The Origins of the Dogs

The scientist C. Keller, derived the Saint Bernard Dog from the Roman "Molossian,", a dog supposedly descended from the Tibetan Mastiff. Marco Polo (1290) described the Tibetan Mastiff: "as large as a donkey" Surely, the breed was never quite that large. From the Tibetan highlands, the dog is said to have found it's way to Nepal and India and from there, into Babylonian and Assyrian cultures. Supposedly, Alexander the Great brought the Tibetan Mastiff to Greece, where it served as found ation stock for the Molossians.

Between 1200 and 1100 BC, the Phoenicians advanced from Cyprus, toward the west and established colonies in Sicily, Spain, France and England. In a fascinating and sharp-witted treatise, Tschudy proposed the theory that the descendants of the old Assyrian dogs existed along the old commercial roads of the Phoenicians. Tschudy suggested that the Assyrian dogs, brought to Europe by the Phoenicians, were the ancestors of the Pyrenean Mountain Dog in Spain, the Dogue de Bordeaux in France, the Mastiff in Engla nd and the Saint Bernard Dog in Switzerland.

Strebel pursued this question about the Molossians very thoroughly. After having consulted all known historical sources he came to the following conclusion: Next to the large and mostly dark colored dogs belonging to the Assyrians and Babylonians there existed a brighter and lighter dog used as a cattle dog and for hunting purposes. This breed, he concluded, must be called the Molossian.

All known Greek and Roman illustrations show the Molossian as a large, well muscled dog with erect ears, a lean head and a mane. The characteristic curled tail and darker color of the Assyrian dogs is never pictured or described by either the Greeks or the Romans. A direct relation between the Tibetan Mastiff and the Molossian is therefore very unlikely.

Even though many authors (Keller, Krämer, Tschudy, Heim and others) tried to trace the origin of the Saint Bernard Dog and the other Swiss cattle dogs to the Tibetan Mastiff via the Molossians there are absolutely no scientific facts to support this thesis; No written documents, no pictures and no osteological proof could be found to endorse these views!

[up]

The Saint Bernard Pass >
The Origins of the Dogs >
The Dogs from the Hospice >
Short- and Long-Haired Saints >
Their Rescue and Life-Saving Work >
The Beginning of Purebred Saints >
The Legendary Barry >
Bibliography, Acknowledgement, Dedication & Copyright Notice >

Greek and Roman dogs (more on full-size pic)

from left to right - lower row: two Neolithic dogs and an Iron Age dog. Upper row: two "Küherhunde" (cowherd's dogs) and Barry. An 'evolution' from the Stone Age dogs to Barry may be explained by a gradual increase in body size of local populations

Prof. Th. Studer devoted his scientific work to the exploration of the origin of the domestic dog and published many papers on prehistoric dogs. He maintained that as early as the bronze age (Hallstatt period a & b, 1200 - 800 B.C.) there existed a Mastiff-like dog breed of medium size (65 - 70 cm at the withers). It is likely that this breed lived in Central Europe and thus can be placed in the region now called Switzerland at a date long before the arrival of the Romans.

Studer came to this conclusion after studying many ancient dog skulls and specifically, a Bronze Age skull from Karlstein. He mentions the "Kollektivrasse der grossen Alpenhunde" (collective breed of large alpine dogs), from which all modern breeds could easily be traced.

Hauck, an expert on canine history, came to a similar verdict. He wrote: "I cannot agree with ancient tales about the transplanting of large Mastiffs from Asia towards Europe. There are no osteological and no pictorial representations to allow an unambiguous proof."

Both Studer and Hauck came to the conclusion that all European Mastiff types evolved locally from Neolithic dogs at different times and at different locations. Prehistoric trade between East and West was not a prerequisite to the existence of similar dog breeds in different locations.Further, the capacity to rear different breeds from local stock was present everywhere.

We cannot deny that, during Roman times, some Roman dogs did mix with local dog populations. However these dogs were by no means huge and did not immediatly affect size within local populations.

Gradually, functional divisions resulted in phenotypic differences between watch dogs, hunting dogs and herding dogs. Later, lap dogs and companion animals were developed. It should be noted that the all-purpose or mixed-breed has probably always outnumbered the specialized or purebred dog.

Thus the direct ancestors of our Swiss dog breeds, which were entered in the first stud books at the end of the last century, were by no means of pure breed. They were dogs suited for specific tasks. Breeders chose certain styles according to their idealistic notions of structure as it enhanced "function." The fact that many dogs exhibited similar morphology, cannot be used as proof for the existence of (genetically) purebred dogs.

[up]