The differences between the dogs bred by the monks of the Congregation of Canons of the Great Saint Bernard and the modern breed are quite startling.
They don’t even look like the same kind of dog.
It’s like the difference between a Jack Russell and a Siberian husky.
(Photos courtesy of Nara U).
Obviously it’s because those monks didn’t understand proper breed type!
It’s not like those dogs ever saved anyone from an avalanche either.
Beethoven stopped an evil vet from running a dog theft/experimentation ring. He also found a female St. Bernard on his own, and he managed to have puppies with her and only her. ( And she had just four of them).
So he has to be the real St. Bernard.
Not these impostors!
Most of them seem to have the well-developed flews that make Saints such great droolers. Yet you’ll also notice that none of them have excessive tissue around the eyes or lower jaw/neck, nor do they look as though they weigh 200lbs or more (Hell, none of them look as though they top 100lbs.) But there is some passing resemblance between the rear-center dogs in the bottom photo and the modern dogs–though there was obviously a lot more genetic variation in those dogs and I suspect a lot less inherited disease. In this vein, as we look to the various pounds and rescues to find a new dog we are looking only at cross-breeds–we want to decrease the likelihood of inherited disease that took our Sammie way too early.
HAHAHAHA! Yeah, it would be interesting to see the modern behemoths try to negotiate deep snow & steep mountains in the thin air, while not freezing to death & dehydrating from all the drool pouring down their chests.
You might like this link. It’s about the native guardian dogs of Central Asia, as opposed to the modern massive type of Central Asian Ovcharkas so popular in eastern Europe & Russia.
http://www.tagiko.com/the-aboriginals
Interesting link. I’m curious to know how large and fierce the wolves they encounter are in comparison to our N. American Grey Wolves or Arctic Wolves. Would these “aboriginals” stand a better chance against our Greys than the current breeds of LGDs being used, or against Russian-style Ovcharkas?
Strike that last sentence. It should read: Would these “aboriginals” stand a better chance against our Greys than do our current breeds of LGDs, or Russian-style Ovcharkas?
I am going to incorporate some of these aboriginal dogs into my breeding program (Central Asian Shepherds). I will be looking for those with a little more size & maybe bone because like you said, our predators are bigger in North America. But I specifically *avoid* the Russian type because they’re not only ridiculously large & lumbering, they also tend to have horrendously flat feet, pogo sticks for hind legs, are riddled with joint disease, have drooly, drippy flews & ectroption, & are bred more for dog aggression than guardian ability. A 100 pound dog which is agile & athletic with stamina has a much better chance than a 200 pound dog that can’t get out of its own way.
Great pictures, Anna, showing perfectly funtional mastiff types – unlike the St Bernard of course, which is sadly a hopeless and shortlved exaggeration. Here in UK I like the healthy trend towards first cross breeding.
Those dogs are very malnourished. Of course their conformation will differ. It is like some of the Qimmiq people who complain Americans are messing with the breed with too strong bones by feeding them kibbles instead of the traditional diet of being fed only fish.
Wow, they look like American Bulldogs.
Another nice photo of this type of old Saint Bernard:
Notice the dew claws on the hind legs.
Thats the original smooth-coated form. The rough arose from cross-breeding w/ Newfies. The rough coats btw, don’t do as well in the snow–they develop iceballs between their toes. The body of the dog pictured on this stamp is configured very much like our Sammie. (Sam was longer and taller than either of my daughter’s two Saints–170lbs & 205 lbs, after dieting–but weighed a “mere” 127lbs.) But Sam’s muzzle and head were much broader, with more prominent flews and significantly more loose facial skin.
Other than coloring, the dogs pictured greatly resemble the breed registered with AKC as Greater Swiss Mountain Dog. (Not too surprising.).
Seeing these dogs compared to the ungainly slobbering monsters they have been turned into reminds me of what is happening to Tibetan Mastiffs in the name of money and ego, particularly in China. We have a typical modern St Bernard locally and when I pass it walking my Tibetan Mastiff, that’s what I see in the breed’s future and it makes me feel depressed.
You’d have to rescue the damn dog if you sent a modern St Bernard onto a Swiss mountain pass! I see no glory in breeding or owning a dog just for it’s size. You know, as if 28 inches to the shoulders and 100 pounds in weight like my TM is isn’t big enough, give or take, for any breed. Not many of the modern, well known giant breeds were ever the bulk, height and in some cases wrinklyness they are now when they were first created for their various working purposes. Even just 100 years ago.
BCP: all 5 of our Saints got around quite well–running with horses, joggers and other dogs. But except for our first Saint, Toby, they were indeed droolers.
The main problem I have with this whole bigger is better thing, is that domestic dogs are simply not naturally this large. Thus the giant breeds suffer from all the issues associated w/ giantism. If a large breed of dog were to be developed from the American Gray Wolf, that might not be the case–although I don’t think our wolves are particularly long-lived either.
When we were still looking to adopt Saints, we always looked for the lighter weight dogs. Sam was a good example of this at 127lbs–a full 70lbs less than the current breed standards for a male. What both my wife and I would like to see is a return to an 80lb standard, with less excess flesh in the face and jowls. It could be done if breeders weren’t so damn obsessed w/ “bone” and wrinkles. We love the breed’s temperament but detest what breeders have done with conformation and longevity.
Excess flesh in the face and jowls.
http://www.bestinshowdaily.com/jamelles-aristocrat-v-elba/
You can buy bibs specifically made for Saints and other drooly breeds like Neos. Which tells you something.
Gross. Drool completely sicks me out.
What the hell? They’re breeding St Bernards for more extreme brachycephaly, too?!
Some of that apparent bulkiness is the result of puffing up the hair with blow drying, stiffeners, coloring agents and other “product”. Against the rules, yes; but rules too often ignored. Just visit the grooming areas at most any AKC dog show.
But be careful because you might choke to death on the chalk dust & hairspray fumes.
Though a lot of the show Saints are very thick and bulky, most of those you find in the shelters and rescues are far less so. As I said earlier, all our dogs could run just fine–you wouldn’t believe how fast Sammie could run when chasing foxes, playing soccer (he could turn on a dime), or just running for the heck of it. And Toby and Jamila would run around in the pasture with our Arab gelding, Archie, the whole live-long day–they all 3 loved it! In addition, the smooth-coated Saints of my experience all got along fine in deep snow–even some of the rough-coats did well. They used to chase us down the hillsides when we sledded.
The big issues for the breed are dysplasia; cancer (especially osteoasarcoma–giant dogs are 20 times as likely to develop it as standard sized dogs); arthritis; and shortened life-spans.
The trend in the UK too is for excessively tall and bulky rather than like your Sam in weight. I don’t see many out and about, but the ones I see are bumbling whoppers, even accounting for them being longcoats. The only Saint I saw who was a reasonable size and weight was one in the vets when the TM was a young puppy. He was slightly heavier boned than my TM is now and was 110 pounds (I asked out of curiosity). I don’t think he was quite as tall as the TM is as an adult. He did have a massive, square head, though it wasn’t overly wrinkly or jowly. He was a rescue and he was a nicer, more balanced Saint to my eye than any in the showring.
As for drool, haha! Having had a chow who was an epic slinger and 4 shar-pei, two of which were/are snot monsters. It ends up on the ceiling and all sorts. My TM on the other hand has a bear like head with a lovely dry mouth. My other two shar-pei weren’t droolers despite one having really fat chops. They were all second hand/rescues as I don’t condone breeding dogs with overly exaggerated features, but I just love the personality of those breeds. Sadly, foregoing longevity and good health for some mad cosmetic “ideal” that never existed, but is seen as a special breed trait is not confined to just one breed.
The original first depictions of St Bernards in the 1600s seemed to have a short muzzle and be very like the dogs in the photos. They look, unsurprisingly, quite like the other Swiss mountain breeds, especially the Great Swiss. Interestingly, the White with red marklings coat very occasionally turns up in some of the Swiss mountain breeds.
When the Saints were “recreated” at a couple of points in their history, several breeds were used. Newfoundlands, quite disastrously (you’d have thought Berner, Great Pyrenees or TMs would have been better choices for creating a dog that could withstand subzero mountain temperatures well). Interestingly, at one time the St Bernard and Tibetan Mastiff shared their breed club in France. If you look up the St Bernard “Chang”, he bears quite a resemblance to a golden Tibetan Mastiff. I’d be unsurprised if there was a smidge of TM blood added in, especially in England where both breeds were crossed with Mastiffs. Mastiffs themselves had at least one Tibetan Mastiff noted down in the original stud book for the Mastiff in England. Number 8 I think.
Here’s a couple of links to the early depiction and Chang.
Hospice dog painting: http://www.hallelujahstbernards.com/HOSPICE_DOGS_.htm
Scroll down for Chang: http://www.hallelujahstbernards.com/ARCHIEVE_C.htm
Anyone left in the world breeding Saints like this?
Sure – the so-called backyard breeders, and the ones who cross breed. I’ve seen a couple of GSD/Saint and Berner/Saint litters out there. I used to foster Saints, and none of them were anywhere near “proper” size; the biggest one I ever had was 120#. No heavy droolers, either.
One of my favorites was an 8yo named Toby. He was only 80#, and shorter than my collie (26″), but people still oohed and ahhed over the “huge” Saint. I guess perception trumps actuality.
What lovely moderate dogs! They do look more like the Greater Swiss Mountain Dogs.
Anyone wnat a saint like this might be better off looking at staint mixes. I have seen a couple of gsd/saint mixes that were lighter built and far less drool than pure saint. The colour may not be spot on though!
My cousin had a GSD/StB cross. He was a fine dog … looked like a less massively-built shorthaired Saint. Except that he didn’t have quite as heavy flews, he looked very much like the dogs in this photo. He had a black muzzle & mostly white body with large tawny patches, & head markings typical of a Saint.
In the best interests of longevity in dogs, smaller is better – provided the small dog one chooses is not for example the hopelessy disease ridden cavalier spaniel.
[…] St. Bernards at their home kennels in Switzerland, 1913. […]
[…] The modern St. Bernard is probably derived from it, but when one looks at the images of the actual working dogs at the hospice, they were not breeding giant mastiffs. […]