Molosserworld at moloss.com


Part one

Even if many well known naturalists and zoologists have questioned the origin of the domestic dog and have suggested that it is not derivatived from the wolf but from an early wild dog, there can be no doubt that the domestic dog, Canis Familiaris, has the wolf as its ancestor. Those who still are not so certain should visit the Multiple and Ancient Origins of the Domestic Dog page. This study is highly controversial and it can be questioned if the domestic dog really is as old as this study claim, even if we cam assume that the domestic dog is much older than the up to now common believed 10.000 years.
First, let us look at the name Molosser, which in fact is a misnormer which now is used on all breeds of the Mastiff, Bulldog and Mountain Dog type.

The name Molosser

Molossi was the name on a people living in the Epirus mountain region of northwestern Greece and southern Albania. These people had very famous guardian and wardogs who were given their name after the people. These dogs, the Molossi, later Molosser, are told to be imported to Rome, and became well known under the name "Canis Molossi". The dogs of the Molossi were more wolfish and not at all so muscular as the Mastiffs today, nevertheless have the whole group of dogs gotten their name from these dogs.
One of the most prominent Molossi kings was Alexander of Epirus (Alexander the Molossian) who died in 330 B.C. His sister was Olympia, the mother of Alexander the Great. The greatest of the Molossian kings was Pyrrhus, who was killed in 272 B.C. The Molossi was a war people and tried to conquer both Greece, Italy and Rome as well as Macedonia and Sicily, before being crushed by the Romans in 170 B.C.
Aristotele, who lived in 384-322 B.C, praises the Molossus and tells us that they serves as guardians of the herds, and distinguises itself from all other dogs through its size and indomitable courage against wild animals. In his "Historia Animalium" he tell us, among several other dog breeds, about the Molossian dog from Molossia in Epirus, who were used to hunting and as a fighting dog. Aristotele also says that the Laconian dog were produced from a cross with the wolf (Laconici canes ex vulpe et cane generantur) and of the Molossian he says; "they differ nothing from the Laconian, but as a guardian of flocks and herds they are eminent against wild beast for size and courage."
M.B. Wynn writes in 1886; "Greece, the land of the classic song and the ennobling art has never possessed the breed, seemingly." (about Mastiffs). He further writes; "...the true molossians was an erect eared (altas aure) slate coloured (glauci) or fawn (fulvus) swift footed wolfish-looking dog, identical or almost so, with the modern Suliot boarhound. A fine sculpture of the true molossus was found at Pompeii, with the inscription "Cave Canem".
To explain to you why the name Molossser is now used on the Mastiff, Bulldog and Mountain Dog breeds I choose to further quote Wynn; "The term for the mastiff among some naturalists, is the molossus, originating with our early writers, who choose to think that the classic writers meant a mastiff, in the sence we now use the word, whereas the molossus was not in reality a mastiff."
We can clearly see by the above that the word Molosser is a misnormer and are originally not describing the breeds now classified as Molosser dogs. Nevertheless is this the word that in modern times describes the breeds in question and I will continue to use this word in lack of a better word that embraces all these breeds.



Cave Canem Olympias dog

Left: True Molossus
Right: Statue of the Molossus, belonging to Olympias, daughter of the Molossian King Pyrrhus I.
(Palazzo Torlonia, Rome)



Theories

On the origin of the Molossers it is common accepted that the Tibetan Mastiff is the first of all Molosser breeds and the ancestor to all other breeds known today as Molossers. This you can read in all dog books, but think about it, which proves have been presented to you that are placing giant dogs in Tibet before anywhere else?
Raymond Triquet writes in his book, "Le sage de Dogue de Bordeaux"; "What does one know about the Mastiff of Tibet at old times? -nothing. And yet, one wrote pages about them. We know all the always repeated traditional history from one author to another, without the shade of proof." Exactly my point, there are absolutly no archaeologic or palaeontological evidence placing the Molosser dogs in Tibet before anywhere else. No pictorial evidence, no folklore evidence, nothing! What about all books that are referring to the Tibetan Mastiff as the ancestor to the Molosser breeds? Well, as Mr. Triquet said, authors copies the history from other authors, and thereby the other authors errors and mistakes. And so it continues. Few, if any at all, of the modern dog book authors have done any researche by themselves on the origin of the Molosser breeds. Since it is so common accepted that the Tibetan Mastiff is the ancestor I guess that they have not bothered to do any researche, or maybe they are afraid that the others would laugh of them. I think it is strange and unbelivable, to see that so well educated people with so much knowledge about these dogs accepts the Tibetan theory without any evidence at all.
Lets look at the theories and evidences, and the lack of evidences on the origin of the Molossers.
Hilzheimer was of the believe that the ancestor of the Molossers was a short muzzle wolf, which he located to central Sweden. Pira found in excaviations of the cave "Stora Förvar" in the island Stora Karlsön in Sweden, fragments of dog craniums from the stoneage. The cranium were from a short muzzled dog who show signs of domistication. Pira classified this dog as Canis Familiaris Paulustris Rutim. Stauder and Hauck came both to the conclution that all European Mastiff types evolved locally from Neolithic dogs at different times and at different locations. Furthermore Hauck, which was an expert on canine history, wrote; "I cannot agree with ancient tales about the transplantation of large Mastiffs from Asia towards Europe. There are no osteological and no pictorial representation to allow an unambiguous proof."
Keller, Krämer, Tschudy, among others, tried to trace the origin of the Saint Bernard Dog and the other Swiss cattle dogs to the Tibetan Mastiff via the Molossians, but came to the conclution that there are absolutly no scientific facts to support this thesis; No written documents, no pictures and no osteological proof could be found to endorse these views.
Professor Th. Studer maintained that as early as the bronze age (Halstatt period 1299-800 B.C.) there existed a Mastiff-like dog breed of medium size (65-70 cm. at the withers)(25,5-27.5 inch), in Central Europe, more precise in the area now known as Switzerland.
My comments to the above researche by the early conelogists is that we can assume that dogs developed an shortning of the muzzle and a brachycephalic type independent of another, but history have learned us that dog breeds have been brought from one area to another from the time humans began their nomadic life, and thereby have been crossed with each other with the result that all modern Molosser breeds are more or less related. There are however breeds today with a brachycephalic head that are not related to the Molosser breeds.



Skulls

A brachycephalic head does not
neccesary place the dog, or breed,
in the Molosser family. There are
several breeds which is far away
from the Molossers and still show
the shortening of the muzzle,
especially the upper muzzle, a
broad head and a definite stop.
Very many of these breeds
belonging to the toy group,
where fanciers have bred for the
extreme and the breeds have
developed the desired traits
through generations and centuries.



The Tibetan Theory

Lets now look at the Tibetan theory, placing the Tibetan Mastiff as the ancestor to all Molosser breeds. First let me say that there are no evidence in Tibet that supports the Tibetan theory, no documents and no art.
Advocates of the Tibetan theory uses Marco Polo's descriptions of the very large Tibetan dogs as a proof on that the Tibetan Mastiffs are the true Molosser, comparing Polo's descriptions with the huge dogs pictured at the Assyrian bas reliefs.
Furthermore the Tibetan theory advocates claim that the dog on the plate from Niniveh, dated about 580 B.C. is a Tibetan Mastiff brought down from the mountains, just because it has a bushy tail carried like the modern Tibetan Mastiff. Yeah, and the moon is a cheese, because it look like a cheese. What about the other bas reliefs? Perfectly Mastiff typed dogs without a bushy tail carried over the back? Tibetan Mastiff mutants?
The fact that the Tibetan Mastiff have its cyclus only once a year, like the wolf, have also been used as an evidence on the Tibetan thory. Come on, what would you expect from a breed "developed" & living in such harsh conditions as in the Tibetan mountains? Living in the Tibetan mountains have always been hard and every day have been a struggle for survival. It is not likely that these primitive people have developed a wolf or a common dog into a Mastiff.
We have to climb down from the mountains and to the lower areas, where there are better living conditions, to find the origin of the Molosser dogs.
Where does the Tibetan theory comes from and who started these false claims?
M.B. Wynn wrote in 1886; "Of later years these Asiatic mastiffs appear to have degenerated greatly in many districts..., and the finest speciments that have become before European notice have been of Thibetan extraction, so much so, that the Asiatic mastiff have generally become denominated the Thibetan Mastiff."
Pierre Megnin wrote in 1891 in the "Stockbreeder" that it is very probable that the Mastiff of Tibet is the current Molosses.
Fanciers embraced the Tibetan theory and used the above mentioned Marco Polo's discriptions and the carriage of the bushy tail as their proof on the theory as well as the once a year syclus.



Niniveh 580 B.C.

The Niniveh Mastiff, about 580 B.C.


Assyrian Assyrian

Assyrian Mastiffs.

Assyrian Assyrian



Click on picture to enlarge

Map of old

1. Catal Hüyük, 2. Jerico, 3. Nineve, 4. Babylon, 5. Ur, 6. Harappa, 7. Mohenjo Daro
The area marked with green is where harvesting first started.



The Ancestor

So if not the Tibetan Mastiff is the ancestor to all Molosser breeds, where did the first Molossers originate and which evidences are there to support my theory? Well, I believe that the Molossers originated in Asia, but not in Tibet. What we must consider in the search for the origin of the Molossers is the evelution of man, because without the man and his evolution, no domestic dog would have developed.
Sivilisation started in the middle east, and in the area known as Babylon, Assyria, Mesopotamia, Sumeria, Catal Hüyük in Turkey and Harappa & Mohenjo in the Indus valley the first cities arose. The first mentioned places in the area, now known as Iraque, gave us the wonderful bas relifs and statues of the Molossers, which are not old enough to be taken as an evidence on the origin. We have to searche for the ancestors to the pictured Assyrian, Sumerian and Babylonican Molossers to locate the Molosser ancestor.
At the picture above you can see the area where the first known harvesting were systemized, marked with green. At the north-east part of the marked area man first began to hold livestock, over 11.000 years ago, and where the need for large protection dogs was a absolutly must. Remember that 11.000 years ago this area was the home of many large and dangerous predators. Without such dogs these first attemts on keeping livestock surely would have failed. These first farmers evolved from the nomadic tribes in the area and we can safely assume that they already had dogs (ref; Multiple and Ancient Origins of the Domestic Dog) which already did show enough caracteristics to be classified as Molossers. When the nomadic people of the area began farming and later built the first cities they did bring these former livestock guardians with them and these dogs evolved into the pictures Assyrian Mastiffs.
This pre-Molosser, which is the ancestor to the Assyrian Mastiffs, was to be found in a large area in the Middle East and Central Asia, and where they are still to be found, known today as Central Asian Ovtcharka (Sredneasiatskaia Ovtcharka), and by dozens of other names in the different central Asian countries.
This breed is the ancestor to all Molosser breeds, included the Tibetan Mastiff, which in fact can be regarded as yet anoyher variant of the Central Asian Ovtcharka (CAO), getting its breed caractheristics isolated in the Tibetan mountains.
In this enourmous area where the CAO is to be found these dogs may vary a bit in type, size and coat, but are through our modern classification still to be considered as the same type of dog. The CAO are also the ancestor to the Caucasian Ovtcharka, the Kangal, the Sarplaninac & the other east European flock guardians. These mentioned breeds can not count the Assyrian Molosser as one of their ancestors but are directly derivatived from the Central Asian Ovtcharka. No other domestic dog breed have such a large natural distribution as the Central Asian Ovtcharka, from the Caspian Sea in the west to the Pamirs in the east, and from northern Iran and Afghanistan in the south to South Siberia in the north and reaching Mongolia in the north-east. This region cover the modern countries - Kazakhstan, Kirghizstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Iran, Afghanistan, northern Pakistan, northern India, southern Russia, northern China and western Mongolia. In earlier times the CAO had an even greater distribution, but because of war, hunger, modern farming and decreasing in predators the area in which the breed are to be found became smaller.
Which evidences supports me?
Based on the distribution on the CAO, which matchs perfectly with the first sivilized humans nomadic life, the fact that these nomadic tribes settled in Mesopotamia, mingled with the people that already were living in the area (which the nomads originally came from centuries earlier), and built the first cities, which later developed into the Assyrian empire, who again have given us the best pictorial evidences on early Mastiffs. And, while on the subject, in many dog books, especially books about Mastino Napoletano and Old English Mastiff, you can read that the pictured Assyrian Molosser dogs is THE Mastino or THE Mastiff, unchanged up to today. This is of course just fairytales and wishful thinking, and the authors confuses recognizabel & close looking type with modern breeds that is of somewhat similar type.
There are in fact one archaeological evidence that places the Central Asian Ovtcharka in the region long before the pictured Assyrian Mastiff. There have been found a little stone statue in Turkmenistan dated about 2000 B.C. This stone statue could easily be a pictured Central Aian Ovtcharka of today. Strebel, was not far away from the truth when he concluded after having consulted all known historical sources; "Next to the large and mostly dark colured 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." What Strebel suggested, without knowing it, was without doubt the Central Asian Ovtcharka, which as a breed offers to us the link between the early Molossers, the Assyrian Mastiff, the big flock guardian breeds, the mountain dogs and the European Mastiffs. This is a breed who have all neccesary characteristics that is required for developing into all the other Molosser breeds.
Wynn wrote in 1886; "...if the history of the Asiatic Mastiff is briefly traced from the earliest times up to present. It would be difficult to denominate any precise home of the Asiatic Mastiff, or to give any more generic name to embrace the allophylian varieties than that from their distinctive features, they must at once be classified as belonging more or less to the Mastiff family. Their geographic position however have extended, and still extends from the Caucasian ranges through the valleys of the Elburz mountains, and onwards through the north of Turkistan to the Himalayas, and thence northwards over the vast area of Tibet, the Shan districts, Mongolia and Siberia."
Wynn writes furthermore; "Colonel Rawlingson was inclined to think that the mastiffs sculptured on the Assyrian slabs were of the Thibetan breed. But they do not accord in peculiarities of feature with more modern speciments of that breed, and I am inclined to think that it is far more likely that these mastiffs sculptured on the Assyrian slabs etc. were a breed either existing in Assyria itself at that date or else were introduced from Sarmatia, Albania, Hyrcania, or Iberia, or some of those northern parts of Asia above Armenia."
These early researchers conclusions on the origin of the Molossers soon got forgotten, overshadowed by the Tibetan theory and the fact Wynn points out for us -that the best imported speciments of the Asiatic Mastiff were from the Tibetan region. My conclusion is that the Central Asian Ovtcharka is the only possible ancestor to the Molosser breeds, based on natural distribution, archaeological findings, evelution of man and his livestock, and the fact that this breed is the living link between ALL other Molosser breeds.
I am sure that in the years to come we will see more and more dog historicans, writers & authors that comes to the same conclusion as I have on the origin of the Molossers.



Assyrian bas relief

The Assyrian Mastiff at left show clearly traits of the Central Asian Ovtcharka.



4000 BC

Sighthounds and Mastiffs. Green slate tablets, 4000 BC. Property of the British Museum.



Continue to the Origin of the Molossers, part two

(Will be up at a later time)




Mail me



Molosserworld link-graphic



MOLOSSERWORLD - THE KONRADSEN'S HOMEPAGE - THE MASTIFF IN SCANDINAVIA - KENNEL OL'NORSE

© Molosserworld 1998-1999-2000-2001-2002