An modern English toy spaniel of the "distorted noseless type."
The following critique of the English toy spaniel fancy comes from Lady Wentworth’s Toy Dogs and Their Ancestors:
The whole fabric of modern judging is utterly unsound. The Club judges are, moreover, bound by the Club regulations, which prevent the exercise of any private judgment.
When I say that I consider the modern standard incorrect, I do not mean that we should go back to long noses. I frankly own that before I began my historical investigations I held the same opinion as that of other writers, namely that the ancestors of the Toy Spaniel had long noses, and I was prepared to advocate a return to whatever the original type might have been. My researches have, however, led me to an exactly opposite conclusion. The red-and-white Toy Spaniel has a perfect right to his short nose. The King Charles had comparatively long-nosed ancestors, but is now a composite breed made up to suit modern taste and no longer bears any resemblance to his earlier progenitors.
I still maintain that certain types of modern dogs are monstrosities, and shall to the end of my days fight against these types and protest against their propagation.
I have been working for some years on the system of drawing attention to the distorted noseless type. There are several noseless types but of late breeders have gone in for sensationalism in heads regardless of beauty or even of general soundness.
I have purposely ridiculed these extraordinary deformities, hoping that at last people would see the grotesqueness for themselves, and this, I am happy to say, has already resulted in the Toy Spaniel Club taking steps to revise their points. It is, however, impossible for any club to properly revise its points without a complete knowledge of the history of its breed, and this no one has in the case of Toy Spaniels, because no one has ever had access to the proper material (p. 88).
Does this sound familiar?
One must understand that toy spaniels from the British Isles were originally several different breeds. Lytton is writing here about the composite breed that developed from these unique strains. In the AKC ring, these dogs are shown in four color varieties, which partly reflect the original strains that once existed as much more distinct strains in the breed.
One should read Lytton’s text. She points out that many different strains of English toy spaniel were being crossbred with toy bulldogs to create the “noseless” type.
At the time, this type of dog became the sensation in English toy spaniels, and it seems that virtually no one listened to Lytton, because the modern English toy spaniel breed is quite brachycephalic— without exception.
The brachycephalic takeover of the breed drove an American fancier, Roswell Eldridge, to care set up a prize for anyone who had a dog that looked like the old Blenheim spaniels that looked like the dogs that were kept in Charles II’s day. From that movement, the Cavalier King Charles spaniel was developed.
I think they would have been better off if they had used papillons or phalenes to create a long-muzzled toy spaniel strain, instead of searching for rare atavisms in the brachycephalic English toy spaniels.
Trying to breed from atavisms is always a bit of a tricky thing. Atavisms are called atavisms because they are rare and may not have enough numbers to create a sustainable population.
In this respect, Cavaliers were probably already doomed to have lots of health problems, simply because of the small number of founding dogs in the breed.
Of course, neither breed is all that healthy, but if one reads Lady Wenworth’s critique of her breed and Max von Stephaniz’s critique of the development his breed (in the comments), one notes a common element of discord.
Sensationalism and fads were already leading to ruination.
Even with the existence of well-constructed breed standards in the more modern era, we still see these elements controlling the destiny of so many breeds.
These writers are saying something more along the lines of William F. Buckley’s line about standing athwart history and yelling “Stop!” They are being reactionary in a sense to the degradation of their beloved breeds, which we now know, got far worse as time marched on.
But the fights over purebred dogs are not new. We’ve been at war over these things for as long as institutionalized fancy has existed.
And we were at it long before the fancy came into existence.
We’ll probably still be at it once it disappears or becomes something different.
The fancy leads to distortions, but distortions are the result of the ego.
And it is the ego that must be dealt with before we can start to turn things around– show, sport, or pet.
Ignorance of breed history and original type is rampant in many breeds. Without complete knowledge of a breed’s origins and the intentions behind it’s creation, it’s impossible to ‘preserve’ or ‘improve’ anything.
“And it is the ego that must be dealt with before we can start to turn things around”
Good luck with that! I don’t disagree, just question the doablility.
“Ignorance of breed history and original type is rampant in many breeds”
Look at the “official” breed histories of most breeds, they are full of sensationalism and mythology. To these people the true breed history doesn’t mean anything.
Lady Wentworth was actually debunking a common fallacy in the history of toy spaniels– that they had always been flat-faced.
What I find interesting is how this breed– which was always a plaything of the nobility– actually existed in what appeared to be several distinct breeds. Some were short in muzzle. Some were not.
It just depended upon which toy breed they used to breed with their bantamized hunting spaniels to make them even smaller.
Lytton’s book is a favorite of mine and I was happy to see her words quoted here. Just as an aside as it was remarked on, in the rebuilding of the Cavalier King Charles, there is a small amount of Papillon and Cocker Spaniel blood. It is admitted that Ann’s Son, an important breed founder, most likely had a Papillon sire. Unfortunately these few outcrosses were far outweighed in the gene pool by those pulled from the short nosed King Charles Spaniel breed.
Ann’s Son, from whom the breed standard was modelled, can be seen at this link: – http://www.arkwebshost.com/nonprofit/cavalierkcsuk/Cavalier_King_Charles_Spaniel_History.shtml
As an example of the short nosed and almost hydrocephalic looking King Charles at the time, this is Garthaigh Snowflake (stuffed and under glass). – http://honeybet.typepad.com/.a/6a010535952948970b0133f37312ea970b-pi
Garthaigh Snowflake is a grand Aunt (through her full brother) to an influential foundation Cavalier bitch, Nell of Ttiweh. Nell is grand-dam to Plantation Pixie, great grand-dam to Plantation Robert, and is behind important founding lines and Cavaliers like Cannonhill Richey and Little Dorrit of Ttiweh amongst others.
Interesting!
I have seen a photo of a taxidermied specimen of the Toy Trawler spaniel (which she mentions in the text as a possible source for recreating the old type toy spaniel.). It reminded me more of a curly-haired papillon than an English toy spaniel.
Wad about the old “Malborough breed” – it wasn’t flat-faced either, but may’ve also been one of the ideals to start with to work on a new toy breed.
There’s another painting of Landseer, with an orange-patched, health-looking spaniel of that type posing.
I have red it was those chinese flat-headed dogs like the pug, that were crossed to the tiny spaniels to create that flat face.
Ancient chinese were masters in making things small, like their palazzo dogs or… womens’ feet.
Yeah. That’s Blenheim spaniel mentioned in the book, not flat-faced at all.
ETS and Cavs that are the red and white color are still called Blenheims.
The Duke of Marlborough named his estate after the Battle of Blenheim during the War of Spanish Succession. He was commander of English forces during the battle, which routed the French and Bavarians.
The Duke of Marlborough was John Churchill, an ancestor of Winston Churchilll.
The above is slightly confusing because lady wentworth did infact keep short nosed dogs and her favorite blenhiem ch windfall was no longer nosed than the tricolor dog at the top of the page .
She seems to have been against extreme Exaggeration ( the bug eyed overly domed , bulldog jawed nose buried in their face types that some breeders still aim for ) But not against a short nose.
she even says in your text above that she had changed her opinion and she believed the red and white version is historically entitiled to his short nose
http://members.optusnet.com.au/beau012/veiwfromturnofcentury.html
She also gives an excellent description of the breeds temperment
“The dog should be bold and courageous, a merry shower, and irrespectively active, always skipping and jumping about as if full of hidden springs, and with a passion for games, racing its
companions and flying in pursuit of a leaf or a shadow simply for the sheer joy of living.
It should be loving, affectionate and sweet tempered, and deeply attached to its owner; inquisitive, watchful, busy little dogs, interested in everything that goes on. They should be full of wiles and tricks and amusing devices, with an intelligence which must be seen to be believed”
Unfortunatly in “recreating” the cavalier no thought was made to keeping the original temperment aswell as the looks.
Cavaliers are lovely but they dont have the cheeky comic side of the English toy she describes so well in her book.
In her text, she’s all over the place.