Author Topic: The debate of creation of the A(p)BT/Olde English Bulldogge.  (Read 1253 times)

D.M. Norrod

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 136
The debate of creation of the A(p)BT/Olde English Bulldogge.
« on: December 16, 2015, 09:45:17 AM »
Pavle Barta I hope, that this is going to be interesting to someone. Smile Stoicevic Bojan mentioned me regarding the APBTs history, so I'll write a word or two...

Now how can someone speak about a breed when they aren't even from this country?

 Speaking about the origins of the APBT and two different general opinions, both of them are right in some way. How can it be so? I’ll try to explain. Naturally, we won’t agree on every aspect. Olde English Bulldogge was predominantly white dog with brindle or color patches. If you look at the old pictures, it is very rare that there are animals of different color (sometimes predominantly brindle).

The person is referring to the current breed of dog Olde English Bulldogge, the original English Bulldog was brindle. With a red or brown back ground behind the brindle strips. He look nothing like the breed you see today of Olde English Bulldogge as in the movie Turner and Hooch staring Tom Hanks.
 The colors marking he is referring often appear of the dogs from the county of Staffordshire England where they were brindle and white.

 There were no solid old English bulldogs, black bulldogs, red bulldogs, black and tan or fawn etc. You will also notice that the old working terriers were mostly black, fawn, yellow, black and ten and white with colored patches. I know that Richard Stratton said one thing, but on the other hand, John Colby said something completely different. I respect Richard Stratton of course, but in my
 opinion his point of view is rather romantic.
I described the color origin on my forum:

 What John Colby wrote was his confusion between the history of the English Bull Terrier (like Spuds McKenzie, Budweiser commercials) who descended from the English Bulldog and the English White Terrier, now extinct..
 John Colby was one of the founding members of the AST with AKC.
 They ban red, liver colored, red nose, black & tan, dogs with more then 80% white or all white on them.
 Years later these same dogs started to produce red/red nose dogs where the Irish influence had already been bred into them.

 Bull and Terriers started to show in greater numbers from 18th to 19th century in Britain. At that time, people started moving from the countryside to cities. In 1835 the Cruelty to Animal Act was declared. The bull-baiting was prohibited by law.
Animal Cruelty laws in US didn't start until the 1930's. Bull baiting was allowed up until the 1900. It was believe it help tenderize the meat.
 Industrialization didn't start until after the civil war and it started here in the US that is why we became the most powerful county in the world. It wasn't in Great Britain.

 You have to know that at that time only rich people (farmers) and nobility had the right to have bulldogs and hounds. Poor people had terriers. One more thing we have to consider is that at that time there were no breeds in present-day terms.

WHAT? farmers were rich? Since when?? They used the bulldog to control the bull! It had nothing to do with the class system. Often many hunters used Bulldogs as their kill dog. Yes there was dogs in the 1800's as known as purebred. Kennel Club of England had shows back in those times. English Bull Terrier was often showed at them. Remember Pilot and Crib match was in the 1850s.

 There were no “purebred” dogs. Old bulldogs were often crossed with Grayhounds to improve speed and agility, long before they were crossed with terriers. Poor people fought their terriers and “bull and terriers”, rich people fought their bulldogs with bulls, ‘cause it was a “noble” sport. When the sport of bull-baiting was banned, bulldogs started to fight in the pits. There they encountered a close relative who
 was smaller, faster, quicker, and more intelligent with more pronounced killer instinct.

Yes there was, there were dog shows put on by the Kennel Club of England in the 1800's. Bulldogs were never crossed. There was no need in it. They were used as kill dogs. Hounds were used for scent and sight for prey. Greyhounds wasn't even a known breed back then. Back then a lot of people mutt bred dogs. There was no grand scheme of things to create a breed.

 That guy was called “half and half” or “Bull and Terrier”. The irony is that Olde English Bulldogge descendant was guilty for its extinction. There was no need for such a dog (old bulldog in his bull-baiting form) anymore and it disappeared through those crosses. Of course, Olde English Bulldogge continued to live through “Bull and Terriers”. You have to also consider that the terriers of that time were entirely working dogs.
Here is the common mistake people make about the A(p)BT, is the belief the whole breed came only from Great Britain. The only time a reference was EVER made was with the Staffords from England. No other country or breed of fighting bulldogs made reference to a terrier cross. This was brought on because of the confusion of the 2 breeds and often it was thought the dogs from Staffordshire was created the same way as the English Bull Terrier. To this day no one can actually state what type of terrier was used to create the Staffords. So it has to be assumed, since they were different breeds, none was ever used but just to mutt breed.

 Nowadays, where you can find the gameness? There are no “game” mastiffs, but there are game German Jagdterriers, fox terriers, Jack Russell Terries, Patterdale terriers, Fell terriers, bull terriers etc. Someone will say: “Yes, because they have bulldog blood in them!”. Exactly! That is the point! All of them are descendants of “Bull and Terriers”.

There isn't? Oh yes there is. Gameness for a sport in hunting is instinctive same as fighting is for the Pit Dogs. Since we owned the number 3 rank hunting Jack Russell Terrier in North America for many years I can tell you this is a false statement to claim there is bulldog in them. This sentence is repetitive in the first place. Fox Terrier and Patterdale Terriers help create the Jack Russell. The Fell IS another name for the Patterdale Terrier! There has never been dogs produced by them which appeared to have bulldog in them. The author of this article must not be knowledgeable of the fact Hounds were crossed to Bulldogs to create the breed of dogs called Terriers!

 The point is that the crossing was done in that way that the phenotype
 remained as it was required. Hunting terriers had to be small enough to enter the hole, fast and light enough to kill as many rats as possible in a short period of time. You have to know that those terriers had been bred for their working abilities for centuries. In “Of English Dogges, by John Caius Doctor of Phisicke in the Universitie of Cambridge, 1576“ you can find descriptions of how the terriers of that time tore up foxes and badgers to pieces. What I want to say is that not only bulldogs were “game” dogs of that time. The fact is that the working terriers were more athletic dogs than old bulldogs. John Meyric, in his book “House Dogs and Sporting Dogs” (1861) writes about the same level of gameness in “Bull and Terriers” and bulldogs but emphasizes better agility and dexterity of the former. John Henry Walsh “Stonehenge” further described “bulldog to bulldog” fights (1859) where dogs gripped each other doing nothing else
 and compared that style to that of Bull and Terriers who were more ferocious, with much more variations in fights and he called them fighting dogs “par excellence“.

It needs to stay on topic, not old writings by people who never owned or fed fighting dogs, topic which is, is there any terrier in the A(p)BT? I have seen Brittney Spaniels and Springer Spaniels to Coon Dogs who's instinctive prey drive was so strong they would hunt themselves to death. Doesn't mean there is Terrier in those dogs or even the Bulldog breed.

 Fighting dogs had to have broader heads and more muscles, but not too heavy to compromise the stamina. Terriers were generally too small and light to fight bigger dogs, and they lacked defensive abilities, but they were more ferocious, quicker, and more intelligent in fighting than old bulldogs. Generally they were much better “dog to dog” fighters than the old bulldogs. They were better attackers.

Terriers won't fight dog to dog to the death like Pit Dogs will do. Bulldogs were known to be the "Killer Hounds".
 They didn't get this reputation by not being able to be quick, intelligence, ferocious attackers! They needed all this not to just survive but to conquer and win.

 So, the point is that old bulldogs and old terriers were not breeds, but working dogs bred to do their jobs best they could. The united traits of those old dogs created the perfection – APBT. A lot of dogmen use the term “bulldog” even today, but that name does not designate a breed but working dogs. You have to know that Olde English Bulldogge had been changing through time
‘because of the different crosses, it was never a “purebred” dog as some want to imply, but it stands as a cornerstone of the American Pit Bull Terrier. All kinds of fighting dogs came to US in the late 1800s. Bulldogs, terriers, bull terriers, Irish Old Family dogs… The best of that “bull and terrier” blood selected for fighting ability have created the dog we admire today.
This is true with most all mutt dogs of the pre 1800's.
 Why I say mutt dogs is because a true pure bred dog will reproduce its self and not revert back to one of the foundation breeds used in creating the mutt.
 The point is, there never has been writing from other countries about other fighting breeds that had terrier bred into them.
 Here is where a correction needs to be made. A(p)BT was known to be in the US in the 1700's. Not the late 1800's. I have posters of advertised dog fights in the middle 1800's.