How exactly did 19th century veterinarians, naturalists, and sportsmen perceive gripping dogs?
SPOILER ALERT: 171 years ago those knowledgeable about dogs felt exactly the same about grippers as we do today and made the same exact observations and arguments: condemnation of owners as the despicable dregs of humanity; the genetic monster dog; genetically determined violence; grippers are different from all other dogs; grippers attack unprovoked; grippers attack their own masters...and there is a lot more, so much more that it is very hard to list it all. So please, when you come across something from these 19th century texts that sounds like it came right out of the maul talk manual, point it out!
A must-read is the very first description of the wiggle butt.
And look for the spiritual ancestor of Craven Desires. Before the frankenmauler, there was the "idiot dog!"
All of the titles are links to the original texts copied here. The old texts are images and you can click on them to enlarge them.
Very strange and amusing comment about the image used. Tell me what it means!
Hamilton-Smith describes the bulldog as being similar to the mastiff and "the Cuba (mastiff) but with the peculiar features of the bull form more strongly marked; 'the distorted blear eyes, cheeks and lips sordid and hanging loose, looking like monsters, and the more repulsive in aspect the better in qualities."
'The Bull-dog is possessed of less sagacity and less attachment than any of the hound tribe; he is therefore less favored, and more rarely bred with care, excepting by professed amateurs of sports and feelings little creditable to humanity."
He describes locking jaws as a spasm. He is not talking about a lock in the bony structure of the jaw, he is talking about the muscles of the jaw being able to lock onto its victim and not let go. And he mentions that bulldogs are different than any other dog.
Johnson describes the bulldog's temperament as being the opposite of all other dogs . He illustrates this by describing a bulldog attacking his owner.
He says they are useless as guard dogs because they are lazy, not protective of the family, and might let the intruders murder the entire family. But that when they do attack, they do not bark or give warning or alert.
He ends the description of the bulldog by hoping they will become extinct because they serve no useful purpose and are dangerous.
Goldsmith again describes the incredible ferociousness of bulldogs, and notes they are unlike other dogs, He observes that they are stupid and useless for anything but violence. He disparages those who own and breed these dogs as uneducated, savage barbarians.
The bulldog is described as being "distinguished almost solely for its undiscriminating ferocity."
To quote Craven from the Bloodhound blog: "Training and environment does not follow the bulldog through history, genetics does."