Roman Dogs? Or Cats?

[Guest 1idii]

Hello all,

 

I read on a different post that dogs were considered unlucky (especially during sacrifices), and on yet another thread, the argument as to whether Romans used dogs in war rages on.

 

I know that some dogs were kept in Ancient Rome as pets, right? I'm particularly interested in any findings concerning the particular collars the dogs (or cats) wore. (I'm an obsessive, you see, and searching for information and pictures if possible).

 

Are there any references anywhere that can help me track down pictures or descriptions of any type of collar the Romans used? Can anyone help me? Any information is greatly appreciated.

 

Many, many thanks.

 

1idii

[M. Porcius Cato]

From a house in Pompeii, we have this warning to "beware of dog" (CAVE CANEM). Note the collar pictured here.

 

A similar image can be obtained from the national museum in Naples (here).

[Antiochus of Seleucia]

I watched something on Roman Crime and it said that they never (or rarely) used dogs for pets, always for protection of property. I someone got through the door lock they would be greeted with a little suprise.

[Pertinax]

I assume that a poor pleb would have no room for a dog in his crowded insula, but that villa or farm dwellers would . Perhaps we have a modern example in Hong Kong, dogs are 1. to eat if bred for such a purpose (chubby, quick growing , tastey). 2. pets of the wealthy , who have space and time to pamper them ( small, fluffy) 3. nasty looking guard animals kept for that use alone (suspiciously like the Pompeian example).

[Antiochus of Seleucia]

Yeah, dogs would be for more wealthy plebs. Poor people really don't have to worry about being robbed...

[M. Porcius Cato]

Poor people really don't have to worry about being robbed...

 

Actually, the poor probably had more to worry about--they could afford to lose less; they were surrounded by more criminals; and they had less influence with the justice system. So if you couldn't afford a Hortensius or Cicero, getting a dog was probably a good idea.

[Antiochus of Seleucia]

Poor people really don't have to worry about being robbed...

 

Actually, the poor probably had more to worry about--they could afford to lose less; they were surrounded by more criminals; and they had less influence with the justice system. So if you couldn't afford a Hortensius or Cicero, getting a dog was probably a good idea.

 

Yes... very true... but would it be more risky breaking into a crowded apartment to grab a few coins than a quiet out-of-the-way villa with a lot of coins? Really though, it could go both ways. The poor plebs probably couldn't afford or house a dog anyway. Interesting thread.

Edited August 23, 2006 by Antiochus of Seleucia

[Sula]

Hiya, this is my first post in here so have mercy.

Um, weren't the dogs in a bit of disgrace when they didn't warn about the barbarians attacking and the geese did? Sorry my knowledge is limited but I am fasinated by Rome and the whole ancient world.

[Guest 1idii]

From a house in Pompeii, we have this warning to "beware of dog" (CAVE CANEM). Note the collar pictured here.

 

A similar image can be obtained from the national museum in Naples (here).

 

Thanks, M. Porcius Cato, for the link. I had found that, and was basing a lot off the picture. I had hoped to find other examples, (also war dogs' collars) but haven't had much luck.

 

So if the cats were in "more favor", would they have (conceivably) had collars? Or maybe not? As a pet, perhaps? (I'm a wee bit fascinated by collars)

 

1idii

[Primus Pilus]

Hiya, this is my first post in here so have mercy.

Um, weren't the dogs in a bit of disgrace when they didn't warn about the barbarians attacking and the geese did? Sorry my knowledge is limited but I am fasinated by Rome and the whole ancient world.

 

Yes, related to the Gallic sack of Rome. Livy explains that it was a single sentry who took the blame rather than the dogs though.

 

While these proceedings were taking place at Veii, the Citadel and Capitol of Rome were in imminent danger. The Gauls had either noticed the footprints left by the messenger from Veii, or had themselves discovered a comparatively easy ascent up the cliff to the temple of Carmentis. Choosing a night when there was a faint glimmer of light, they sent an unarmed man in advance to try the road; then handing one another their arms where the path was difficult, and supporting each other or dragging each other up as the ground required, they finally reached the summit. So silent had their movements been that not only were they unnoticed by the sentinels, but they did not even wake the dogs, an animal peculiarly sensitive to nocturnal sounds.

 

But they did not escape the notice of the geese, which were sacred to Juno and had been left untouched in spite of the extremely scanty supply of food. This proved the safety of the garrison, for their clamour and the noise of their wings aroused M. Manlius, the distinguished soldier, who had been consul three years before. He snatched up his weapons and ran to call the rest to arms, and while the rest hung back he struck with the boss of his shield a Gaul who had got a foothold on the summit and knocked him down. He fell on those behind and upset them, and Manlius slew others who had laid aside their weapons and were clinging to the rocks with their hands. By this time others had joined him, and they began to dislodge the enemy with volleys of stones and javelins till the whole body fell helplessly down to the bottom. When the uproar had died away, the remainder of the night was given to sleep, as far as was possible under such disturbing circumstances, whilst their peril, though past, still made them anxious.

 

At daybreak the soldiers were summoned by sound of trumpet to a council in the presence of the tribunes, when the due rewards for good conduct and for bad would be awarded. First, Manlius was commended for his bravery, and rewarded not by the tribunes alone but by the soldiers as a body, for every man brought to him at his quarters, which were in the Citadel, half a pound of meal and a quarter of a pint of wine. This does not sound much, but the scarcity made it an overwhelming proof of the affection felt for him, since each stinted himself of food and contributed in honour of that one man what had to be taken from his necessaries of life. Next, the sentinels who had been on duty at the spot where the enemy had climbed up without their noticing it were called forward. Q. Sulpicius, the consular tribune, declared that he should punish them all by martial law. He was, however, deterred from this course by the shouts of the soldiers, who all agreed in throwing the blame upon one man. As there was no doubt of his guilt, he was amidst general approval flung from the top of the cliff.

 

A stricter watch was now kept on both sides; by the Gauls because it had become known that messengers were passing between Rome and Veii; by the Romans, who had not forgotten the danger they were in that night.

[Sula]

Thanks Primus Pilus

[Skarr]

Link to University of Chicago - article on dogs in Ancient Rome

 

The above link has an interesting article with further links to explore...

[caldrail]

Poor people really don't have to worry about being robbed...

 

Actually, the poor probably had more to worry about--they could afford to lose less; they were surrounded by more criminals; and they had less influence with the justice system. So if you couldn't afford a Hortensius or Cicero, getting a dog was probably a good idea.

 

Especially since it wasn't money they would steal. It would be clothing, utensils, or food. Possibly even a child. For a poor person this would be disastrous. I recall a reward being offered by a roman for the return of a kitchen pot.

Edited August 26, 2006 by caldrail

[Gini]

Don't know much about this topic but I do recall some writing by a roman villa owner - no one famous in which he talked about the pleasure he had from his little (fluffy-type) dog Perhaps this type came later

[caldrail]

The wealthy have always adopted pets of one sort or another. Cats were introduced from egypt so I understand. Some romans of means even adopted child slaves as pets. Although this smacks of the darker side of human nature there wasn't usually any paedophilia involved. The child was a pet and treated as such. Of course when it got a bit hairy after a few years it was time to sell.