that in Burmah, where comparatively little milk is used, they are of large size.  In Hindostan, on the contrary, where milk forms the staple food of the population, the whole breed is stunted, no calf having, for ages, been allowed its due supply of nutriment.) The Professor also holds that these small oxen, together with the goat, sheep, horse, dog, and swine (of the Asiatic breed), were introduced into Britain by the Ugrian races in the Neolithic Age; and that the pre-Roman Britons had no domestic fowls except geese.[30]

E. 9.—­If these considerations are of weight they would point to an excessive dependence on milk even amongst the agricultural tribes of Britain.  And there were others, as we know, who had not got beyond the pastoral stage of human development.  These, as Strabo declares, had no idea of husbandry, “nor even sense enough to make cheese, though milk they have in plenty."[31] And some of the non-Aryan hordes seem to have been mere brutal savages, practising cannibalism and having wives in common.  Both practices are mentioned by the latest as well as the earliest of our classical authorities.  Jerome says that in Gaul he himself saw Attacotti (the primitive inhabitants of Galloway) devouring human flesh, and refers to their sexual relations, which more probably imply some system of polyandry, such as still prevails in Thibet, than mere promiscuous intercourse.  Traces of this system long remained in the rule of “Mutter-recht,” which amongst several of the more remote septs traced inheritance invariably through the mother and not the father.

E. 10.—­These savages knew neither corn nor cattle.  Like the “Children of the Mist” in the pages of Walter Scott,[32] their boast was “to own no lord, receive no land, take no hire, give no stipend, build no hut, enclose no pasture, sow no grain; to take the deer of the forest for their flocks and herds,” and to eke out this source of supply by preying upon their less barbarous neighbours “who value flocks and herds above honour and freedom.”  Lack of game, however, can seldom have driven them to this; for the forests of ancient Britain seem to have swarmed with animal life.  Red deer, roebuck, wild oxen, and wild swine were in every brake, beaver and waterfowl in every stream; while wolf, bear, and wild-cat shared with man in taking toll of their lives.  The trees of these forests, it may be mentioned, were (as in some portions of Epping Forest now) almost wholly oak, ash, holly, and yew; the beech, chestnut, elm, and even the fir, being probably introduced in later ages.

E. 11.—­Of the British tribes, however, almost none, even amongst these wild woodlanders, were the naked savages, clothed only in blue paint, that they are commonly imagined to have been.  On the contrary, they could both weave and spin; and the tartan, with its variegated colours, is described by Caesar’s contemporary, Diodorus Siculus, as their distinctive dress, just as one might speak of