Early History
by S.L.Hemstock
(extracts from "The Stafford" 1998)

Conclusions

References

Bull Breeds

Why is this knowledge important?
Biological concepts (such as evolution and genetics) and historical evidence for breed development may seem separate and distinct. However, the connection between historical evidence and biological explanation should become clearer. Please do not be put off by scientific jargon - the principles of evolution and genetics are simple. Evolution is the first biological concept we should examine in order to connect the history of the breed to our modern day breeding programmes.

Historical Evidence: 600BC to the Middle Ages
At least two types of dog were known to exist in Britain prior to Julius Cæsar’s invasion of 55 B.C., one of these was reported as being massive in build and the other was smaller. The large one was employed in hunting and warfare, referred to by the Romans as "Pugnaces", and the smaller one was used as a guard and protector, as well as for herding. The larger dogs were highly prized by the Romans and many were sent to Rome to provide "entertainment" in the amphitheatres. It has been reported that, apart from size, very little separated the physical appearance of the two types of dog. In ancient times dogs were bred for their skills and duties, for example, the gamest dogs were picked for fighting and baiting, and little attention was paid to the physical appearance of the animal. It is interesting to note that similarities in characteristics, but differences in size, persisted down the centuries as in the sixteenth century small and large "Mastiff" types were described - the large one being used for baiting sports and the smaller type being used for guard work.
Early names used to describe "breeds" of dog in Britain include Bandog, Band-dog, Bandogge and Tie-dog for the smaller type, and Mastyve and Mastie-dog were generally used for the larger type. Although some of these names were not documented until Medieval times, it is likely that they correspond to the two sorts of dog recorded in Roman Britain.
The names Bandog, Band-dog, and Tie-dog probably owe their derivation to the fact that the smaller dogs were bound or tied in the areas that they were guarding as both "band" and "tie" are archaic Old Norse words for bond and restrain. The names Mastyve, Mastie-dog and ultimately Mastiff were not, as often quoted, derived from the word massive (meaning large, bulky or heavy) but is in fact derived from the Latin word mansuetus, which means to make tame by handling. Evidence for this derivation of the word Mastiff comes from the use of the words Mastyve (Mastie-dog, Mastie-dogge etc.) prior to the use of the word massive, and that in some Tudor literature the term Mastiff (Mastie etc.) was used to describe both small and large types of dog of similar appearance.
The Molossos was another ancient large type of dog depicted on some Egyptian Pharaohs’ tombs. The name Molossos was used to describe large "Mastiff-type" dogs from Molossus, Ancient Greece.
Due to the fact that domestic animal selection was on the basis of use, rather than looks, and that the two sizes of dog shared similar physical characteristics (other than size), it is not unreasonable to assume that they were from a single common ancestor, and that the large type (progenitors of the Mastiff) and the small type (largely the progenitors of the Bulldog) are inextricably linked. It is also possible to surmise that the evolutionary "split" of the large and small types of dogs from their common ancestor occurred within the two centuries prior to the Roman invasion of 55 B.C. as the Romans found little difference in physical appearance, apart from size.
Due to the presence of the Molossos and smaller dogs of similar physical appearance to the Molossos in Egypt by 600 B.C., it is not unreasonable to assume that all these canine types had a the same common ancestor. This common ancestor may have been imported into Britain by the Phoenicians, the Semitic people of North West Syria who dominated trade in the ancient world in the first millennium B.C. and founded colonies throughout the Mediterranean.
As to the history of Bull Breeds in general, the first known authentic record of bull-baiting took place in Stamford, Lincolnshire, in 1209. However, by the fifteenth century the Bulldog was well documented as a "breed" as the annals of the Knights of St. John of Jerusalem tell of the appearance of a giant serpent on the Island of Rhodes. "Twelve Bulldogs of the true breed" were used to attack the serpent, one of the dogs "Dreadnought" took hold of the serpent’s throat and Deodati de Gozona, a Knight of St. John of Jerusalem, administered the lethal blow to the serpent. The documentation presented in the annals of the Knights of St. John of Jerusalem and the use of the term "Bulldogs of the true breed" may indicate that some degree of contention existed over which was the "true breed" of Bulldog and hence which points were "selected" in order to produce the "true breed", just as there are preferred types in the Staffordshire Bull Terrier of today.