Dogs and dog breeding in interwar Poland

ABSTRACT

This article examines the world of dog breeding in interwar Poland. It argues that studying relations between species – human and canine – tells us a great deal about historical constructions of culture and identity. When we talk about dogs as a species, and when we scrutinize various approaches to breeding dogs, what we are really exploring is humans, their identities, anxieties, and desires; what we are describing is the mental landscape of time and place. Dog breeders in the Polish Second Republic (1918–39) understood purebreds as an essential element of modern culture and regarded dog breeding as a civilized and rational pursuit that contributed directly to raising Poland’s status in Europe. In particular, interwar breeders promoted purebred dogs as useful working animals – “canine citizens” – that, through the various forms of service they provided (in policing and military services, for example), offered tangible benefits to the state and its people. Breeders believed that they, together with the dogs that they bred, contributed to the collective good.

Cet article examine le monde de l’élevage de chiens dans la Pologne de l’entre-deux-guerres. Il affirme que l’étude sur les relations entre espèces – humaine et canine – nous révèle bien des choses sur les constructions historiques de la culture et de l’identité. Quand nous parlons de chiens en tant qu’espèce, quand nous examinons les diverses façons d’aborder l’élevage canin, ce que nous explorons, ce sont les humains, leurs identités, leurs angoisses, leurs désirs; ce que nous décrivons, c’est le paysage mental du temps et du lieu. Les éleveurs dans la Seconde République polonaise (1918-39) ont compris les chiens de race comme un élément essentiel de la culture moderne. À leur avis, l’élevage de chiens était une activité civilisée et rationnelle qui contribuait directement à augmenter le prestige de la Pologne en Europe. Notamment, les éleveurs de l’entre-deux-guerres ont promu les chiens de pur sang en tant qu’animaux de travail utiles – « citoyens canins » – qui présentaient des avantages tangibles pour l’état et son peuple grâce aux diverses formes de service (dans la police et l’armée, par exemple). Les éleveurs ont estimé qu’ils, et leurs chiens, contribuaient à l’intérêt collectif.

KEYWORDS:

• Interwar Poland
• Polish history
• dogs
• dog breeding
• animals

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their careful reading of this article and for their insightful questions and comments. Thanks also to Heather Coleman and Oksana Vynnyk at Canadian Slavonic Papers/Revue canadienne des slavistes.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1. Trybulski, “Wystawy psòw i ich rola,” 1. Please note: the editor of Canadian Slavonic Papers/Revue canadienne des slavistes, Heather Coleman, took charge of the review process and editing of this article by this special section’s guest editor.

2. W[lekliński], “Powody uprzedzania się do psòw rasowych”; and Biernacki, “Czy to nieporozumienie?”

3. Trybulski, “Pies gospodarski.”

4. Marchlewski, “Bigos kynologiczny.”

5. On modernity and civilization generally, see Gawin, Bilet do nowoczesności, 13.

6. This definition of civilization is inspired by Skabelund, Empire of Dogs, 10.

7. Plach, “Ritual Slaughter,” 2.

8. Plach, “Animal Welfare Movement,” 28–9.

9. For surveys of different aspects of dogs’ place in human societies see Shipman, Invaders; Serpell, Domestic Dog; Morey, Dogs; and Sanders, Understanding Dogs.

10. Ritvo, Animal Estate, 84; and Ritvo, “Pride and Pedigree,” 227. For a brief introduction to the place of animals in the field of history see Nance, “Animal History.”

11. Skabelund, Empire of Dogs, 6 and 196.

12. van Sittert and Swart, “Canis Familiaris,” 6.

13. Plach, “Mad Dogs.” There is a small body of literature about dogs in contemporary Poland. A Dog is Also a Human? stands out as a particularly sophisticated inter-disciplinary collection grounded in the latest animal studies literature. See Pręgowski and Włodarczyk, Pies też człowiek? See also Pręgowski and Włodarczyk, Free Market Dogs.

14. Skabelund, Empire of Dogs, 195.

15. For a summary of the latest thinking on the dog’s origins, see Gorman, “Big Search.”

16. Hobgood-Oster, Dog’s History, 108; McHugh, Dog; and Pearson, “Dogs, History, and Agency,” 132. See also DeMello, Animals and Society, 85.

17. Derr, Dog’s Best Friend, 43.

18. Arluke and Bogdan, Beauty and the Beast, 9.

19. Ritvo, “Pride and Pedigree,” 231.

20. Budiansky, Truth About Dogs, 24.

21. Ritvo, Animal Estate, ch 1. In our present day, we have about four hundred known breeds, making dogs one of the most diverse species on earth. See van Sittert and Swart, “Canis Familiaris,” 3.

22. For popular histories of dog breeding see Coppinger and Coppinger, Dogs, 299; and Bulliet, Hunters, Herders, and Hamburgers, 211.

23. Ritvo, “Pride and Pedigree,” 230 and 238–9.

24. Hobgood-Oster, Dog’s History, 108.

25. Kete, Beast in the Boudoir, 65.

26. Poland had long been a “horse nation” rather than a “dog nation.” This was in no small part thanks to the horse’s role in protecting the Polish lands from foreign invasion (it was the mounted cavalry, after all, that had famously protected Poland in 1683 when Jan Sobieski’s forces turned back the Turks at Vienna). See Forelle and Szuszkiewiczowa, Psia księga, 217. On Poles’ appreciation for Arabian horses see Karnkowski, “Słowo prawdy”; and “Dziesięciolecie odrodzenia hodowli.” On horses generally see McShane and Tarr, Horse in the City. Dogs also played a role in warfare, though this history remains to be written for the Polish context.

27. Ritvo, “Pride and Pedigree,” 240–1; and Kete, Beast in the Boudoir, 67.

28. Forelle and Szuszkiewiczowa, Psia księga, 218–19 and 221. See also Dąbrowska, “Głęboka gra?” 201. Dᶐbrowska provides an excellent analysis of modern-day Polish dog shows as well.

29. Białasz, Pies w mieście; Malhomme, Wychowanie psa; and Grimm, Pies towarzysz.

30. Błocki, Nasze psy, 82–5. As a point of comparison, a yearly subscription in 1935 to the newspaper Purebred Dog was 7 PLN.

31. Wlekliński, “Zapomniana gałᶐź hodowli.”

32. Kete, Beast in the Boudoir, 77.

33. Fudge, “Dog, the Home,” 37–8.

34. DeMello, “Present and the Future,” 81.

35. Błocki, Nasze psy, 218.

36. Kohlrausch, Steffen, and Wiederkehr, “Introduction,” 9.

37. Błocki, Nasze psy, foreword.

38. On the British veterinary field see Gardiner, “‘Dangerous’ Women,” 467.

39. See the advertisement for a boarding facility in Mòj Pies, no. 4 (April 1934): back cover.

40. Archiwum Narodowe, Krakow (AN-Krakow), Związek Opieki nad Zwierzętami (ZOZ), Syg. 5, p. 33, “Pochòd zwierzᶐt po ulicach stolicy,” n.p.

41. Polski Zwiᶐzek Hodowcòw Psòw Rasowych, Regulamin Polskiej Księgi Rodowodowej. See also Trybulski, Polish Greenfoot Hens; this was arguably Trybulski’s most successful book.

42. “Wystawa psòw rasowych w Warszawie.”

43. “Polski Zwiᶐzek Hodowcòw Psòw Rasowych”; and Old., “S.O.S.”, 2 On conflicts in the Polish breeding world, see W[lekliński], “Z wędrowek w celu”, 6; Błocki, “Na czasie”; “Jak stoi sprawa”; and Błocki, Nasze psy, 82. On kennel club conflicts in Britain see Howell, “Dog Fancy at War.” Modern-day conflicts in the American Kennel Club are described in Derr, Dog’s Best Friend, ch. 6.

44. Lamla, “Czas powiedzieć prawdę,” 15 and 17–18.

45. “Sprawozdanie Polskiego Zwiᶐzku Hodowcòw Psòw Rasowych za 1935 rok”,31; and “Sprawozdanie Polskiego Zwiᶐzku Hodowcòw Psòw Rasowych za r. 1937.”,21

46. “Sprawozdanie Polskiego Zwiᶐzku Hodowcòw Psòw Rasowych za 1935 rok.”, 31

47. “Sprawozdanie Polskiego Zwiᶐzku Hodowcòw Psòw Rasowych za r. 1937.”,21 “Sprawozdanie Polsk. Zwiᶐzku Hodowcòw Psòw Rasowych za 1935 rok.”,29

48. “Statut Polskiego Zwiᶐzku Hodowcòw Psòw Rasowych”; and W[lekliński], “Powody uprzedzania się.”

49. Four hundred copies of the no. 1 issue of 1936 were printed. See front cover. Only two issues came out in 1938.

50. “Sprawozdanie z Wstawy Psòw Rasowych.”

51. Trybulski, “Pomieszczenia dla psòw.”

52. The group’s statute appeared in Międzyklubowy Komitet Kynologiczny, 1938, 3. See also “Z Międzyklubowego Komitetu Kynologicznego.”

53. Międzyklubowy Komitet Kynologiczny, 1938, 5.

54. Pemberton and Strange, “Dogs and Modernity,” 706.

55. Poland participated in the Federation’s 1935 congress in Frankfurt. See “Na czasie”; and Lamla, “Światowy kongres kynologiczny.”

56. Trybulski had tried (but failed) to establish a kennel club in the early 1930s. See “Jak stoi sprawa”; and Marszel, “List do Redakcji.”

57. Milczarek, Pies, 92. Note that the decision to form the Kennel Club was taken earlier, in July 1938. See also “Z Międzyklubowego Komitetu,” 13; Międzyklubowy Komitet Kynologiczny, 4; and Smyczyński, Psy. Rasy i wychowanie, 20. Smyczyński was a prominent breeder and breeding activist into the postwar era.

58. The paper’s first editor was W. Cieszkowski. From issue no. 4 in 1933 the editor was Dr. Leokadja Chmielewska, and from 1936 a committee edited the paper. Most issues were around 20 pages in length. In terms of circulation, 1500 copies of the September 1934 issue, for example, were published. See front cover.

59. “Mòj pies.” The second subtitle was added to the no. 2 issue of 1932.

60. See for example Trybulski, “Ze Zwiᶐzku Hodowcòw Psòw Rasowych.”

61. “Mòj pies.”

62. “Z Towarzystwa Miłośnikòw Psa Służbowego w Polsce.”

63. Stawecki and Szklarska-Lohmannowa, “Nagler, Leon.”

64. “Statut Stowarzyszenia p.n. Tow. Miłośnikòw Psa Służbowego w Polsce”; and Niemczycki, “Uwagi o wychowie.”

65. Smyczyński, Psy. Rasy i wychowanie, 20.

66. Maszewska-Knappe, “Pies i jego ochrona w Polsce.”

67. Trybulski, “Pies gospodarski,” 6.

68. Maszewska-Knappe, “Pies i jego ochrona w Polsce,” 8. See also “Sprawozdanie Polsk. Zwiᶐzku Hodowcòw Psòw Rasowych za 1935 rok,” 29; “Plan pracy Polskiego Zwiᶐzku Hodowcòw Psòw Rasowych na 1937”; and “Sekcja psa służbowego.”

69. “Sekcja psa służbowego”; and “Sprawa hodowli psòw w Polsce.” See also Majewski, Podręcznik tresury psa policyjnego; On dogs during the Jack the Ripper investigation in England, see Pemberton, “Bloodhounds as Detectives.”

70. See for example Dobrowolski, “Pies w służbie policyjnej.”

71. Błocki, “Pies ochronny na usługach.” See also the advertisement in Mòj Pies, no. 12 (15 December 1936), back of front cover. The reference to a “four-legged Army” is from Cieszkowski, “Na czasie.”

72. Błocki, “Pies ochronny.”

73. Błocki, “Praca psa jako przewodnika ociemniałych”; and Wlekliński, “Zapomniana gałᶐź hodowli.” On seeing-eye dogs see Wroczyński, “Pies przewodnik ociemniałych.” Wroczyński edited The Blind Soldier (Ociemniały Żołnierz).

74. In this focus on utility and public good, Polish breeders reflected contemporary Soviet approaches to dogs, which they openly admired. See “Jeszcze o podatku od psòw.” On Soviet pet keeping see Nelson, “Hearth for a Dog.”

75. Archiwum Akt Nowych (AAN), Towarzystwo Ochrony Zwierzᶐt (TOZ), Syg. 270, Letter to Komenda Głòwna Policji Państwowej, p. 31.

76. AN-Krakow, ZOZ, Syg. 2, Kurzbauer, “Pies w służbie dla państwa,” 855.

77. For typical images see “Psy służbowe straży granicznej”; and Mòj Pies, no 5 (15 May 1936): 8.

78. Marchlewski, “Bigos kinologiczny.,” 1–2.

79. W[lekliński], “Powody uprzedzania się.”

80. “Zakup psòw,” back of front cover. See also Old., “S.O.S.”, 1; and Majewski, Tresura psa policyjnego, 9.

81. Majewski, Podręcznik tresury psa policyjnego, 3.

82. Cieszkowski, “Na czasie.” 2.

83. “Odezwa Polskiej Ligi Przyjaciòł Zwierzᶐt”; and “Do naszych czytelnikòw.”, 2

84. See for example Krzywicka, “O suce dolmie.”

85. Nowakowski, “Pies à thèse.”

86. Schochet, Animal Life, 38.

87. “Sprawa hodowli psòw w Polsce.”

88. W[lekliński], “O celowości importu psòw.”

89. “Sprawozdanie Polsk. Zwiᶐzku Hodowcòw Psòw Rasowych za r. 1936”, 20; and Maszewska-Knappe, “Pies i jego ochrona w Polsce.”

90. Cena, “W Polskim domu.”

91. Stachiewicz, “Owczarki.” See also Lisiecki, Psy, 99–100 and 104.

92. Dabrowski, “Constructing a Polish Landscape,” 45–6.

93. Stachiewicz, “Owczarki,” 4.

94. Trybulski, “Owczarek Podhalański.” On the sheepdogs’ potential in police services see AAN, TOZ, Syg. 32, Letter from Alojzy Grimm, p. 30.

95. Maszewska-Knappe, “Pies i jego ochrona w Polsce.”

96. Cena, “Wzorzec polskiego owczarka.”

97. Smyczyński, Psy. Rasy i wychowanie, 180.

98. For depictions of sheepdogs with Górale see Katalog dorocznego pokazu psòw rasowych w Warszawie; O.J., “Polski owczarek Podhalański”; “Owczarek Polski Podhalański”; and Trybulski, “Pies gospodarski,” 4–5.

99. O.J., “Polski owczarek Podhalański,” 10. See also Smyczyński, Psy. Rasy i wychowanie, 179; and Stachiewicz, “Owczarki,” 6–7.

100. Trybulski, “Owczarek Podhalański.”

101. O.J., “Polski owczarek Podhalański,” 10.

102. “Sprawa hodowli psòw w Polsce.”

103. Trybulski, “Ze Zwiᶐzku Hodowcòw Psòw Rasowych,” 6.

104. Numbers of dogs in Poland, whether purebred or mixed breed, are not available.

105. Zarząd Polskiego Związku Hodowcòw Psòw Rasowych, “Przedmowa.”

106. On eugenics see Gawin, “Progressivism and Eugenic Thinking.” On breeding and eugenics, see Skabelund, Empire of Dogs 8.

107. “Pokaz psòw rasowych.”

108. Błocki, “Na psim froncie bez zmiań.” Błocki expands on these ideas in Nasze psy, passim. See also W[lekliński], “Z wędrowek.”

109. Bulikowski, “Jeszcze w sprawie ‘hodowcòw’.”

110. W[lekliński], “Z wędrowek w celu,” 5; and B[łocki], “Psia nędza.”

111. Trybulski, “Pies gospodarski,” 5–6. See also Skabelund, Empire of Dogs, 11. In our contemporary period mutts often symbolize rebellion and opposition to the status quo. See Pręgowski and Włodarczyk, “Trzecia Rzeczypospolita Czworonożna,” 38–9.

112. Gawin, “Sex Reform Movement,” 182.

113. Old., “K.M.P. – Nieprzyjaciòł Psòw.”

114. “Z Polskiego Związku Hodowcòw Psòw Rasowych.”

115. O.J., “Polski owczarek Podhalański,” 11; and “W Polskiej zagrodzie Polski pies.”

116. On Jews and dogs generally see Teter, Jews and Heretics, 44; and Tenner, “Citizen Canine.”

117. Karnkowski, “Słowo prawdy.”

118. Wlekliński, “Pies rasowy a kundel.”

119. Wlekliński, “Zapomniana gałᶐź hodowli”; and Matecki, Ochrona zwierzᶐt w Polsce, 93.

120. On the defence of mutts in communist Poland see Forelle and Szuszkiewiczowa, Psia księga, 8–9.

121. Maszewska-Knappe, “O prawo do życia.”

122. Ibid.

123. Maszewska-Knappe, “Pies i jego ochrona w Polsce,” 6.

124. Białasz, Pies w mieście, 5. On rabies see Plach, “Mad Dogs.”

125. “Jeszcze o podatku od psòw.”

126. Old., “S.O.S.,” 1.

127. “Sprawa hodowli psòw w Polsce.”

128. Trybulski, “Wystawy psòw i ich rola”; and “Pokaz psòw w Krakowie.”

129. “Jeszcze o podatku od psòw,” 1.

130. Wlekliński, “Pies rasowy a kundel,” 10.

131. “Pies pokojowy.”

132. Cieszkowski, “Na czasie,” 1; and “Psi smalec.”

133. “Sprawa hodowli psòw w Polsce”; and Cieszkowski, “Na czasie,” 1.

134. “Wyjᶐtki z odczytu p. Jana Białasz.”, 1

135. “Jeszcze o podatku od psòw.”

136. Cieszkowski, “Na czasie.” 1.

137. “Sprawa hodowli psòw w Polsce.”

138. AN-Krakow, ZOZ, Syg. 1, sub-file 18, Letter from ZOZ Krakow, 177–8.

139. Smyczyński, Psy. Rasy i wychowanie, 20.

140. Ibid.; Lisiecki, Psy, 245; and Forelle and Szuszkiewiczowa, Psia księga, 9.

141. Smyczyński, Psy. Rasy i wychowanie, 20.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Eva Plach

Eva Plach is an associate professor of history at Wilfrid Laurier University in Waterloo, Ontario. She is the author of The Clash of Moral Nations: Cultural Politics in Piłsudski’s Poland, 1926–35, and is currently writing a history of animal welfare in interwar Poland.