work through all the historical texts I can find, may even interpret artworks here as well as it all would fall under "Canine Classicism". Classicism is like history but more about analysing and interpreting "clues" from source material, whether literature or artwork or whatever, rather than learning from "Historians".
So yeah feel free to post any old dog stuff or share your thoughts.