Original breed standard?

[Chicagocanine]

Does anyone know if there is a place online to find a translation of the "original" breed standard from when the GSD breed was created, or soon after?

[khawk]

The original American breed standard for the German Shepherd dog was codified in 1929 and the text of that standard is presented in Fred Lanting's book "The Total German Shepherd dog" along with the changes and modifications made in 1943, 1958, and 1978. The original standard for the breed written by Captain von Stephanitz in 1922 and translated to English and published in America in 1925 appears in chapter 4 of his work, 'The German Shepherd Dog in Word and Picture' with photographs, diagrams and skeletons to illustrate.

Dogs with over-long thighs of the sort so common among German 'High-line' dogs today were castigated by Stephanitz as 'over-built' and 'weak' and 'faulty'. All diagrams and photographs and skeletons given as examples of 'correct' conformation show dogs walking on their hind feet and only their hind feet, with metatarsal bones perpendicular to the ground. Over-angulated hocks of the sort so popular in American showlines today, Stephanitz denigrates, and the well-known in his time (1940-1960) American judge Milo Deinlinger agrees with him. Stephanitz merely says that dogs that are thus made cease to correspond to the racial type. He says that though they may look fine, they are no longer Shepherd dogs because the suitability for use is absent from their body build.

Deinlinger is more specific. He describes the over-angulated hock as resulting in weakness. He describes the correct conformation of the hind leg as the leg dropping 'vertically' from the hock to the foot. According to him, this formation gives the dog the maximum of leverage and propulsive power. He says it is of supreme importance. "The craze for excessive angulation. . . weakens the hock joint, an added tension upon the muscles." He adds that "They are spectacular and may fool the uninitiated, but they exemplify weakness rather than strength." From the Complete German Shepherd by Milo G Denlinger, c1952.

Stephanitz states (1925) that the dog should be shown 'standing easily and naturally, never over-stretched nor unnaturally placed in a special position'. He decrees that the hind legs should fall naturally directly beneath the hindquarters and provide support for the body in a 'free and natural' condition. Denlinger, in 1952, concurs--'The dog should be permitted to stand normally during its examination.' 'The efforts on the part of some exhibitors to stretch the hindquarters. . . as far back as possible deceives nobody. Many judges rightly resent this artificial posing of the dog and in the effort to examine the dog in his normal position ask that the handler break the pose by moving the dog a step or two.'

As for size, Stephanitz himself chose at the very least, 2 Siegers of at least 27 inches in height between 1910 and 1920 and uses Jung Tell of the Kriminalpolizei (Champion of Holland in 1913), another large dog, in a photograph as an example of a correct dog. The Boll lines, the Kriminalpolizei, and Secretainerie lines were all tall, large dogs, well known and well regarded in their time. In the early twenties, with dogs like Nores of the Kriminalpolizei (29 inches) being so heavily used, (180 litters were recorded from Nores alone) Stephanitz deliberately chose Klodo of Boxberg, a small, (24 inches) but very correct dog as Seiger in 1925, knowing that people would turn to him and that this would inevitably bring the dogs back to middle ground. Choosing the Klodo son Utz vom Haus Schutting in 1929 to follow merely solidified that modification. Stephanitz knew that he could depend upon people breeding heavily to whatever dog he chose as Sieger, and he was right, they did, but there is no doubt that historically, the early breeders of the German Shepherd preferred dogs of larger size to those of smaller stature. Early American breeders were no different, preferring dogs of larger size over those of smaller stature.

The breed standard is not holy writ. It has been written and re-written through the years by influential show breeders who had no regard for temperament or working ability and according to whatever the fashion in dogs was in force at the time. It has been and is open to interpretation by judges and breeders whose only interest is in dog shows.

Given Stephanitz' diagrams and photographs and skeletons, he would be appalled by the toplines of today. He considered roach backs seriously faulty and sloping backs completely improper and unfit for any real work. Stephanitz' over-arching concern was always that the dog be conformed in a manner to fit him for work, firstly as a herding dog and secondly as what he called an 'ambulance' dog and police dog. If you want a dog to do actual work in the real world it is perhaps beneficial to go back to the old arbiters of the breed, to Stephanitz and to others both before and after him who actually worked their dogs, for ideas as to how you want your dog to look. If, of course, you are only interested in a show animal, then by all means, choose your dog for his red and black color, roached back, grotesquely elongated thigh, or the Am-line black and gold show dog with their sloping back and severely over-angulated hock. A good working structure in a dog is not going to get a look in the show ring any more than a show ring dog will be effective on the job in the real world (as opposed to the artificial world of 'titles').

Fortunately for those of us still working dogs, the German Shepherd breed has expanded to include a wide variety of types of dogs, German and American show dogs, Schutzhund dogs, and the rare old-fashioned dogs who still do real work in the real world. It also includes dogs who are conglomerations of all these types. Some of these mixed type dogs have a structure that comes together pleasingly and looks very attractive. Some of them do not. They are all 'real' German Shepherd dogs and they all suit somebody. khawk

[Doc]

Indeed.

[umzilla]

Coupled with reading the early versions of the standard, it is nice to look at lots of photos and old videos from the 30s and earlier. What a different look!

[cliffson1]

KHawk, it is from THIS background of knowledge that some of us express our views....nice post...Take care!!

[ldw6559]

Thanks khawk, I have not posted for some time as my puppy although beautiful and irreplaceable to me has become too large for what has become the standard but seems to have been right on target for a 1920's GSD. Griffin is now 8.5 months old and stands at 28 inches at the shoulder and 2 weeks ago weighed in at 96.5 lbs at the vets office so based on his growth pattern I'm sure he is about 102lb. presently.
I have been hearing for sometime now that he is too large, I'm feeding him to much, etc.
He is in fact still growing as his feet are too large for his body, his head too small for his ears, etc. he seems to be well porpotioned to me as well as the vet but does not have the sloping back you refer to although I'm not to sure exactly what you mean when referring to the hocks. My puppy is just a house dog and a family pet but we all love him him to death. He is spoiled rotten and I could not have ever asked for a better family companion. I know this is long but I am so relieved by your post as I was concerned something was seriously wrong with him but I guess maybe because he comes from the Eastern Ky. mountains where changing the breeds looks probably isn't to important, and bigger is better for defense and a working dog still applies maybe he is just fine after all.

[FredD]

Yes, indeed.

Originally Posted By: cliftonanderson1KHawk, it is from THIS background of knowledge that some of us express our views....nice post...Take care!!