·   · 1 posts

Change my view- No such thing as "mastiffs"

First of all, the site looks great Gary. This is Tonedog from back in the day. I decided to just randomly see if molosserdogs was still around, fearing the worst, but wow, looks good. 

Maybe some controversial debate will help liven the place up a bit? lol

Over the last few years I've been continuing my recreational research into dogs and dog history (which has now spanned many decades), and I've stumbled onto a realization that "mastiffs" basically don't exist and never did.  

Hear me out... 

I believe the mastiff category is merely comprised of retired dogs from various other functional types. They have no real genetic foundation making them a group and no real ancestral function. If you name a mastiff I can tell you how it isn't one and never was, and what it really is. 

English mastiff- Boarhound. Essentially a breed created at Lyme Hall by the descendants of Sir Piers Legh to pay homage to the legend of Sir Piers being saved by a mastiff in a battle with the french in 1415. The thing is, before the recreation, the dogs of lyme park were clearly boarhounds. As boars were depleted from the english countryside they continued to keep these boarhounds for a while as "chamber dogs" that would hang around inside and play with the kids. 

But they were simply england's great danes, really. Retired boarhounds, which initially were created by crossing bulldogs with large sighthounds. Any image of a mastiff in england from before the 1800s looks like a long legged mongrel boar hound, and only rarely won't be referred to as such. I'm rather convinced that's all they were, while they were working functional animals. The modern english mastiff is a recreation based on the legend of these boarhounds, and they made them more bulky and sluggish, but not for any real functional reason.  Big for bigness' sake, with total amnesia about their boar hunting origins. 

Neapolitan mastiff -  Bulldog. The neapolitan mastiff and cane corso were assuredly one in the same dog before the early 1900s, and this dog was simply italy's answer to the alano espanol. A bull catching dog. It likely was rarely 100 lbs, usually less. Even in the usa in the 1970s the italian immigrants in new york still called them bulldogs. 

Cane corso - Bulldog. see above. 

Boerboel -  Bulldog. See above. Photos of boerboels from as recently as the 1970s show them to be around 60 lbs, and the name literally translates to farmers bulldog. The giant boerboel is an extremely recent fabrication. 

Dogue de Bordeax - Bulldog. See above. Same story. We even have photos of the working dogue de bordeaxs from around 1900. 

 

IMG20201024231255.jpg

This legendary individual was considered freakishly large at 105 lbs. And in fact it probably got larger as a result of no longer being a bull catching dog (it was a fighting dog, and this probably allowed it to balloon out of the usual size limitations). 

Presa canario - bulldog. See above. Find any old photo of a presa canario and it is a small bulldog, and many are even photographed with cattle and working cattle. There was a revolution to turn all these bulldogs into "mastiffs" at some point, probably in all of our lifetimes for most of them. 

Fila brasileiro - Boarhound. Or a bloodhound, if you will. Bloodhounds though were merely boarhounds with the job of hunting humans rather than boars. Once again just the result of crossing bulldogs with hounds, large sighthounds and in some cases like with the fila some scenthound thrown in too. I mean it's a bit of a free for all, as it still is with boar hunting dogs. 

Bullmastiff - Bulldog x boarhound. Notoriously a bulldog cross mastiff, but by mastiff as established they just meant boarhound. And this was before lyme hall decided to establish the modern english mastiff. Boarhounds had been used to "hunt humans" extensively already, but they found crossing these bulldog based boarhounds back to the bulldog again was handy to get them more compact and specialised for close combat with an armed man (long legs to run down a slow man were redundant, and also they actually wanted to breed them AWAY from an ability to run down the king's deer).

St Bernard - Boarhound. Known to descend from "the alpine mastiff" along with the other "sennenhunds" (bernese and greater swiss), it seems to me the alpine mastiff was really just another european boarhound they took up a mountain, found it had nothing much to do up there, retired it from hunting and gave it other niche duties like pulling milk carts or rescuing people lost in the snow.  Long retired, and modified to be heavy and bulky (and in fact may have been used to help make other mastiffs bulky as well in their recreations), but a retired boarhound all the same. A bulldog/hound mongrel hybrid at it's roots. 

Kangal - Livestock guardian. As we all know of course, but we need to acknowledge livestock guardians and the above mastiffs have no genetic connection at all, in fact are extremely disconnected on the phylogenetic chart. No relation. See chart below.  

Volkodav - Livestock guardian. See above. 

Tibetan mastiff - ahhh spitz? The tibetan mastiff actually isn't a mastiff or even a livestock guardian. It's an ancient spitz breed, essentially. Modified to be big and scary. No connection to livestock guardians or bulldogs. 

gr1.png

None of this is necessarily new or revolutionary info, however it paints a bigger IMO overlooked picture, an elephant in the room that there's really no such thing as mastiffs. It's not a type of dog. All the mastiffs are really something else, and more importantly aren't all the same thing. Should one of these groups lay claim to the mastiff moniker? Which one? I'd argue none, what does mastiff even mean? "Big" is the closest thing to a definition I can find, and I don't think breeding dogs to be big has done anyone any favours. If you break dogs down to their working roots you can more clearly keep in perspective what they SHOULD be like. Maybe your mastiff SHOULD be able to catch a boar or swing on the nose of a bull, or guard livestock. And if it's not built to do any of those things? Maybe it shouldn't even be. 

I believe dogs can be categorised as follows- 

Asiatic spitz/pariah

American pariah 

Toy breed

Terrier

Middle eastern/Mediterranean sighthound

Livestock guardian

Scenthound

Gun dog - (with spaniel, retriever, setter, pointer subsects)

Euro Pastoral (herders)

British pastoral (collies, kelpies, corgis, and etc) 

British and diaspora sighthound

Gripping dog (bulldogs, boarhounds and the "retired" alpine mountain dogs - also the proto gripper which IMO is the rottweiler)

And I'd say that covers it? No mastiffs, no "guard dogs", no molossers (unless that means livestock guardian? Since it seems the molossian people only had a livestock guardian and a sighthound, according to my research). 

Am I missing something? 

#mastiff #molosser #guardian #pariah #landrace

2 0 0 0 0 0
  • 7639
Comments (18)
  • Finally got a few minutes to weigh in on this interesting topic. 

    I am of the opinion that there really is no "mastiff" so to speak but rather a group of mastiff type dogs. How can there be no Mastiff with a lot of mastiff type dogs you ask? So the type of dogs that fit this grouping is what we all know or have come to be aware off because they have the moniker of mastiff attached to their name. While there are similarities between the various mastiff designated breeds there is also a significant amount of variation.  With the exception of the Neapolitan "ehm.. mastiff" they are mostly fawn/red/brown color and have a  typical blocky head and loose fluce. I won't even get into the variety in sizes. Could that be because of their original purpose of gripping a prey and still being able to breathe.  So, how did we get here to where we have so many different Mastiffs?

    So if we took a generic grouping of "presa" type dogs and mastiff to it then we have the xyz mastiff. cool huh?

    0 0 0 0 0 0
    • An interesting thing about colour is if you look at old artworks of mastiffs they're most often white with patches. Including those of Lyme hall from which the English mastiff breed originated. Only occasionally are they fawn (and also occasionally brindle or black, but most commonly white with patches). Old photographs of boerboels and presa canarios and Alanos and fila brasileiros also often show white with patches dogs. 

      There was a trend in the 1700s and 1800s with the ancestors of the bull mastiff, the gameskeepers night dogs, to breed them black or brindle and avoid white so they couldn't easily be seen by the poachers they were tasked with hunting, but even this would indicate their stock foundations were often white. That they had to breed against it. 

      Where the dominance of fawn and black masked came from I'm not sure but I do know it seems very recent and I suspect it's connected to narrow gene pools used in the creation of the pure kennel club breeds of bullmastiff and English mastiff. The same few individual dogs, who happened to be fawn, overused in the establishing of these breeds in the late 1800s and early 1900s, and these dogs then played a big role in creating the tosa and boerboel. A similar phenomenon, but with blue and black, happened in the establishment of neos and cane corsos as breeds, and then red with dogue de bordeauxs. But before kennel clubs I think all of the above were a mixture of colours, most often white with patches (of brindle, black, red or tan) and sometimes black, brindle, red or fawn. This is what we see with old paintings (and some old photos) depicting the working ancestors of these breeds regardless of country. 

      0 0 0 0 0 0
    • "But before kennel clubs I think all of the above were a mixture of colours, most often white with patches (of brindle, black, red or tan) and sometimes black, brindle, red or fawn. This is what we see with old paintings (and some old photos) depicting the working ancestors of these breeds regardless of country. "

      I have held this belief for many years now.  You are spot on in my opinion in that the show breeding and exhibitions drove the evolution of the colors as the clubs and judges expressed their preferences and anointed "champions'> Much the same way that some are trying to change the Caucasian Ovcharks and other of the LGDs where it is more about the size, color, and coat than about the ability to guard.

      I prefer a white masked dog but in my chosen breed that is not easy to find anymore. Maybe one day we will have a hard reset and go back to function over form.

      0 0 0 0 0 0
      • For me....

        (Who came first the chicken or the egg.)

        None of it even matters, historically breeds are based on fantasies of the author. Far too many put value on names, purposely selecting towards variations is what has created Every breed and it doesn't matter what the original type was because they are far from the beginning. 

        The only thing that truly matters is the dog in front of you. 

        🤷‍♀️ mastiff, bulldog or a coyote...

        If it fulfills the expectations of the owner that is what matters most. 

         

        0 0 0 0 0 0
        • As a dog owner I agree, but as a dog enthusiast/wannabe scholar I'm troubled by how misunderstood and poorly studied dogs are as an animal. The breed encyclopedia/kennel club stories are extremely unscientific and inaccurate to the point of being farcical, there should be some effort by someone to accurately classify and catalogue dog lineages and dog types and understand them. It's very odd that it isn't already thoroughly understood and easily searchable clear information. For any other species it would be, but dog info is monopolized by stuffy kennel clubs which are stuck in a cartoonishly ignorant 1800s state of mind. 

          If their official story is mastiffs are a family of large heavy dogs which were used to fight lions and soldiers in war, and it's total BS, I want to know and figure out what the real story is. I want to understand what the evolved dog lineages really are and why they are, what they actually arose to do before any BS tales were dreamed up by dog show people.

          Real dogs are real natural animals that fill a niche as role players in the social units of hominids, so that's the angle I like to approach their study. More recently people have taken some and made them into silly beauty pageant contestants for dog shows and given them breed names and wrote little fairy tales for them. I try my hardest to ignore all that or at least cut through it. 

          0 0 0 0 0 0
          • Hi Jess, I do agree that from a practical standpoint the dog in front of you is the most important. From a scholarly Point of view the curiosity is in the understanding of why that dog in front of us in its current form.

            That is something that we have the luxury to question whereas historically if the dog could not do its job it was not needed.

            This is an awesome discussion.

            Thanks for stimulating it @Tony

            0 0 0 0 0 0
          • https://science.sciencemag.org/content/370/6516/557.full

            Hot off the press for you scholars 😉

            0 0 0 0 0 0
            • What I find absolutely amazing is how scientists can say and write so much and still have no reasonable conclusion and get away with it. 

              "We find that the modern and ancient genomic data are consistent with a single origin for dogs, though a scenario involving multiple closely related wolf populations remains possible. However, in our view, the geographical origin of dogs remains unknown. Previously suggested points of origin based upon present-day patterns of genomic diversity (2, 8, 10) or affinities to modern wolf populations (12) are sensitive to the obscuring effects of more recent population dynamics and gene flow. Ultimately, integrating DNA from dogs and wolves even older than those analyzed here with archaeology, anthropology, ethology, and other disciplines is needed to determine where and in which environmental and cultural context the first dogs originated."

              Basically, they don't really know what happened.  However, on one of their Chart is something called the Tibetan Mastiff - which, if historically accurate, would indicate there were some form of heavy dogs that were adopted to the altitude already - giving rise to the TM or Dho Kyi.

              Anyhow - this is a very interesting topic.  Maybe if all participants share it on Social Networks it may get us some new participants

               

              0 0 0 0 0 0
              Not logged in users can't 'Comments Post'.
              Info
              Category:
              Created:
              Updated:
              Featured Posts
              •  · 
              •  · Tony
              First of all, the site looks great Gary. This is Tonedog from back in the day. I decided to just randomly see if molosserdogs was still around, fearing the worst, but wow, looks good.  Maybe some controversial debate will help liven the place up a bit? lol Over the last few years I've been continuing my recreational research into dogs and dog history (which has now spanned many decades), and I've stumbled onto a realization that "mastiffs" basically don't exist and never did.   Hear me out...  I believe the mastiff category is merely comprised of retired dogs from various other functional types. They have no real genetic foundation making them a group and no real ancestral function. If you n
              1949, Mastín Español from Seville, Spain
              The Calgary Model   The animal control bylaw in Calgary, Alberta, Canada has been hailed by many as a HUGE success.  While other cities and provinces in Canada are banning breeds, Calgary is choosing education program and stronger enforcement.  What's the end result?  By all accounts, reports and statistics, the bylaw is working!   Not only that, the bylaw works so well and the results are so highly praised, Calgary is inspiring animal control officials outside of Canada to use the bylaw as a model for their own animal control ordinances.     The following is written by Dana Grove:   The bylaw officers in Calgary have taken a stand against breed banning, and responded to dog bite concerns w
              From signs and symptoms to what to do if your dog's been diagnosed, get the important dog cancer information you need. Posted: May 29, 2014, 2 p.m. PST   While too many dogs still get diagnosed with cancer each year, new research and treatments are helping increase the quality and quantity of life for dogs with the disease. Education also works as a powerful tool in preventing and dealing with canine cancer. In observance of Pet Cancer Awareness Month in May, the staff at The Veterinary Cancer Center in Norwalk, Conn., offers information on the disease that can benefit both you and the dogs in your life.     Do Dogs Get Cancer?Answer By Gina Olmsted, D.V.M. Not only do dogs get cancer, but
              •  · 
              •  · desiree
              These 33 Dogs With The Most Unique Coats On Earth Took My Breath Away. My Favorite Is #7! These amazing dogs have such unusual colors and markings that once you see them, you’ll never be able to forget them. Some of these markings are a result of a rare genetic variations or conditions, but all of these dogs are undeniably beautiful. Of all the adorable and stunning dogs on the Internet, Reshareworthy.com collected and specifically chose the following 33 as the dogs with the most memorable and gorgeous markings!   This sweet husky has a natural little mask. This puppy also wears a mask! Everyone *nose* that this puppy has a lot of love to offer! This is Puck. He’s beautiful A
              Beware! Plants Poisonous to Dogs Know which plants and foods are no-nos for your dog. By DC Editors | Posted: Mar 19, 2013, 3 p.m. EDT People are often surprised to learn that there are actually hundreds of plants potentially poisonous to dogs many of which could be in your home, or yard. The following is a list of some plants, trees, flowers, and foods that are poisonous to dogs: American bittersweet roots, leaves, berries Apple seeds, in large amounts Apricot seeds Autumn crocus -  Its active ingredient, colchicines, triggers an anti-metabolic effect that can cause rapidly dividing cells, shedding of the gastrointestinal tract, bloody diarrhea, and vomiting. Learn more>> Avocado l
              June 14, 2011 The Science Diet website now has a page titled “The Truth About Pet Food Ingredients Pet Food Myths Answered with Facts”.  Here’s what Science Diets says and of course I have some follow up… The Science Diet webpage starts off like this… “The TRUTH about pet nutrition.”  They go on to say “It’s important to understand what is myth or fact when making choices about what you feed your pet.”  I agree Science Diet, it IS important for pet parents to understand what is myth or fact when making choices about pet food.  So, let’s see what Science Diet’s myths and truths are… “Myth 1:  Corn is just filler.”“Fact:  A filler is an ingredient providing no nutritional purpose.  Corn is NOT
              There are those that believe that everyone should not use any aversive when training a dog or doing behavioral modification.  They believe operant and classical condition is the only way to go. Others prefer to use force corrections. They use tools like check chains, pronged collars, e-collars, etc. There are also those that call themselves balance trainers. Instead of trying to train a dog or modify its behavior by force only or positive reinforcement only they believe nature teaches us that you need to have a balance between both in when dealing with dogs. I'm curious as to what other preference are? Where do you stand on this subject. I won't condemn anyone for their methods of choice