> Yes, one of the sayings we have here on our farm is "goats are b@stards".
But so much smarter than sheep, in my experience.
> In the surviving Tax records of the period goats are rarely mentioned but sheep and cattle
> are common place. Some researchers theorise that goats may no have been a "taxable" animal,
> you could not pay your taxes with goats and due to the similarities between sheep and goat
> skeletal structures the archeological record of goats in the early middle ages is
> questionable. From a personal point of view the lack of goaty evidence could also stem from
> the fact that "goats are b@stards", and that keeping goats is much harder than keeping
> cattle or sheep. Also goats require a differing diet from other ruminants (more trees and
> other woody plants) to thrive and so would require a differing food source than the rest of
> the herds. Also with a goats proclivity for breaking out of fencing the social, dietary and
> financial punishment from your herd of goats eating the neighbors trees would make goats
> less than desirable compared to sheep. Purely speculation of course but interesting to
> debate on.
I suppose that depends on where you are living.
In the Near and Middle East, home turf of my persona, goats and sheep were commonly kept, but cattle were far less common, and i am not... uh... kidding...
I don't know about paying taxes in animals. It was considered against Islamic law to tax Muslims - although Dhimmi, the protected People of the Book -- Jews, Zoroastrians, Christians -- were taxed. Where are you talking about?
Urtatim (that's err-tah-TEEM)