History of dobermann


Philipp Grünig



By Philipp Grünig 1934

Translated by Maximilian von Hoegen

Published by

Howell Book House Inc.

© 1939 F.F.H.Fleitmann and Howard K.Mohr


Contemporary Dobermann history with glossary notes on the dogs and bitches which contributed most to the creation of the breed, from 1893 to the present.


VERY breeder with eleven elementary knowledge of biology will bear witness to the marvels which Nature has wrought through the instrumentality of the occasional but towering individual. The last secret of heredity has admittedly not been wrested from her or the thread of life been traced into its last ramification but enough has been learned in the last few decades to raise us mountain high over the uncertainties and traditional prejudices which beset our minds some fifty years ago.

The breeds of today are not the Simon-pure creations of Nature as many fanciers so fondly assume. Intervention of man bastardized and transmogrified them to suit his need and fancy. Without this intervention most of our modern breeds would revert to their atavistic forms and pass into the limbo of the lost within half a century. Ample proof of this is on every hand.

Within the limits of these bastard breeds there inevitably arise individuals of exceptional quality and distinction. They rear their imposing forms far above the mean average of their fellows and, through sheer power of their individual hereditary capacity, elevate the general level of the whole breed by transmitting to it some, if not all, of their distinctive traits. It is one of the minor phenomena of well ordered breeding that the rise of such a highly valuable and potential individual coincides with a corresponding debilitation of the less valuable. All breeding dogs and bitches are capable of raising the numerical quantity of a breed but the outstanding individuals will in time, more quickly if they have the active co-operation of purposeful breeders, gain the ascendancy even against great difficulties. Exactly as it is with plants of every genus the weaker ones lag or disappear altogether, so with the various breeds of dogs, especially those of modern times. Out of the surrounding underbrush the selected individual rears its height and from its stature flow the growth and type of future generations.

It is not our purpose herein to dwell upon the predecessors and vanished forms of our Dobermann breed. We intend to picture it in terms of its best individuals (by “best” we mean those greatest hereditary capacity), how they entered into, worked creatively and moved about, as a distinctive Dobermann breed, in the dawn of the relatively new history of genetical science. It is quite beside the point that their ancestors may not have been qualified for entry into some stud book. All the stud book numbers quoted in this work have been checked and verified for their correctness in books now actively in use or those superseded by newer ones. Among the studbooks named are the “National Dobermannpinscher Stud Book”, hereinafter referred to by the symbol “NZ”, which was published by the oldest German organization in our breed and known as “The National Dobermannpinscher Verein”. We use the symbol “DZ” to identify entries in the stud book published by “The Dobermannpinscher Club of Hamburg”, “The Dobermannpinscher Verein” and “The Dobermannpinscher Verband”. The entries contained in “The German Stud Book for Dogs” are referred to as “DHSt”, those in that of “The Swiss Genetical Society” as “SHSB”, those in Holland as “Holl. Reg. No.” and those in the Czechoslovakian “Breeding and Training Societies Stud Book” as “ZP.BSt.”. In the United States of America a stud book is published by the American Kennel Club and entries therein are referred to as “A.K.C.”.

Concerning the scientific correctness of the pedigrees entered in those stud books no guarantee can be given. No prescribed rules or methods of procedure for correct breeding existed in the early days of the breed as there do today.

1893 – 1894

The oldest animals to be entered in our stud books as parent stock are the dog Bosco and the bitch Cäsi, whelped in the years 1893 and 1894 respectively. They were the parents of the Sieger Prinz Matzi v. Grönland, whelped August 15, 1895, DZ7.


Prinz Matzi v. Grönland  was no paragon even for those early days. With his coarse, heavy body, very long hair and light eye almost anything other than a Sieger title was expected of him. Matzi failed to carry through as a sire and, except for some local success in and around Frankfurt, his zone of operation, his name as well as that of his progeny disappear from our records after three generations. The relatively best of the dogs sired by him was Siegwart v. Hochheim.


As previously stated, this year saw the rise of a new strain in another part of the land. The branch just bursting into bloom was destined to overshadow Matzi by far. Significantly enough it was located in Thüringia, the original home of the breed. Quite a number of good animals which subsequently proved to be the real foundation of our Dobermann had been produced here. Figuratively speaking, they were the germ cell of the breed of today but, judging from their pictures, it would have required a brave and hardy prophet, indeed, to foretell the heights to which their progeny might aspire. In all probability the individuals of this group were all whelped in 1896. The lore of Thüringia, that of Apolda, its metropolis, in particular spins a wreath of flattering legends about the life and being of these dogs. Out of all these legends there emerge two facts – solid and immutable: First, the dogs did exist; and second, they were possessed of the priceless gift of being able to transmit their hereditary traits. Of these founding ancestors only one was ever entered in any stud book.

The dogs were named Lux, Schnupp, Landgraf and Rambo. The names of the bitches were Tilly I (later v. Grönland), Helmtrude, Hertha and Elly. It has never been satisfactorily determined whether any of the above dogs were related to one another of, if so, to what extent. The black bitch, Tilly I v. Grönland (NZ17) was whelped May 16, 1896, out of Schnupine by Lord. She was destined to make Dobermann history two years later when with Lux as its sire, she became the mother of Goswin Tischler’s great five star litter.


Out of one of these combinations, that of Rambo and Elly, sprang the noted stud dog Junker Slenz v. Thüringen, NZ5, whelped December 14, 1897. Credit for breeding him belongs to Münzenberg of Giebichstein. Slenz become the property of the Frankfurt Club and during the years of his prime dominated the territory. Considering the breed’s state of development at that time, an exceptionally large number of excellent dogs were sired by Slenz. Among the best of these were the bitches Thinda Veronika and Walpurgis v. Thüringen and the dogs Schill v. Deutz and Leporello v.d. Nidda. The paternity of Zingo v. Thüringen, credit for which was for a long time withheld because both Slenz and Belling v. Grönland were involved, was ultimately and justly ascribed to Slenz. His Leporello line of descendants are still valid and priced in Switzerland. His blood constitutes an invaluable contribution to the breed of today. His line pushed its way like a wedge between those of his litter brothers, Greif and Belling v. Grönland, well named the authors and architects of the breed.

Alarich v. Thüringen was another product of this year but bore no registration number. He was known for his incredible sharpness and correspondingly feared. He won a permanent place in the breeds history as the sire of Ines, the worthy mother of Landgraf Sighart v. Thüringen.

Adele v. Thüringen, a litter sister of Alarich, has more hereditary potency than any bitch of her time. Although she was small, crooked and physically unimpressive according to our standards she became the dam of Weddo v. Thüringen.

Alarich v. Thüringen



This year brought forth a goodly number of first class breeding dogs and the best litter – it consisted of five individuals – up to that time. It was by Lux and Tilly. Goswin Tischler, the most successful breeder of his time, gave us a combination of the best possible animals in Belling NZ1, Greif DZ184, Krone DZ2, Lottchen DZ8 and Tilly II, NZ 28, all of which bore the further appellation v. Grönland. This stellar quintet was whelped on June 13, 1898. The kennel name v. Grönland has no bearing on the name of the vast peninsula (Greenland) but it is a tribute Tischler pays to the street of Apolda on which he was born in 1859.

Troll v. Grönland, a black son of Tilly I became the sire of Flora v. Grönland and thereby the grandsire of Leporello v.d. Nidda.

Another breeder whose ambition reached to the stars was Otto Göller, also of Apolda. In this year he acquired Freya v. Thüringen, NZ3, bred by Seifert of Weimar, out of Schnupp and Helmtrude and whelped August 16, 1898. This capital bitch became one of the pillars of the breed. Her powers of heredity, operating through Wedigo and Ullrich’s Glocke, culminated in Hellegraf and, of course, in his son, Lord v. Ried.

In Ines v. Thüringen, a daughter of Alarich we now find the mother of Landgraf Sighart.

Gerhilde v. Thüringen, NZ2, whelped October 16, 1898, becomes the mother of Belli, Kuno, Roby, and Hilda v. Hessen and thereby exercises a determining influence upon the line of Fedor v. Aprath.

To complete the story of 1898 we must record the name of one more bitch, Jungfer Grete.


Only one dog and one bitch can lay claim to our special attention in this year. Winfried v. Thüringen, NZ7, whelped March 3, 1899, fulfills his duty as sire with noteworthy success. A son of Landgraf and Hertha, he justified his splendid heredity and exalted position by transmitting both to his two grandsons, Hans and Hellegraf v. Thüringen, before he himself emigrated to his permanent home in Switzerland.

Winfried v. Thüringen

A bitch of doubtful origin, Lady v. Ilm-Athen appears as a harbinger of the extraordinary success this new kennel is to achieve in the Dobermann world. Through her son, Prinz v. Ilm-Athen she advanced the cause of the Dobermann with a mighty stride. While we would gladly do so on sentimental grounds we must not blind our self to the fact that this great bitch carried the blood of the English Manchester Terrier. Reliable information in this regard comes from breeders who actually saw and knew her. Your author never saw the bitch personally but from a study of her progeny arrived at the conclusion that she was unquestionably of that blood. One need only recall her grandson, Sturmfied and great grandson Moritz to realize the truth of the assertion. Their short, hard hair, their rich, deep, dark markings and eyes and other physical traits, not a part of the Dobermann up to then but essentially of the Manchester Terrier, all these justify the claim that she was in part of foreign (to our breed) blood.



The breed is steadily going forward. Several plans designed to improve the general average of the breeding stock end in failure in spite of individual and isolated success. The year is marked by the stud book entry requirement of every breeding animal. A general type as well as the imminent levelling off process is unmistakably indicated, although most of the detail work and individual adjustment remained to be done.

Landgraf Sighart v. Thüringen, NZ63, whelped November 14, 1900, was a dog of a great deal of hereditary powers. His sire was Winfried, NZ7, and his dam was Ines the daughter of Alarich. Five distinct main blood lines radiated from him. He was the sire of Hans and Hellegraf v. Thüringen. One of these lines died out in 1906 with the blue Gunzelin v. Altenburg, although feeble remnants of it are occasionally discernible. Sighart is apparently the bearer of an off color (blended) heredity. His sons Hans and Hellegraf were brown, and his grandson Gunzelin was blue.

Erbgraf Zingo v. Thüringen, NZ33, whelped on September 22, 1900, was a dog about the paternity of which grave doubt existed for many years and which was finallyestablished only by circumstantial evidence. His mother Freya v. Thüringen was accidentally mated to both Belling v. Grönland and Junker Slenz v. Thüringen while in rut. Zingo was a goodlooking, wellformed and substantial dog. Also of good hereditary power. Only the doubt as to his paternity remained to vex an otherwise happy combination. Subsequent developments led to the almost irresistible conclusion that he was sired by Slenz. That Thina was a double granddaughter of Slenz is well nigh beyond cavil because all of her filial descendants showed radically different physical traits, especially those of the body, from those distinctive of the filial generations of Belling.

Siegwart v. Hochheim, DZ9, whelped May 1, 1900, once more fanned to life the spark which remained of the torch kindled by Sieger Matzi. This last important descendant of Matzi left nothing of his heredity which survived to our dog. His mother, Lottchen v. Grönland gave him what value was attributed to him.

Among the bitches the most successful was Flora v. Grönland (later v.d. Nidda), DZ12, whelped May 3, 1900, bred by Goswin Tischler of Apolda. She is most distinguished as the mother of Leporello v.d. Nidda.

In Merigarda, NZ70, whelped April 9, 1900, as a daughter of Krone v. Grönland, there appeared a very fine, substantial bitch. She was the recipient of great adulation nd justified this esteem by becoming the mother of the brown dog Hans v. Thüringen, DZ76.

The black Ortrud v. Thüringen, NZ47, whelped December 1, 1900 (Belling v. Grönland and Junger Grete) was to become famous as the grandmother of important Immo v. Isenburg.


This year, like those immediately preceding it, stood in the sign of Goswin Tischler’s breeding star. His great “five-star-litter” of 1898 had now come to full maturity and was being used to good effect by this master. Without this litter, particularly without the two dogs, the progress of our breed would have been much slower. Greif was by far the most potent and powerful in heredity but Belling after a short interval and after a somewhat longer Krone, Lottchen and Tilly II fel into line and kept pace with him. In our old pedigrees and stud books these great dogs move about like wraiths. We find them listed under   the most bizarre names and connotations. For instance, Greif appears as Greif v. Weimar, Hohenstein, etc., Belling as Belling v. Thüringen and Krone as Korvin’s Krone, etc. It is only an act of simple justice that the unwarranted departures from the correct names of these dogs are called to the reader’s attention.

One of Greif v. Grönland’s sons out of Lady v. Ilm-Athen was Prinz v. Ilm-Athen, NZ303, whelped September 12, 1901. This black dog was not only the best dog of that year but he was pre-eminently one of the greatest breeding dogs of all time. Right up to this very day he stalks through five generations – over Belling v. Berlin and Troll v.d. Blankenburg to the greatest of our breeding and show dogs. Prinz’s outstanding dominance was in the field of colour heredity, a trait which carried on right through his descendants. Almost all of his progeny were black with the much sought after dark markings. This power he in turn had inherited from his mother, Lady. His whole line was distinguished and noted for its sharpness.

Prinz was a sire of utmost capacity. Five main lines descended from him but two of them, those over Sturmfried and Edel v. Ilm-Athen respectively became the most valuable for the breed.

Another dog of this year Graf Wedigo v. Thüringen, NZ74, whelped August 25, 1901, though great and useful is not to be regarded as the equal of Prinz. A son of Belling and Freya, he was a litter brother of Ullrich’s Glocke, described and considered later on.

Graf Wedigo v. Thüringen


The main lines of descent emanating from Graf Wedigo go over Weddo v. Thüringen to Lord v. Ried and, secondarily, over that culminating in Silvio v. Fernrode.

A Belling – Gerhilde son was Belli v. Hessen, DZ31, whelped April 29, 1901. He was a litter brother of the equally good Kuno v. Hessen (later v. Schwaben), DZ23, and Roby v. Hessen, DZ68, and made himself famous in the breed as the sire of Tell v. Kirchweyhe and, through the last named, as the grandsire of Fedor v. Aprath. The v. Hessen strain and were among the best of their day.

Wedigo’s litter sister Ullrich’s Glocke v. Thüringen, NZ66, whelped August 25, 1901, and in conjunction with her mate Sighart NZ63, created a truly great son and heir: the brown Hellegraf v. Thüringen. This dog’s traits and creative work will be specially considered farther on.

Veronika v. Thüringen, NZ65, whelped May 23, 1901, a Slenz, NZ5 daughter is best known for her good descendants. She projected her heredity, after a most auspicious beginning in 1906, right into the renowned Carlo Viktoria, NZ620. For no apparent or readily determined reason this last dog, together with his main line of descendants, seems to have vanished from our stud books.

Another bitch belonging to this year demands attention because of her undeniable importance. To an extent that is hardly appreciated she dominated and determined the prototype of the Dobermann in the years ahead. This is Lady v. Calenberg (not registered). A parallel between her and that other Lady (v. Ilm-Athen – see 1899) is of more than passing interest. Though the Lady part of their names was a strange coincidence and of no real importance it adds picturesqueness to the further but tremendously important coincidence of blood constituency. What were rumor, surmise and deduction as to one was absolute certainty with reference to the other. Although this Lady v. Calenberg cannot properly be classified as a full blooded Manchester Terrier it is a known fact that a preponderance of this blood coursed through her veins. As the mother of “Tell v. Kirchweyhe” and through him, the grandmother of Fedor and Hans v. Aprath, she won and exercised immense influence over the whole breed, but in particular over the browns. Her entire progeny was as well known for their admirable, smooth, short hair, as they were for their sharpness toward everything predatorily inclined. Her progeny left much to be desired as to size but their coloring and markings were superbly dark.

A daughter of Greif v. Grönland, Dina v. Thüringen (not registered) later distinguished herself as the mother of Peter and Betti I v. Ilm-Athen.

Hilda v. Hessen, NZ57, whelped April 29, 1901, a litter sister of Belli v. Hessen is to become the mother of the excellent Siggo v. Hohenstein two years later.

A Slenz daughter, Thinda v. Thüringen, NZ51, whelped May 28, 1901, became famous for her good progeny among which, in the second filialgeneration, we find Fedor and Hans v. Aprath.

Still another bitch that must be mentioned in connection with this year is Walpurgis v. Thüringen, NZ67, whelped July 27, 1901, a daughter of Slenz, NZ5. In her maturity she became the grandmother of Gunzelin v. Altenburg, NZ645.

Another good dog was Hopsa Hinz v. Thüringen, NZ146 (black).


Compared to the years just past and again to those immediately to follow, this year is not very significant to the breed.

Only one black dog stands out over the others of this year but that one is Leporello v.d. Nidda (later v. Main), DZ35, whelped August 28, 1902. He was a descendant of Slenz, NZ5, out of Flora v. Grönland, DZ12. He was an exceptionally beautiful dog but lacked the power to transmit that quality, expect as to his head. Herein, however, he was very potent. His most famous descendant was Walhalla’s Favorit, DZ163. With a few others of little consequence this sums up his creative work in Germany. In Switzerland, however, his line is still in full flower, due to the force generated into it by Gertrud II v. Frauenlob, DZ229. What made this dog valuable to us was his arresting head type. Leporello had a full muzzle and decided stop. Its proportions in other respects were also good and for many years it served as objective model for the breeders. Today it has been completely overtaken and displaced by a more elegant but hardly aesthetically better type: that of Lux v.d. Blankenburg.

A bitch of highest class and later the mother of Gunzelin v. Altenburg was Suse v. Thüringen, NZ100, whelped September 26, 1902, a daughter of Sighart, NZ63, and Walpurgis, NZ67.

One more noteworthy black bitch is to be noted as coming in this year. She is Hulda v. Isenburg (not registered) a daughter of Slenz and Ortrud v. Thüringen was born to the high honor of becoming the mother of Immo v. Isenburg (later Max v. Kaiserring).

Another good dog was Arnim v. Hochheim, DZ558 (black).

Leporello v.d. Nidda



This year made amends for the shortcomings of 1902. Not less than six outstanding stud dogs made their appearance herein and among them the first brown with hereditary powers of genuine and lasting value.

We will first take up our brown pioneer Hans v. Thüringen (later v. Ronneburg), DZ76, whelped March 4, 1903 and at first registered under the name of Junker Hans v. Rheinpfalz. According to the conceptions of today he was little more than of medium size with the undesired but recognized, dark brown (chocolate) color. Because of his rare color he was the object of much astonished attention but easily won in and over all competition in South Germany. “Hans” had had one brown predecessor in these exhibitions, a Gunzo v. Thüringen, whelped July 22, 1900, and, incidentally, the first brown Dobermann to be exhibited in any show. Gunzo was a Belling – Freya son but was coarse and altogether without a trace of the quality known as “adel”. We can justly regard Hans as a herald to Hellegraf, especially in that he enjoyed the same paternity: that of Sighart v. Thüringen, NZ63; but with Merigarda, NZ70, as his mother instead of Ullrich’s Glocke, NZ66. “Hans” sired the great Immo v. Isenburg (later Max v. Kaiserring), NZ446, and endowed him with his own great powers of heredity. His field of operation was Thüringia and South Germany.

In the meanwhile North Germany was enriched by the advent of the black Peter v. Ilm-Athen, NZ301, whelped September 18, 1903, a capital dog. He would unquestionably have produced more and better progeny if a good and suitable line of bitches had been available. Peter was a son of Prinz v. Ilm-Athen and as a grandfather of the great bitch Edle v. Ilm-Athen contributed generously to the progress of the breed.

Weddo v. Thüringen, NZ133, whelped August 22, 1903, was an intensely black dog. He dominated in color and markings throughout and transmitted this hereditary trait to his grandson, Lord v. Ried, NZ249.

In Northwestern Germany there come to light in this year Tell v. Kirchweyhe (not registered). His body would hardly serve as a model but he achieves fame as the son if his Manchester Terrier blooded mother, Lady v. Calenberg. Through his two sons, Fedor and Hans v. Aprath (both of them brown) he projected an excellent line of descendants.

A black dog, called and identified by a half dozen names throughout Germany, and therefore either well known or correspondingly unknown, was setting a high mark as a first class stud dog. It was Graf Siggo v. Hohenstein, DZ11, whelped December 31, 1903, and at various times and places known as Hagen v. Nibelungenhort, Peter v. Frauenlob, Peter v. Friesland, etc. This list does not exhaust his aliases by any means. He was authentically a son of Prinz v. Ilm-Athen, NZ303, out of Hilda v. Hessen. Siggo was an exceptionally powerful dog, with some coarse traits and of diabolical sharpness. Today his line enjoys continued esteem and power in Switzerland. His zone of operation and where his heredity was most widely distributed was Central and Southern Germany.

Another black dog, Normann (not registered) made his mark as the sire of Nora Frischauf, the granddam of Lord v. Ried.

In this year the breed was favored by the appearance of five excellent bitches. They were:

First, a daughter of Wedigo, NZ74, called Eleanore v. Thüringen, NZ162, whelped August 17, 1903. She was out of the previously described Veronika v. Thüringen, NZ65. Eleanore’s chief and quite sufficient claim to fame was a son, Benno v. Thüringen, NZ416.

Second, Hertha v. Grönland, DZ65, whelped May 17, 1903, was a daughter of Greif and Lotte II v. Grönland. She combined the two valuable capacities of begin and excellent show specimen and still better brood bitch. By way of her daughter, Gertrud I v. Frauenlob, her blood line extended into Switzerland where it is still active and productive.

Third, Thina v. Aprath, DZ89, whelped November 15, 1903, was another to qualify as a superb brood bitch and a breed determinant. She was sired by Zingo v. Thüringen, NZ33, and out of Thinda v. Thüringen, NZ51. When mated to Tell v. Kirchweyhe, Thina became the mother of that pair of outstandingly beautiful and significant browns: Fedor and Hans v. Aprath.

Fourth, Hulda v. Zavelstein (not registered). By Normann she became the mother of Nora Frischauf, NZ98.

Fifth, and last of this precious quintette was the singularly gifted and beautiful Vroni v. Thüringen, DZ559, whelped August 22, 1903. She was out of a mating of Wedigo v. Thüringen and Adele and first achieved fame through her son Walhalla’s Favorit. Years later, to be precise, in 1909, she gave us that marvel of beauty and show ring perfection, Isolde v. Nibelungenhort, NZ828. With the prestige of her other parent, Lord v. Ried behind her Isolde swept all opposition before her, but, like her brother Favorit, she proved to be more of a deterrent than a stimulant to the breed’s progress. The only exception to this was the line of Treuhort dogs emanating from her.

Other good dogs were Waldo v. Hohenstein (later v. Frohnberg), NZ149, (black), Ekkehard v. Thüringen, NZ168, (blue), Frundsberg v Thüringen, NZ169, (black), Eulalia v. Thüringen, NZ161, (black), Freude v. Thüringen, NZ170, (black), Esther v. Thüringen, NZ317, (black).


Because it brought forth one of the mightiest stud dogs of any age or breed this year stands out brilliant and significant. Let the name be written in letters of fire! – Hellegraf v. Thüringen, NZ219, was whelped on June 12, 1904. He was a sire “comme il fault” and through him the entire breed took on a new face and stature. This brown dog was equipped with every possible advantage that blood and breeding could supply him to fulfill his exalted mission. His sire, Sighart, already the head of the best and most vigorous blood lines extant, gave us Hellegraf as his last card, – the Ace of Trumps. His mother, Ullrich’s Glocke v. Thüringen, NZ66, was a daughter of Belling and a sister of Wedigo. Here and in her we have a perfect concentration (line breeding) of Belling – Freya – Winfried.

Hellegraf was a paragon of beauty, perfection and power. His was a degree of genuine “adel” that will be difficult to surpass or even equal. Ten main lines radiate from him and many more lateral minor lines. His ability and power to transmit his heredity is best demonstrated in comparison with that of his litter brothers, Belling, NZ237, and Balthasar, NZ228. Great as their power was, judged by ordinary standards, it was, as to Hellegraf, but slight indeed. Another factor of tremendous and exceptional moment is that Hellegraf was drawn upon at an early age for breeding in and around Thüringia. Later on he extended his zone of influence into the Rhineland and Württemberg. Without too high a price on his services he was available to the main geographical divisions of the breed. The contemporary and subsequent inability of the North German Dobermanns to dominate and carry their heredity on is accounted for by that region’s failure to produce a dog corresponding to Hellegraf. In dealing with him it is difficult to speak of faults but sentiment must yield to honesty. His muzzle was a little too pointed and his shoulders might have been tighter.

The previously mentioned Immo v. Isenburg (later Max v. Kaiserring), NZ446, was whelped on August 15, 1904. He was out of Hulda v. Isenburg by Hans v. Thüringen, DZ276. He was a great and outstanding dog but the presence of Hellegraf overshadowed him. His medium size and height and his beautiful stature belied his unrelenting sharpness. His broad withers heightened his appearance and added to his impressiveness. Over Leuthold v. Hornegg and the Langerode strain his bloodline survives to this day. Attention is called to the fact that the picture on page 74, of Vol.1 of the DZ, purporting to be that of Immo, is not authentic. It was obtained by super-imposing that of Leporello v.d. Nidda (see page 40 of Vol.1 of the DZ). For this piece of trickery Immo’s owner was barred from membership in the Verein. In view of the fact that Immo was at least a full class better than Leporello is is difficult to see what the object of this chicanery was.

Silvio v. Fernrode, DZ93, whelped March 29, 1904, was compelled to stand aside because he was an outsider. This son of Wedigo was the recipient of underserved show ring honors and rewarded his benefactors by failing signally in the matter of transmitting his heredity. His line disappear altogether with his last important scion, Axel Hochwart, whelped in 1913.

Hellegraf’s two black litter brothers, Belling and Balthasar v. Thüringen, NZ237 and 228, respectively, were both excellent dogs. Their only misfortune was that they were in the same litter with a brown that succeeded in monopolizing everything that a dog might have, show, enjoy and transmit.

Hellegraf v. Thüringen


A son of Slenz, NZ5, called Schill v. Deutz was a dog of good and many parts and earned his place among the stars as the sire of the blue Jenny v. Deutz.

Some high class bitches came in this year and among them we count that good blue daughter of Greif v. Grönland. Betti I v. Ilm-Athen. She acquitted herself of the responsibility that went with such heredity by giving us Edel and Sturmfried v. Ilm-Athen.

Nora v Frischauf, NZ98, whelped January 27, 1904, and bred by Vollmer, of Pforzheim, was born to the high honor of becoming mother of Lord v. Ried.

The black Flora v. Haiterbach, DZ223, whelped on November 2, 1904, deserves a place in our list as the grandmother of the well known fawn (isabella) colored Assad v Röderberg.

Other good dogs were Guntram v. Thüringen, DZ380, (black), Lux v. Odenwald, DZ128, (black), Lux v. Rhein, DZ130, (black), Bodo v. Hohenstein, DZ185, (black), Lotte v. Warteberg, NZ944, (brown), Ingomar v. Holstein, DZ108, (black), Irma v. Giessen, DZ144, (black), Zilla v.d. Almenwiege, DZ181, (black), Grimgerte v. Thüringen, DZ221, (brown), Lutti v. Deutz, NZ272, (blue).


This year, naturally, could only offer less than the one which produced a Hellegraf. One distinction claimed for this year, however, is that all its leading dogs were black. Benno v. Thüringen, NZ416, was whelped on May 25, 1905. He had no particularly large amount of “adel” but in build this medium sized dog was faultless. He was a product of Peter v. Ilm-Athen and Eleanore v. Thüringen. Much of his hereditary trait has survived to this day. His noblest line proceeded to Asta Voss over Jula v. Engelsburg and so, via Asta to the leading dogs of today. A later (side) line, running over the stellar bitch Senta and ultimately producing Fedor v. Bütersburg, bids fair to add to his fame. In the main, however, his line seems to pale after reaching its zenith in the beautiful Carlo Viktoria.

Muck II v. Ilm-Athen, NZ426, whelped April 15, 1905, a son of Prinz v. ilm-Athen and Nelly v. Ilm-Athen was himself an elegant dog but failed to transmit his hereditary qualities to any considerable extent. His best claim to success and nomination to fame rest on his Theophano v. Thüringen and Bojorix and Raspe v. Thüringen.

Almost without effect or influence on the breed was Walhalla’s Favorit, NZ253, whelped July 12, 1905. He was a son of Leporello but experts recognized him as and for his “flash”. He was also too long in back. He only produced blanks. In the hope of stimulating any powers latent in him he was transferred to a new field of breeding in Holland but here also he produced nothing of value or consequence.

Among the bitches we have the mother of Lord v. Ried, the black Beda Frischauf, DZ129, whelped February 17, 1905.

Cordula v. Thüringen, DZ269, was whelped December 15, 1905. She was the first daughter of Hellegraf, NZ219, and a fine black bitch of excellent character. She had good progeny ad, among others, with Muck v. Ilm-Athen as mate, produced the superb bitch Theophano v. Thüringen.

As a bitch of quite exceptional beauty and the power to transmit her qualities in the true sense of the word was the blue Jenny v. Deutz, NZ295, whelped April 11, 1905, must be ranked high. Her son Carlo Viktoria is all the proof of this required.

Cordula v. Thüringen


Gertrud I v. Frauenlob, DZ158, whelped May 16, 1905, exercised great and beneficial influence upon the Swiss strains to which she was imported. This daughter of Siggo was a happy combination of the blood of Ilm-Athen, Hohenstein and Grönland. The results of her hereditary powers have been notably fortunate and widely spread through Switzerland.

The grand average appearance of the breed in this year can best be visualized and judged by reference to illustration 9, a reproduction of Normann v Frauenlob, DZ168, and the two pups of Göller’s breeding shown in illustration 10. (These illustrations unavailable. – Ed).

Another good dog was Primus v. Thüringen, NZ313, (black).


1906 was a good, even if not an exceptional year for the breed. It brought us six dogs chiefly valuable for their beauty but two of which had the power of transmitting their valuable traits.

In the first place, by virtue of his peculiar importance, stands Sturmfried v. Ilm-Athen, NZ381, whelped July 12, 1906. This black dog’s immediate ancestors were Prinz v. Ilm-Athen and Betti I v. Ilm-Athen. In his veins the blood of Greif v. Grönland predominated. To this was added a jet of his grandmother’s (Lady) allegedly Manchester Terrier blood. He leaned heavily to Greif, the grandsire on both sides, and experts readily agreed that latter in the amount of “adel” he displayed and in the richness of his markings, both of which traits he transmitted with great hereditary power and consistency. To their good fortune the blood of Sturmfried left its indelible stamp upon our best dogs. His son Moritz v. Burgwall and his grandson Prinz Modern v. Ilm-Athen made his name and fame imperishable.

The second really great dog of the year was the brown Fedor v. Aprath, DZ244, whelped May 6, 1906. As in the case of Sturmfried the blood of the Manchester Terrier asserted itself in him and again in the second filialgeneration. In this case it was another Lade we had to deal with as his grandmother. This year marks the beginning of a trend to more refinement of form, darker and richer markings and stabilized size. The fearsome sharpness of the breed lets down somewhat as its watchfulness increases. Fedor was somewhat small but beautifully proportioned. His parents were Tell v. Kirchweyhe and Thina v. Aprath. Through Theo v.d. Funkenburg and the dogs of the Lützellinden and Hörnsheim strains Fedor’s blood is intimately related to the leading dogs of today. His power in transmitting his head type was the outstanding feature of his hereditary potency.

Fedor’s litter brother, Hans v. Aprath (later Hans v. Walde), NZ337, DHSt250, gave the German breed its Carlo v. Frauenlob, DZ358. Hans later went to Switzerland where he was largely instrumental in building up the Swiss breed through the v. Tale, Lentulus, Berneck and v.d. Bärenburg kennels. He was of the same good size as his brother Fedor but (if the expression is applicable to browns) he was heavily melanated.

From the beginning of the breed and right through our time it has been the tragedy of many famous dogs that, in spite of surpassing beauty and quality, they were hereditarily incapable of transmitting their traits. This was the case of the blue Gunzelin v. Altenburg, NZ645, whelped May 7, 1906, (Prinz v. Ilm-Athen and Suse v. Thüringen). He was an ideal dog in both build and character. His courage and aggressiveness were proverbial. Only his hereditary power seems to have been impaired for after transmitting his distinctive traits to Loni and Adelfried v.d. Wendenburg all bridges connecting him with the dogs of the future seem to have broken down.

Fedor v. Aprath


Almost the identical fate seems to have overtaken Gunzelin’s contemporary, the black Carlo Viktoria, NZ620, whelped December 27, 1906 (Benno v. Thüringen and Jenny v. Deutz); himself a prodigy in size, build, coat and markings, traits in which he was hardly surpassable. His head was a little too heavy and became cheeky in time. As is so often done by Nature when foregoing her chains of heredity she may create the links years or even decades apart. In this case she brought forth the duplicate of Carlo with such fidelity and exactness in a distant descendant that the latter might have been former. This likeness not only lay in external appearance and trait but apparently extended to internal deficiency of hereditary power. This Carlo prototype and genotype was the precocious Fedor v. Bütersburg, a dog due to be considered at length in his time. Seventeen years separate forebear and heir. In justice to Carlo we must record that among his descendants was the universally admired talking bith, Senta v.d. Moorinsel, his granddaughter and Fedor’s grandmother.

Another dog that demands our attention at this time is Wedigo II v. Thüringen, NZ418, whelped August 20, 1906. He was a son of Hellegraf and, on his mother’s side a grandson of Slenz. This black dog is the real progenitor of the Römerschanz strain and almost all of the dogs of Holland are descended from his blood.

The brown Annemarie v. Thüringen, NZ357, whelped April 6, 1906, (Hellegraf v. Thüringen and Bella v. Heringen) was the most lovable Dobermann of her time but left no outstanding progeny. When a stud dog fails to transmit any of his hereditary traits through good and suitable bitches we know that he is weak in his powers of transmission. A bitch possessing her known good and powerful hereditary qualities could be expected to transmit some outstanding trait to her progeny when mated twice to the brown Hans v. Aprath, the litter brother of Fedor. Instead there were dogs of good average quality but nowhere a star. The solution of the riddle might have been found by her owner if he had looked into her choice of a mate for her could not have been otherwise than a Greif or Belling son or grandson. In her we have another illustration of a good bitch being lost to the breed because of the ignorance of the owner or the desire to avoid the payment of a high stud fee. This is by no means a thing of the past.

Hertha v. Burgwall, NZ775, whelped June 18, 1906, the black mother of Moritz v. Burgwall is another example of a bitch that succeeds in establishing her real worth only after many generations.

The black Flora v. Hörnsheim (not registered) was destined to become the mother of Zilla v. Lützellinden.

Another good bitch was Lona v. Giessen, DZ189, whelped February 14, 1906. This black daughter of Silvio was owned by the highly successful v. Giessen kennel and was to become the great grandmother of Axel Hochwart.

Gertrud II v. Frauenlob, DZ229, the black bitch to become so beneficial to the Swiss Dobermann breed, was whelped on September 20, 1906. This daughter of Leporello continued her father’s blood and heredity in Switzerland and through the v. Tale strain of dogs brought them to bear upon Emir Lentulus.

Other good dogs were Abs v. Thüringen, NZ293, (blue), Nikodemus v. Thüringen, NZ362, (blue), Stolz v. Ilm-Athen, NZ486, (black), Daisy Viktoria, NZ279, (brown), Vera I v. Giessen, NZ410, (black), Ruska v. Deutz, NZ581, (black), Mimmi v. Starkenburg, DZ712, (black)


This was another year which far exceeded every hope and expectation entertained for the Dobermann breed. A stud dog of first magnitude came into being with Lord v. Ried, DZ249, whelped May 2, 1907. This son of Hellegraf traced his ancestry on his mother’s side over Weddo to Wedigo v. Thüringen and finally to Belling v. Grönland. The author can well recall the sensation created at the time when this novice was first exhibited at Frankfurt A.M. Mere astonishment was heightened to dumb wonder when Helmuth v. Aprath and Annemarie v. Thüringen also appeared. Dobermanns like these had never been seen. At the time of Lord v. Ried the Dobermann breed had achieved an advanced degree of evolutionary development. This was marked by a wide geographical distribution. The result was that the main blood lines emanating from the leading specimens of the breeding stock multiplied rapidly. Where Sighart v. Thüringen, Lord’s grandfather could boast of five main blood lines, Hellegraf, the father of Lord, had nine. No less than a full dozen proceeded from Lord himself. The dog was distinguished by a good substantial build but was slightly “French-fronted”. His head, while not particularly handsome, was well defined and proportioned. The markings also were sharply delineated and dark. The hind quarters were not beyond reproach. His size was considerably above the average of the times. For years his pedigree and genealogy were wrongly alleged and in the Dobermann stud book, referred to throughout this work by the symbol “DZ” his genealogy is still found entered incorrectly in places. His blood line is that of Belling over Winfried. His maternal side must be credited for his fine coloring, markings and proportion. From his father’s, Hellegraf’s side he inherited the “adel”, elegance and imposing size and appearance. The bitches mated to him were, of course many in number but, in the majority not suited to him. Today we find this dog in almost every pedigree of merit and his hereditary power and value cannot be overestimated. Throughout his life this dog remained the property of his breeder in Lampertsheim, Ried (Hessia). It remains an open question how much more this Lord could and would have done for the breed had he been permitted to wander about as much as his distinguished sire, Hellegraf.

The second best dog of the year was Edel v. Ilm-Athen, DZ677, whelped June 28, 1907. This black dog had the same ancestry as his brother Sturmfried. While perhaps not as valuable as the latter he was the author of a great deal of good. His blood comes to us in our leading dogs over Belling v. Berlin. That he was used exclusively in and around Berlin is a cause of regret for the German breed as a whole, which thereby lost the beneficent result of his hereditary qualities.

Helmuth v. Aprath, DZ250, whelped July 7, 1907, deserves mention as of this year because of his extreme elegance. This beautiful son of Hellegraf was overly refined and hence failed to transmit his quality. Helmuth deserves this place because he produced the first recorded and widely known fawn (Isabella) colored dog. Assad v. Röderberg, after two filialgenerations of browns. Otherwise his heredity is a minus quantity.

Lord v. Ried


The year produced quite a number of good bitches, eight of which were to become famous for their contributions to the breed.

The black Theophano v. Thüringen, DZ591, whelped July 8, 1907 (Muck II v. Thüringen and Cordula v. Thüringen). Her main line of descendant, except for some unimportant sidelines, was unfortunately extinguished after two filialgenerations over Loni v.d. Wendenburg and her son Adelfried v.d. Wendenburg. Theophano’s outstanding trait and chief claim to fame was her unmatched beauty.

Representing quite another type was Zilla I v. Lützellinden (not registered) a daughter of Hellegraf and Flora v Hörnsheim. She became the mother of both Marko v. Lützellinden and Zilla II v. Lützellinden. Like their mother both were brown. A number of brown filialgenerations follow in the wake of this bitch of which her grandson, Bodo v. Hörnsheim is the center. After a decade we note a distinct loss of vitality which cannot be charged to Zilla I. Among other traits she bequeathed to her descendants a good, sound, handsome Dobermann type.

Still another brown daughter of Hellegraf to distinguish herself by her progeny was Wally v. Burgwall, NZ735, whelped July 23, 1907. She left a large number of immediate descendants among which Moritz v. Burgwall was decidedly the best. When mated to dogs of the Ilm-Athen strain she transmitted her hereditary best.

Among the Ilm-Athen dogs as a group Dina v. Ilm-Athen (not registered) requires special mention as the mother of Edle v. Ilm-Athen. Dina herself was the daughter of Peter v. Ilm-Athen.

A Sturmfried daughter, Lotte v. Ilm-Athen (not registered) stands out in this brilliant assemblage as the mother of the great sire Prinz Modern v. Ilm-Athen. In the rush of progress her maternal descent has never been satisfactorily determined.

Both of the bitches last named were black.

Another of the black bitches to be included in our enumeration is Schnupp v.d. Saale, DZ1979, whelped October 10, 1907. Her pedigree is still somewhat confused but definitely known is the fact that Glocke v. Thüringen was her paternal grandmother and by which the presence of Belleing blood is explained. Schnuppe became the grandmother of Prinz Modern v. Ilm-Athen.

Wanda v.d. Hardt, a black daughter of Fedor, is only given mention here because of her intimate connection with the appearance of the fawn (isabella) color. Aside from her brown son, Lord v.d. Hardt, her heredity never asserted itself positively.

An excellent representative of her natal year was the black Jula v.d. Engelsburg, DZ782, whelped on July 19, 1907. As a daughter of Benno v. Thüringen she was of almost pure Ilm-Athen blood. Her son, Theo v.d. Funkenburg, and her granddaughter, Senta v. Jägerheim, used this hereditary trait to good effect in the subsequent constitution of the Blankenburg strain. From the vantage point of today we can visualize how a single blood line of Benno v. Thüringen was developed into a powerful strain in a period of little more than ten years.

Other good dogs were: Raspe v. Thüringen, NZ296, (black), Roland v.d. Saar, NZ664, (black), Hans v. Starkenburg, DZ236, (black), Goetz v. Doermen, DZ327, (black), Vera II v. Giessen, (later Klettenberg), NZ493, (black), Jolanda v. Friesland, NZ593, (black), Lucie Viktoria, DZ278, (black), Vera v Starkenburg, DZ281, (black), Sena (later v. Lauenburg), DZ463, (black).


This year is less rich in outstanding breeding animals than it is in interesting developments. It is the year during which one of the best and greatest brown Dobermann stud dogs came upon the scene. This anatomically and aesthetically well nigh perfect Marko v. Lützellinden (later Marko v. Jägerhof) DZ637, was whelped July 25, 1908. Marko was descended from Fedor v. Aprath and Zilla I v. Lützellinden and was the embodiment of elegance. Sad to say, but the truth must be emphatically told, this dog did have a bad character. As so often happened in our breed, Marko transmitted his worst (in this case an incomprehensible cowardice) along with the best of his hereditary traits to his best descendants: the two bitches, Tatjana and Cosima v. Jägerhof. Many generations were – and still are – doomed to suffer from that influence. We will content ourselves by singling out just three of the blood lines from those constituting his progeny. First, that over Tatjana v. Jägerhof to Edelblut v. Jägerhof which would be sufficient for our purpose of demonstrating the best of his heredity, beauty and physical perfection. Two other bitches sprang from him, however, and they were destines to carry their sire’s best traits to future generations. These were Medea v. Jägerhof later so invaluable to the Koningstad strain, and Isolde v. Cöln. This last bitch, with but three intervening generations, carries through to the Lobenstein dogs.

Marko v. Lützellinden


Lux Edelblut v. Ilm-Athen (not registered) the sire of Prinz Modern was born in this year. At first little hope was held out for this black dog as a stud dog. Only when his son Modern, was at the height of his glory, was attention drawn to him. It was unfortunately too late by then to make practical use of his breeding powers. Lux has given rise to many legends about himself. As with all the old dogs of our breed the legend-spawning city of Apolda has clothed him, along with them, in a mantle of mystical fabric. No denial is made that breeding experiments with various dogs were constantly being made but no one seems to know where the exact truth lies. The opinion generally held, and it is probably the correct one, is that Lux ended his days on a chain in a brewery where he served as watch dog.

A black dog that was to exercise great influence on the breed in our neighboring Holland was Sepp v. Kraichgau DZ1452, whelped September 27, 1908. One of Holland’s best and most successful breeders, H. Klöppel, built a good part of his Grammont strain of dogs upon Sepp’s progeny. Sepp was a son of Lord v. Ried and was bred in Southern Germany.

Max v. Burgwall, (later v.d. Klosterburg) NZ1041, whelped October 1, 1908, (Hellegraf and Hertha v. Burgwall) was a beautiful brown dog with an excellent character. The chief bearers of this well disposed dog’s hereditary virtues were Adelfried v.d. Wendenburg, Tasso v.d. Weissen Elster and even more so a bitch, Erika v. Parthengrund, which inclined heavily to the strains of Czechoslovakia. But the main and most important line of descent from Max is over Marathon v.d. Klosterburg, in the filialgenerations of which we find the Goldgrund dogs and Fedor v. Bütersburg.

After a good beginning the lines emanating from Carlo v. Frauenlob, DZ858, whelped March 29, 1908. (Hans v. Aprath and Gertrud II v. Frauenlob) came to a quick and unexpected end. With this beautiful, agreeable and very sharp dog the last line of his sire came to its end in Germany, although it is still in full vigor in Switzerland.

The most interesting event of the year was the appearance of the somewhat legendary black bitch, Stella. Her origin and pedigree appeared unfathomable and all that is positively known about her is that she was whelped in Ried, Hessia (Germany). All stud book entries vary on the important point of origin. Our personal investigation, undertaken and finished in her lifetime, would bear out the conclusion that she was the product of a black English Greyhound dog and a black Dobermann bitch. Dog breeding had reached a high stage of development in the Hessian districts of Ried. Since the inhabitants of irs villages were employed in the industrial plants of Mannheim and Ludwigshafen at high wages a great deal of money was available for dog breeding and all sorts of breeding experiments were resorted to. Stella was sumply the product of one of them. The most typical of her progeny, and one which carried the obviously visible hallmark of the Greyhound, was her daughter Sybille (later v. Langen). This bitch Sybille became the maternal head of the Silberberg dogs and through them  to a large extent an abiding influence upon the Blankenburg strain. The injection of this Greyhound blood into our Dobermann breed can be approved to the extent that it reconstituted the breed’s sharpness which suffered a severe set-back from the admixture with the blood of the gentle Manchester Terrier. Had the burden of proceeding with the development of the breed fallen entirely upon the lines of Modern and the Jägerhof dogs the breed’s characteristic temperament would have suffered severely. Stella gave the breed a Trojan Horse in the form of her son Roland (later v.d. Haide). Concerning this dog’s devastating influence upon the breed more will be said later on.

The beautiful blue Loni v.d. Wendenburg, DZ1387, whelped October 12, 1908, (Gunzelin v. Altenburg and Theophano v. Thüringen) was of almost pure Ilm-Athen blood. It is a matter of regret that her blood line was extinguished. Adelfried v.d. Wendenburg was a fine example of her capacity.

Lina v.d. Pfalz (not registered) the black daughter of Immo v. Isenburg contributed some more Leporello blood to her better daughter Helga v.d. Pfalz.

Lona v.d. Lahn (not registered) (Lord v. Ried and Lona v. Giessen). Her claim to fame rested in her son Hans v.d. Lahn and through him in her grandsons Axel Hochwart and Assad v. Röderberg.

Hella v.d. Römerschanz, DZ1468, whelped March 2, 1908 (Wedigo v. Thüringen and Dora II v. Schwaben). The progeny of this stately brown bitch was instrumental in building up the breed in Holland.

Feodora v. Warteberg, DZ2852, whelped October 10, 1908 (Fedor v. Aprath and Toska v. Warteberg) was a product of closest (incestuous) inbreeding to Tell v. Kirchweyhe. This black bitch’s heredity and power of transmitting same were excellent, as is borne out by her son, Lord v. Warteberg.

Other good dogs were: Dagmar v. Wied, NZ1019, (brown), Folkhardt v. Haiterbach, DZ309, (brown), Siegfried v. Reuss, NZ678, (black), Helma II v. Warteberg, NZ737, (black), Nora v.d. Waldeshöh, NZ947, (brown), Nuscha v. Giessen, NZ275, (black), Jenny (later v.d. Alten Vehmlinde, DZ368, (black), Isolde v. Deutz, DZ661, (black).


Proved to be a fruitful year for the Dobermann, since its beginning the breed had known none to surpass it.

In its course there came to us an exceedingly powerful sire with vast powers of transmitting his hereditary traits to distant generations. This was Prinz Modern v. Ilm-Athen, NZ885, whelped May 25, 1909. On his mother’s side he brought us pure Ilm-Athen blood and on his father’s side we had it in part through Lux Edelblut v Ilm-Athen, a son of Hellegraf. At least a dozen main blood lines radiate from this potent dog and more than half of them survive to this day. Prinz Modern was of medium size, elegant, with a good but distinctively individual head type, the physical traits – but unfortunately also his lack of courage – which he transmitted in their entirety. As indicated above, he was not a brave dog and his spirit left much to be desired. The fortuitous circumstance that he was owned and kept in the kennels of Councillor Harry Peek, in Düsseldorf, led to the dog’s complete success. This meant that he stood in the very center of the breed’s growth and activity. The lower Rhine at that time was the seat of an interested and devoted Dobermann fancy. We were living in the breed’s golden age. Large exhibitions, an enthused following, lively public interest, great breeders and outstanding breeding animals all put the stamp of irresistible progress upon this period. The unity of the breeders was a constructive force, a community of interest made itself manifest everywhere and each took a sporting interest in the welfare and success of the other. Nothing seemed more assured than the future of the Dobermann. This spirit found expression in the breed as each one concerned with it bent every effort to raise its level higher. It was no occasion for surprise, therefore, that bitches were sent to Modern from Belgium, Holland, Silesia, Berlin, South Germany and other outlying regions. He not only raised the mean level of his own home district but became a significant force for the breed in all parts of the world. His pet name was Slenz. During the years of the World War he passed into other ownership and in the course of this difficult time was kept from continuing the work he had begun so well. His great fault, cowardice and its consequences to the breed, must not be overlooked or passed by in silence. The damage it did to the breed has not been entirely repaired or eliminated to date.

The black Moritz v. Burgwall, NZ741, whelped July 11, 1909, (Sturmfried and Wally v. Burgwall) must be ranked as a dog of the highest class. He projected five main blood lines into the future and his dominance in them is all the proof required of his hereditary power. Almost everywhere his progeny testifies to his worth. His descendants over Bodo v. Elfenfeld, Fernando v. Merseburg (Holland) and Gudrun v. Hornegg have retained their vigor and influence to this day. Moritz was a little long in back but excellent in coat, markings and head. His sharpness did not ring true but was surely on of the best dogs sired by Sturmfried.

Prinz Modern v. Ilm-Athen


Teja Herzynia, DZ1843, whelped July 1, 1909, (Sturmfried and Freya Herzynia). This blue dog displayed a great deal of “Adel” but not enough spirit. On the whole, though, he was a most attractive dog. His best descendants proceed from Lea v. Weissenfels to Lotte v. Röneckenstein as well as from Fee v.d. Börde to Burschell v. Simmenau. Himself or some immediate descendant is probably in every pedigree of importance today.

The brown Theo v.d. Funkenburg, DZ779, whelped May 25, 1909, (Fedor v. Aprath and Jula v.d. Engelsburg) was a strapping big dog and thoroughly sound but he lacked the capacity to transmit his hereditary power. His most important descendant is the black bitch Senta v. Jägerheim, the mother of Asta Voss. This makes him one of the direct ancestors of the Blankenburg strain.

Theo v.d. Funkenburg


Another very handsome dog of this year was the brown Lord v.d. Hardt (later Lord v. Rheintor) DZ1232, whelped August 18, 1909, (Lord v. Ried and Wanda v.d. Hardt). With the exception of the fawn (Isabella) colored Assad v. Röderberg, Lord was a blank as to progeny.

This group of good dogs was supplemented by an equally large group of excellent bitches.

The Most valuable of these, with reference to their hereditary power, was the black Edle v. Ilm-Athen, DZ873, whelped July 22, 1909, (Sturmfried and Dina v. Ilm-Athen). She combined beauty and hereditary worth. It suffices to enshrine her in our history that she brought us Belling v. Berlin, the sire of Troll v.d. Blankenburg.

Another of this select group is the black Kitty, DZ897, whelped January 9, 1909, (Urian v. Eckardstein and Kitty v.d. Ruhr). She became the mother of Tatjana and Cosima v. Jägerhof.

Sybille, (later v. Langen) DZ705, whelped May 28, 1909, (Lord v. Ried and Stella) was a black bitch with typical Greyhound look and expression, flat chest and with little, if any temperament. She acquitted herself of her duty as a brood bitch splendidly and transmitted her head type with great hereditary power and persistence. This was especially  true of the three individuals of one litter: Heidi, Hispa and Bayard v. Silberberg.

The black Helga v.d. Pfalz, DZ713, whelped March 9, 1909, (Lord v. Ried and Luna v.d. Pfalz) was a fine, sharp and elegant bitch. Her most famous and outstanding son was Leuthold v. Hornegg.

Zilla II v. Lützellinden, DZ774, whelped February 2, 1909, (Fedor v. Aprath and Zilla I v. Lützellinden) was a brown bitch as generously supplied with beauty as she was generous in transmitting it to her progeny. Her hereditary powers and character were as good as her appearance. Her best descendant was Bodo v. Hörnsheim.

Last but nevertheless one of the best of the year was the black Wally v.d. Strengbach, DZ3428, whelped June 25, 1909, (Sturmfried and Freya v.d. Strengbach). She carried almost pure Ilm-Athen blood and is the product of the closest (incestuous) inbreeding to Prinz v. Ilm-Athen. Her pedigree shows Greif v. Grönland twice as her grandfather. No wonder, therefore, that her great son, Waldo v.d. Strengbach, was the extraordinary potent transmitter of his own hereditary traits which he ultimately proved himself to be.

Other good dogs were: Lord v. Eichendorf, NZ831, (brown), Bredo v. Ilm-Athen, NZ867, (black), Falstaff v.d. Klosterburg, NZ917, (blue), Benno II v. Nibelungenhort, DZ824, (black), Sydow v. Deutz, DZ913, (black), Sigfried v. Brumstadt, DZ1447, (black), Kunibert v. Limburg, DZ2379, (brown), Kuno v. Umstadt, DZ963, (black), Nora v. Pfälzerland, DZ831, (black).


This year brought us no outstanding dogs but many of good average quality.

The black Hans v.d. Lahn, DZ1574, whelped October 17, 1910, (Hellegraf v. Thüringen and Lona v.d. Lahn) was of less importance than his imposing pedigree would indicate. His greatest service to the breed was to sire Axel Hochwart.

A very good dog, however, was the brown Bodo v. Elfenfeld, DZ1133, whelped December 26, 1910, (Moritz v. Burgwall and Eddie v. Elfenfeld). His litter brother Bob v. Elfenfeld, DZ1132, was his equal in every respect. Bodo left two excellent bitches, Borste and Brünhild v. Falkenhain, as his legacy to the breed. Borste v. Falkenhain was to become invaluable for the “Simmenau” strain of dogs.

Bob v. Elfenfeld


Rino v.d. Römerschanz, DZ1908, whelped October 28, 1910, (Sepp v. Kraichgau and Hella v.d. Römerschanz). This brown dog became the sire of Troll v. Albtal. The latter was of inestimable value in the development of the Dobermann breed in Holland.

An outstanding brown stud dog was the sharp and equally handsome Tasso v.d. Weissen Elster, DZ3000, whelped May 22, 1910, (Max v. Burgwall and Brenda v.d. Weissen Elster). His hereditary transmissions were good even if not outstanding.

An equally handsome half brother was the black Adelfried v.d. Wendenburg, DZ1377, whelped February 10, 1910, (Max v. Burgwall and Loni v.d. Wendenburg). He was unfortunate in that the bitches mated to him were in the main unsuited, with the result that only one blood line, that of the Sachsenburg dogs, remain to do him honor.

Roland (later v.d. Haide) DZ1291, whelped June 28, 1910, (Lord v. Ried and Stella) was a brown dog pre-eminently qualified to ruin the entire breed and forthwith proceeded to exercise his talents. Lack of taste, ignorance and other unfathomed motives of our judges permitted this grotesque caricature of a Dobermann to win officially recorded high honors. His devastating hereditary influence was soon forcibly active and observable in many of the Ostersee, Rottal, Siegestor and Isarstrand dogs. To a minor extent this “Roland pest” infected the “Tirol” dogs. His progeny were mostly narrow but deep-chested monstrosities, unbelievably coarse with wide open, round eyes,. For the real Dobermann fancier and expert they required a decade and a half to repair the damage he had done. Most of his life he passed in Bavaria. Salto v. Rottal was one of his sons but of no discoverable value to the breed.

Roland v.d. Haide


Switzerland at this time had a good black stud dog in Roland v. Tale, SHSB5803, whelped November 1, 1910, (Lord v. Ried and Gertrud II v. Frauenlob). The best of his numerous progeny was Leporello v. Tale.

The year also brought us some very good bitches. The best of these was Liesel v. Dambachtal, DZ2120, whelped January 18, 1910, (Lord v. Ried and Leska v.d. Wartburg). This blue bitch was a most lovable and beautiful creature with a great deal of “Adel”. In three filial generations she leads to Lotte v. Röneckenstein and can therefore be included among the builders and progenitors of the modern Simmenau and Sigalsburg strains.

Medea v. Jägerhof, (not registered), (Marko v. Lützellinden and Juliane v. Jägerhof) she became the mother of Selma v. Jägerhof and the grandmother of Waltraute v. Grammont. Carlo and his son Favorit v.d. Koningstad are descendent from her in direct line. To her, therefore, much of the credit for the high state of the breed in Holland and in America is due.

The black Anne-Liese v. Lützellinden, DZ1202, whelped May 10, 1910, (Lord v. Ried and Elsa v. Lützellinden) in conjunction with Hans v.d. Lahn also of this year, brought us the stalwart and solid Axel Hochwart.

Another brown bitch demanding our attention at this time is Lotte v. Haiterbach, DZ1083, whelped March 3, 1910, (Helmut v. Aprath and Flora II v. Haiterbach). She is the third in an unbroken line of brown descent, through two brown parental generations over Helmuth to Hellegraf. A continuation of this pure brown succession led to her production of the fawn (Isabella) colored Assad v. Röderberg.

Other good dogs were: Trick v. Deutz, DZ590, (black), Hans v. Dambachtal, DZ1091, (blue), Wodan v.d. Hohen Burg, DZ1122, (black), Blücher v Hörnsheim, DZ1138, (black), Max v.d. Weissen Elster, DZ4145, (brown), Sorma v. Eckardtstein, DZ1296, (black), Cleo v.d. Börde, DZ1312, (black), Lotte Buronia, DZ1312, (black), Ursula v. Hornegg, DZ1442, (black), Luthi v. Frohse, DZ3261, (blue).


The year 1911, with the exception of one brown bitch yielded only black Dobermanns. This is another way of saying that the Ilm-Athen blood had won its battle and absorbed the Hellegraf and Fedor blood completely. All efforts to restore the brown color to its equivalent and rightful place in the breed will be in vain as long as the artificial influence of such dogs as Greif v. Grönland, Prinz v. Ilm-Athen, Prinz-Modern, Edelblut, Burschel v. Simmenau, Troll and Lux v.d. Blankenburg, and, of course, their immediate descendants is not combated. These dominant transmitters of black have not succeeded in annihilating the brown of the Winfried and the Sigharts but have made it latent. The browns that do break through this “color cordon” are of such exceptional beauty, power and value that no further proof is needed that the brown color, though latent, has lost none of its pristine power and quality. Only a breeder of great stature and determination can bring this biological process to a halt by systematic and conscious objectivity. He would incidentally stabilize the production of colors other than black and restore them to the popular acclaim and place which is their due.

Leuthold v. Hornegg, DZ1982, whelped May 30, 1911, (Lord v. Ried – Helga v.d. Pfalz) was a large mighty and attractive dog with a great deal of “Adel”. His angulation was insufficient and too steep. His head type, when considered separately from that of Sybille (late v. Langen) was in need of much improvement. His eyes were narrow slit and slanting, a feature not improved by an almost total absence of stop. The amateur and self-appointed judges of the time almost apotheosized the dog with the result that his head type, which he transmitted with great individual power and persistence was introduced into  the breed, to be sure, in a somewhat modified form.

Leuthold v. Hornegg


This came to its natural fruition in his great-grandson, Claus v.d. Spree, its best known bearer. Unless we attribute the derivation of this objectionably domed head type to Leuthold’s great-grandmother we would be at a loss for an explanation of its origin. Certainly neither his sire Lord v. Ried nor any of the Immo v. Isenburg line can be found guilty on that charge. His two sons, Achim and Artus v. Langerode were both high grade dogs and powerful transmitters of their own qualities. They present another instance of the individual hereditary potency of their mother, Asta v. Starkenberg. Not only did she transmit her own dominant and almost perfect type and traits to them but obviously and also the power of transmitting them.

A dog that was almost as significant and important as Leuthold was Belling v. Berlin, DZ1945, whelped September 19, 1911, (Edel v. Ilm-Athen and Edle v. Ilm-Athen).  The blood line of both his sire and dam go back to Greif v. Grönland over Prinz v. Ilm-Athen in two and three parental generations respectively. Belling was a real and typical representative of the Ilm-Athen blood which proved so beneficial to the Blankenburg, Sigalsburg and Simmenau dogs. In spite of, or more correctly, because of his inbreeding Belling carried through so gratifyingly to Troll v.d. Blankenburg. In a previous chapten we devoted considerable space to the influence and effect of a dog’s age on the quality of his progeny. Both Leuthold and Belling were six years of age when they sired their best descendants.

In the third place we have Bayard v. Silberberg, DZ1598, whelped May 23, 1911, (Prinz Modern v. Ilm-Athen and Sybille (later v. Langen). Mated to his sister Heidi v. Silberberg, he produced the incestuously inbred Sybille v. Silberberg and, through her, in three direct filial generations, Claus v.d. Spree and Claus v. Cothenius.

A dog with the very best hereditary possibilities but which unfortunately could never be sufficiently employed was Waldo v.d. Strengbach, DZ2642, whelped May 6, 1911, (Prinz Modern v. Ilm-Athen and Wally v.d. Strengbach). This dog had the best of Ilm-Athen blood on both parental sides and his individual potency in transmitting his good build and head was the object of much justified wonder. Like all dogs born from 1911 on, he was beset by the curse which consisted of the outbreak of the World War in 1914, just at the time when they would reach the peak of their productive power. The rapid sinking of the breed upon that occurrence practically precluded the natural continuation of their heredity. Waldo was one of the victims of this War Curse. Several excellent specimens sired by him were at hand but in the stress and turmoil indicental to the war no attention could be paid to them. One line emanating from him is of particular interest, that which leads to Hertha II v. Golzheim over Jack v. Stübbenhaus. In its more distant ramifications we find such good dogs as Achill v.d. Rheinperle, etc. His greatest service to the breed and the world in general was his contributory assistance to the elimination of that pestilential Roland blood in Bavaria.

In Lord v. Warteberg, DZ2005, whelped February 24, 1911, (Prinz Modern v. Ilm-Athen and Fedora v. Warteberg), we had a good dog, used less for his eminent breeding qualities than for advertising the police dog movement at that time in the public eye. He became almost valueless for the breed and its progress but left one good heir in Horst Söberdt.

Marathon v.d. Klosterburg, DZ3208, whelped April 8, 1911, (Max v. Burgwall and Netty v.d. Klosterburg). This black dog became valuable to the breed as the sire of Gerhard v. Parthengrund and thereby as the grandsire of Hela v. Götterfelsen. This last bitch is of special significance to and for the breed in America.

For the Swiss breed the coming of Max (Sommer), SHSB6725, whelped November 21, 1991, an Immo v. Isenburg son, is of fortunate consequence. This black dog was to become the sire of Max Heidenstein.

The year 1911 was rich in good bitches which helped the breed to higher levels. Among them were:

Tatjana v. Jägerhof, DZ7787, whelped December 18, 1911, (Marko v. Lützellinden and Kitty) was a bitch of the nobles stature but she brought the cowardice and shyness of her sire into the breed. She transmitted these traits through her handsome son., Edelblut and it is still an open question whether the benefits of her hereditary ardice. Her sister Cosima was almost her equal in form and neither could be excelled therein during their time.

Two litter sisters of Bayard v. Silberberg were:

Hispa v. Silberberg, DZ1605. Together with Bodo v. Alfenfeld she produced, among others, the litter sisters Borste and Brunhild v. Falkenhain. The former produced the mother of Alex v. Simmenau and the latter Salto v. Rottal.

Heidi v. Silberberg, DZ1606, has already been discussed in connection with her litter brother Bayard.

The black bitch Blanca v. Parthengrund, DZ1588, whelped May 18, 1911), Lord v. Ried and Gerhilde v. Parthengrund) was a grand-daughter of Carlo Viktoria on her mother’s side and was fated to become the mother of the brown Arnfried v. Brandis.

Another product of the Parthengrund kennels, which now takes an active and very successful part in the development of the breed, requires mention at this point. This was Erika v. Parthengrund, DZ2350, whelped December 2, 1911, (Max v. Burgwall and Lore v. Parthengrund). This brown bitch produced one of the bitches  from which the Dobermann breed in Czechoslovakia is derived.

Switzerland in enriched by one of her most successful and valuable brood bitches when Glocke II v. Tale SHSB6735, whelped May 14, 1911, (Hans v. Aprath and Gertrud II Frauenlob) first sees the light of her Alpine days. She became the chief ancestor of both the Lentulus and the Bärenburg dogs.

Other good dogs were: Rino v. Greifenstein, DZ1681, (brown), Hans Schwarz, DZ2496, (black), Mylon v.d. Alten Vehmlinde, DZ3080, (black), Marko v. Warteberg, DZ5575, (black), Ilse v.d. Weissen Elster, DZ2606, (brown), Toska II v. Warteberg, DZ2853, (black).



During this year the bitches were better than the dogs. Only one really outstanding dog was produced and we will begin our recital with him.

Bodo v. Hörnsheim


Bodo v. Hörnsheim, DZ3106, whelped January 8, 1912, (Lord v. Ried and Zilla II v. Lützellinden). This unusually good and handsome dog carried in his veins a preponderance of blood of brown ancestry but most of it was lost to the breed because he was unaccountably disinclines to mating. The Jägerhof kennels disposed of him because of this. He refused to serve the majority of the bitches brought to him and for no apparent reason. Only a few blood lines went out from him the most important of which is that over Alex v. Simmenau. His ancestry goes back to Hellegraf in part and also to Fedor. Had he developed and exercised his full breeding potentialities h would have become one of the Great of the breed. His sharpness was proverbial.

In Lord v. Mainz, DZ2669, whelped April 5, 1912, (Moritz v. Burgwall and Flora Römertal) Southwest Germany had a fine black dog, although the fact was almost entirely unknown. He was a correct and handsome dog and in conjunction with Betty Weber became the basic ancestor of the Zinsgut dogs.

Gerhard v. Parthengrund, DZ5453, whelped September 17, 1912, (Marathon v. Klosterburg and Sorma v. Parthengrund) was a black dog that over his daughter, Hela v. Götterfelsen gave an excellent account of himself in connection with the breed in America.

Troll v. Albtal, DZ2411, Holl, reg. No. 19806, whelped February 28, 1912, (Rino v.d. Römerschanz and Hella v. Pfinzgan). This excellent compact dog was largely of Hellegraf blood. His progeny only became of benefit to Holland and America. His ultra successful lines over Waltraute, Bubine, Benno v.d. Römerhof or Waltraute, Carlo and Favorit v.d. Koningstad both are in their ascendancy in America.

The most interesting dog of the year decidedly the oftmentioned fawn (Isabella) colored dog Assad v. Röderberg, DZ2881, whelped May 23, 1912, (Lord v. Hardt and Lotte v. Haiterbach). In the stud book he is modestly described as a “blue”. His ancestry goes back to Hellegraf in three parental generations of which the only individual not brown is Lord v. Ried. Science has seized upon this result as proof of the previously asserted deduction that an unbroken line of browns mated to browns would ultimately result in a color deterioration known as “Flavism”. To be sure, coloring matter (pigmentation) is still present in the skin. It can be brought to life and stimulated to biological activity by mating to the dominant black but if the mating to brown is still persisted in it will become progressively weaker. Whether “Albinism” can be achieved at all can only be determined by an intensive extension of this process or even of mating a fawn to fawn again. Under no circumstances must we confuse the fawn color which is derived from brown with that which is derived from a deteriorated blue and has a faded, washed-out appearance. It is indeed a matter of regret that the various breed organizations will not tolerate this beautiful fawn color. In ignorance of the cause of its appearance the belief is held that it will cause damage to the breed. The spectre of degeneration is raised and made to walk about. How effective and attractive this color, with its resulting contrasts, can be is best seen in other breeds which have long ago brought about its fixation, constancy and stabilization. Our Dobermann could only profit by permitting this color to assume its rightful place in the spectrum of the breed. Not the least remarkable feature of this color is that during the first few days of the pups’ life the fawn cannot be distinguished from the browns and the breeders usually report and enter them as browns. We have the well known case of Carmen v. Kraichgau over Undine v. Grammont. If we trace the line faithfully over every filial generation we come to Angela v. Grammont and Favorit v.d. Koningstad, etc, etc. There are many of such unbroken lines of brown. How easy it would be, in America for instance, where these animals are now located, to breed outstanding fawns. It would be a profitable venture for the breed. There are, as a matter of recorded fact, several generations of fawns in Esthonia and Czechoslovakia.

Switzerland produced a good breeding dog in this year in Leporello v. Tale, SHSB6723, whelped March 4, 1912, and a son of Roland v. Tale.

The bitches which we enumerate here were, without exception, black.

Fee v.d. Börde, DZ3042, whelped May 14, 1912, (Teja Herzynia and Helma II. Warteberg). She was of pure Sturmfried blood on both sides and demonstrated her hereditary capacity by producing the invaluable Arno v.d. Glücksburg.

Betty v. Jägerhof, DZ3659, whelped May 1, 1912, (Prinz Modern v. Ilm-Athen and Alma v. Jägerhof). On her mother’s side she carried Lord v. Ried blood. She was overly fine but correct in every feature. She produced one of the great dogs of the days to come, the bitch Asta v. Starkenburg the maternal ancestor of all the Langerode dogs.

Senta v. Jägerheim, (not registered), (Theo v.d. Funkenburg and Liesel v. Seeberg), as the mother of Asta Voss exercised a dominating influence upon the Blankenburg dogs. This bitch was almost totally unknown. According to my findings, corroborated by documentary evidence and all other obtainable information, the real name of this bitch was Senta v. Jägerhaus, whelped June 17, 1911. She was owned by K. Seipp of Barmen, and was several times given high rating against strong competition. Her pedigree is the same as above.

Carola v. Elfenfeld, DZ2370, whelped February 26, 1912, (Moritz v. Burgwall and Eddie v. Elfenfeld). This bitch has a very interesting blood synthesis. The Ilm-Athen dogs, Hellegraf and Slenz, all contributing some to her by way of good ancestors, form a rarely found combination. As the mother of Senta v. Nesselrode she is a dominating influence over the Stresow dogs.

Selma v. Jägerhof, DZ4284, Holl. reg. no. 19722, whelped August 20, 1912, (Prinz Modern v. Ilm-Athen and Medea v. Jägerhof) was much better known under her later name Thea v. Jägerhof under which she was registered in the Dutch stud books. Her influence on the breed both in Holland and America is noticeable, especially as the grandmother of Carlo and great-grandmother of Favorit v.d. Koningstad.

Isolde v. Cöln, DZ4780, whelped May 22, 1912, (Marko v. Lützellinden and Ruska v. Cöln). In the course of her filial generations she became of utmost importance to the Lobenstein strain of dogs.

Other good dogs were: Montwitz v. Eckardstein, DZ2890, (black), Stopp v. Parthengrund, DZ2901, (black), Siegfried v. Friedewald, DZ2987, (black), Bella v. Dambachtal, DZ3665, (blue), Wanda Knoll, DZ3895, (black), Alice v.d. Sachsenburg, DZ4302, (brown), Tea v. Sickingen, DZ4378, (brown).



In spite of the unlucky number “13” this was a good year for the Dobermann breed. Dogs and bitches pressed forward in equal numbers but all, with the exception of two brown bitches, were black.

They were all overshadowed by Edelblut v. Jägerhof, DZ4691, whelped January 25, 1913, (Prinz Modern v. Ilm-Athen and Tatjana v. Jägerhof). His pedigree is well worth close study. We find that Ilm-Athen blood preponderates in it, to be sure, but also that it is well diluted by that of Fedor. That from this combination we had no right to expect a dog of real and unusual sharpness goes without saying, for both of the parents and each of the grandparents were anything but belligerent. He did not deserve the reproach of shyness or cowardice, however. This excellent show and breeding dog faithfully reflected the high status of the breed of his day, and, as a worthy successor of Lord v. Ried and his own sire, Prinz Modern v. Ilm-Athen, dominated and conditioned it. His breeding career came at a most unfortunate time, during the World War people’s thoughts could not be directed to dog breeding. This difficulty was to some extent offset by the fortunate circumstance that he was located in the Rhineland. Because of its proximity to Holland, this was the best place for a stud dog. What breeding was done in this difficult time rook place in this general neighborhood. Envy inspired a campaign of calumny against the dog, the breeder and the owner. It was rumored that the dog was being used by the owner to serve seventy to eighty bitches a year. Aside from the obvious fact that so many bitches could not have been found for breeding at that particular time and place, the lie was completely refuted by the carefully kept stud records which we have personally inspected and verified. Up to 1924 Edelblut had served exactly 104 bitches or a negligible fraction more than ten a year. Today his blood is found in every Dobermann pedigree on earth. Like every other dog, he had some faults but we will call attention only to the most serious and fateful one, loose shoulders. His progeny were being preferred to that of every other dog of his time. Although otherwise sound, he spread this primary fault until the entire breed of Western Germany has succumbed to its evil. This pandemic fault left no alternative but to yield the highly prized breed leadership to the Berlin group, which then assumed the coveted role with its sound and correct dogs. But the same trouble, in another form, was developing there, too. By resorting too largely to a breed leader of any time or place a district will spread this leader’s faults in aggravated form all through its home strains. Jealously monopolizing its leading dog’s services serve to confine and also to intensify the spread of these faults to its own area. There was a complete repetition of this historical process in the case of Lux v.d. Blankeburg . Extensive damage resulting from a spread of Lux’s many and grievous faults was averted only by a timely recognition of the danger and removal of the dog, by way of a sale, to another field so thoroughly insulated by distance that he was rendered harmless to Germany. Warnings against oversaturation by any one blood, with its attendant faults, are always in order. Of course Nature will call a halt in time but no breeder need wait upon that call and lose precious time in doing so.

Edelblut v. Jägerhof


But let us return to Edelblut. As grandsire of the best of the Blankenburg dogs his hereditary value to that strain was beyond compute. It would be a hopeless task to follow out all the blood lines emanating from him, so we will consider only a few. Asta v. Starkenburg was by far his best and loveliest daughter, and we have had and will have frequent occasion to comment upon her. She was the product of an incestuous mating and quite unique in her hereditary influence. The Swiss bitch Dely v. Bärenburg was no less beautiful. Another high class show and breeding dog was his son, Achill v.d. Rheinperle, but another of his get, Lord v.d. Horstburg, was more prized for his beautiful show qualities than his capacity for reproducing. This held good both in Germany and America whither he was sent. The equally nonproductive Motte v. Friedewald does not materially alter this picture. Edelblut’s brown descendants Urian and Undine v. Grammont were most important for the breed in Holland. Every one of his litter sisters proved to be high class breeding dogs but only a few ever attracted wide notice. Edelblut lived to become more than thirteen years. He was living corroboration of the disputed truth a properly used and cared for stud dog will outlive an indolent brother wallowing in luxury, food and care but without sexual activity by years.

Arno v.d. Glücksburg, DZ4216, whelped June 13, 1913, (Bayard v. Silberberg and Fee v.d. Börde). This dog is to share the honor of being the other grandsire of Lux v.d. Blankeburg with Edelblut. It is most regrettable that Arno’s field of activity was so largely confined to Eastern Germany. His best descendant was the powerful transmitter and hereditarily potent Burschel v. Simmenau.

Fernando v. Merseburg, DZ3662, Holl. Reg. No. 22329, whelped January 6, 1913, (Moritz v. Burgwall and Adelgunde v. Treuhort). This dog’s greatest success was achieved in Holland and his best descendant was Rival’s Adonis.

Fernando v. Merseburg


Axel Hochwart, DZ3999, whelped May 4, 1913, (Hans v.d. Lahn and Anne-Liese v. Lützellinden). This was a faultless, robust yet pleasing dog. Unfortunately only unimportant sidelines from him reach our time.

Jack v. Stübbenhaus, DZ3966, whelped February 26, 1913, (Waldo v.d. Strengbach and Grete v. Düssetal). Jack was a good son of a better father and became famous because of his daughter Hertha II v. Golzheim.

Horst Söberdt, DZ5113, whelped March 17, 1913, (Lord v. Warteberg and Sieglinde v. Schloss Försterheim). This dog vindicated his descent by giving us a famous son, Wuotan v. Thüringen.

The black Flock v. Traunfeld, DZ9490, whelped March 29, 1913, (Max v.d. Weissen Elster and Asta v. Eggenberg) proved to be one of the pillars of the Czechoslovakian House of Dobermann. His blood is derived to some extent from Fedor v. Aprath but to a greater from Hellegraf. His sire Max was of a closely and incestuously bred Hellegraf line.

The bitches of this year, taken as a group, became a vast reservoir of hereditary value upon which the breeds of Germany, Switzerland, Holland and the United States of America drew to their great and lasting benefit.

Borste v. Falkenhain, DZ3615, whelped January 16, 1913, (Bodo v Elfenfeld and Hispa v. Silberberg). This black bitch transmitted hereditary traits of such value and power that over Alex. Simmenau and Lotte I v. Simmenau her descendants as distant as Claus and Figaro v. Sigalsburg are still drawing sustenance from her.

Her brown litter sister Brunhild v. Falkenhain, DZ3621, is also registered under the name of Brunhild v. Silberberg. The first time in volume V and the second in volume VI of the DZ, as No. 6143. This was not the result of an error but a deliberate attempt to deceive. It must be remembered that the breeder and the kennel name are also falsified and hence wrong in every “official” pedigree. A Mrs. Tornier is the real breeder and not the alleged Mrs. Stahr. As said before we are dealing with a fraud. However, Brunhild later became the mother of Salto v. Rottal.

Werry v.d. Rolandsburg, black, DZ6384, whelped October 10, 1913, (Prinz Modern v Ilm-Athen and Freya v. Lafferde). On her dam’s side she had some blood of Theo v.d. Funkenburg and produced Lord v.d. Horstburg.

The black Helmtrude v. Kranichstein, DZ3992, whelped March 10, 1913, (Leuthold v. Hornegg and Verra v. Henneburg) was a good transmitter and among other worthy descendants gave us Orest v. Kranichstein.

Edelblut’s very stately sister, Helga v. Jägerhof, DZ5573, was now in Holland. She lent refinement to the entire line of Rival’s descendants and among them we find, but a few filial generations away, Angola and Ajax v. Grammont, Carlo and Favorit v. Koningstad and also Benno v. Römerhof.

The brown Carmen v. Kraichgau, DZ3814, Holl. Reg. No. 21225, whelped January 31, 1913, (Sepp v. Kraichgau and Stella v. Rosenhain) was a mixture of Ilm-Athen and Hellegraf blood. She planted herself deeply in Holland where the Grammont strain owes much of its excellence to her. Her descendants Urian and Undine v. Grammont speak more for her than we could.

Waltraute v. Grammont, Holl. Reg. No. 24939, (Troll v. Albtal and Selma v. Jägerhof) was the black bitch that completed the structure of the Grammont strain. Her two chief descendants, Carlo and Bubine v.d. Koningstad were universally recognized breed pillars, especially the former in America.

In Switzerland the black Helda Lentulus, SHSB7503, whelped June 26, 1913, (Leporello v. Tale and Glocke II v. Tale), raised herself above the welter of excellent dogs. Her claim to recognition was more than justified when she gave us Miss Berneck, Budy Hambühl and Bosco Hambühl.

A blue bitch, Freya v. Ostersee, DZ5155, whelped October 18, 1913, (Waldo v.d. Strengbach and Wanda Knoll) carried outstanding blood in her veins. She seems to have endowed her daughter, Thessa v. Ostersee, with much of her own hereditary worth. Her blood line, vitalized and accentuated by suitable dogs, carries over into the present through Ikos v. Siegestor.

Other good dogs were: Northon v. Johaimistal, DZ4826, (brown), Edelblut v.d. Sachsenburg, DZ5078, (brown), Max v. Isenburg, DZ5203, (brown), Remo v.d. Bergstrasse, DZ5488, (black), Fedor v. Giessen, DZ4812, (black).