Click for Previous Page
Le Couteulx also advocated the idea that the word ‘Bloodhound’ means ‘dog of pure blood’, rather than ‘blood-seeking dog’. If he were correct, the meaning would naturally give support to the argument that the breed was kept pure in Britain. It is quite likely that this derivation of the word originates with Le Couteulx himself. No one appears to have thought of it before the 19th Century, and it is clear from an examination of early sources that it is incorrect. There is thus nothing in what we know of the Normans, or in the derivation of the word ‘Bloodhound’ to support the idea that the Normans brought the St Hubert to England, and that it was subsequently kept pure under the name of the Bloodhound. It remains possible that the ancestors of the Bloodhound included large hounds brought over by the Normans, but what they were, we do not know.  It now becomes significant to look at the History of the Bloodhound in Britain, as far as it is relevant to this question. It is reasonable to suppose, and there is nothing to contradict the notion, that the Bloodhound known in the 19th century, which we can trace in pedigrees to our present hounds, was descended from animals known as Bloodhounds in this country in ancient times. There is no evidence of a discontinuity, from the earliest references to Bloodhounds down to the present day. An early reference to the Bloodhound in surviving English writing is round about 1350. Although it appears in an English version of a French poem, the word is not  used to translate Chien de Saint Hubert, and is used in a way which suggests it was perfectly familiar to English readers at the time. It is virtually certain that the animal was in use for at least fifty years before this, and quite probably had existed for centuries in Britain.  Another reference of the period implies the Bloodhound was a big dog.