[quote] Good point. I think the "molossian hound" is the title as it refers back to what the Romans called it. I personally never took the term hound in this context literally, i.e. depicting a hunting dog. It obviously ain't one.[/QUOTE] Well I don't know about that, it COULD be one. A specialised role player used to subdue dangerous animals after running hounds and scenting hounds had slowed it down and bayed it up. Not saying it is, just that it perhaps could be with that build. I agree it looks more sheep doggy though. The romans definitely would have had dogs used on hunts to subdue dangerous unruly animals, they were bigger on catching dangerous animals (and alive) than any other culture in history. Only practical way to do that is with gripping dogs playing a major critical role. They also "incriminatingly" left a lot of "big game subjugation" dog breeds in their wake, not to mention suggestions they had dogs they used to tackle opposing cavalries horses in war. No doubt in my mind they were big on gripping dogs, but whether that's one of them in the statue is another question entirely. They undoubtedly had lots of different types of dogs, they were an immense multicultural civilisation with lots of roles for lots of different dog types, the foundations of which they sourced from far and wide. This could have been anything, but I agree with you it seems sheepdoggy, meaning it either was a livestock guardian, or some kind of livestock guardian infused mutt hybrid of types for some other purpose (eg war dog). [QUOTE] What always puzzled me is that noone wondered about the obvious mane on that thing. With closer observation (i.e. chest and front legs) one can safely assume anatomical correctness of the statue. That period of time was known anyway for their precise anatomical depictions.[/QUOTE] You think it must be shorn? It couldn't just have a mane? I think it's kind of cool to imagine they might have had mutts that developed manes to protect them from throat injuries in combative situations, but maybe you're right and it's more likely the rest of it's fur was shorn short. [QUOTE] But I digress. I don't know about alaunt (I actually don't), but I would bet money that there's "sheepdog" in that dog.[/QUOTE] I'm inclined to agree. [QUOTE]On another note, what's with all the color talk about alaunts? Is that a myth, romanticized "showie" talk? Or absolute necessity and staple in alaunt descendents? [/QUOTE] News to me that there is talk of that, would be intrigued to hear if someone else has more to say on that?