My Photo

Keep Up


    christiekeith's items Go to christiekeith's photostream

« Kittehs conquer world, one grandmother at a time | Main | Cutting Rx costs: Your veterinarian can help with pet prescription options »

07 December 2008


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


small dogs, I avoid them at all costs. My dog is fine with them, but I don't feel she should be subjected to in your face bad behavior. I on the other hand, don't tend to do well with the owners who permit this behavior. So we cross the street, avoid small dog time at the park, etc. I know not all small dogs and/or owners are this way, but best to go forward with caution for me ;)

at our dog runs, we have 2. One general for all dogs any size who play well with others. the second run is a bit smaller and has small dog hours. The rest of the day it's used for dogs that are dog aggressive, can't handle big crowds, training time etc. That's the run I use for Dot as I consider it the safest. We all communicate with other dog owners waiting or if it's okay to bring their dogs in etc. Been working well for years. I like to use the space for training around lots of doggie distraction, to play our one on one games and also for photographs :)

Lis, my objection and avoidance of small dogs, is not the dogs. It's the owners. There are some well trained small dogs in my 'hood and training classes geared towards small dogs that owners take advantage of. Unfortunately, they don't wear a sign saying their dogs have manners. I don't think my dog would hurt a small dog, but I've had my share of stupidity happen around her and I also wonder if she'll ever just get fed up ;) I won't risk another dog (or mine) for an owner's stupidity, which they have displayed 'round here. The separation of our dog runs happened naturally. The "small" dog run was originally for anyone who did want to put their dogs in the larger one for whatever reason. Small dog hours came down the road so there could be small dog play groups/socialization.

Sometimes, so called doggie prejudices work for the greater doggie good ;)


I volunteered in greyhound adoption for 15 years. I recently quit because most adoption groups don't give adopters the entire story. I am so sick of hearing racing is cruel. I don't agree. They don't need to be run every day. They do however need to run some. They love the couch. They also love to sleep with their human. I have adopted 16 greyhounds in the last 15 years. I currently live with 8 greyhounds a beagle and a terrier mix. You are right. They get into your soul and allow you to feel the intense love they have for their keeper. I will never be without at least 1 greyhound. They are a very special breed to say the least.


Two comments here - separate but related:

1) I wonder if a post on "dog park politics" might not be interesting to explore peoples' thoughts and experiences?

2) Lis' point on the small dogs generally being blamed for being "too belligerent" is well-taken. On the other hand, I've run into PLENTY of small dog owners who don't feel it's "necessary" to train their small dogs because - well - because they're small dogs! And then the rest of us with well-trained and well-behaved small dogs pay the price. Definitely one of my pet peeves!


"When I signed on today and saw 3497889 comments on Gina’s post about greyhound adoption"

Wow! You weren't kidding about world domination! (Although I only counted 24 posts . . . . . . . . )

Kathleen Weaver

I have beagles. I won't let large sighthounds, especially track greyhounds near my dogs.


I've personally known of two incidents that make me afraid of them.

I was at a pet expo in San Antonio when I saw a track greyhound grab an Aussie puppie, shake it and maul it faster than anyone could stop it. The puppy was in her owner's arms.

I only saw the aftermath of the second incident -- a large male track greyhound mauled a friend's female track greyhound. He came very close to killing her and our vet spent hours patching her back together.

Is this common? Like I said, I keep especially track greyhounds but all large scenthounds far away from my 13" inch beagles.

Gina Spadafori

I know Christie will come back in on this, but many dogs (not just sighthounds) with high prey drive are not safe around small dogs, who they tend to think of not as dogs but as prey.

It always appalls me when people bring toy dogs into a dog park. That's just not safe, which is why many dog parks/runs now have separate areas for small dogs and puppies.

A friend of mine had a little dog who she allowed to get in every big dog's face. She thought it was "cute." One day, a golden retriever decided it wasn't cute at all, and just about killed the little dog with one head-crunching bite.

Whose "fault"? Since I'd warned the friend several times that her little dog was belligerent and needed to be kept out of the faces of other dogs, especially big ones, I'd put most the blame on the friend. And on BOTH owners for not noticing as the situation escalated to a near-deadly level. "Cute" or not.

Dogs are dogs, not animated stuffed animals. They all have teeth, and in some cases may use them.

Sarah Regan Snavely

What a wonderful post! Greyhounds, while not for everyone, make fabulous companions. Thanks!

Christie Keith

I've had dozens of deerhounds, and none of them was aggressive to dogs and all were safe with cats indoors. My Borzoi is fearful of other dogs when she's on a leash, and while she's never harmed a cat, I don't trust her with them in an open field. She also exhibited a predator reaction to a specific toy dog a long time ago -- not sure if that was unique to that critter or the situation. She's never done it again, but she also rarely sees toy dogs. But there's a woman who has Italian greyhounds who walks in our neighborhood, and Kyrie hasn't ever reacted that way to them.

I've known many, many sighthounds of many breeds who have lived in perfect harmony with small dogs, toy dogs, other sighthounds, and cats, including track greyhounds.

I would defer to those who have lived with many track greyhounds, or who are involved with racing greys, to indicate how common or uncommon the kind of behavior you describe is. Any individual dog can be good or bad with other dogs, smaller dogs, cats, etc. I'd say this is more an individual thing than a breed thing, with the additional recognition that sighthounds have a powerful chase instinct, which can put small animals including cats at risk in an environment where the smaller animal can run and the larger, chase.

But sighthounds are not aggressive, protective, or territorial as far as general breed characteristics go.

Susan Fox

I wish you and Gina would collect all this great breed info. into a book. It's always so practical.

Like many shelter volunteers, I see lots of different breeds and mixes and having some idea as to their tendencies and likely behaviors not only lets me work more effectively with the dogs, but also be more helpful when I am showing a dog to a potential adopter. It's one of the things that makes this blog a must read for me.

What I usually do is ask if they are familiar with pitbulls/border collies/jack Russells/ whatzit hounds, etc. and, if not, then I suggest that they do some research online to get an idea if that kind of dog is a good fit for them. I've also been know to, well, slightly exaggerate the amount of exercise a border collie needs, if necessary. Oh, you know, two-three of hours a day will at least take the edge off ;-) Works every time.

And can anyone tell me why older women always seem to want the maniac fox terrier that can go right up over a six foot fence? They would be so much happier with a greyhound.

Christie Keith

I've never had a toy dog, or even a small one, so my perspective on this is totally skewed by that. But my giant breed dogs have been attacked multiple times, dozens of times or more, by small and toy dogs. And their owners almost always seemed to think it was "cute," or even somehow my dogs' fault regardless of the fact that my dogs did NOTHING WHATSOEVER to so much as REACT to the attack, let alone instigate it in some way.

I think it's a very real and pervasive problem. What it's not is a deadly problem, at least for the big dogs, because let's face it: there's only so much damage a toy dog can do to a Scottish Deerhound, but a large dog can cripple or kill a toy, even it it's just an accident (such as stepping on the other dog).

But as large dog owners, we do worry a lot about our dogs hurting little dogs in some way, and how hard it is to avoid that a lot of the time because of things we can't control. That's where I think a lot of these comments come from, that sense of "can't win, can't break even, can't even quit the game." Short of never leaving the house, many of the situations I deal with on a daily basis simply can't be avoided.

As to the specific issue of dog parks, well, I would never in ten million years want to bring my dogs into a small dog area, whether they had prey drive issues or not. I have never heard anyone suggest that, though... this is the first time in my life I've heard of such an idea! Everywhere I've seen small dog areas established, it's been welcomed by everyone.

What I REALLY wish is that parents would keep their small children out of dog parks. One day I was in the fenced run at Golden Gate Park, and woman walked in, carrying a kid who was around 2. She plopped him down, went back to the car and got her dog, and then sat down on the bench. The little kid toddled around, fell numerous times (hello, this is where the dogs poop and pee!), and in general got into so many unsafe situations I couldn't watch anymore and finally left.

Don't people have common sense?

Don't answer that.


I have long considered adopting a sighthound but specifically have wondered about my fencing. It's more of a "visual barrier" type, garden fencing. The dogs I've had have respected the fencing although they could jump it anytime they like, if they chose to do so. I worry that a sighthound actually *would* jump it, perhaps in pursuit of a bunny or one of the many roaming dogs in the area. Other than that, I think I'd be a good match for a sighthound and we have plenty of space to allow the kind of running where they could actually hit their stride.

Christie Keith

A sighthound would jump it.


It always appalls me when people bring toy dogs into a dog park. That’s just not safe, which is why many dog parks/runs now have separate areas for small dogs and puppies.

I've had a number of "discussions" with the owners of big, boisterous dogs who regard any suggestion of a separate "small dog" section in a dog park, from which dogs over a certain weight would be excluded, as an outrage. If the small dogs can't cope with the play of the big, boisterous dogs, you see, they have no business at the dog park at all.

Or they say, fine, let there be a "small dog" section, but big dogs who are old, or physically handicapped, or just don't cope well with those boisterous dogs and prefer to play with small dogs, then they should be able to play in the "small dog" section. And if some of the small dogs are afraid of big dogs, and can't enjoy the "small dog" section of the park if there are big dogs in there, why, then, they shouldn't come...

I know you and Christie aren't guilty of this, Gina, but many big-dog enthusiasts have a godawful sense of entitlement, and really do seem to regard toy breed dogs as stuffed animals who have a bloody nerve expecting to be allowed to do any "doggy" activities at all.

I would never bring Addy into a mixed-size dog park, not ever. It is, as you say, not safe.

But anytime there's an incident between a big dog and a small dog, there's no shortage of big dog people willing to find, on the basis of scant or no evidence, that it must have been the fault of the small dog's belligerence, and not the big dog's boisterousness (accidental injury) or prey drive (intentional attack.)

I mean, just look at this comment thread. Only seven comments in, and already we're getting stories of how belligerent little dogs provoke confrontations and their owners think it's cute--and in response to what? Someone asking whether two incidents she witnessed with track greyhounds, one attacking an Aussie pup held int is owner's arms, and the other attacking another greyhound was typical or atypical of the breed? Does that make sense?


"Comment by Sarah Regan Snavely — December 7, 2008 @ 12:35 pm"

Sarah - I just went to your site, and I must say your artwork is GORGEOUS!


I love greyhounds. They are not the right breed for me right now, but someday there will be room in my house for a ex-racing hound.

As far as large dog owners having a sense of entitlement re: small dogs in dog parks, I think it's a safety issue plain and simple. Many many dogs large and small have prey drive, but if a small frolicking dog happens to trigger the prey drive of a much larger dog, tragedy can strike in an instant. That's not a situation ANYBODY wants.

H. Houlahan

In response to Ms. Weaver, I have never seen a sighthound that was inappropriately aggressive towards other dogs. Predatory, yes -- a dog who might chase and grab a running JRT and do damage. But not aggressive in the "start fights" or "snatch puppy from owner's arms way."

Of course all dogs are individuals, but none of the sighthounds are dogs I am on guard with around other dogs. It's male akitas and chows and shar-pei, and their mixes, that ping my radar in a gathering of loose dogs.

Most of my sighthound experience has been with off-track career-change greyhounds, which have to be the most common sighthounds in the US by an order of magnitude. A fair number of salukis -- which I adore. And ones and twos of other sighthound breeds. I've trained just one Scottish deerhound -- they really are rare. He had the most tremendously droll sense of humor of any dog I've ever met. I'd sometimes leave the room so he wouldn't see me laughing at his little joke. I don't think I fooled him.

Christie, I think this is an extraordinary claim:

"Sighthounds are all the dogs of the greyhound family, the earliest domesticated dogs on earth."

What evidence do you have for this?


Straybaby, when I say that I'm cautious around certain types of larger dogs because they tend to often have owners who are irresponsible in their management of their dogs, I'm accused of irrational hatred of those breeds.

Many big-dog owners seem never to have considered the possibility that a little dog might be alarmed by, say, a Lab's standard friendly greeting--and with good reason! Or that a series of unfortunate encounters with "He's FRIENDLY!" big dogs might be responsible in some, even many, cases for what big-dog owners call "small dog syndrome."

I've worked for a year and a half to overcome the issues that Addy arrived with (she was already a year old and had had an unfortunate original buyer.) She's improved a lot. She has friends now that are Big Dogs--my sister's Lab, my neighbor's two Rotties, and, before the dog's death, another neighbor's German Shepherd. She passed the CGC when the "stranger dog" was a big GSD-type dog. Just a couple of weeks ago, we had a friendly chance meeting with two Belgian shepherds we hadn't met before. This is all huge progress, given where she started from 18 months ago.

And when she's having a rough day, I manage the distance between us and any Big Dogs, so that we don't reach the FreakOut Zone.

Except, you know, when I can't. When the Big Dog Owner is what I fondly refer to as a "f*****g idiot", who does not get that I am repeatedly moving away from them for a reason, and keeps closing the distance again. And then has the nerve to comment on the behavior of my dog.

I can tell almost at a glance, these days, who it's worth saying, "My dog was not socialized well during her first year, and we're working on it," and who I should just save my breath with.

The good ones, some acknowledge the situation and cooperate in keeping our dogs separated enough that Addy can remain calm, and others offer to work with us for a bit, to give Addy a chance to see this big dog is not that different from her big dog friends--and if Addy's in a good state for it, I always say yes, because every positive experience helps, just as every negative one is a setback.

And when someone dismisses my traumatized but recovering girl's behavior as just how small dogs are, or assumes I indulge this behavior, or dismisses the very real and considerable progress she's made, rediscovering the happy, friendly personality she was meant to have--well, sorry, I don't take kindly to that.


As far as large dog owners having a sense of entitlement re: small dogs in dog parks, I think it’s a safety issue plain and simple. Many many dogs large and small have prey drive, but if a small frolicking dog happens to trigger the prey drive of a much larger dog, tragedy can strike in an instant. That’s not a situation ANYBODY wants.

Um, Katie--the "sense of entitlement" I was referring to includes opposing taking part of the dog park to make a small-dog area, or thinking that at least some big dogs, based on their own needs, should be allowed in any small-dog area, and any small dogs who can't cope with that can just stay home. If this were actually practiced uniformly, small dogs would have no place to go to play without the risks associated with playing around big dogs, rather than very few places to go to play without those risks.


As a small dog owner, I recognize that when I take him out in public, I am first and foremost the only advocate he has for his safety. It's no one's responsibility but my own. And as a 5 lb. dog with an EXTREMELY soft and submissive temperament, I simply can't assume he will have the wherewithal to know how to deal with the approach of a large dog without possibly going into flight mode, thereby possibly triggering a chase response in the other dog.

Therefore, I simply pick him up when large dogs are approaching (and make sure I gather up his long, fluffy, and oh-so-tempting tail when I do so!) This is the best way to assure his safety. And it is HIS safety that is my paramount concern because HE is in my care.

When large dog owners express how offended they are at my actions (and I don't make a big deal of this - I simply pick him up), I wonder if they've ever considered things from the vantage point of having the responsibility for a life that weighs no more than a small bag of sugar?

Christie Keith

H. Houlahan, you think that's an "extraordinary claim"? While it's possible it will be proven wrong, all you have to do is google "Saluki" or "greyhound" and you'll find a thousand references to them as the oldest of all dog breeds. When "Science" published its admittedly inconclusive DNA analysis of dog breeds, the Saluki was one of the breeds they started with, and it ended up on their short list of 8 breeds still in the running to be the oldest of all dog breeds. There are carvings of sighthounds dating back NINE THOUSAND YEARS.

New science may ultimately prove some other dog got there first, but honestly, it's not an "extraordinary" claim; I would honestly say it's conventional wisdom... at least among sighthound people. ;)


Someday I would love to have a greyhound to hold down the couch with me.

For now I have both big and small dogs in residence. So I deal with both sides of the issue.

I think common sense isn't very common these days. I dont do the dog park thing at all because there are to any clueless owners that fustrate me and make my dogs unsafe.

Instead we do off leash walks with a group of friends and known friendly dogs when possible.

I think people forget that ALL dogs are individuals. They just aren't going to get along with every dog they meet. To much depends on the actions of the other dog as well in the picture.

Prey drive isn't exclusive to certain breeds either. Sometimes a situation will bring out the worst behavior (in our human opinion)in our dogs. They are just being dogs.

And honestly, does how old a breed is or when they were domesticated really matter as to how we live with them? It is interesting sure. But consider it our human baggage. We are going to love and care for them regardless.

Tail wags.

Anne T

Yes, I have and it's part of my dog library. That's partly why I made the comment about archeologists and dogs ( or horses,or textiles another area where U R doin' it rong). People get locked into their specialties and don't see the Big Picture and due to prejudices, don't enlist the expertise of their colleagues.

I have spent considerable hours in virtual online museum collections ( the next best thing to being there) researching illustrated manuscripts for depictions of sighthounds, specifically small ones. Most of the "breeds" ( Victorian reconstructions or not) that we call sighthounds can be found: greyts, IWs, deerhounds, prick eared types, wire coats, smooth coats etc. Western Europe doesn't show Saluki, Tahzi, or Sloughi types, but you can bet that if there were such types in the Levant during the Crusades, such dogs found their way into Western Europe as part of the overall booty, just as Barb and Arabian type horses did.

In fact, Edward of Norwich ( I have a fascimile) refers to owning 3 sizes of sighthounds as being the ideal for the early 15th century hunter. Of course most of Edward's book is an english translation of Gaston Phoebus's treatise "le Livre De Chasse" ( got a fascimile of that too). However Gaston does not mention types of sighthounds by size.

There is information out there, but what I find missing is in the archeological data. When a club says our dogs resemble the dogs depicted in Egyptian hieroglyphs, that's all well and fine, but has anyone actually evaluated the skeletal remains and literally drawn a conclusion?

H. Houlahan

My point was exactly such -- that "oldest pictorially documented consistent breed type and(possibly) lineage" is not by any means the same as "earliest domesticated dogs."

There isn't even wide agreement about when those earliest domesticated dogs came on the scene. Ranges vary from ten to a hundred thousand years -- from reputable scientists with evidence to support them.

Sighthounds as a group have some refinements, or specificities, of morphology and behavior that tend to line up against the notion that they are "the originals." The same is true of another very old, well documented pictorially, lineage, the molossers.

It's pretty logical to postulate that the "originals," dog-wise, were morphologically nearly indistinguishable from their wolf ancestors, and that small but crucial behavior changes came first. (Along with, perhaps, some cosmetic variation in color pattern and ear carriage, none of which would be preserved in the fossil record.)

It is difficult to construct a plausible mechanism by which a species that, when hunting, has the primary comparative advantage over human beings of an olfactory power that is orders of magnitude greater than ours would, as a first step in differentiation become a mostly visual courser. (And of course, worldwide, dogs that hunt by scent must far outnumber hunting sighthounds to this day.)

Sighthounds as a group are adapted to/selected for a specific kind of hunting that takes place in wide-open spaces -- deserts and prairies and such. I had to go to the flat near-desert of central California to see salukis coursing game. There is no such landscape here in the eastern US, so no coursing.

It's not surprising that urbanizing and heirarchizing agrarian elites in a part of the world where there are many wide-open spaces (some of them caused by human activities -- agriculture, pastoralism, deforestation) would develop dogs that could hunt scarce game by high-speed chase. That's what's documented on those tombs and pottery.

It's not reason to believe that the poor pastoralist in the same culture, who had no leisure for recreational hunting and no status to join the party, didn't have a less refined sort of dog to guard the goats and kill rats.

It's certainly not reason to believe that a hunter-gatherer in, say, northern Europe or southeast Asia or central Africa or north America didn't have entirely different sorts of hunting dogs at exactly the same time in history -- and that the types of dogs that they had didn't have lineages that far predated the selection for sighthounds in the Middle East and North Africa, and that also continue, in less morphologically consistent form, to this day.

Saying that a dog breed is "ancient" is like saying that I come from an ancient lineage. Of course I do. I could trace my mitochondrial DNA back to Eve. So? Who can't?

Anne T

Heather, did you read Bryan Sykes' "Seven Daughters of Eve" by any chance?

Or are you familiar with Carlos Vila et alia paper "Multiple and Ancient Origins of the Domestic Dog" or Peter Savolainen et alia "Genetic Evidence for an East Asian Origin of Domestic Dogs ? Interesting stuff, all of them!


Christie, I think "oldest breed still in existence" and "earliest dogs domesticated" are different claims. There's lots of evidence that sighthouds are the oldest breed(s) in existence--those 9,0000-year-old included. But dogs appear to have first been domesticated 14,000 years ago in China. Do we have evidence that those first dogs were sighthounds?

It wouldn't astonish me if we eventually learn that they were, or even to learn that we have evidence now that they were. But do we?


Addy's bigger--fourteen pounds, now--so I don't feel the need, perhaps, quite as often as you do, but I've also encountered situations where the safest option was to pick Addy up.

And I have been roundly criticized for it, because the other owner is offended, and because, you know, if my dog weighed sixty pounds, I wouldn't be able to manage the situation that way. And if it wouldn't work for someone with a big dog, obviously someone with a small dog shouldn't do it--even though the situation wouldn't be the same, if Addy weighed sixty pounds. If she didn't look like potential prey, to the other dog. Or if she just wouldn't be crushed (literally) by the other dog's play behavior. :(


Pat, I would be thrilled to see small dog owners pick up their dog when I came along. I would know they were aware! I've had several situations where my mouth just hit the ground because of the actions of 'some' small dog owners around my dog (they have NO clue if she's safe). One time I was out with a friend and my dog. She was shocked at the lengths I went to direct my dog off the sidewalk for a small dog and owner, and how the owner was oblivious and let her dog start getting in my dog's face even as I was doing the body block to keep my dog un-annoyed and her dog a safe distance (confirmation I wasn't nuts!). Again, I don't think my dog would ever hurt a small dog, but what the owners find acceptable behavior looks like a dangerous chance to me.

I've walked my cats (that are comfortable on leash) out and about and they all weigh more than your pup. So I have been at the other end of that leash in a manner. And yeah, they go in my arms when dogs appear ;) I'm just always surprised at the lack of common sense, especially from those that think their little dog being "tough" in the face of a larger dog is "cute"!

I will say things have improved to a degree with more dog trainers available in the 'hood. And offering classes for small dogs. One gives free seminars at a pet supply place to build awareness. And Dot and I are pros at crossing the street ;)

Anne T

Whether a sighthound was the earliest recognizable type of domesticated dog really has to do more with the canine savvy of archeologists when they uncover a dog skeleton than anything else. Unless they pass photos, replicas or the actual bones of it on to a colleague who has an interest in canids, we won't know.

I do suspect that types with long legs, deep chests, strong hindquarters and supple spines were right up there among the first dog types developed, as many of the "primitive" sighthound breeds are dual purpose hunters and guardians. The other choice would be early scent hounds. Both types work independently of people, and the body type of the bigger dogs is not all that dissimilar. Once they learn their jobs, people play a minor role in the activity. The next choice would be the spitz breeds that were bred for hauling human possessions on travois from place to place, following the game the scent and sight hounds chased.

I have what I consider the best of both worlds, I have small sighthounds, recognized by ASFA, AKC, NOTRA, and LGRA to take part in racing and lure events.

I love your "total sighthound world domination" Christie! Excellent! Sighthounds Rule!

Christie Keith

Anne, have you read "Gazehounds: The search for truth"? She takes some of the skeletons of dogs that have been reconstructed in museums and basically says, "Canine anatomy: ur doin it rong!" Some of those dogs couldn't even WALK, let alone run, if they were really put together that way, LOL!

Sighthounds are not as different conformationally from some kinds of wolf as some people might believe them to be, either.


“Canine anatomy: ur doin it rong!”

Okay - now I wanna see the picture that goes along with this one! LOL!

Christie Keith

The abstract of the Belgian study says that it's not possible to really form a clear picture of what the dogs looked like from the remains, but they weren't of a homogenous type. I wonder what the hell that means, really? I routinely meet people on the street and in the park who think Rebel and Kyrie are the same breed... to me, they look completely different. How much more from just a group of bones?

Christie Keith

I don't know, Lis... research more recent than the studies used to support the Chinese theory has already found an even older domesticated dog type, this one in Europe again.

We certainly have more images and remains of sighthound-type dogs in the ancient Middle East than we've found in either Asia or Europe. And all the dog remains being studied in Asia are said to be conformed very like wolves; the older Belgian dogs are of diverse types of conformation. I'm not absolutely sure, although I've read the three studies based on the Chinese remains and the abstract of the Belgian study, how they are distinguishing dogs from wolves here.

Fascinating question!

Richard Hawkins

Hi there Christie – looking good as your photo shows, and as Barb told me on her return from Lompoc this year

Some late, hopefully brief, comments from my side.

So, if there is “Sighthound Domination”, what does that mean. Are sighthounds the New Emperor’s clothes? You betcha.

Think of the AKC proposed re-alignment of show groups Not only does the AKC still not know what a sighthound really is, they don’t even know how to spell the word. While that word itself is an American invention.

Re: the sighthound age and the earliest type or variety, question. Professional ‘scientific’ investigation such as that of R.K.Wayne reinforces the notion that there were about 200,000 or much more years necessary to evolve the domestic dog from the original wolf groups. Intermediate “ dogs” through the years would have looked more like wolves than any of our modern dogs. Juliet Clutton-Brock, another authority, hypothesises that the earliest type of dog would have been there to retrieve escaped game wounded by the novel invention of projectile weapons. Ergo, definitely not a sighthound.

Do not confuse modern breeds with ancient depictions/descriptions of ancient dogs. Some researchers make comparisons, such as the Dutch palaeontologist Bosscha Erdbrink (“Dogs Long Gone “1991 and 1992). Other UK types such as the historian Toynbee go further so as to claim that for instance the Celto-Romanic bronze , Lydney Dog, was an Irish wolfhound. Major mistake!

Oh yes , Edward and the Phebe. Edward actually faithfully interpreted Phebus’ original in writing that there should be three sizes of sighthounds/lévriers, for small and large game.

But what exactly is a sighthound?


The comments to this entry are closed.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner