[分享]"魔罗刹 MOLOSSER" 所有猛犬起源之谜

ODY

<h1><br/><font size="4">以下是资深獒科研究者、挪威好友 <font color="#0066ff">Kaare Konradsen</font> 对 <font color="#00ccff">MOLOSSER</font> (魔罗刹) 起源的一篇论文,<br/>其中论点经多年细心考证及搜罗各方所得资料编成;<br/>可能会引起藏獒死硬派支持者不满;<br/>请谅!</font></h1><p><br/><font size="1">再次麻烦 Leo 叔叔 、 3 狗 大哥翻译。</font></p>

[此贴子已经被作者于2007-8-29 0:24:53编辑过]

ODY

<h1><center><font face="Arial"><font color="#0000ff">O<font size="5">RIGIN</font> &amp; H<font size="5">ISTORY</font><font size="4"><br/>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</font><font size="5">OF THE</font> MOLOSSER</font></font></center><center><font face="Arial"><font color="#0000ff"><br/>art one</font></font></center></h1><font face="Times New Roman"><h4>Even if many well known naturalists and zoologists have questioned the origin of the domestic dog and have suggested that it is not derivatived from the wolf but from an early wild dog, there can be no doubt that the domestic dog, Canis Familiaris, has the wolf as its ancestor. Those who still are not so certain should visit the <a href="http://www.kc.net/~wolf2dog/wayne1.htm">Multiple and Ancient Origins of the Domestic Dog </a>page. This study is highly controversial and it can be questioned if the domestic dog really is as old as this study claim, even if we cam assume that the domestic dog is much older than the up to now common believed 10.000 years.<br/>First, let us look at the name Molosser, which in fact is a misnormer which now is used on all breeds of the Mastiff, Bulldog and Mountain Dog type.<br/></h4><h2><font face="Arial"><font color="#800000">The name Molosser</font></font></h2><font face="Times New Roman"><h4>Molossi was the name on a people living in the Epirus mountain region of northwestern Greece and southern Albania. These people had very famous guardian and wardogs who were given their name after the people. These dogs, the Molossi, later Molosser, are told to be imported to Rome, and became well known under the name "Canis Molossi". The dogs of the Molossi were more wolfish and not at all so muscular as the Mastiffs today, nevertheless have the whole group of dogs gotten their name from these dogs.<br/>One of the most prominent Molossi kings was Alexander of Epirus (Alexander the Molossian) who died in 330 B.C. His sister was Olympia, the mother of Alexander the Great. The greatest of the Molossian kings was Pyrrhus, who was killed in 272 B.C. The Molossi was a war people and tried to conquer both Greece, Italy and Rome as well as Macedonia and Sicily, before being crushed by the Romans in 170 B.C.<br/>Aristotele, who lived in 384-322 B.C, praises the Molossus and tells us that they serves as guardians of the herds, and distinguises itself from all other dogs through its size and indomitable courage against wild animals. In his "Historia Animalium" he tell us, among several other dog breeds, about the Molossian dog from Molossia in Epirus, who were used to hunting and as a fighting dog. Aristotele also says that the Laconian dog were produced from a cross with the wolf (Laconici canes ex vulpe et cane generantur) and of the Molossian he says; "they differ nothing from the Laconian, but as a guardian of flocks and herds they are eminent against wild beast for size and courage."<br/>M.B. Wynn writes in 1886; "Greece, the land of the classic song and the ennobling art has never possessed the breed, seemingly." (about Mastiffs). He further writes; "...the true molossians was an erect eared (altas aure) slate coloured (glauci) or fawn (fulvus) swift footed wolfish-looking dog, identical or almost so, with the modern Suliot boarhound. A fine sculpture of the true molossus was found at Pompeii, with the inscription "Cave Canem".<br/>To explain to you why the name Molossser is now used on the Mastiff, Bulldog and Mountain Dog breeds I choose to further quote Wynn; "The term for the mastiff among some naturalists, is the molossus, originating with our early writers, who choose to think that the classic writers meant a mastiff, in the sence we now use the word, whereas the molossus was not in reality a mastiff."<br/>We can clearly see by the above that the word Molosser is a misnormer and are originally not describing the breeds now classified as Molosser dogs. Nevertheless is this the word that in modern times describes the breeds in question and I will continue to use this word in lack of a better word that embraces all these breeds.</h4></font></font><pre>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<br/><table><center><tbody></tbody><table border="0"><tbody><tr><td align="center"> </td><td align="center"></td></tr></tbody></table></center></table><table border="0"><tbody><tr><td align="center"> </td><td align="center"></td></tr></tbody></table></pre><pre><center><font face="Arial"><font color="#800000">Left: True Molossus<br/>Right: Statue of the Molossus, belonging to Olympias, daughter of the Molossian King Pyrrhus I.<br/>(Palazzo Torlonia, Rome)</font></font></center><font face="Arial" color="#800000"><center><br/><br/><br/><br/><br/><br/></center><center></center><center></center><center></center><center></center><center></center><center></center><center></center><center></center><center></center><center></center></font></pre>

[此贴子已经被作者于2007-8-28 23:22:21编辑过]

ODY

<h2><font face="Arial"><font color="#008000">Theories</font></font></h2><font face="Times New Roman"><h4>On the origin of the Molossers it is common accepted that the Tibetan Mastiff is the first of all Molosser breeds and the ancestor to all other breeds known today as Molossers. This you can read in all dog books, but think about it, which proves have been presented to you that are placing giant dogs in Tibet before anywhere else?<br/>Raymond Triquet writes in his book, "Le sage de Dogue de Bordeaux"; "What does one know about the Mastiff of Tibet at old times? -nothing. And yet, one wrote pages about them. We know all the always repeated traditional history from one author to another, without the shade of proof." Exactly my point, there are absolutly no archaeologic or palaeontological evidence placing the Molosser dogs in Tibet before anywhere else. No pictorial evidence, no folklore evidence, nothing! What about all books that are referring to the Tibetan Mastiff as the ancestor to the Molosser breeds? Well, as Mr. Triquet said, authors copies the history from other authors, and thereby the other authors errors and mistakes. And so it continues. Few, if any at all, of the modern dog book authors have done any researche by themselves on the origin of the Molosser breeds. Since it is so common accepted that the Tibetan Mastiff is the ancestor I guess that they have not bothered to do any researche, or maybe they are afraid that the others would laugh of them. I think it is strange and unbelivable, to see that so well educated people with so much knowledge about these dogs accepts the Tibetan theory without any evidence at all.<br/>Lets look at the theories and evidences, and the lack of evidences on the origin of the Molossers.<br/>Hilzheimer was of the believe that the ancestor of the Molossers was a short muzzle wolf, which he located to central Sweden. Pira found in excaviations of the cave "Stora Forvar" in the island Stora Karlson in Sweden, fragments of dog craniums from the stoneage. The cranium were from a short muzzled dog who show signs of domistication. Pira classified this dog as Canis Familiaris Paulustris Rutim. Stauder and Hauck came both to the conclution that all European Mastiff types evolved locally from Neolithic dogs at different times and at different locations. Furthermore Hauck, which was an expert on canine history, wrote; "I cannot agree with ancient tales about the transplantation of large Mastiffs from Asia towards Europe. There are no osteological and no pictorial representation to allow an unambiguous proof."<br/>Keller, Kramer, Tschudy, among others, tried to trace the origin of the Saint Bernard Dog and the other Swiss cattle dogs to the Tibetan Mastiff via the Molossians, but came to the conclution that there are absolutly no scientific facts to support this thesis; No written documents, no pictures and no osteological proof could be found to endorse these views.<br/>rofessor Th. Studer maintained that as early as the bronze age (Halstatt period 1299-800 B.C.) there existed a Mastiff-like dog breed of medium size (65-70 cm. at the withers)(25,5-27.5 inch), in Central Europe, more precise in the area now known as Switzerland.<br/>My comments to the above researche by the early conelogists is that we can assume that dogs developed an shortning of the muzzle and a brachycephalic type independent of another, but history have learned us that dog breeds have been brought from one area to another from the time humans began their nomadic life, and thereby have been crossed with each other with the result that all modern Molosser breeds are more or less related. There are however breeds today with a brachycephalic head that are not related to the Molosser breeds.</h4></font>

ODY

<div class="msgheader">QUOTE:</div><div class="msgborder"><b>以下是引用<i>ODY</i>在2007-8-28 23:18:00的发言：</b><br/><h1><center><font face="Arial"><font color="#0000ff">O<font size="5">RIGIN</font> &amp; H<font size="5">ISTORY</font><font size="4"><br/>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</font><font size="5">OF THE</font> MOLOSSER</font></font></center><center><font face="Arial"><font color="#0000ff"><br/>art one</font></font></center></h1><font face="Times New Roman"><h4>Even if many well known naturalists and zoologists have questioned the origin of the domestic dog and have suggested that it is not derivatived from the wolf but from an early wild dog, there can be no doubt that the domestic dog, Canis Familiaris, has the wolf as its ancestor. Those who still are not so certain should visit the <a href="http://www.kc.net/~wolf2dog/wayne1.htm">Multiple and Ancient Origins of the Domestic Dog </a>page. This study is highly controversial and it can be questioned if the domestic dog really is as old as this study claim, even if we cam assume that the domestic dog is much older than the up to now common believed 10.000 years.<br/>First, let us look at the name Molosser, which in fact is a misnormer which now is used on all breeds of the Mastiff, Bulldog and Mountain Dog type.<br/></h4><h2><font face="Arial"><font color="#800000">The name Molosser</font></font></h2><font face="Times New Roman"><h4>Molossi was the name on a people living in the Epirus mountain region of northwestern Greece and southern Albania. These people had very famous guardian and wardogs who were given their name after the people. These dogs, the Molossi, later Molosser, are told to be imported to Rome, and became well known under the name "Canis Molossi". The dogs of the Molossi were more wolfish and not at all so muscular as the Mastiffs today, nevertheless have the whole group of dogs gotten their name from these dogs.<br/>One of the most prominent Molossi kings was Alexander of Epirus (Alexander the Molossian) who died in 330 B.C. His sister was Olympia, the mother of Alexander the Great. The greatest of the Molossian kings was Pyrrhus, who was killed in 272 B.C. The Molossi was a war people and tried to conquer both Greece, Italy and Rome as well as Macedonia and Sicily, before being crushed by the Romans in 170 B.C.<br/>Aristotele, who lived in 384-322 B.C, praises the Molossus and tells us that they serves as guardians of the herds, and distinguises itself from all other dogs through its size and indomitable courage against wild animals. In his "Historia Animalium" he tell us, among several other dog breeds, about the Molossian dog from Molossia in Epirus, who were used to hunting and as a fighting dog. Aristotele also says that the Laconian dog were produced from a cross with the wolf (Laconici canes ex vulpe et cane generantur) and of the Molossian he says; "they differ nothing from the Laconian, but as a guardian of flocks and herds they are eminent against wild beast for size and courage."<br/>M.B. Wynn writes in 1886; "Greece, the land of the classic song and the ennobling art has never possessed the breed, seemingly." (about Mastiffs). He further writes; "...the true molossians was an erect eared (altas aure) slate coloured (glauci) or fawn (fulvus) swift footed wolfish-looking dog, identical or almost so, with the modern Suliot boarhound. A fine sculpture of the true molossus was found at Pompeii, with the inscription "Cave Canem".<br/>To explain to you why the name Molossser is now used on the Mastiff, Bulldog and Mountain Dog breeds I choose to further quote Wynn; "The term for the mastiff among some naturalists, is the molossus, originating with our early writers, who choose to think that the classic writers meant a mastiff, in the sence we now use the word, whereas the molossus was not in reality a mastiff."<br/>We can clearly see by the above that the word Molosser is a misnormer and are originally not describing the breeds now classified as Molosser dogs. Nevertheless is this the word that in modern times describes the breeds in question and I will continue to use this word in lack of a better word that embraces all these breeds.</h4></font></font><pre>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<br/><table><center><tbody></tbody><table border="0"><tbody><tr><td align="center"> </td><td align="center"></td></tr></tbody></table></center></table><table border="0"><tbody><tr><td align="center"> </td><td align="center"></td></tr></tbody></table><table></table><table border="0"><tbody><tr><td align="center">
                                                </td><td align="center"></td></tr></tbody></table></pre><pre><center><font face="Arial"><font color="#800000">Left: True Molossus<br/>Right: Statue of the Molossus, belonging to Olympias, daughter of the Molossian King Pyrrhus I.<br/>(Palazzo Torlonia, Rome)</font></font></center><font face="Arial" color="#800000"><center><br/><br/><br/><br/><br/><br/></center><center></center><center></center><center></center><center></center><center></center><center></center><center></center><center></center><center></center><center></center></font></pre><br/></div><p></p>

ODY

<div class="msgheader">QUOTE:</div><div class="msgborder"><b>以下是引用<i>ODY</i>在2007-8-28 23:18:00的发言：</b><br/><h1><center><font face="Arial"><font color="#0000ff">O<font size="5">RIGIN</font> &amp; H<font size="5">ISTORY</font><font size="4"><br/>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</font><font size="5">OF THE</font> MOLOSSER</font></font></center><center><font face="Arial"><font color="#0000ff"><br/>art one</font></font></center></h1><font face="Times New Roman"><h4>Even if many well known naturalists and zoologists have questioned the origin of the domestic dog and have suggested that it is not derivatived from the wolf but from an early wild dog, there can be no doubt that the domestic dog, Canis Familiaris, has the wolf as its ancestor. Those who still are not so certain should visit the<font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff;">
                                </font><a href="http://www.kc.net/~wolf2dog/wayne1.htm"><font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #0099ff;">Multiple and Ancient Origins of the Domestic Dog </font></a>page. This study is highly controversial and it can be questioned if the domestic dog really is as old as this study claim, even if we cam assume that the domestic dog is much older than the up to now common believed 10.000 years.<br/>First, let us look at the name Molosser, which in fact is a misnormer which now is used on all breeds of the Mastiff, Bulldog and Mountain Dog type.<br/></h4><h2><font face="Arial"><font color="#800000">The name Molosser</font></font></h2><font face="Times New Roman"><h4>Molossi was the name on a people living in the Epirus mountain region of northwestern Greece and southern Albania. These people had very famous guardian and wardogs who were given their name after the people. These dogs, the Molossi, later Molosser, are told to be imported to Rome, and became well known under the name "Canis Molossi". The dogs of the Molossi were more wolfish and not at all so muscular as the Mastiffs today, nevertheless have the whole group of dogs gotten their name from these dogs.<br/>One of the most prominent Molossi kings was Alexander of Epirus (Alexander the Molossian) who died in 330 B.C. His sister was Olympia, the mother of Alexander the Great. The greatest of the Molossian kings was Pyrrhus, who was killed in 272 B.C. The Molossi was a war people and tried to conquer both Greece, Italy and Rome as well as Macedonia and Sicily, before being crushed by the Romans in 170 B.C.<br/>Aristotele, who lived in 384-322 B.C, praises the Molossus and tells us that they serves as guardians of the herds, and distinguises itself from all other dogs through its size and indomitable courage against wild animals. In his "Historia Animalium" he tell us, among several other dog breeds, about the Molossian dog from Molossia in Epirus, who were used to hunting and as a fighting dog. Aristotele also says that the Laconian dog were produced from a cross with the wolf (Laconici canes ex vulpe et cane generantur) and of the Molossian he says; "they differ nothing from the Laconian, but as a guardian of flocks and herds they are eminent against wild beast for size and courage."<br/>M.B. Wynn writes in 1886; "Greece, the land of the classic song and the ennobling art has never possessed the breed, seemingly." (about Mastiffs). He further writes; "...the true molossians was an erect eared (altas aure) slate coloured (glauci) or fawn (fulvus) swift footed wolfish-looking dog, identical or almost so, with the modern Suliot boarhound. A fine sculpture of the true molossus was found at Pompeii, with the inscription "Cave Canem".<br/>To explain to you why the name Molossser is now used on the Mastiff, Bulldog and Mountain Dog breeds I choose to further quote Wynn; "The term for the mastiff among some naturalists, is the molossus, originating with our early writers, who choose to think that the classic writers meant a mastiff, in the sence we now use the word, whereas the molossus was not in reality a mastiff."<br/>We can clearly see by the above that the word Molosser is a misnormer and are originally not describing the breeds now classified as Molosser dogs. Nevertheless is this the word that in modern times describes the breeds in question and I will continue to use this word in lack of a better word that embraces all these breeds.</h4></font></font><pre><center></center><table><tbody></tbody></table><table border="0"><tbody><tr><td align="center"> </td><td align="center"></td></tr></tbody></table><table><tbody></tbody></table></pre><pre><center><font face="Arial"><font color="#800000">Left: True Molossus<br/>Right: Statue of the Molossus, belonging to Olympias, daughter of the Molossian King Pyrrhus I.<br/>(Palazzo Torlonia, Rome)</font></font></center><font face="Arial" color="#800000"><center><br/><br/><br/><br/><br/><br/></center><center></center><center></center><center></center><center></center><center></center><center></center><center></center><center></center><center></center><center></center></font></pre><br/></div><p></p>

[此贴子已经被作者于2007-8-29 1:50:33编辑过]

ODY

<h2><font face="Arial"><font color="#008000">Theories</font></font></h2><font face="Times New Roman"><h4>On the origin of the Molossers it is common accepted that the Tibetan Mastiff is the first of all Molosser breeds and the ancestor to all other breeds known today as Molossers. This you can read in all dog books, but think about it, which proves have been presented to you that are placing giant dogs in Tibet before anywhere else?<br/>Raymond Triquet writes in his book, "Le sage de Dogue de Bordeaux"; "What does one know about the Mastiff of Tibet at old times? -nothing. And yet, one wrote pages about them. We know all the always repeated traditional history from one author to another, without the shade of proof." Exactly my point, there are absolutly no archaeologic or palaeontological evidence placing the Molosser dogs in Tibet before anywhere else. No pictorial evidence, no folklore evidence, nothing! What about all books that are referring to the Tibetan Mastiff as the ancestor to the Molosser breeds? Well, as Mr. Triquet said, authors copies the history from other authors, and thereby the other authors errors and mistakes. And so it continues. Few, if any at all, of the modern dog book authors have done any researche by themselves on the origin of the Molosser breeds. Since it is so common accepted that the Tibetan Mastiff is the ancestor I guess that they have not bothered to do any researche, or maybe they are afraid that the others would laugh of them. I think it is strange and unbelivable, to see that so well educated people with so much knowledge about these dogs accepts the Tibetan theory without any evidence at all.<br/>Lets look at the theories and evidences, and the lack of evidences on the origin of the Molossers.<br/>Hilzheimer was of the believe that the ancestor of the Molossers was a short muzzle wolf, which he located to central Sweden. Pira found in excaviations of the cave "Stora Forvar" in the island Stora Karlson in Sweden, fragments of dog craniums from the stoneage. The cranium were from a short muzzled dog who show signs of domistication. Pira classified this dog as Canis Familiaris Paulustris Rutim. Stauder and Hauck came both to the conclution that all European Mastiff types evolved locally from Neolithic dogs at different times and at different locations. Furthermore Hauck, which was an expert on canine history, wrote; "I cannot agree with ancient tales about the transplantation of large Mastiffs from Asia towards Europe. There are no osteological and no pictorial representation to allow an unambiguous proof."<br/>Keller, Kramer, Tschudy, among others, tried to trace the origin of the Saint Bernard Dog and the other Swiss cattle dogs to the Tibetan Mastiff via the Molossians, but came to the conclution that there are absolutly no scientific facts to support this thesis; No written documents, no pictures and no osteological proof could be found to endorse these views.<br/>rofessor Th. Studer maintained that as early as the bronze age (Halstatt period 1299-800 B.C.) there existed a Mastiff-like dog breed of medium size (65-70 cm. at the withers)(25,5-27.5 inch), in Central Europe, more precise in the area now known as Switzerland.<br/>My comments to the above researche by the early conelogists is that we can assume that dogs developed an shortning of the muzzle and a brachycephalic type independent of another, but history have learned us that dog breeds have been brought from one area to another from the time humans began their nomadic life, and thereby have been crossed with each other with the result that all modern Molosser breeds are more or less related. There are however breeds today with a brachycephalic head that are not related to the Molosser breeds.</h4></font>

ODY

<h2><font face="Arial"><font color="#008000"><h2><font face="Arial"><font color="#008000"><br/>Theories</font></font><font face="Times New Roman"><font color="#000000"><br/><br/><font size="3">On the origin of the Molossers it is common accepted that the Tibetan Mastiff is the first of all Molosser breeds and the ancestor to all other breeds known today as Molossers. This you can read in all dog books, but think about it, which proves have been presented to you that are placing giant dogs in Tibet before anywhere else?<br/>Raymond Triquet (波尔多獒之父) writes in his book, "Le sage de Dogue de Bordeaux"; "What does one know about the Mastiff of Tibet at old times? -nothing. And yet, one wrote pages about them. We know all the always repeated traditional history from one author to another, without the shade of proof." Exactly my point, there are absolutly no archaeologic or palaeontological evidence placing the Molosser dogs in Tibet before anywhere else. No pictorial evidence, no folklore evidence, nothing! What about all books that are referring to the Tibetan Mastiff as the ancestor to the Molosser breeds? Well, as Mr. Triquet said, authors copies the history from other authors, and thereby the other authors errors and mistakes. And so it continues. Few, if any at all, of the modern dog book authors have done any researche by themselves on the origin of the Molosser breeds. Since it is so common accepted that the Tibetan Mastiff is the ancestor I guess that they have not bothered to do any researche, or maybe they are afraid that the others would laugh of them. I think it is strange and unbelivable, to see that so well educated people with so much knowledge about these dogs accepts the Tibetan theory without any evidence at all.<br/>Lets look at the theories and evidences, and the lack of evidences on the origin of the Molossers.<br/>Hilzheimer was of the believe that the ancestor of the Molossers was a short muzzle wolf, which he located to central Sweden. Pira found in excaviations of the cave "Stora Forvar" in the island Stora Karlson in Sweden, fragments of dog craniums from the stoneage. The cranium were from a short muzzled dog who show signs of domistication. Pira classified this dog as Canis Familiaris Paulustris Rutim. Stauder and Hauck came both to the conclution that all European Mastiff types evolved locally from Neolithic dogs at different times and at different locations. Furthermore Hauck, which was an expert on canine history, wrote; "I cannot agree with ancient tales about the transplantation of large Mastiffs from Asia towards Europe. There are no osteological and no pictorial representation to allow an unambiguous proof."<br/>Keller, Kramer, Tschudy, among others, tried to trace the origin of the Saint Bernard Dog and the other Swiss cattle dogs to the Tibetan Mastiff via the Molossians, but came to the conclution that there are absolutly no scientific facts to support this thesis; No written documents, no pictures and no osteological proof could be found to endorse these views.<br/>rofessor Th. Studer maintained that as early as the bronze age (Halstatt period 1299-800 B.C.) there existed a Mastiff-like dog breed of medium size (65-70 cm. at the withers)(25,5-27.5 inch), in Central Europe, more precise in the area now known as Switzerland.<br/>My comments to the above researche by the early conelogists is that we can assume that dogs developed an shortning of the muzzle and a brachycephalic type independent of another, but history have learned us that dog breeds have been brought from one area to another from the time humans began their nomadic life, and thereby have been crossed with each other with the result that all modern Molosser breeds are more or less related. There are however breeds today with a brachycephalic head that are not related to the Molosser </font></font><font size="3"><font color="#000000">breeds.</font></font><div align="center"></div></font></h2><h4><div align="center"><table align="center"><tbody></tbody></table></div><div align="center"><table align="center" border="0"><tbody><tr><td align="center">&nbsp;</td><td align="center">&nbsp; <h4>A brachycephalic head does not<br/>neccesary place the dog, or breed,<br/>in the Molosser family. There are<br/>several breeds which is far away<br/>from the Molossers and still show<br/>the shortening of the muzzle,<br/>especially the upper muzzle, a<br/>broad head and a definite stop.<br/>Very many of these breeds<br/>belonging to the toy group,<br/>where fanciers have bred for the<br/>extreme and the breeds have<br/>developed the desired traits<br/>through generations and centuries.</h4></td></tr></tbody></table></div></h4><p></p></font></font><font face="Times New Roman"></font></h2>

[此贴子已经被作者于2007-8-29 1:52:05编辑过]

ODY

<h2><h2><font face="Arial"><font color="#008000">The Tibetan Theory</font></font></h2><font face="Times New Roman"><h4>Lets now look at the Tibetan theory, placing the Tibetan Mastiff as the ancestor to all Molosser breeds. First let me say that there are no evidence in Tibet that supports the Tibetan theory, no documents and no art.<br/>Advocates of the Tibetan theory uses Marco Polo's descriptions of the very large Tibetan dogs as a proof on that the Tibetan Mastiffs are the true Molosser, comparing Polo's descriptions with the huge dogs pictured at the Assyrian bas reliefs.<br/>Furthermore the Tibetan theory advocates claim that the dog on the plate from Niniveh, dated about 580 B.C. is a Tibetan Mastiff brought down from the mountains, just because it has a bushy tail carried like the modern Tibetan Mastiff. Yeah, and the moon is a cheese, because it look like a cheese. What about the other bas reliefs? Perfectly Mastiff typed dogs without a bushy tail carried over the back? Tibetan Mastiff mutants?<br/>The fact that the Tibetan Mastiff have its cyclus only once a year, like the wolf, have also been used as an evidence on the Tibetan thory. Come on, what would you expect from a breed "developed" &amp; living in such harsh conditions as in the Tibetan mountains? Living in the Tibetan mountains have always been hard and every day have been a struggle for survival. It is not likely that these primitive people have developed a wolf or a common dog into a Mastiff.<br/>We have to climb down from the mountains and to the lower areas, where there are better living conditions, to find the origin of the Molosser dogs.<br/>Where does the Tibetan theory comes from and who started these false claims?<br/>M.B. Wynn wrote in 1886; "Of later years these Asiatic mastiffs appear to have degenerated greatly in many districts..., and the finest speciments that have become before European notice have been of Thibetan extraction, so much so, that the Asiatic mastiff have generally become denominated the Thibetan Mastiff."<br/>ierre Megnin wrote in 1891 in the "Stockbreeder" that it is very probable that the Mastiff of Tibet is the current Molosses.<br/>Fanciers embraced the Tibetan theory and used the above mentioned Marco Polo's discriptions and the carriage of the bushy tail as their proof on the theory as well as the once a year syclus.<br/><table><tbody></tbody></table></h4><center><table border="0"><tbody><tr><td align="center">&nbsp;</td></tr></tbody></table><p></p></center><table></table><p></p><h4><center><font face="Arial"><font color="#800000">The Niniveh Mastiff, about 580 B.C.<br/></font></font></center></h4><table><center><tbody></tbody><table border="0"><tbody><tr><td align="center"><a href="http://www.moloss.com/001/ori/map000.jpg"></a>&nbsp;</td></tr></tbody></table><p></p></center></table><table border="0"><tbody><tr><td align="center"><a href="http://www.moloss.com/001/ori/map000.jpg"></a>&nbsp;</td></tr></tbody></table><p></p><table></table><p></p><h4><center><font face="Arial"><font color="#800000">1. Catal Huyuk, 2. Jerico, 3. Nineve, 4. Babylon, 5. Ur, 6. Harappa, 7. Mohenjo Daro<br/>The area marked with green is where harvesting first started.</font></font><br/></center></h4></font><br/></h2><br/>

[此贴子已经被作者于2007-8-29 1:40:30编辑过]

ODY

<h2><font face="Arial"><font color="#008000">The Tibetan Theory</font></font></h2><font face="Times New Roman"><h4>Lets now look at the Tibetan theory, placing the Tibetan Mastiff as the ancestor to all Molosser breeds. First let me say that there are no evidence in Tibet that supports the Tibetan theory, no documents and no art.<br/>Advocates of the Tibetan theory uses Marco Polo's descriptions of the very large Tibetan dogs as a proof on that the Tibetan Mastiffs are the true Molosser, comparing Polo's descriptions with the huge dogs pictured at the Assyrian bas reliefs.<br/>Furthermore the Tibetan theory advocates claim that the dog on the plate from Niniveh, dated about 580 B.C. is a Tibetan Mastiff brought down from the mountains, just because it has a bushy tail carried like the modern Tibetan Mastiff. Yeah, and the moon is a cheese, because it look like a cheese. What about the other bas reliefs? Perfectly Mastiff typed dogs without a bushy tail carried over the back? Tibetan Mastiff mutants?<br/>The fact that the Tibetan Mastiff have its cyclus only once a year, like the wolf, have also been used as an evidence on the Tibetan thory. Come on, what would you expect from a breed "developed" &amp; living in such harsh conditions as in the Tibetan mountains? Living in the Tibetan mountains have always been hard and every day have been a struggle for survival. It is not likely that these primitive people have developed a wolf or a common dog into a Mastiff.<br/>We have to climb down from the mountains and to the lower areas, where there are better living conditions, to find the origin of the Molosser dogs.<br/>Where does the Tibetan theory comes from and who started these false claims?<br/>M.B. Wynn wrote in 1886; "Of later years these Asiatic mastiffs appear to have degenerated greatly in many districts..., and the finest speciments that have become before European notice have been of Thibetan extraction, so much so, that the Asiatic mastiff have generally become denominated the Thibetan Mastiff."<br/>ierre Megnin wrote in 1891 in the "Stockbreeder" that it is very probable that the Mastiff of Tibet is the current Molosses.<br/>Fanciers embraced the Tibetan theory and used the above mentioned Marco Polo's discriptions and the carriage of the bushy tail as their proof on the theory as well as the once a year syclus.</h4><h2 align="center"><br/><br/><center><font face="Arial"><font color="#800000" size="3">The Niniveh Mastiff, about 580 B.C.<br/><br/></font></font></center><center><font color="#ffffff">*</font></center><center><font face="Arial" color="#800000" size="3"></font></center><center><font face="Arial" color="#800000" size="3"></font></center><center></center><center></center><center><font face="Arial" color="#800000" size="3"></font></center><center></center><center></center><center><h4><center><font face="Arial"><font color="#800000">1. Catal Huyuk, 2. Jerico, 3. Nineve, 4. Babylon, 5. Ur, 6. Harappa, 7. Mohenjo Daro<br/>The area marked with green is where harvesting first started.<br/></font></font></center></h4><br/></center></h2></font>

[此贴子已经被作者于2007-8-29 1:48:06编辑过]

ODY

<font face="Arial"><font color="#008000"><font face="Arial"><font color="#008000"><h2><font face="Times New Roman"><font color="#000000"><br/><font size="3">There are in fact one archaeological evidence that places the Central Asian Ovtcharka in the region long before the pictured Assyrian Mastiff. There have been found a little stone statue in Turkmenistan dated about 2000 B.C. This stone statue could easily be a pictured Central Aian Ovtcharka of today. Strebel, was not far away from the truth when he concluded after having consulted all known historical sources; "Next to the large and mostly dark colured dogs belonging to the Assyrians and Babylonians there existed a brighter and lighter dog used as a cattle dog and for hunting purposes. This breed, he concluded, must be called the Molossian." What Strebel suggested, without knowing it, was without doubt the Central Asian Ovtcharka, which as a breed offers to us the link between the early Molossers, the Assyrian Mastiff, the big flock guardian breeds, the mountain dogs and the European Mastiffs. This is a breed who have all neccesary characteristics that is required for developing into all the other Molosser breeds.<br/>Wynn wrote in 1886; "...if the history of the Asiatic Mastiff is briefly traced from the earliest times up to present. It would be difficult to denominate any precise home of the Asiatic Mastiff, or to give any more generic name to embrace the allophylian varieties than that from their distinctive features, they must at once be classified as belonging more or less to the Mastiff family. Their geographic position however have extended, and still extends from the Caucasian ranges through the valleys of the Elburz mountains, and onwards through the north of Turkistan to the Himalayas, and thence northwards over the vast area of Tibet, the Shan districts, Mongolia and Siberia."<br/>Wynn writes furthermore; "Colonel Rawlingson was inclined to think that the mastiffs sculptured on the Assyrian slabs were of the Thibetan breed. But they do not accord in peculiarities of feature with more modern speciments of that breed, and I am inclined to think that it is far more likely that these mastiffs sculptured on the Assyrian slabs etc. were a breed either existing in Assyria itself at that date or else were introduced from Sarmatia, Albania, Hyrcania, or Iberia, or some of those northern parts of Asia above Armenia."<br/>These early researchers conclusions on the origin of the Molossers soon got forgotten, overshadowed by the Tibetan theory and the fact Wynn points out for us -that the best imported speciments of the Asiatic Mastiff were from the Tibetan region. My conclusion is that the Central Asian Ovtcharka is the only possible ancestor to the Molosser breeds, based on natural distribution, archaeological findings, evelution of man and his livestock, and the fact that this breed is the living link between ALL other Molosser breeds.<br/>I am sure that in the years to come we will see more and more dog historicans, writers &amp; authors that comes to the same conclusion as I have on the origin of the Molossers.</font></font></font></h2></font></font><font face="Times New Roman"><font color="#000000"><h2><br/><font size="3">There are in fact one archaeological evidence that places the Central Asian Ovtcharka in the region long before the pictured Assyrian Mastiff. There have been found a little stone statue in Turkmenistan dated about 2000 B.C. This stone statue could easily be a pictured Central Aian Ovtcharka of today. Strebel, was not far away from the truth when he concluded after having consulted all known historical sources; "Next to the large and mostly dark colured dogs belonging to the Assyrians and Babylonians there existed a brighter and lighter dog used as a cattle dog and for hunting purposes. This breed, he concluded, must be called the Molossian." What Strebel suggested, without knowing it, was without doubt the Central Asian Ovtcharka, which as a breed offers to us the link between the early Molossers, the Assyrian Mastiff, the big flock guardian breeds, the mountain dogs and the European Mastiffs. This is a breed who have all neccesary characteristics that is required for developing into all the other Molosser breeds.<br/>Wynn wrote in 1886; "...if the history of the Asiatic Mastiff is briefly traced from the earliest times up to present. It would be difficult to denominate any precise home of the Asiatic Mastiff, or to give any more generic name to embrace the allophylian varieties than that from their distinctive features, they must at once be classified as belonging more or less to the Mastiff family. Their geographic position however have extended, and still extends from the Caucasian ranges through the valleys of the Elburz mountains, and onwards through the north of Turkistan to the Himalayas, and thence northwards over the vast area of Tibet, the Shan districts, Mongolia and Siberia."<br/>Wynn writes furthermore; "Colonel Rawlingson was inclined to think that the mastiffs sculptured on the Assyrian slabs were of the Thibetan breed. But they do not accord in peculiarities of feature with more modern speciments of that breed, and I am inclined to think that it is far more likely that these mastiffs sculptured on the Assyrian slabs etc. were a breed either existing in Assyria itself at that date or else were introduced from Sarmatia, Albania, Hyrcania, or Iberia, or some of those northern parts of Asia above Armenia."<br/>These early researchers conclusions on the origin of the Molossers soon got forgotten, overshadowed by the Tibetan theory and the fact Wynn points out for us -that the best imported speciments of the Asiatic Mastiff were from the Tibetan region. My conclusion is that the Central Asian Ovtcharka is the only possible ancestor to the Molosser breeds, based on natural distribution, archaeological findings, evelution of man and his livestock, and the fact that this breed is the living link between ALL other Molosser breeds.<br/>I am sure that in the years to come we will see more and more dog historicans, writers &amp; authors that comes to the same conclusion as I have on the origin of the Molossers.</font></h2></font></font><h2 align="center"><font face="Times New Roman"><br/><h4 align="center"><center><font face="Arial"><font color="#800000">The Assyrian Mastiff at left show clearly traits of the Central Asian Ovtcharka.<br/></font></font></center></h4><h2 align="center"></h2><h4 align="center"><center><font face="Arial"><font color="#800000">Sighthounds and Mastiffs. Green slate tablets, 4000 BC. Property of the British Museum.</font></font></center></h4><h2 align="center"><br/><br/></h2><h2 align="center"><center><font face="Arial"><font color="#ff0000">Continue to the Origin of the Molossers, part two</font></font></center></h2></font></h2></font></font>

[此贴子已经被作者于2007-8-29 1:46:23编辑过]

ODY

多谢阿芝美女整晚时间为俺编辑这贴!!!<br/>连最爱电视剧"岁月风云"也没看!!![em02][em02][em02]

[此贴子已经被作者于2007-8-29 1:55:32编辑过]

dogdogdog

顶,谢谢!

ODY

<p>3 狗兄,<br/>翻译如斯大段文字,<br/>会不会太沉重?</p>

leo

3狗兄 我怕你太辛苦 这个简单的我来吧 今天弟弟从意大利回来 我夜里去接 今天不翻译了 占个茅坑不拉屎先 哈哈

ODY

叔叔,<br/>弟弟还会再到意大利吗?

leo

<div class="msgheader">QUOTE:</div><div class="msgborder"><b>以下是引用<i>ODY</i>在2007-8-28 23:25:00的发言：</b><br/><div class="msgheader">QUOTE:</div><div class="msgborder"><b>以下是引用<i>ODY</i>在2007-8-28 23:18:00的发言：</b><br/><h1><center><font face="Arial"><font color="#0000ff">魔罗刹的起源与历史</font></font></center><center><font face="Arial"><font color="#0000ff"><br/>第一部分</font></font><font face="Times New Roman"><h4>虽然很多著名的自然学家和动物学家对家犬的起源于狼提出质疑并认为家犬起源于另一种古代野犬,但是家犬的祖先是狼是没有疑问的.如有疑问可访问<a href="http://www.kc.net/~wolf2dog/wayne1.htm"><font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #0099ff;">Multiple and Ancient Origins of the Domestic Dog </font></a>.该研究倍受争议,有人提出疑问如果家犬历史真的有该研究声称的那么久远,我们就可以认为家犬的出现远早于现在普遍认为的1万年.首先我们来看看魔罗刹,这个名字实际上是误名现在用来总称所有的獒类,斗牛类和山脉犬.<br/></h4><h2><font face="Arial"><font color="#800000">魔罗刹称呼的由来</font></font></h2><font face="Times New Roman"><h4>魔罗斯是居住在希腊西北部和阿尔巴尼亚南部地区的一个民族.该民族有一种非常出名以该民族名称命名的护卫和战斗犬.这就是魔罗斯犬后来成为魔罗刹,据说被引进到罗马成为著名的魔罗斯犬.实际上魔罗斯上一种类狼犬根本不象现在的獒类一样强壮,尽管獒类的总称以该犬名字命名.<br/>Epirus的亚历山大是最著名的魔罗斯国王之一,死于公元前330年,他的姐妹就是奥林匹亚,亚历山大大帝的母亲.魔罗斯是个好战民族,在公元前170年被罗马人打败之前,试图攻克希腊,意大利,罗马以及马其顿和西西里.<br/>亚里斯多德(公元前384-322)盛赞魔罗刹:作为畜群的保护者,魔罗刹有着不同于其他狗的体型和不惧野兽的勇气.在他的&lt;动物历史&gt;中,他在几种狗的介绍中,提到魔罗斯人用来做战狗和猎狗的魔罗刹狗.亚里斯多德也提及有狼血统的Laconian狗，至于魔罗刹他说：魔罗刹和Laconian狗区别不大，但是作为牛羊的保护神它们有卓越的对付野兽的体型和勇气．<br/>M.B. Wynn 在1886写道:希腊这片经典音乐和高贵艺术的发源地似乎从来不曾拥有 (獒犬)...真正的魔罗斯狗是立耳狼灰色或鹿色的速步的类狼狗,类似于现代的 Suliot 猎狗.在意大利古都Pompeii发现一块精美的真正魔罗刹的雕塑,刻着"Cave Canem"的铭文.为何现在魔罗刹用来总称獒类.斗牛类和山脉猛犬,我再次引用Wynn的话"在部分自然学家口中mastiff这个词就是 魔罗刹,&nbsp;这是早期作家的发明, 他们认为古典作家写的魔罗刹就是mastiff, 因此我们也用了魔罗刹这个词语,实际上的魔罗刹的原意并不指真正的獒类."从上面我们可以清楚地知道魔罗刹是个误称,原来并不是指现在所指的魔罗刹犬类.&nbsp;尽管现在用魔罗刹称呼獒类猛犬有点问题,但是由于没有更好的词来总称这些猛犬,我会继续使用魔罗刹一词.</h4></font></font></center></h1><pre><table border="0"><tbody><tr><td align="center"> </td><td align="center"></td></tr></tbody></table><table><tbody></tbody></table></pre><pre><center><font face="Arial"><font color="#800000">左边真正的Molossus<br/>右边: 魔罗刹雕像, 魔罗斯王Pyrrhus的女儿Olympias I.所有<br/>(Palazzo Torlonia, Rome)</font></font></center><font face="Arial" color="#800000"><center><br/><br/><br/><br/><br/><br/></center><center></center><center></center><center></center><center></center><center></center><center></center><center></center><center></center><center></center><center></center></font></pre><br/></div><p></p><br/></div><p></p>

[此贴子已经被作者于2007-9-2 22:11:08编辑过]

dogdogdog

<p>谢谢大夫. 我会在全部翻译完成后一次性上传! 不会辛苦的,得益非浅!</p>

猛犬庄园

期待！学习！！！

fahaiwuya

<p>好文章 先收藏!</p>

leo

<div class="msgheader">QUOTE:</div><div class="msgborder"><b>以下是引用<i>ODY</i>在2007-8-28 23:52:00的发言：</b><br/><h2><font face="Arial"><font color="#008000"><h2><font face="Arial"><font color="#008000">假说</font></font><font face="Times New Roman"><font color="#000000"><br/><font size="3">关于魔罗刹的起源人们普遍认可藏獒是所有魔罗刹犬种的祖先. 可以看到几乎所有狗的书本上都这么写, 但是想想看,有证据表明西藏比其他地方最早拥有大型狗吗?Raymond Triquet (波尔多獒之父) 在"Le sage de Dogue de Bordeaux"书中写道:"我们知道哪些有关古代西藏獒类的知识? -什么也不知道.,但是就有人写关于西藏獒犬的文章.我们知道他们总是毫无根据地不断地人云亦云重复着传统的历史"&nbsp; 我的确切观点是:西藏是魔罗刹的发源地毫无考古学和古生物学证据. 既没有图文证据也没有民俗根据.如何看待所有的书把臧獒作为所有魔罗刹类猛犬的祖先呢?正如Triquet&nbsp;先生所说作者们总是抄袭前人的文章, 因此不断的重复着前人的错误.即使有也只有个别现代作者自己对魔罗刹起源有做一些研究.由于藏獒是猛犬之祖如此被普遍接受,我想作者们都认为没有深入研究的必要,甚至质疑这观点也许会遭人嘲笑.我非常奇怪和不可思议,看到这么多受过良好教育有着关于犬类渊博知识的人接受毫无根据的臧獒假说.我们来看看魔罗刹起源的理论和证据的有无.Hilzheimer 相信魔罗刹的祖先应该是他定位在瑞典中部的一种短吻狼. Pira 在瑞典中部Stora Karlson 岛的"Stora Forvar"山洞里发现了时期时代狗的头盖碎片,这些头盖骨是来自具有被驯化特征的短嘴巴的狗. Pira 把这些狗归类Paulustris Rutim家犬. Stauder&nbsp;和 Hauck 经过研究不约而同得出所有的欧洲的獒类猛犬在不同的的地点和不同的时间从新石器时代的狗进化而来的结论. 犬类进化史专家Hauck还提出, "我不赞同獒类从亚洲迁移的欧洲的古老传说.没有骨学证据也没有图文描述可以得出哪怕是莫凌两可的(支持这个论点)结论".其他学者如Keller, Kramer, Tschudy, 试图从圣伯纳及其他瑞士的牧牛犬类通过魔罗刹追溯到臧獒,得出的结论是根本没有科学证据支持这个假设. 没有找到文献图文以及骨形态学证据支持这个观点.Th. Studer教授提出 早在青铜器时代在欧洲中部确切地说是瑞士就存在着有獒类特征的中型狗 (65-70 cm.)对于上面这些学者的研究我的解释是:我们可以假设古代家犬中独立演化出短嘴短头品种的狗,从历史我们可以知道这些狗可以通过人类的游牧生活播散到不同的地方,而相互之间杂交,因此所有的现代獒类或多或少有关联.还有写短头种类的狗和魔罗刹没有关联.<br/></font></font><div align="center"></div></font></h2><h4><div align="center"><table align="center"><tbody></tbody></table></div><div align="center"><table align="center" border="0"><tbody><tr><td align="center">&nbsp;</td><td align="center">&nbsp; <h4>不一定只有魔罗刹家族才有短头颅.有许多和魔罗刹关系很远的狗种也有短吻,特别是上颚,宽阔的头盖骨,阶梯明显的额段.<br/>大部分这些狗属于小型观赏狗.人们数百年来一代接一代在培育强化希望得到的特征繁育出极端品种.<br/></h4></td></tr></tbody></table></div></h4><p></p></font></font><font face="Times New Roman"></font></h2><br/></div><p></p>

[此贴子已经被作者于2007-9-2 21:42:59编辑过]