> few hundred years. That being the case, what did they do for the previous
> 20,000 years that they have been domesticated? Only goats have been
> domesticated longer.
No. I said that they have been actively used for herding for the last few hundreds of years. Of course dogs have been useful for thousands of years earlier. Their primary purpose has always been to hunt and to guard. I am just trying to dispel the myth that they are vital for herding. Especially during the bronze and iron ages.
> From: Andrew Barton <AndrewBarton_at_compuserve.com>
>
> Remember the story of the Capitoline Geese. In their ritual celebration
> of the event the Romans gave honour to their Sacred Geese while
> crucifying dogs. This last detail only makes sense if the dogs were
> expected to serve as guards.
>
> Hmm ... do the Orlanthi use watch geese? Maybe they're more
> likely to be used in Yelmite societies.
Geese are far better than dogs at guarding. They make more noise, are more difficult for humans (thieves) to bypass, eat all of those annoying insects and they lay eggs! (And from personal experience a flock of geese are just as, if not more intimidating when they mob you than a dog!)
I have yet to find any Roman reference for the use of canines to herd. Although I'll be happy to change my point of view if somebody can find one!
> From: Dan McCluskey <daniem_at_microsoft.com>
>
> Though that MAY be the case in western europe (and I don't really think so),
> I know for a near certainty that at least the Magyars relied extensively on
> dogs as flockguards/herders well over a thousand years ago. (I own a
> Komondor... you just can't breed that kind of wierdness into a dog in only a
> couple hundred years) If Pam's cable modem is working yet, I suspect that
> she might be able to provide even more evidence, and Jamuz might also be
> able to back me up, as he has at least a passing knowlege of hungarian
> history ;-)
I look forwards to Pam's evidence. ;-)
This is the one area where flock herding and flock guarding may be crossing over. Dogs are the second best defence against wolves. Humans being the best. So in remote, non rural areas dogs may have been actively used to scare or even kill opportunistic wolves. Were Komondors trained to herd or did they simply follow the shepherd around as part of the flock, ready to defend their woolly brothers?
In modern times sheep farming is very different from its early predecessor. We now allow our sheep to roam wild across the hills doing as they will until shearing (or dipping) time. It is when the flock is gathered that the herding dogs are required. Only then do we need fast, energetic helpers to chase the wayward sheep into a single flock.
Prior to this, shepherds spent all their time with the flock and the sheep imprinted on them. Remember the nursery rhyme 'Mary had a little lamb'? Dogs were not needed to herd since the sheep would follow the shepherd anyway.
Also, a farmer would never let his flock simply wander around the hillsides. It wasn't until the middle ages when the last wolves were killed in Britain. And even if the herder lived in a wolf free area, it didn't stop his sheep from being stolen by men. Or even wandering off completely. Fencing 10,000 acres of pasture with fencing or stone walls is also a modern development.
Of course this is all my own point of view from what I have read. I am quite happy to be proven wrong. ;-)
Putting all this historical real world stuff aside, my main point is this.
Why bother with a dog when a young boy can do the job just as well? Voriof is a cult for young shepherd boys. It teaches them independence from the clan, responsibility to the sheep, how to move through mountains, wilderness survival, and makes each boy a master in sling!
Dogs are just a waste of space and food IMO. Using them reduces the inherent skill and accomplishment a youth should feel guarding, caring for and ultimately propagating his flock. If you need an animal to help you then you're not a proper shepherd. ;-)
Powered by hypermail