[quote="Astibus"]Yaj, Thanks. This is a nice text about the TM's and other breeds of the region, but I find it very hard to believe that the various "sub-breeds", which were kept to guard sheep and cattle, supposedly [u]descended[/u] from dogs that were mainly kept to guard households. Anthropologically, the proposed direction of influence doesn't make any sense. To me, it sounds just a little too "TM biased", being the "mother of all" those LGD's etc. But maybe someone more knowledgeable on Asian breeds could shed some additional light on it? :) Dan[/quote] Well Dan I wont go into who descended from whom but they definitely seem to be related. I dont know why you find it so hard to believe. These dogs exist in the same geographical region with an exchange of men, animals and goods for centuries, probably millenia. As for function: the terms Mastiff, LGD etc are all western concepts.The dogs here are expected to do more than one job. I have traveled the region where they are found and I have seen Bhotiyas with the nomads doing their job guarding the livestock as well as Bhotiyas in households doing guard dog duty.The Bhotiyas can range from dogs who cannot be distinguished from TMs(Huge heavy, Mastiffy dogs) to much lighter leggier,narrow muzzled specimens. Even the sighthounds in India function as property guardians when they are not being used for the hunt.Indeed some lines of the Pashmi in the Marathwada region seem to be more guard dog than sighthound, huge heavy boned and strong muzzled dogs that can measure upto 33" :) Regards, Yaj.