Breed histories can be real head scratchers if you don’t dig deep.

For instance………….

In the early days of recognition, the Coton de Tulear had two breed standards, one written by the Madagascar Kennel Club, the other by the FCI.

And this is how one might interpret things if one reads only so much.

In actuality, there weren’t two independently created standards, there was one original Coton de Tulear standard interpreted through two different lenses. The impression that two standards suddenly appeared stems from a compressed timeline at the point of official recognition, not from separate origins. The foundational description began earlier, in the early 1960s, with the work of Louis Petit and the Société Canine de Madagascar (Malagasy Kennel Club), who drafted it to document the breed and position it for international recognition. When the breed reached the recognition stage around 1970, that same document was interpreted and refined in Europe, resulting in a contemporaneous European-adapted version. Because both versions entered the historical record at nearly the same moment, it later appeared as though two “original” standards had existed.

The original draft described a dog that was hardy, slightly larger than modern toy breeds, and genetically diverse in color;  the FCI version, however, used the original document as a starting point to create a refined, uniform white show dog.

Why?  Why “fix” what wasn’t broken?

And here is where a bit more digging may lead one to see that the FCI’s motivation wasn’t about rejecting the breed, it was about making it successful within the European system. The latter’s vision was for the breed to fit European show‑ring aesthetics, marketability, and administrative simplicity better than the more variable island type described in Louis Petit’s version.  We think it’s important to look at events not through our 2026 eyes, but through the eyes of European fanciers in the 1970s, and this demographic was strongly attracted to small, elegant, white companion dogs. Emphasizing a pure or nearly pure white coat made the Coton easier to “brand” and promote in that niche.  After all, the name “Coton” (French for cotton) and “Tulear” (the port city) already suggested a specific aesthetic. European breeders, particularly in France, wanted the dog to physically embody its name.  A narrow color palette and tighter size range solved this while making judging and breeding more straightforward in a conformation system built around visual uniformity and clear disqualifications.

In short, the FCI’s aim wasn’t to erase the Coton’s origins, but to translate the breed standard into a form compatible with European show culture. Rightly or wrongly, a refined, uniform white dog was a deliberate choice to ensure acceptance, consistency, and long-term viability within the international kennel system.

Image: Coton De Tulear by Frizzantine | Dreamstime