Of Noble Dogs and Nobility

 "Histories are more full of examples of fidelity of dogs than of friends." Alexander Pope

Alexander Pope wrote this at the beginning of the 18^th century, in agreement with the sentiments of King Frederick II of Denmark. Indeed, some histories have it that the latter 16^th century king created the country's highest order of merit in order to honour his dog, Wilpret.

King Frederick II had a reputation for being a man who enjoyed life to the full. He had a penchant for wine, woman, hunting, and feasts, and some even say that he drank himself to death. But perhaps being hot-headed, vain, and ambitious hides an underlying disappointment in the fidelity of the human race. It seems the one constant in his world was his dog, Wilpret.

 

1581, King Frederick II of Denmark

It is said that Frederick honoured Wilpret by awarding the dog the Chief Order of Denmark (which later became the Order of the Elephant – an honour only bestowed on royalty, or people of exceptional importance.) This is backed up by an gilded plaque, now hanging in the Wallace Collection, London, showing a mounted Frederick. The plaque bears the inscription:

"My trust is in God alone, Wilpret is true."

In a world of shifting allegiance, Frederick's dog at least was constant.

 

Frederick's plaque - on display at the Wallace collection, London.

Writing a little of over a century later, Alexander Pope applauds this recognition of canine allegiance.

"A modern instance of gratitude to a dog is that the Chief Order of Denmark (now call'd the Order of the Elephant) was instituted in memory of the fidelity of a dog nam'd Wild-Brat [sic]."

However, some people believed that dogs had a place, and that wasn't necessarily at a king's side in the council chamber. Samuel Pepys, writing in his diary in 1667, seems irritated by King Charles II playing with his dogs during a meeting.

"the silliness of the King, playing with is dog all the while, or his codpiece, and minding the business."

The spaniels that Charles so favoured. 

With the Stuart family history it is easy to understand why Charles had a low opinion of people and only truly trusted his dogs. As Bishop Burnet remarked after Charles' death:

"He thought that no one did serve him out of love…"

Although, the constant companionship of faithful canine companions hopefully brought some comfort. Indeed, they did go everywhere with him, as this poem by Lord Rochester implies:

"His very dog at Council Board,

Sits grave and wise as any Lord."

Perhaps one of the reasons why Charles loved dogs was that they put on no airs and graces in his company.  Indeed, whilst traveling on a barge with "a dog the King loved", Samuel Pepys writes how the dog fouled in the boat.

“which made us laugh, and me think that a King and all that belongs to him are but just as others are.”  

Perhaps that's the point, and dogs don't see class or station, but offer unconditional devotion and love. 

No relevance to this post I'm afraid!
Just too cute. 

A Tax on Dogs

In 1796 a seemingly innocuous piece of tax legislation caused uproar in England. The new law provoked a debate about the very nature of the human spirit and whether owning a dog was a right or a luxury.

At the end of the 18^th century the English government was desperate for money to finance the on-going war with France. One way of raising the necessary cash was taxation. Tax was raised on everything from soap, to tea, tobacco, windows and lace – and indeed it didn’t stop there. Servants were a taxable asset under the auspices of the Male Servants’ Tax bill 1777- 1852 and the Female Servant’s Tax bill  1795 – 1852- but fortunately (or unfortunately?) wives and children were not taxable assets!. There was a Horse Tax (for owners of carriages and saddle horses), a Farm Horse Tax (for horses and mules used in trade) – but none of these taxes created quite the same stir as the imposition of the Dog Tax in 1796.

The crux of the disquiet lay in the very English relationship between man to dog. It raised a serious debate about whether a dog was a luxury or a natural part of being human. The tax tapped into questions about the emotional bond between the two. By putting a tax on dogs it implied a shift in relationship from one of nurturing and caring, to servility and subordination – and dog owners were enraged. To many this was tantamount to taxing spouses and children , and people weren’t happy. This wasn’t about the financial aspect of the tax, but the moral implication and feelings ran high.

Those that supported the bill pointed out that pet dogs were a luxury, and consumed food that could have been better used to feed the poor. Opposers argued back that to need things beyond the essential – such as a dog – was a distinctly human trait. These people considered pets to be their friends, and putting a tax on them turned the language of friendship to that of slavery and service.

Interestingly, the idea behind the dog tax may have originated in France (the very country the English needed to raise funds to fight!) In 1770 a French census suggested a population of four million dogs –an arithmetic extrapolation of the amount of food they consumed was equivalent to feeding a sixth of the population. The French dog tax was proposed to discourage dog ownership, as a means of disease control and to increase food availability.

French authorities also insisted dogs belonging to the poor spread disease – especially rabies. This was considered a disease of dirty and hungry dogs, so poor labourers who – “Can scarcely feed themselves” should be discouraged from owning dogs by means of a tax.

The difference between France and England was that in the former the tax remained as a proposition, whereas in the later it was acted upon.  Whatever the moral argument the English government won in the end – the Dog Tax was imposed and stayed in place until 1882. 

Mary, Queen of Scots, and her Dogs

Mary, Queen of Scots

Mary, Queen of Scots, was born in 1542, during the reign of King Henry VIII. She led a turbulent life of which the most constant factor was her loves of dogs, specifically Maltese terriers. These small, white dogs were her constant companions from infancy to the scaffold and this is their story.

As a 5 year old child, Mary was betrothed to French dauphin, Francis, and sent to live with him abroad. Uprooted, disorientated, and unable to speak French, Mary would only talk to her Scottish governess or one of the twenty-two dogs at Francis’s court. Mary confided in those dogs, a collection of pugs, spaniels and Maltese terriers, and in turn, Francis used them to teach his bride the French language. Her early love of dogs was established.

Francis, with Mary. King and Queen of France.

When she was just 18, Francis died, leaving Mary a widow in a foreign country. Devastated by the loss of the husband she had grown to love, she returned to Scotland to reclaim her throne.  She took with her some of her favorite Maltese dogs. 

But things were very different from when she left as a child. Scotland had become a Protestant country, and Mary was a devote Catholic. Queen Elizabeth I sat on the English throne and was deeply suspicious of her cousin, Mary’s motives. Added to that Mary unwisely married another Tudor, her cousin, Lord Darnley, which put further pressure on Elizabeth to recognize Mary as successor to the English throne.

Mary and Darnley

Darnley, however, turned out to be a brute, and Mary feared for her life. When he died under suspicious circumstances the finger was pointed at Mary and her lover, the Earl of Bothwell. This murder enraged the Scottish nobility and population in general, and Mary was forced to abdicate in favor of her baby son with Darnley, James (later James I of England).

Mary eventually fled over the border to seek the protection of her English cousin, Elizabeth. But Queen Elizabeth could not ignore the scandal dogging Mary’s heels and imprisoned her. It was politically expedient to keep the former queen safely under lock and key, and for 18 years Elizabeth kept Mary a prisoner.

A Maltese Terrier

Whilst in prison, Mary was not allowed contact with friends or relatives, for fear of her plotting against the queen. Her only companions and source of comfort were her Maltese lapdogs. Her jailor, Bess of Hardwick, reported her charge spending hours talking to these dogs; about her estranged son, James, and religion. Mary even sent a portrait of one of her favorite dogs to James – but the picture was intercepted and never reached him.

Things went from bad to worse for Mary, when she was charged with being an accomplice in the 1586 plot to murder Queen Elizabeth, (Mary would have been next in line for the throne.) Mary was moved to Fotheringhay Castle and brought to trial. She was found guilty and sentenced to death by beheading. Fotheringhay was a damp, dark, miserable place and her only comfort were her lapdogs – after she appealed directly to Elizabeth in order to keep them with her.

Mary walking to the scaffold.

As Mary took her final walk to the scaffold, she moved slowly in order to keep pace with a small white dog concealed beneath her skirts and petticoats. No one realized the dog was there, until after Mary’s death when the executioner, Mr Bull, was removing the body. The dog refused to leave the corpse and had to be forcibly removed, where upon he ran back and settled between the severed head and shoulders.

Mr Bull had orders to wash or burn anything that was soiled with Mary’s blood, “for fear someone might dip a piece of linen in it…who keep it as a relic of this act [execution], to incite to vengeance those concerned for the death of the dead person.”

The white dog was now covered in blood, but Mr Bull acted kindly and had him washed clean. The dog was then given to a French princess, on the condition that he left the country.

A Tax on Dogs

Dc Johnson’s dictionary (1755) defined a pet as: “Any creature that is fondled or indulged”.

With thanks to 'One Cool Thing a Day'

In 1796 a seemingly innocuous piece of tax legislation caused uproar in England. The new law provoked a debate about the very nature of the human spirit and whether owning a dog was a right or a luxury.

At the end of the 18^th century the English government was desperate for money to finance the on-going war with France. One way of raising the necessary cash was taxation. Tax was raised on everything from soap, to tea, tobacco, windows and lace – and indeed it didn’t stop there. Servants were a taxable asset under the auspices of the Male Servants’ Tax bill 1777- 1852 and the Female Servant’s Tax bill  1795 – 1852- but fortunately (or unfortunately?) wives and children were not taxable assets!. There was a Horse Tax (for owners of carriages and saddle horses), a Farm Horse Tax (for horses and mules used in trade) – but none of these taxes created quite the same stir as the imposition of the Dog Tax in 1796.

With thanks to LeFunny.net

The crux of the disquiet lay in the very English relationship between man to dog. It raised a serious debate about whether a dog was a luxury or a natural part of being human. The tax tapped into questions about the emotional bond between the two. By putting a tax on dogs it implied a shift in relationship from one of nurturing and caring, to servility and subordination – and dog owners were enraged. To many this was tantamount to taxing spouses and children , and people weren’t happy. This wasn’t about the financial aspect of the tax, but the moral implication and feelings ran high.

Those that supported the bill pointed out that pet dogs were a luxury, and consumed food that could have been better used to feed the poor. Opposers argued back that to need things beyond the essential – such as a dog – was a distinctly human trait. These people considered pets to be their friends, and putting a tax on them turned the language of friendship to that of slavery and service.

With thanks to 'AnimalJam Wiki.'

Interestingly, the idea behind the dog tax may have originated in France (the very country the English needed to raise funds to fight!) In 1770 a French census suggested a population of four million dogs –an arthimetric extrapolation of the amount of food they consumed was equivalent to feeding a sixth of the population. The French dog tax was proposed to discourage dog ownership, as a means of disease control and to increase food availability.

French authorities also insisted dogs belonging to the poor spread disease – especially rabies. This was considered a disease of dirty and hungry dogs, so poor labourers who – “Can scarcely feed themselves” should be discouraged from owning dogs by means of a tax.

With thanks to 'TheMetaPicture.com'

The difference between France and England was that in the former the tax remained as a proposition, whereas in the later it was acted upon.  Whatever the moral argument the English government won in the end – the Dog Tax was imposed and stayed in place until 1882.

So what do you think? Are dogs part of the family or a luxury - do leave a comment!  

Halloween - Ghostly Dogs.

Photo courtesy of www.hawaiikawaii.net

 

As nights draw in, and the autumn air turns thick with bonfire smoke, the stage is set for the arrival of Halloween ghouls and spooks. These conditions would be perfect for Conan Doyle’s phantom dog, the Hound of the Baskervilles, to set about his chilling work of terror. Does it send a shiver down your spine to learn that Conan Doyle based his deadly hound on a dog from British folklore called the ‘Shuck’?

        From the ‘Black Shuck’ of Orkney to Suffolk and ‘Old Shuck’, stories abound of these ghostly dogs; the size of a Retriever, with blazing eyes. The word ‘Shuck’ is derived from an Old English word ‘Scucca’ meaning a demon, and the Norse believed  a dog baying at night was an omen of death.

Illustration from Conan Doyle's "Hound of the Baskervilles."

Many legends have a 'shuck' dog haunting the gallows as if waiting for a soul to steal. For instance, in 1751 in Tring, Hertfordshire, an old woman was drowned by a chimney sweep because he suspected her to be a witch. He was then found guilty of her murder and sentenced to death by hanging, where upon the gibbet became haunted by a large black dog. The local schoolmaster saw and described it-
‘Eyes of flaming fire, shaggy… and as big a Newfoundland.’
Part of the horror these legends instilled was the fear of losing your soul. Because people believed that the physical body needed proper burial for the soul to be released, any animal that was seen to eat carrion was labelled as evil.


Photo courtesy of Keith Evans.

Black Dog ghosts were widespread in the 15^th century. Warwick Castle was subject to just such an apparition after the Earl of Warwick, antagonised an old woman, Moll Bloxham. She sold butter and milk around the castle precincts but always gave short measures. The locals were too afraid to challenge her, certain she would bewitch them. When the Earl cut off the source of her dairy supplies, Moll swore to haunt him and barricaded herself within the castle tower. Uncertain of how to rid himself of an angry witch the Earl called in three priests. However when they broke down the tower door they found not Moll but a snarling black dog with eyes blazing red and immense fangs. Catching site of the priests the Black Dog jumped from Caesar’s Tower into the river below, and was never seen again.


Warwick Castle - photo courtesy of Martin Dawes

In the reign of King Charles II a ghostly black dog, the Moddey Dhoo (pronounced ‘Mauther Thoo’ in Manx Gaelic) haunted Peel Castle, the Isle of Man. This large black dog wandered the corridors of the castle at night, to settle himself by the guardroom fire. The soldiers believed him to be an evil spirit waiting for an excuse to harm them and so were respectful in his presence. However one night, a drunken guard mocked them all as cowards and set off to lock the castle gates, passing through the darkened chapel, cursing and swearing as he went. Minutes later his compatriots froze with fear at the blood-curdling sound of screaming. He eventually returned but was unable to speak, his face twisted with fear. He died three days later and the dog was never seen again. Interestingly, in 1871, excavations in the castle found the bones of Simon, the Bishop of Man who died in 1247 and was famous for his intolerance of drunkenness. Buried alongside him at his feet was the skeleton of a dog….
All over Europe tales of spectral hounds exist such as ‘Gabriel’s hounds’ in Britain, the ‘Wild Hunt’ from Germany and the Scandinavia ‘Woden’s Hunt.’  The latter are hounds that crossed the sky, not dissimilar from the stories of Cherokee Indians - they describe the Milky Way as ‘Where the dog runs.

From Siberia comes the belief the dogs belonging to the god, Tuli, caused earthquakes. These flea-ridden dogs pulled a sledge through the sky, on which rested the earth. Each time the dogs stopped for a scratch, the earth shook and man was aware of an earthquake.

 

Certain dogs struck fear into the ancient Chinese who believed they could possess their souls. They distrusted the elderly dogs called ‘jen-shih’ or ‘one who imitates a person.’ It was believed they saw and knew too much, granting them power to possess the living and transform people into vampires.

Finally, some dogs were used to break spells and bring good luck. Dog’s blood poured at the village threshold would protect the inhabitants from evil and be a barrier for epidemics.  Three thousand years ago, when a Prince of China undertook a long journey, disturbingly, he would deliberately roll his cart over a dog to crush the poor animal. The blood was said to consecrate the road and the body buried as a sacrifice to the road god for his goodwill. Who knows what ghostly form these sacrificial dogs might then take – the Black Shuck perhaps?

Black dog legends are widespread
and part of local culture.