Sorry poor wording. I was actually thinking of the live cow grazing
in the field (whose puprose is to ultimately become steak). But the
result is the same, I think. The cow grazing in the meadow has value
as (a) potential meat and possibly (c) provider of a calf (depending
on whether the bull gets around to covering her).
The provider of a calf is interesting, and this is probably off topic,
and will definitely reveal my urban background. But when a humans
(women) lactate conception is often (but not always) hindered or
blocked altogether until the nursing of the current child is complete
(and lactation stops). Not so with cows?
On 12/21/06, Neil McLeod <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Dec 2006 09:59:25 -0800, Candon McLean
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >Could you comment on why a _cumal_ was equal to 3 milch cows as
> >opposed to the 3 cows ready to be cooked on the barby? Were milch
> >cows worth more?
> Yes indeed, for the same reason they still are. A dead cow has value only
> as flesh for consumption. But a live cow which is giving milk has value as
> (a) potential meat, (b) the provider of a milk and (c) the provider
> (annually) of a calf.