1170

NEW NEED FOR BOAR-LURCHERS
By David Hancock

Our newspapers tell us that the wild boar is now a threat in several parts of Britain, ruining sports-grounds and menacing farmers and dog-walkers. Hunting such a quarry with hounds is not to be undertaken lightly; in ancient times, more boar hounds were killed in the hunt than boars. To recreate the boarhound would be some task, mainly in the character of the hounds used. In Australia the Gammonwood kennel has produced some exceptional ‘Greydogges’ or Mastiff- Racing Greyhound crosses. I see, at 'alternative' i.e. unsanctioned dog shows, quite fascinating hybrids produced by enthusiasts eager to prove or at least demonstrate that their combination of say, Mastiff and Staffie, Canary Dog and Greyhound, Dogue de Bordeaux and Bulldog or Bullmastiff and Bull Terrier reproduces the hunting mastiff types of old. When they are more like the ‘seizers’ they dub them 'alauntes'; when they are more like 'bullenbeissers' they dub them Bull Lurchers, especially when they are tucked-up behind the rib-cage. Historically, the latter were usually called 'strong Greyhounds' and used on deer and boar, as well as by butchers needing to control wayward cattle.

  In his 'The Illustrated Book of the Dog', Cassell, 1879, Vero Shaw wrote, on a strain of Greyhound: "The best of Lord Orford's strain were purchased by Colonel Thornton on the death of the breeder, and thus found their way from Norfolk to Yorkshire...we are told that 'it was unanimously agreed by all the sportsmen present, that they ran with a great deal of energetic exertion, and always at the hare; that though beaten they did not go in, or exhibit any symptoms of lurching or waiting to kill. These qualifications - pluck and endurance - were no doubt the result of the Bull cross alluded to...". At country shows I see lurchers that closely resemble such a strain; they combine the pace of the Greyhound with the strength and persistence of the bull breeds.  They are today’s Boar-lurchers!

    Hunting par force, or at speed, using the pace and power of strong, quite fierce dogs was replaced by hunting cunning or the use of packs of scent hounds in Britain. This led in turn to a decline in the use of hunting mastiffs, able to pull down their quarry by sheer force. The mastiff breeds, whether huge like the Mastiff of England, as small as the Bulldog of Britain, cropped-eared like the Cane Corso of Italy and the Perro de Presa of the Canaries, loose-skinned like the Mastini of Italy or dock-tailed like the Boerboel of South Africa, are not only fine examples of powerful but good-tempered dogs but form part of their respective nation's canine heritage. It is vital that they do not fall victim to show ring faddists or misguided cliques of rosette-chasing, over-competitive zealots. Today's breeders need to wake up to such unacceptable excesses, honour the proud heritage of these distinguished breeds and respect them for what they are: the light heavyweights of the canine world, quick on their feet and devastating at close-quarter protection when threatened. Such magnificent canine athletes deserve the very best custodianship, with every fancier respecting their hound ancestry, remembering their bravery at man's behest and revering their renowned stoicism. In Britain the blend of breeds combined to make a Bull Lurcher perpetuate this ancient canine tradition.

Whatever the blend of blood behind a Bull Lurcher, the anatomical requirements are similar for this type of hunting dog: a powerful neck, a seizing jaw, with breadth right down to the nose, strong loins, good spring of rib, with the rib-cage showing good length as well as circumference, immense power in the sprint and great muscularity. Mentally, such a dog has to have extraordinary persistence, enormous amounts of  determination when closing with quarry, yet always be responsive to commands. In the wrong hands such a dog is capable of being misused or not being satisfactorily under control. In today's society, a powerful hunting dog, allowed to be too dominant or inadequately trained, is going to be troublesome. The awesome catch-dogs depicted by Rubens, Tempesta, Hondius, Riedinger, Snyder and Desportes simply cannot fit in with 21st century living in Britain. Breeders of Bull Lurchers need to be wise and socially aware, concentrating on highly biddable dogs and avoiding the production of hyper-aggressive specimens. The Bull Lurcher perpetuates a long line in powerful hunting dogs; their breeders need to respect this as well as the constraints of modern living. 

 But Bull Lurchers do not need to be canine giants in order to reflect past form, a previous role and a declared function. The German boarhound, before becoming a  'parade dog' for German Regiments based on an outcross to the powerful Suliot Dog, was never a giant dog - as so many show ring Great Danes have become. The Mastiff of England, when, as the famed Englische Dogge, was the most coveted hunting mastiff in Europe, was never the giant it has been bred to be by show ring criteria. The Dogue de Bordeaux was far smaller when used as a boarhound in France a century or so ago. The Cane Corso from Italy represents the correct size for a hunting mastiff - two feet tall at the withers, under a hundredweight on the scales. American farmers and sportsmen using the American Bulldog as a catch-dog never breed for size but for performance. Function should always decide design. Bull Lurchers need pace and power, not bulk and sheer size. The best specimen I have ever seen was at a show on the Oxfordshire/Gloucestershire border; this dog, simply named Barney, came straight from De Foix's book on hunting and would have simply delighted that remarkable sportsman who prized such dogs for their athleticism as well as their stoicism. We must now do the same.

  Hounds that hunted boar were often killed in the hunt and boar hunting in Central Europe down the ages was massively conducted. In 802AD Charlemagne hunted wild boar in the Ardennes, aurochs in the Hercynian Forest and later had his trousers and boots torn to pieces by a bison; all three quarry were formidable adversaries and were hunted by the same huge hounds. The sheer scale of hunting is illustrated by these 'bags': in 1656, 44 stags and 250 wild boar were killed on Dresden Heath; in 1730 in Moritzburg, 221 antlered stags and 614 wild boar were killed and in Bebenhausen in 1812, wild boar were pursued by 350 'strong hounds', clad in armour like knights of old. Hunting big game in Western Europe in the Middle Ages was more an obsession than a pastime - so often a demonstration of manliness.

  Between 1611 and 1680, gamebooks reveal that around 40,000 wild boar, sows and young boars were killed in Saxony. In 1737, King Augustus II himself killed more than 400 wild boar in the course of a single hunt in Saxony. John George II, killed over 22,000 wild boar in 24 years. In the Bialowieza Forest in 1890, in a fortnight's hunting, 42 bison, thirty-six elk and 138 wild boar were killed. This is the frame in which to picture the Great Dane type as a bison hound, auroch hound, staghound and boarhound. Perhaps because of the wholly arbitrary division of hounds today into scent or sighthounds, multi-purpose hounds which hunted 'at force', using scent and sight to best effect, have been neglected.

 It is important too to acknowledge that boar hunting in the ancient world was not just another form of hunting. In his valuable book 'Hounds and Hunting in Ancient Greece', published in 1964 by the University of Chicago, Denison Hull states: "It was the very danger of the boar hunt that made it fascinating to the Greeks; victory was essential, for there was no safety except through conquest. It was that urge to display courage that made the boar hunt the highest manifestation of the chase;" the hounds of course were always in greater danger than the human hunters. Hull quotes from Xenophon's Cynegeticus as recording that boarhounds "must by no means be picked by chance, for they must be prepared to fight the beast". These were clearly highly respected and rather special hounds. A new need for a boar-lurcher could produce some superb seizers – many of our bull lurchers already are.

  Before a wild boar harms a child in rural Britain, a likely occurrence if a sow is accompanied by piglets, some form of control makes good sense. Shooting wild boar is not easy and a wounded boar is doubly dangerous. Although ignorant do-gooders would never sanction it, boar-hounds, or boar-lurchers, seizing the boar by the ear for immediate despatch by humane-killer is a kinder option. Our distant ancestors knew the value of such seizing dogs; we have unthinkingly pursued the shooting method - and that is not wise - or the most humane. Some dogs in such dangerous work might well get killed - that is the nature of such a form of control.

 It would be good to see appropriate recognition for the boar-lurchers or hunting mastiffs, whether described as docgas, bandogges, seizers, holding dogs, pinning dogs, perro de presas, filas, bullenbeissers or leibhunde. They should at least be respected for their past bravery and bred to the design of their ancestors. A big game hunting breed like the Mastiff of England seems prized nowadays solely for its weight and size. The Englische Dogge ('dogge' then meant mastiff) was once famous throughout central Europe as a hunting mastiff par excellence. It is a fact that, in the boar-hunting field in central Europe in the period 1500 to 1800, many more catch-dogs were killed than the boars being hunted. In those days there was a saying in what is now Germany that if you wanted ‘boars' heads you had to sacrifice dogs' heads’.

 Many types of dog have been used in the boar-hunt, with only one modern breed, the Great Dane or German Mastiff, directly inheriting the boarhound mantle. Hounds of the pack were often regarded as too precious to be risked in the final moments of the boar-hunt, so more coarsely-bred dogs were used 'at the kill', being considered expendable. These were recklessly brave, remarkably agile, extraordinarily determined and admirably athletic. A better name for them would be 'boar-lurchers'; although they never were. If you want a humane method of controlling wild boar in England, a revived boar-lurcher would have that role; in the past they were never uniformly bred and nearly always owned by the lower classes, millers in particular, who were sometimes paid or rewarded for doing so, as a contribution to the hunt.

 In England, in the reign of Henry the Second, the wild boar was hunted with hounds and spears in many wooded areas, from the Forest of Dean to Warwickshire and beyond. King James hunted the boar at Windsor, this being described as "a more dangerous amusement than it was likely he could find any pleasure in". Turbervile writing in the late 16th century, recorded that hounds accustomed to running the boar were spoiled for game of scent less strong. They were alleged to be less inclined to stoop to the scent of deer or hare and disinclined to pursue a swifter quarry which did not turn to bay when out of breath. The East India Company introduced hunting dogs from England into India in 1615; on one occasion a mastiff from England shaming "the Persian dogs" at a boar kill.

 In central Europe there were once huge dogs used in the boar hunts of the great forests of what is now Germany, western Poland and the Czech Republic. They were known as 'hatzruden' (literally big hunting dogs), huge rough-haired crossbred dogs, supplied to the various courts by peasants. They were the “expendable" dogs of the boar hunt, used at the kill. The nobility however bred the smooth-coated 'sauruden' (boar hounds), and 'saupacker' (literally, member of a pack used for hunting wild boar). The 'saufanger' (boar seizer) was the catch-dog or hunting mastiff. The 'sauruden' were the equivalent, in the late 18th century, of the hunting alaunts of the 15th century, with the Bullmastiff being the modern equivalent of the "alaunts of the butcheries". The specialist 'leibhund', literally 'body-dog', was the catch-dog used to close with the boar and seize it.  I believe it is perfectly reasonable to regard the modern breed called the Great Dane (in English-speaking countries) or Deutsche Dogge (German mastiff), although not as huge when a boarhound, as the inheritor of the saurude or boarhound mantle. But not the show-ring specimens!

The true boarhound, a hound of the chase or chien courant, as opposed to a huge crossbred dog once used at the killing of the boar, deserves our respect. Such a hound was required to pursue and run down one of the most dangerous quarries in the hunting field. It needed to be a canine athlete, have a good nose, great determination and yet not be too hot-blooded. Both the Fila Brasileiro and the Dogo Argentino have been used in the boar hunt in South America. American Bulldogs are still used as catch-dogs on feral pig in the USA, with Bullmastiff crosses being favoured in New Zealand. Such a dog must have immense perseverance allied to great agility. In our modern so-called more tolerant society, such powerful determined hunting dogs are stigmatized and even banned in some allegedly liberal countries. These are not happy times for hunting dogs bred by man to be determined, strong and recklessly brave. Sadly, they are also irreplaceable. Prized for several millennia for their dash and bravery, powerful sporting dogs are now under suspicion just because they are powerful. We may not want strapping courageous dogs to pull down big game for us in modern times but they are part of our sporting heritage and deserve our support. We never lacked support from them.

 The great forests of central Europe provided endless opportunities for hunting. In the 19th century the pursuit of wild animals with hounds was conducted on a vast scale. In France there were over 350 packs of hounds. In 1890 the Czar of Russia organised a grand fourteen-day hunt in which his party killed 42 European bison, 36 elk and 138 wild boar. In many of these hunts, scenthounds, sighthounds, running mastiffs or par force hounds (the true gazehounds) and hunting mastiffs (often held on the leash until needed at the kill and called 'bandogges' by the Saxons) were used in the same hunt.

 The ancient Greeks, Gaston Phoebus in the 14th century, the Bavarians in the 17th century and the Czars in the 19th century used hunting dogs of different types in unison according to function. Sighthounds, scenthounds and hunting mastiffs were used together and not hunted separately, unlike our more specialist packs. Boarhounds could therefore be the loose term to describe all hounds on a boar hunt, whatever their function in the chase and kill. Casual researchers can therefore look at a painting of a boar hunt or read accounts of one and jump to all sorts of false conclusions about what boarhounds could look like in past times.

 The invention of firearms brought not just dramatic advantages to hunter-sportsmen but a substantially reduced risk to their lives. This very much lessened their dependence, in some forms of hunting, on determined courageous dogs. We live in times when powerful dogs brave enough to tackle boar, bull and bison are banned in some countries, not because of any current misdeeds, but purely because of their past as a type of dog. In modern times too a dog that can single-handedly catch a hare is valued less than a dog that can only retrieve a dead rabbit. The recklessly brave dogs which closed with the boar in the medieval hunt were boar-lurchers in today's phraseology. The broad-mouthed dogs that survive, the once coarsely-bred mastiff-types developed by show-men into distinct breeds and now being ruined in today's show rings, have a remarkable heritage and deserve all the respect we can afford them. They might still have a use in controlling wild boar both humanely and effectively. But a well-bred boar-lurcher would excel – if bred from the right ingredients. If only the intelligentsia now dictating our lives could, just for once, heed the lessons of the past. Welcome back the boarhound - or our own admirable bull/boar-lurcher!