What was a "dog-room" in 1847 (or 1773)?

[Douglas G. Wilson]

>Yes, there's some context that might help; it certainly didn't
>suggest to me "a room for a dog".  May I refer you to the source,
>"Stono: Documenting and Interpreting a Southern Slave Revolt", ed.
>Mark M. Smith (Columbia, S.C., 2005), page 40?  Or should I
>transcribe some context, such as the previous two sentences:
>
>"The room into which Mr. Verney conducted his guest was on the same
>floor with the dining-room and parlors, as they were called in those
>days before drawing-rooms.  It had the look of having been intended,
>and of having been formerly used, for the reception of company."
>
>A little later, the visitor sees two or three family portraits on the walls.

Mere rank speculation: the "dog" may be about the same as in "putting on
the dog", i.e. = "airs"/"display"/"ostentation" [sense 6a in HDAS, I
guess]. This would be a room for receiving guests, then, designed to
impress visitors. I don't know that this sense of "dog" is [otherwise]
attested so early, however.

-- Doug Wilson