» 
ferring to certain Norfolk manors, to include horses. Sint | 
_ cattle-dealers of the present day the old term deast is used in 
1092 Horniess Ruminants. [Dec 
likewise fastened to the Freehold by the former artifice; all their 
quadrupeds (Dogs alone excepted, in which sort they much 
abound) are honored with wooden Bracelets about their necks, 
legs, or arms, &c.’ 
The first word cattle is here used in its original sense as given 
by the lexicographers. Todd says the term chattail, a provincial 
term, is used about Lyons, in France, for all the beasts of every 
kind on an estate. Johnson’s definition of the word is “Beasts 
of pasture—not wild nor domestic.” Richardson’s definition is 
“ Kine, horses, and some other animals appropriated to the use of 
man.” en we have the term neat. It is not accompanied by 
the word cattle, as it isin later forms, as neat cattle. It is used 
also in its original manner. It is the same as the English nol 
and the Scottish zow?t, The latter word, nowt, is still used in 
Scotland, by itself, to signify cattle, exactly as it is by T. Kirke. 
These facts are interesting, and are useful in explaining how after- 
wards kine and oxen had to be termed, generally, horned catile, 
“to distinguish them from horses.” This term horned cattle was 
used of beeves in England, whether they were long-horns, mid- 
dle-horns, short-horns, or polled. But in Scotland, where cattle 
(neat) without horns had been as indigenous as cattle (horses) that 
Se se ee 
baile 
_ never had such “ preferment,” the former were called “dodded,” 
Shee used also to be termed small cattle. While on this mat- 
ter I may note here that I have seen the word szot, meaning 2 
young ox, applied, in documents of the fourteenth century ryt 
4 
etc., “to distinguish them” from the latter.’ : 
same sense as nowt in Scotland. The word Beast is the : 
still stereotyped on the bills of sale of the London salesmen to — 
denominate cattle of the cow kind, and still pronounced ier : 
I shall not venture further to explain the passage Bé 
Kirke, but’ along with the somewhat paradoxical case from 
lenden allow the reader to make his own construction. For ba 
however, the interesting fact remains that previous to aise 
the cattle of the Scots are stated by an observant raat nf 
have been hornless. Where had he seen them? or to what | 
existent race could the observation a ly: 
It certainly would not be in the jee of Scotland that the 
* Statistical Account of the Parish of Bendochy, 1795- _ 
