As many/most of you know I have not ever given up on getting to the core of the history of the Barbet, being thoroughly convinced the Barbet is not at all the ancestor to the Poodle…
IF it were, it would look like one and it does not. The drawing below was made in the late 1990’s by 2 Australian sisters, commissioned by the Nordic Kennel Club. This is what best portrays the Vieux Barbet, Old Barbet or Old Bloodlines. Nothing to do with the looks of a Poodle.
Several have laughed and tried to ridicule what work/ research I have done, or simply tried to ignore it, but however keeping an eye on my every move. It does become frustrating to be under a magnifying glass on a permanent basis, but that is life. It does, as recently read on a social network page, get rather annoying.
I have found help along the way and more help and finally we have gotten to a point where something can be said publicly.
The person above dragged with him Belgian and Luxemburger nationals, along with some Canadians and Swissers, others being lessers in “contributing” such as french nationals and the likes.
The opinion given below is of another historian not en herbe this time! This ought to answer another MDG aka Vérité Barbet who spread terror in the hamlets in 2012 ( not under his own name)
I tried to understand what this is all about and read the article of Lanckmans; must say he should have asked one of his colleagues to help him with a proper English translation, because it seems to be some online translator’s product. At the end but it doesn’t make so much difference. It seems he got his certificate for history teacher, which technically does not make a man a historian, but a school teacher whose task it is to bring some basic awareness of history to school children. I’m sorry to be a bit fixed on the person, but the picture of his certificate seems to meant to deliver the evidence that we should stop using our brains.
Analyzing I must say it’s interesting how he points out where the idea comes from about the North African origin: one had such assumption 400 years ago or so and after that people loyal copied it, but no one ever checked it.
Further he makes a fixation of the facts several phases of the registered breeding started with dogs of unknown descent or from locally known lines, which weren’t registered with the LOF.
He seems to try to let the reader believe a dog breed does not exist when it has no papers …. this is the thinking level of an office clerk, and not of an historian. If he had any sense for history he would have obtained a solid level of background information what starts with the French hunting dogs and the French registration system and how it worked over the years. I have some original pedigrees of Petit bleu de Gascoigne from the early 1960ties, when there were only 2 registered with the LOF. Most was bred without papers, but people knew rather well their origin and lines. The system was, inf I remember well, more or less any good looking specimen of the breed could become registered but got provisional papers and had to be confirmed at the age of about 1, to be sure the dog really turned in to the breed he should be. It should be to expect that after lets say 4 or 5 generations of registered dogs, the confirmation wasn’t necessary any longer, but I don’t know exactly how that went. This made is also possible to use a crossbred with a related breed (in case of the Bleu de Gascoigne, some had blood of the Gascon-Saintongeois, or Anglo-Gascon). At the confirmation it was definitely decided what breed it was: Bleu de Gascogne or Gascon-Saintongeois. A very simple system, but effective and helpful for the situation.
Lanckmans seems to think that when a dog has no papers it does not exist, and when after some period people start to breed it and have it registered, that their dogs, in exterior and character (working capacities) may just have fallen from the sky. Evidence for the purity of breedtype you obtain by observing the results of breeding. If there is some degree of permanency, fitting in a certain frame, what more evidence does one need to understand dog of those special characteristics must have descended from other dogs with the same characteristics. So dogs from after the war somehow descent from the dog before the war, and those from before the war descent from those in the later 19th century and those in the later 19th century from those early in th 19th century, &c.
Those who need to know the name of the author, know.
This is info from the SCC, I( meaning ME) finally got it today.
“Nous ne pouvons malheureusement pas vous donner plus d’indications sur les parents de Bézeff de Floirac ( in the database that everyone runs to that is pseudo official). En effet, le registre du LOF n’indique que leur nom : Médor et Timballe.
L’information sur les races provient du site d’Alain Lanckmans (contact que nous avions transmis à M. Targowski) qui vous cite (voir lien ci-contrehttp://barbet-francais.fr.gd/L-h-avis-d-h-un-historien-.htm). [ That info cites Médor as a Bouvier de Flandres, but no one knows where it comes from and I find out the SCC cites me…]
N’ayant pas eu accès aux documents primaires, nous avons préféré écrire les races entre crochets. So, the SCC says “we think” and the next one says we think is a fact and it snowballs into what we have today. I am the one who got the info about Medor and Timballe from the family/descendants of that particular breeder when they let me use their archives. So, what I say is “croire ( infinitive)= cru”( past)= believed, but then on the other hand…Then you say cross check everything you say which I believe (croire) is certainly wise. So I published what you said without referring to anything or anyone. The ones who come here know who wrote it, of course, but no one batted an eyelash on it, whilst continuing to claim the drawing ( stupid, I agree, but official SCC/FCI and only breed club can modify it which does not seem like a complicated task.