The pug was always Brachycephalic (and why that doesn't actually matter).

Introduction: 

I'd first like to preface this post with one key fact: Brachycephaly is a spectrum. 

Brachycephalic dogs encompass a wide range of phenotypes, ranging from the more moderate Dogue de Bordeaux to the practically snoutless pug and frenchie. I feel it's important that this distinction is made. After all, your average bullmastiff with minimal facial foreshortening is far less likely to be a snorting wreck when compared to the respiratorally challenged pekingese. 

It also plays into a wider discussion about history and the snub nosed breeds of the past. See, fanciers have always asserted that the pug was intended to be brachycephalic with this conformation dating back to ancient China. It should be said that there is no such thing as an ancient pug. The Lo-sze did indeed resemble what we would recognise as a pug today, but it was a breed in it's own right which differed vastly from the dogs produced by the Europeans. You can read more about the Lo-sze and it's history here, but the key takeaway is that both dogs are separate entities that can't (and shouldn't) be equated to one another. 

Even still, I'll discuss the old toy dogs of the orient later to clear up some misconceptions. For now let's take a brief look at the pug throughout the centuries. 

1500s-1600s:

Sometime during the 1500s, Lo-sze dogs would be imported from China to the Netherlands by the Dutch East India company. These would form the foundation of the pug breed, later being crossbred with European dogs. It's likely that the pugs depicted below are F1 Lo-sze mixes or represent the first "pure" Chinese dogs to be brought to the Netherlands. Either way, they were rather leggy and appear to have snouts similar in length to the Cavalier King Charles spaniel. 

Two dogs belonging to Anna Katherina, 1575-1612

The 1600s mark the true beginning of the Pug's development when they made their way to great Britain (a nation that was instrumental in the shaping of the breed). Many dogs from this era are remarkably spaniel-like, with long pendulous ears, perhaps suggesting an early mix of the two. 

Two muscular pugs with the now standard "button ear". 

1700s:

The 1700s were a period of great diversity for the pug where we see specimens of every shape, size and colour. No two dogs looked the same and were highly variable in appearance; likely a result of crossbreeding introducing new traits into the population. It's important to remember that the concept of standardisation and "pure" bloodlines wouldn't come along until the Victorian era. Breeds were instead "types" of dog that shared a common ancestor or set of traits, irrespective of their lineage. 

Despite what some would like you to believe, the non-conformity of pugs from this time doesn't mean they weren't real representations of the breed. To assert they were little more than mutts is to apply modern ideals to a bygone age. 

From Buffon's "Histoire Naturelle"

A more recognisable shorter snouted pug

A larger gallery of 18th Century pugs is available at the Pug History Facebook group here. 

1800s: 

It's here that a more uniform breed type emerges- no doubt helped by the burgeoning concept of dog shows. No longer do we see the vast assortment of colours that came before, fur being whittled down to shades of fawn, black and occasionally white. This isn't to say that the pug was entirely rigid in appearance, however. In fact the mid 1800s would see the creation of two prolific strains of pug: the Morrison and Willoughby lines. 

There are many things I could say regarding the two, and I do plan on offering a more in-depth article in the future, but for now all you need to know is that Morrison and Willoughby pugs differed greatly in terms of conformation. The former was short and cobby with notably less muzzle than the taller Willoughby pug. Some people have described this as a split in breed type, similar to how cocker spaniels can be segregated into show and field lines, but I think it's an unnecessary distinction to make. Neither strain was bred with an opposing goal to the other, nor were they the product of crossbreeding. Willoughby and Morisson pugs were both pure variants derived from different stock at a time where no standard existed to encourage conformity. 

Imported Morrison pug, "Teddy"

A Morrison pug (top) and Willoughby pugs (bottom)

In 1860 British and French allied troops would raid Yuanmingyuan- also known as the old summer palace- in Peking. They brought back with them several Pekingese including a smooth coated variety called the Happa dog. These Chinese specimens had shorter muzzles than what was typical of the pug at the time, likely resembling the Morrison line rather closely. This description, whilst true, is somewhat misleading- and you would be forgiven for making the assumption that the Happa was almost identical to the pug of today. 

In reality, the difference is stark. Many of the photographs we have of the Happa dog depict a breed more in line with the Tibetan spaniel facially. Heavy wrinkling is absent and they have overall cleaner heads as a general rule. Of course this isn't the case for all, "dogs of all nations" shows us a more exaggerated individual, but this look doesn't appear to have been present in the earliest imported dogs. 

The Happa would be branded as the "pekinese pug" by fanciers of the day and was bred to the existing dogs in Britain, changing the breed forever. A descendent of the initial Peking palace imports, Click, became a prolific stud and was responsible for the merging of the Morrison and Willoughby lines. Supposedly the Windsor pugs (belonging to Queen Victoria) were an early mix of the two. 

Mopps

Topsey and Minnie

Bradford Ruby, a successful show dog of the late 1800s owned by Mr and Mrs Foster

Pug history's gallery of 19th Century pugs can be found here. 

1900s: 

When discussing the changing face of the pug, it's the 20th century which is of the greatest significance. See, whilst breeders of the late 1800s had begun to produce increasingly brachycephalic dogs, it was the 1920s onwards that would yield the most extreme examples- a true testament to the power of selective breeding. 

This change was very gradual. Many accomplished pugs at the beginning of the Century would be out of standard by its conclusion. Mrs Greshams' "York" and Champion Loki illustrate this perfectly; being dogs that still retained some degree of muzzle. It was clear in which direction the breed was heading even by this point in time, but it would be unfair to say that it was beyond saving. Had there not been an increasing desire for deformity, for pushing the boundaries of what could be achieved through intense inbreeding, its entirely possible that we would have retained this comparatively moderate type. 

A pug dated 1920

Banchory pugs, 1954

Conclusion:

The pug has a complex history that can't be summed up by just one sentiment. Very few things are strictly black or white, and often the nuances can only be fully understood when we view them through the lens of the past. Unfortunately, simplifications made by bad actors, fundamental misunderstandings and the omission of key details have all allowed a picture to be painted which isn't indicative of the truth. 

The degree of brachycephaly in the breed has differed over time, ranging from moderate to extreme, and whilst not untrue; the claim of the pug always being brachycephalic is misleading. This is for one key reason: the average person generally only knows of the "big 3" brachycephalic breeds (these being the french bulldog, English Bulldog and modern pug) all of which fall on the severe end of the CFR spectrum. The assumption made by a majority of people is that the pug of the past must be just as short faced as the pug we see today, which is of great benefit to the Kennel Club. 

The present day pug is no longer a monstrosity created less than 100 years ago, but rather an archaic breed that has remained the same since imperial China. In that case it must be healthy. Something so sick couldn't possibly have endured this long, and who are we to question the wisdom of ancient tradition?

This is the crux of the issue. The misadvertising of the pug's history is not innocuous. but rather a calculated attempt by breeders to justify their pursuit of deformity. The push against unethical breeding practices has left clubs and breeders in a situation where they need to recoup their damaged reputation, and painting their operations with a veneer of cultural preservation has gained them some goodwill amongst the ill-informed. This is in part what spurred the creation of this blog, my response to the egregious PR now widely accepted by the dog fancy. 

Because the pug may have always been brachycephalic; but that doesn't excuse a century old epidemic of man-made suffering.