History of the Papillon
By Roseann Fucillo

Preface:

In my journey to write about the history of the Papillon breed, one of my prime resources was an article of great interest printed by a former president of PCA, Dick Richards.  It was written by the Belgian canine authority, Baron Albert Houtart, and translated from French to English by Virginia Newton entitled, “Les Epagneuls Continentaux Nains.” 

In February of 1949, this piece was reprinted in the magazine “L’ABOI,” (The Bark) because the original was very scarce and the information in it was used at the time as one of the reference materials when the F.C.I. Standard of the Papillon was written.

Houtart, in his article, writes about the evolution and history of the Continental Toy Spaniel and its varied types as it runs parallel to that of the Papillon.  It was such an important piece explaining the development and the history of our Papillon breed, that I    wanted to extract as much information from it as I could, while attempting to keep the original meaning of the author, and write in a less formal modern day style. Virginia Newton herself admitted that although her English translation of Houtart’s French article was accurate; it was somewhat stilted, and needed to be converted into idiomatic English.

Introduction:

It is known throughout ancient history that an animal had to be sound to survive.  In order to live, it had to have the ability to secure food and escape from predators.  This meant that it had to move quickly using the least amount of energy to get the task done efficiently, whether it was to hunt for their next meal, or to escape from being the next meal.  It was known as “the survival of the fittest.”

From evolutionary biologists we know that wolves and wild canids, probably split off from each other more than 100,000 years ago, almost the same time that modern man emerged.  The first evidence of dogs was seen in the ancient caves of Egypt. We have learned from these cave drawings that even ancient man had dogs for companions. Shaping man’s best friend, however, was an accident.  Long before anyone suspected domestication was possible, ancient man simply wanted a pet.  They would capture animals and keep them. Along with the domestication of the canine to fill the various needs of their masters, came specialized breeding. 

Men became obsessed with canine form and function and developed breeds of dogs based on their own needs; the sporting dogs to hunt for their food, the herding dogs to herd their sheep and cattle, etc.  But for many years, dogs changed little. Then in Europe, it was the dog’s turn to become a status symbol.  This led to a proliferation in dog breeding and a creation of various dog breeds.  Through man’s selective breeding process, which tampered with the physical traits of the dogs and amplified and altered their physical appearance, it gave rise to the development of many breeds as we know them today.

The Continental Toy Spaniel:

According to Houtart, in his article, “Les Epagneuls Continentaux Nains,” Large or small, all spaniels share the same specific characteristics and instincts.  They belong to the braccoid classification of canines and are therefore hunting dogs that have a keen nose.  Toy Spaniels are normal in their structure and distinguish themselves by the richness of their coats.  Houtart describes their hair as abundant, long and silky, often flat, sometimes wavy, but it never stands off like that of the Pomeranian, nor is it curly.  It has abundant fringes that ornament the ears, thighs, and the back of the legs; however, their hair is always short on the skull, the muzzle, and the front of the legs.  Rarely is the Toy Spaniel all white. Their coat is often enriched with flecks or large patches, which may be ebony black, a distinguished silver gray, deep red, or lemon.  Sometimes it is adorned in a solid color, but only of the richest shades of either black or mahogany red. 

Houtart believes that in action, the Toy Spaniel carries his tail horizontally, “if man has left it whole, it retains this direction.  When it is docked half way and is shorter, it stands erect, like a provocative stump.  Among the dwarf breeds, it tends to lie on the back, with the graceful curve of the yetaghan.  Never does it roll up. The ear is pendant, attached at the top of the head, and of meduum length.” His description here of the “dwarf breeds” and “pendant ears” sounds like he could be describing the Phalene, the drop-eared variety of the Papillon breed.

Where does the Spaniel originate from?  Writers have claimed they originated from Spain, but the Spaniel was known in China many centuries before Jesus Christ.  Whatever its source, it multiplied in all is forms, colors, and very different sizes, decreasing to almost the smallest size one can conceive for a dog.  In the Toy size were the breeds of the Far East, English Toy Spaniels, and finally, the Continental Toy Spaniels.

More than three centuries before Jesus Christ, Theophrastus said, “If a little dog dies, one buries it, complete with an epitaph with these words, ‘He was of the race of Malta.’” Aristotle stated that to prevent little dogs from developing, they confined them in strong narrow boxes and later they gorged them on alcohol. In so doing, torturing these innocent little creatures, man has been able to amplify traits, and diminish the size, each time an alteration was conceived.

Our history tells us that Toy dogs were created as objects of pride for the elegant and exquisite classes.  We rewarded dogs for expressing their traits, shaping their behavior on an evolutionary speedway, for better or for worse.

However the Toy Spaniel was created, it seems that we can not look in books to learn its history.  Many naturalists told us nothing of value and were imprecise. On the other hand, we can look to paintings and sculpture where artists have faithfully transcribed the features of the dogs of their times.  Still it is necessary to be prudent, since the presence of a dog in a painting is not enough to assume the existence of a breed from that particular country the painting originated from.  There can be many reasonable assumptions as to why a dog may be depicted in a country not known to have the breed proliferate there.  Artists travel, kings and other royalty have been known to take their Toy dogs with them, and also these Toys were even used as gifts.

But when we see repeatedly many Masters of a school depicting the same model of a dog, having the same general characteristics, we are then certain as to the presence of a very distinct variety.  Then when this same type of dog reappears over a period of centuries of from far removed places, as Houtart asserts, we can thus believe that there is one breed.

In Baron Houtart’s article, he touches upon the idea of how the true Toy Spaniel may have been born, as he studies various works of art and uses examples seen from many paintings taken from the book, Toy Dogs and Their Ancestors, written by Mrs. Neville Lytton.  He suggests it was conceived by crossing the Toy Spaniel with the dog of Cayenne, a small more apple domed dwarfed Spaniel with short coat.  Baron Houtart gives this type the name “Veronese Spaniel” because Paolo Caliari, called Veronese (1528 – 1588), was the first to reveal this type in a series of paintings. 

With the Veronese dog we finally come upon a series of true Toy Spaniels.  Indeed this result of the cross breeding does have the essential characteristics of the Spaniel.  The forehead, muzzle, front of the forelegs are all adorned with short hair, while the rest of the body is abundantly adorned with a long silky coat.  The main physical characteristic taken from the breeding of the Dog of Cayenne with the Toy Spaniel seemed to be the deeper stop and the wider set eyes.

Before the Veronese type of Caliari, he believes the Spaniel head had the normal braccoid structure with a slight tendency to a domed head and tapering muzzle, a characteristic feature of dwarfism.  Houtart distinguishes Caliari’s Toy Spaniels, who were of a different type than previously painted, which show a high domed forehead against a diminished tapered muzzle.  With the one, the ears are large in size and carried lightly.  But, contrarily, with the Veronese dog, the ears are diminished and right up against the head.  In the former the eyes are medium large, placed near each other at the slight stop, but in the latter type they are very large, thrown to the side of the domed skull and placed low in the face.  These accentuated characteristics, Baron Houtart suggests, are probably due to the interbreeding with the Cayenne dog.

Another concept he introduces in his argument; is that it is also probable that this Veronese type of Toy Spaniel was consummated previously to Calieri, and appeared in France contemporaneously.  The time that the Veronese Spaniel was exposed to the world by Calieri’s paintings, like all fashion, canine fashion had its whims as well, and this type now became popular.

In the book written by Mrs. Lytton, Toy Dogs and Their Ancestors, on page 32 was a picture copied of a painting from Jacopo Chimenti, called Jacopi da Empoli (1551-1640) The subject was a dwarf in charge of thirteen dogs owned by Henry III.  There were five Dogs of Cayenne, two Bolognese of which one is trimmed like a lion, a toy barbet with a round skull and a short muzzle, possibly an ancestor of the “Smoeshond” and of the Brussels Griffon, a “matineau” several times larger than his companions, and finally, four Spaniels typical of Veronese.  One is standing, body thickset, head high, two others are sitting; on the side is the fourth, ready to spring with tail carriage in the shape of a yataghan, so characteristic of the Toy Spaniels. 

Contemporary with Veronese, yet earlier than Chimenti, is the portrait of Marguerite de Valois, painted by Francis Clouet (1510-1572).  In this painting were several people accompanied by little Spaniels.  There appears to be a striking contrast between the heavily fringed ears of this type, their skull, and their entirely smooth muzzle.  This dog, as Baron Houtart suggests, is of the Veronese type, although the characteristics are not strongly marked.  In the varieties from crossbreeding, the influence of the one type conflicts with the other and thus a whole gamut of intermediates is born.

The vogue of the Veronese Spaniels seemed to die down a little after the XVIth Century. The type survived in rare portraits, notable in the canvas in the Brussels Museum.  D. Teniers shows the Archduke Leopold, Guillame in his gallery, suddenly to recover under the brush of Watteau (1681 – 1721). We see it in the Feast of Love” (Dresden), the “Toilet,” “The Picnic,” (Dulwich), “The Embarkation for Cythera.”  Nearly all these dogs appear long in body as Bassets.  Were they really so or was this the stylized version of the painter?

Although the dogs of the XVIth Century were generally white and red, the Veronese Spaniels of Watteau often have large black capes like that of the Teniers dog, which is marked in very dark grey.  In two centuries the influence of the Cayenne Dog on the coat was extinct.  They now seem to have a thick and very wavy fleece, but it must be said that Watteau painted several Spaniels of another type.

According to Houtart’s article, if this breed of dog had disappeared at this time, at least it had left traces, notably the spot, in certain English Spaniels, into which country they were introduced by the Princes of Orange.  The same fate overtook two French breeds which appeared suddenly in the middle of the XVIIth Century, only to disappear two centuries later; the Gredin and the Pyrame.  Their origins are as obscure as their names.  Except for their color, they are alike; the Gredin was pure black, the Pyrame black and tan.  It was Mignard (1610 – 1685) who first painted them.  In “the Dauphin of France and His Family,” where there is an excellent example of this type being petted by a child.  We can better judge the two breeds by examining the Gredin of Mme. De Pompadour, painted by Cachelier, and her Pyrame, Mimi, painted by the same and by C. Huet.  Engraved by Fessart in 1758, they resembled Toy Spaniels for they were no larger than bichons.  The skull and muzzle are both well shaped; the ears appear heavy, set high and falling low.  They are heavily fringed, although the hair is thin on the rest of the body and almost bare on the tail which ends in a plume.  It seems a short haired variety seemed to exist.

Gredins and Pyrames were not always as small as those of Mme. De Pompadour, for naturalists have classified them as very efficient hunting Spaniels.   Often miniature dogs were the product of chance or of unskilled abortions.  However they were incapable of reproducing themselves, but were interesting nevertheless since they recur for some years, proving that the breeders tenaciously sought this type.

Such seem to be the two Spaniels painted in 1552 by Antonio Moro, at the feet of Philip II of Spain and of Mary Tudor, to which the so called Corneille de Lyon (XVIth Century) shows us on a table in the “Portrait of a Man” in the Brussels Museum.  These three dogs, just alike, have small, pointed heads and exaggerated well set pendant ears.  The coat is scanty except on that of the undocked tail.  They are not any larger than the hands of their owners. Almost confirming statements of M.A. Blondus, who speaks of dogs that are no bigger than a mouse.

The last brilliant ray of the Venetian school shows that Italy in its day preserved the secret to beautiful spaniels.  In “The formal Reception,” in the Royal Gallery of Berlin, the artist Tiepolo (1692-1769), shows us a nobleman being well received, while a tiny little dog rushes eagerly towards him from a court lady. Unluckily he turned his back to us so that we cannot see him well.  However, the dog appeared to be short legged, long bodied, with a heavy coat, which can be described as a cape.  He may have been a Spaniel or a Bichon type.

The direct modern day ancestor of this pure Spaniel once had been used to create the Veronesean and the Bichon by crossing with the Dog of Cayenne and of the dwarf barbet.  Veronese bestowed his name to the breed depicted by him and for the same reason; we are now discussing the Vecelli Spaniel.

Tiziano Vecelli, also known as Titian, was not the first artist to bring this dog to our attention, but he did it far better than anyone else.  This Spaniel of Titian is small, but not extremely so, and remains true to his original stock, natural and normal in appearance with none of the anomalies or of the exaggerated deformities seen in the whims of other breeds.  He is normal in every part of his body.  The shape of his skull appears wide between his ears, which are set rather high, not too large, and are not hanging close against his cheeks.  He is lightly rounded without having more flesh than is proper for a purebred Spaniel.  His eyes are oval rather than round and are not very far apart, since no deformity of the skull pushes them far from each other.  For the same reason, they are also not prominent.  The body is well rounded, long rather than broad, and without having a frail appearance.  The chest is deep, but not like that of a Basset Hound because the legs are graceful rather than heavy.  The tail is not shortened and hangs at rest, but in action it is lifted strongly over the back without touching or curling. 

The Baron has given to this breed the name “Pomeranian Spaniel” because of a certain resemblance between the outline of his head to that of the Pomeranian dog.  Titian, on the other hand, has left numerous portraits of his preferred Spaniel.  He had not a monopoly on this type; other Italians, such as Bronsino (14501-1572) and Veronese himself represented it at nearly the same time.

Earlier artists, including Hans Memling, who died in 1494, was a Master of Bruges who painted a type of dog that had a strong resemblance to that of the Vercelli or Titian Spaniel.  Here, a little companion which Memling represented sleeping at the feet of Chretien de Hondt (d’Anvers Musuem), is quite similar to the sleeping Spaniel depicted in Titian’s “Venus”  hanging in the Musee des Offices in Florence, Italy. 

Widespread throughout the Low Countries, we see numerous figurations, such as “Les Heures de Notre Dame” attributed to Hennessey (first third of the XVIth Century), Month of March, “Planting the Garden” Jan Metsys (1510-1575 about) which shows in “David and Bathsheba,” ( Louvre) a Spaniel having the “spot” in the middle of its forehead and one is also seen in Pierre Aertsen (1508-1575) “Jesus at the Home of Martha and Mary,” (Brussels Museum).

The Infanta Isabella bred Spaniels which did not appear to have been brought with her from Spain.  In 1622 she ordered Rubens to offer Marie de Medici a little dog of this breed wearing a collar made of twenty-four enameled plaques.  Rubens twice reproduced this graceful animal in the paintings which he dedicated to the Queen Mother.  They were painted at Anvers, and adorned the Luxembourg before being moved to the Louvre in Paris.  In the “Marriage of Marie de Medici” and in “The Birth of Louis XIII,” it is seen quite distinctly.  One will also recognize a very characteristic Vercelli Spaniel and here a comparison may be made between these two portraits and the dog which was painted in the foreground of the Bathsheba in the Dresden Museum.  It appears to be the same one, not only in type but in demeanor, which appears identical, complete with markings that correspond almost exactly as well.

The Vecelli Spaniel is also seen in Spain from the works of Murillo.  France, Germany, England all knew it equally well.  The type remained perfectly constant through the centuries as we will find it today.  However, the Spaniel of Memling and of Vecelli became the object of a careful breeding program, losing what was primitive, coarse and clumsy and transforming it into the most aristocratic beauty.  This change occurred contemporaneously in France and in the Low Countries, far from Italy, to launch its debut in the middle of the XVIIth Century, the Continental Spaniel.

We have already seen this dog, pure in type, in certain canvases of the Flemish masters of the XVIth Century and in the first years of the XVIIth, for instance in “The  Preaching of St. Norbert” and in “The Members of a College of Rhetoric” by Jerome van Graesbeck (1620-1677 o  1678) at the Anvers Museum.  It is necessary to note that the Dutchman, Barthelemy van der Helst (1611-1670) and his “Introduction of the Fiancee” to find perfection.  In this painting appears a little Spaniel, apparently a house dog, slender without affectation, precious as he is among other dogs in the painting of greater size and the people who are elegantly dressed. 

This dog, according to Houtart, is the image of “tiny grace.”  His coat is abundant, streaming and slightly curly.  His legs are fine, rich with fringes, and end in feet long rather than broad.  His ears are attached high on his head and hangs delicately, not too long and not too close to the head.  His skull and muzzle are all Spaniel, the former slightly rounded, while the later is proper to the characteristics of a Toy dog.  His nose is slightly turned up and gives his face a lively and spirited look.  His neck, lost in the fur, which on his body appears a little longer than that of the Veronesean.  Finally, his tail is undocked, set high, and here, seen in our little prudent animal, hangs down at the end a hook, heavily covered with hair.  You can see at just a glance the progress that has been made in breeding since Memling, Titian and Murillo.

Not behind in the endeavor to refine the Spaniel, France, with their official painter, Mignard (1610-1695), was no less than Vecelli and Caliari in his depictions of this lovely Spaniel.  His various portraits of Henriette d’Orleans, of the child Marie de Bourbon, and of the Dauphin surrounded by his family, all show us specimens very close to the perfect Spaniel.  Louis XIV had the opportunity of possessing these lovely Spaniels and Larguilliere (1656-1746) of painting them as perfect as that of Van der Helst. 

Baron Houtart describes this painting where Louis XIV and his family pose in quite a formal portrait along with a little Spaniel, which is leaping and barking with his plumed tail in the air, lending itself to the gayety and charm of French life. This little one appears to be the perfect example of the Continental Toy Spaniel in structure, elegance, vivacity and in charm.  He is very small in spite of his heavy coat, which is never rough.  His legs are delicate and his tail has a hook that is bent high.  The ears are fine and made larger by the abundance of silky hair, while the skull is neither flat nor high, and is neither apple shaped nor narrow, but is delicately rounded.  He has a delicious little pointed muzzle, a lively eye that is neither protuberant nor sunk, and placed exactly right where the skull ends and the muzzle begins.  The back is supple and the tail is set exactly in the dorsal line, not long, carried alertly and curved inwards at the end, expanding into a handsome plume.  Such is this graceful little Spaniel.

It has been well documented that this great king held a large affection for these little dogs.  So too did Mme de Pompadour share in the same love.  Many of her dogs were reproduced in portraits, notably Inez, painted by C. Huet, etched by Fessart in 1755, and finally engraved by a pupil of his, August St. Aubin.  This work shows us the characteristics of this breed, its refinement, and the consistency it had possessed since the time of Van der Helst and Larguilliere, better than any written description.

According to Houtart, portraits of Spaniels that were done around the XVIII Century were never depicted as symbols of fidelity but rather as frivolities, particularly from Greuze, Fragonard and other contemporaries of their times. All throughout the XIXth Century these little Spaniels held their favor in France and Belgium.  One can not deny that the Toy Spaniels bred in our day belong to the “selected type” were obtained by perfecting the type preferred by Titian. 

In the last years of the XIXth Century, there suddenly appeared among the Continental Spaniels a type with erect ears that were carried obliquely like the spread wings of a butterfly.  Logic requires us to reserve for that variety the name, “Butterfly Spaniel,” and we do not apply the name “Papillon” to dogs with drop ears, because there is no way that they suggest the butterfly.

Houtart argues that his research has been in vain as to the origin of the oblique ears.  He goes on to say he has no knowledge of a single old drawing or painting showing a spaniel with such an ear and can only be contented to record its sudden appearance a the same time in both countries, attributing it , for the lack of better explanation, to the perpetuation of an accidental characteristic.

One will try in vain to discover in the little Papillon any sign of a cross breeding responsible for this difference.  No breed possesses such ears, Houtart asserts, not even the short haired English black and tan terriers with soft, fine ears, which have sometimes been called butterfly dogs.  Those of our little Spaniels are placed cleanly at the side of the head, set and held obliquely, while the rigidity of the cartilage enables them to be perpetually spread.

Houtart absolutely rejects the notion at the guess of a cross with the Pomeranian.  Spitzes have small ears, pointed toward the front, like “the ventilators of a steamer, and not spread like the sails of a ship.”  Furthermore, he asserts that it is incredible to believe such an infusion of such blood would have left no other traces, and would not have affected the shape of the foot, the texture of the coat, or the length of the body.  Nothing of this sort appears in the Papillon.

In an essay published many years ago by the Papillon (Butterfly Dog) Club of England, Mr. Robert Leighton gives a new explanation of the phenomenon.  According to Leighton, the Spaniels were discovered in Mexico, imported by the conquerors to the Peninsula, and then spread among the Spaniels of the Low Countries.  He believes it is to Mexican breeds, Chihuahuas and others, that the Papillon owes his oblique ears.

Houtart does not share in his views.  What Leighton calls his “very decided belief” seems contrary to Houtart, who states is nothing but pure speculation, contradicted by the pictures of any number of Continental Spaniels prior to the Conquest of Mexico (1519).  How can it be explained then that the influence of the Chihuahua on the shape of the ears delayed three centuries and a half before making itself felt?

L. Van der Snickt in 1896 described the Continental Spaniel as having “straight hair, red  on the back, while on the belly, with a long fringed tail, a small head with a delicate muzzle, surmounted by very large upright ears.  These tiny dogs, as Van der Snickt describes, look a little like a squirrel.  We have seen several specimens, and nothing would be easier than to resurrect the old breed.” (Hunting and Fishing, August 30, 1896)

When we say how enthusiastically Van der Snickt accepted as true the theories of his fertile imagination, we are not disrespecting his memory or his admiration for the breed.  Belgium owes too many of its beautiful native breeds to the lightning flashes of his genius for us to be critical of him.  At that time, there appeared many pretty fawn dogs and thus he affirmed as early as 1898, speaking as a naturalist, that there existed two breeds, the Papillon and the little Squirrel Dog.

It was only two years later on August 19, 1900, that he reserved the first name for dogs with drop ears and the second for dogs with “large and upright” ears.  Shortly, to support the logic of his choice of words, he decreed that red was the obligatory color for the latter (October, 1901). 

Only a year later, after the admission of the two varieties at the show of the Schipperke Club and of the Brussels Griffon Club, that the founder of Hunting and Fishing gave the name of “Papillons” to Spaniels with erect ears, which he defined still further, August 16, 1903, in adopting the word “oblique.”  The name “Squirrel Dog” did not represent a distinct variety after that, so he gave up the exclusive color fawn for these Spaniels.  Van der Snickt soon recognized as a typical color “red more or less marked with white.”  In 1905, he gave first prize to a chestnut dog, another prize to a black and tan one without any white, but did not hide his ancient preference for “the genuine squirrel color.”  Reddish Papillons are more effective,” he said, “because the nose and the black eyes stand out more.”

Houtart agrees that he too favors the red coloring, particularly when it is near mahogany and even lightly trimmed with charcoal, expressing the same sympathy as Van de Snickt.
He remembers very beautiful dogs of this coloring nearly forty years ago, and it has become very rare in his day.  He believes that dogs of those colors had a tendency to have thin ears, scanty coat and a long body, which was a simple impression engraved in his memory.

Today the name “Squirrel Dog” neither corresponds to any particular variety nor to any obligatory color.  The name was then, even at the time of its inception, superfluous. Houtart felt it was fitting to discard it, as its imprecision too often obscured the history of the Toy Spaniel and he shall rejoice if this study of the Toy Spaniel has brought about a little clarity.

Bibliography:
Houtart, Baron; "Les Epagneuls Nains Continentaux"

Houtart, Baron: L'ABOI, (Belgian Kennel monthly);

Lytton, Mrs. Neville; "Toy Dogs and Their Ancestors"

Weidensaul, Scott; “Tracking America’s First Dog” (Smithsonian monthly)