How did the pork taboo come about?

[LSCatilina]

I dunno about that man, Herodotus says Egyptians didn’t like pigs:

Probably wrong, Herodotus having confused with pigs being unholy animals, not allowed to go into temples or being eaten by priests of his time, while it was the meat for common people.

(That's one problem with Herodotus, he tends to mix up things easily)

(ANSA) - Florence, November 15 - Italian researchers have found a pig-related disease in a mummy, squashing a common belief that Ancient Egyptians had a dietary ban on pork .

Until now historians have found evidence suggesting ancient high priests in Egypt prohibited pig meat, in common with many Middle Eastern peoples who still don’t eat pork today .

"It has hitherto been thought that there was a sort of religious-hygienic ban on eating pork in Ancient Egypt," said Pisa University historical pathologist Fabrizio Bruschi .

The researchers recently found the oldest recorded case of a rare disease called cystercosis in the belly of a second-century BC mummy. Cystercosis, which can spark dangerous mood swings and epilepsy, is caused by an intestinal parasite contained in raw or poorly cooked pork .

It can also get into the body from fruit and vegetables that have been contaminated with pig faeces. Cystercosis, which has only recently been recognized and is very uncommon in the industrialised world, strikes the human nervous system. It develops when people consume the larval form of the parasitic tapeworm Taenia solium. The larvae eventually affect the muscles and brain, and moving larvae can be detected in the affected person’s eyes. In the brain, the larvae can severely damage the frontal lobe and cause personality changes. The most common symptom of this disease is mood swings. Last year an American executive died after a bizarre stunt thought to have been induced by cystercosis contracted in Mexico. He climbed onto the roof of his moving car and "surfed" on top, then jumped off and was killed. As with all serious brain damage, there is no direct treatment for cystercosis. Patients are sometimes given antidepressants to help with the mood swings and psychotherapy to help them resist irrational impulses. The Italian discovery is set for publication in the American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene .

It was also the topic of a recent study : Pig in Ancient Egypt that point out that while the animal was certainly bearer of an ambiguousity being tied up with Seth and considered unclean religiously speaking. The author argues that alimentation taboos in Ancient Egypt were more focused on fishes or sheeps (being idenfitied to a lot of gods as Khnum).

i also remember reading in Michael Flynn’s “introduction to cliology” that by the time of Hammurabi pig farming was already disappearing from Mesopotamia and the near east. Due to deforestation, and the fact that pigs consume more water than other animals.

While the cosumption of meat itself seems to have been limited in Upper Mesopotamia, pig breeding and lard production were definitely a thing by the IInd Millenia

Texts concerning pigs from the Old Babylonian period in Upper Mesopotamia,Syria and the Trans Tigris mostly come from palaces and administrative buildings.They therefore document institutional pig husbandry and there is practicallyno information on domestic husbandry.The tablets treat size of herds, fattening of the animals,and sometimes the professional personnel.

Only a few refer to meat and consumption, but lard production is well attested. References to pigs and lard are concentrated in the Khabur triangle. Elsewhere, attestations are sparse,even at Mari,despite the extensiveness of the palace archives there.

There's mention of a letter, where ambassadors coming in Babylon were welcomed with pork, while the King Išme-Dagan of Ekallatun complained nobody gave to him*, while elite class of Mari seems to have contempt for it.

*

When I went to Babylon, pork, fishes, birds, pistachios were constantly offered to Zimrî-Lîm, while for me, nobody cared about me!

Basically, they were rare in Upper and Middle Mesopotamia but not unheard off and not subject to a general taboo, and even in places where pork wasn't eaten, lard was.

Babylonians did have reserve about pork, leeks, grass seeds, garlic, onion, beef eating right before going to the temple; but nothing against them apart it gave small breath.

It seems that several peoples, as Babylonians or Assyrians did eat pork, while other Mesopotamian peoples didn't or only partially without clear idea if it was a taboo or not.

 

[Falecius]

I dunno about that man, Herodotus says Egyptians didn’t like pigs:


http://classics.mit.edu/Herodotus/history.2.ii.html

i also remember reading in Michael Flynn’s “introduction to cliology” that by the time of Hammurabi pig farming was already disappearing from Mesopotamia and the near east. Due to deforestation, and the fact that pigs consume more water than other animals.
The theory seems to be proposed by one, Carleton Coon but I can’t however find his original book.
The 3rd result for my goggle search for “Pigs, Hammurabi” seems to be of interest to the discussion.
http://etnologija.etnoinfolab.org/dokumenti/82/2/2009/harris_1521.pdf

Harris' article is interesting and probably broadly correct, but I find it too deterministic. He greatly downplays the degree of spread Islam has had in Indonesia (most of which is potentially good for swine) and he does not take into account the pretty major spread of it in areas like the forests of the Volga region and North Caucasus, where pigs could probably also be raised very well (although I wonder that Tatarstan may be too cold for them?).

 

[AdmiralBlake]

pigs are considered unclean, their almost always dirty, they snort and grunt

also, pigs will literally each anything they can get down their throat, pigs have been known to eat dead bodies, and even other dead pigs

 

[altwere]

Pigs are very good at turning just about anything into protein.

 

[Mr. pollos]

Probably wrong, Herodotus having confused with pigs being unholy animals, not allowed to go into temples or being eaten by priests of his time, while it was the meat for common people. .

Well that makes sense, after all why would the aforementioned Egyptian make contact with a pig if they were so unclean to begin with?

It was also the topic of a recent study : .

Off topic: My dad had a friend who died of that, choked on his own vomit while having a seizure.

There's mention of a letter, where ambassadors coming in Babylon were welcomed with pork, while the King Išme-Dagan of Ekallatun complained nobody gave to him*, while elite class of Mari seems to have contempt for it.
Basically, they were rare in Upper and Middle Mesopotamia but not unheard off and not subject to a general taboo, and even in places where pork wasn't eaten, lard was.
It seems that several peoples, as Babylonians or Assyrians did eat pork, while other Mesopotamian peoples didn't or only partially without clear idea if it was a taboo or not.

Neither Flynn nor Harris, claimed any taboos of the period, their thesis is based on the fact that Coon(an archeologist) found a sharp decline in evidence for pig consumption at the same time that environmental degradation became a thing. Admittedly since I can’t get my hands on that book we can’t be sure about it. Then again, the passage you provided certainly shows pigs as scarce, or at least scarce enough that a Petty king would go without. Together these sources, provide an economic context were Pigs were becoming unfeasible,



Harris’s article also mentions that Pig’s are hard for herders to keep. Presumably the philistines and Canaanites had pigs, at least to service the upper classes, and then as you previously said, the Israelites shunned the animals as a way to differentiate themselves form both foreigners and what were perceived as decadent practices. But this happened in a context were pigs were already economically inefficient. If we suppose that settled peoples were often replaced by herders in the first and second millennia, pig taboos as a manner of differentiation were bound to happen.

After that the dietary prohibition spread to the rest of the world by cultural diffusion, due to the success of radical and aggressive missionary religions. Those too were likelier to originate in the Middle East, and as such likelier to develop such taboos on pig.

(although I wonder that Tatarstan may be too cold for them?).

probably not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Siberian_pig

 

[LSCatilina]

Then again, the passage you provided certainly shows pigs as scarce, or at least scarce enough that a Petty king would go without.

Together these sources, provide an economic context were Pigs were becoming unfeasible

Limited breeding, but still existing as part of basic production and maintained even in regions where meat consumption is unaccounted or less accounted for (contrary to Lower Mesopotamia where it was, would it be only trough the knowledge of days where it could be eaten or not). It's annoying we lack sources on domestic breeding but it wouldn't surprise me to find it was as well present.

So, I'm not sure unfeasible is the word : limited, certainly but it still existed up the Islamic period. The historians that I quoted concluded that they didn't saw in this limitation the explanation of alimentation taboo as it wasn't forbidden but regulated, which why I brang the Mesopotamian counter-exemple on "all Middle-East people didn't eat pork because X".

But this happened in a context were pigs were already economically inefficient. If we suppose that settled peoples were often replaced by herders in the first and second millennia, pig taboos as a manner of differentiation were bound to happen.

I mostly agree, but this differenciation may not have been religious if it was only about social stratification (as it may have been the case in Upper Mesopotamia).

Those too were likelier to originate in the Middle East, and as such likelier to develop such taboos on pig.

That said, the "Fourth Middle East" religion, zoroastrism had different way on taboos based on the beasts of Ahreman's realm : worm, lizards, ants, flies, locusts, gnats, fleas, winged creatures, frogs, tigers, cats, fowes, hyenas, etc. while Ohrmazd's creatures, belonging to not evil creations, were allowed.

I'm a bit wary about deterministic explanations on religious taboos (that are, by essence, dogmatical more than rational) when such big exceptions existed. (That said, I wonder about Manichean, Mazdean and diverse Christian heresies religion taboos, though nazôreans most probably kept judaic prescriptions)
That it played is probable, tough, it's just that I don't see it as why it happened in first place.

 

[Mr. pollos]

So, I'm not sure unfeasible is the word : limited, certainly but it still existed up the Islamic period. The historians that I quoted concluded that they didn't saw in this limitation the explanation of alimentation taboo as it wasn't forbidden but regulated, which why I brang the Mesopotamian counter-exemple on "all Middle-East people didn't eat pork because X"..

Scarcity means it is not incredibly onerous to suspend production due to a taboo, thus implementation of the taboo is feasible, the ecological explanation addresses the whys of the scarcity.

I mostly agree, but this differenciation may not have been religious if it was only about social stratification (as it may have been the case in Upper Mesopotamia). .

Indeed, completely agree on this point. The problem is that at least in the case of Jews ethnic and religious traits are muddled.

That said, the "Fourth Middle East" religion, zoroastrism had different way on taboos based on the beasts of Ahreman's realm : worm, lizards, ants, flies, locusts, gnats, fleas, winged creatures, frogs, tigers, cats, fowes, hyenas, etc. while Ohrmazd's creatures, belonging to not evil creations, were allowed. .

That being said the regions were Zoroastrianism originated at the time of Zoroaster were far from deforested, The Afghan highlands, Lake Helmand, etc. And Zoroastrianism at least in Pre Sassanid times was never as aggressive as Abrahamic religions, even then it coexisted with Buddhism and Pagan cults in Khorasan, Sistan, and Transoxania

I concede your point that the success of Judaism (and thus the spread of these prohibitions) was far from deterministic. But still it would have been likelier for them to take hold in the Middle East than in the European subcontinent, for economic reasons regarding pig rearing in dessert environments.

 

[Green Painting]

I like how do few people are willing to say it's a silly social taboo.

I come from a dominantly pork-eating society, and have little incentive to excuse anyone who maintain such taboos. But since some of the world's most ancient nations have such a taboo, I think there must be a reason behind it.

Why don't hindus eat beef? Is it to avoid mad cow disease?

Cattle/Buffaloes were vital plough animals for Asian farming societies. I've read, in the book White Tiger, how the protagonists' village had poorly fed villagers but nevertheless maintained a fattened, well tended cattle, primarily not for some religious reason, but because the livelihood of the entire village depended on it.

But during famine years, people can get so desperate that cattle are eaten, together with any hope of a good harvest next year. The only way to convince people not to do so is to make the cattle sacred. (Religion is the Indian way of problem-solving in a country that lacks an effective central government for centuries.)

In Ancient China, with no/weaker religious taboo associated with cattle, the court nevertheless often issued decrees against killing of cattle, purely for economic reasons.( I know the Hakkas traditionally refrain from eating beef, and it was maintained through custom/moral code/tradition other than religion.)

Correspondingly, I speculate that European and European descended cultures do not have beef-taboos because plough horses are used more often than plough cattle. There is a horse-meat taboo instead.

 

[LSCatilina]

Correspondingly, I speculate that European and European descended cultures do not have beef-taboos because plough horse are used more often than plough cattle. There is a horse-meat taboo instead.

Which horse-meat taboo exactly? That is was considered as a "special" meat is certain, but there's really a lot of traditional rites involving horsemeat eating (my "favourite" being the Irish rite about a king fucking an horse, then killing it, then boiling it in water, then swimming in the mix while driking the soup) at the point Roman church had to forbid (without too much effect) eating horse meat because of it (more a ban itself than a taboo).

 

[Green Painting]

Which horse-meat taboo exactly? That is was considered as a "special" meat is certain, but there's really a lot of traditional rites involving horsemeat eating (my "favourite" being the Irish rite about a king fucking an horse, then killing it, then boiling it in water, then swimming in the mix while driking the soup) at the point Roman church had to forbid (without too much effect) eating horse meat because of it (more a ban itself than a taboo).

I had an English teacher from Romania, who told me that the Romanians respected horses highly, so high that when horse meat was imported from Mongolian People's Republic, the Romanians felt upset and launched a revolution against Ceausescu.

The other case was when I watched a Polish film called POPIOŁY on YouTube. There was a scene showing a horse being thrown down the cliff. The most "liked" comment in the comment section was expressing his discontent about how that horse was treated in making this scene. That's how I concluded that horses enjoyed quite a lot of respect in European (at least Eastern European) culture.

 

[Haaki]

I had an English teacher from Romania, who told me that the Romanians respected horses highly, so high that when horse meat was imported from Mongolian People's Republic, the Romanians felt upset and launched a revolution against Ceausescu.

The other case was when I watched a Polish film called POPIOŁY on YouTube. There was a scene showing a horse being thrown down the cliff. The most "liked" comment in the comment section was expressing his discontent about how that horse was treated in making this scene. That's how I concluded that horses enjoyed quite a lot of respect in European (at least Eastern European) culture.

I don't know about other European countries, but here in Belgium you can buy horse steak in just about every supermarket and I've never noticed any taboo about eating horse meat.

 

[jahenders]

Several of those, plus a) God said so, and B) it avoided Trichinosis which would certainly have been a big problem at the time. Of course, the ancients didn't understand the link to Trichinosis, but if pork was avoided for any combination of reasons, it would have reduced disease among the population

Was there a practical rationale behind some cultures' avoidance to pork/meat of swines?

When it comes to the spread of disease, it can hardly be said that swines beat cows or sheep in its proneness to spreading disease.

I've discussed with my friends and they come out with three explanations:

1) Pigs' habit of bathing in mud gives people the impression that they are dirty, even though it's the swines' own method of keeping clean. (Mr.C)

2) Probably, pigs, as omnivores, eats everything they get from their feeders. And thus the "preparation of swine food"(stockpiling of dirty garbage) increases the chance of pandemic diseases in crowded Semitic cities without proper sewage system, like Ancient Jerusalem or Ancient Mecca. (me)

3) Swine's diet overlaps with that of humans, as both could consume roots, fruits, flowers, corn and soybeans. So in societies where resources are scarce, like the ancient near east, feeding the pigs by the wealthy means taking food away from the poor. Therefore they developed the pork taboo to avoid contentions between social classes. (Mr. L)

 

[Nialironarm]

I was always led to believe that the taboo arose because the ancient Israelites were nomadic and pigs are not suitable for herding. The taboo would have served to differentiate them from their sedentary rivals.

Islam then picked up on this taboo and spread it further.

If you are going to have a dietary taboo it makes sense to pick something you don't eat anyway.

In the UK we are hesitant about eating horses, and a lot of people would be repulsed by the idea but it's not really much of a problem as up until recently horse meat wasn't readily available anyhow. I believe most horses were sold to the Europeans for their consumption.

I don't really go with the hot climate argument as it seems to me that pork is eaten in the tropics as soon as you get away from Islamic areas.

Does anyone know how widespread pork consumption was in the middle east and north Africa prior to the spread of Islam?

 

[LSCatilina]

I had an English teacher from Romania, who told me that the Romanians respected horses highly, so high that when horse meat was imported from Mongolian People's Republic, the Romanians felt upset and launched a revolution against Ceausescu.

That may be...an exageration to say fall of Ceausescu is due to that.
Horse meat, in modern and contemporary Europe is among many cultures considered a "siege food" "fraudulent food" (as pointed out by a recent Romanian scandal ) or a "starvation food" : a bit as asking people to eat rat, if you allow me the exxageration.

That's how I concluded that horses enjoyed quite a lot of respect in European (at least Eastern European) culture.

Enjoying a form of respect is not the same thing than a food taboo. The exemple I have point as well a special function, tied with kingship that still lead the horse to be eatern (among other things).

Eventually it's extremly dependent of cultures : we know that Slavic people were hippophagic, but that Greeks and Romans clearly weren't (safe some rare rituals), that Celtic peoples in contact with them gradually abandoned the practice but that it reappered in Middle-Ages (I remember an archeological digging where we found an almost entiere horse skeleton among other food disposal).

Germanic peoples were renowed for being both hippophagic and tying up horses with pagan rituals (again, the only reason why it was banned by the Roman Church, a ban that fell off with the Christianisation of these peoples).

While hippophagy wasn't dominant, it still existed enough and continuously to not being call a taboo, at least in Europe.

I was always led to believe that the taboo arose because the ancient Israelites were nomadic and pigs are not suitable for herding.

It's not clear ancient Hebrews were nomadic, at least once they formed a cohesive groups. Canaanites, that were culturally and originally really close from Hebrews, had very few issues eating pigs.

Does anyone know how widespread pork consumption was in the middle east and north Africa prior to the spread of Islam?

Well, for Middle-East, look up for previous posts.
Basically, while it declined after the IInd Millenia, it had a continuous usage would it be only for lard and wasn't much of a taboo than a fell in disuse.

For North Africa :

Carthagians did consumed pork (and strangely kept pigs as a symbolic figure that was lost in Mesopotamia around the IInd millenia) and it probably influenced some practices (see Naiskos of Thuburbo Maius); as well than Africano-Roman consumption of pork.

Regarding Berbers, we have Herodotus claiming that Libyans doesn't eat pork as Egyptians do, but giving Egyptians *did* eat pork, it's definitely not helping.
But we know that boar meat was eaten (and still was in Islamic periods), and that pig was probably an unclean animal (which would make the Egyptian comparison valid, as long it's corrected) but without indication of a taboo (that is not mentioned by others than Herodotus)

 

[Dave Howery]

If you are going to have a dietary taboo it makes sense to pick something you don't eat anyway.

which begs the question of 'why make a food taboo in the first place?' In ancient times, cutting off any source of potential food seems like a bad idea. Even if pigs aren't so great for a nomadic culture, saying no one can eat them seems weird... you might pass by some place that has pigs to eat, be a bit short on food, want to buy a few. If pigs were a totally new and unfamiliar animal, I could see a taboo popping up, but pigs weren't any of that....

 

[Cochlea]

Try comparing it to the legislation currently in force in whatever country you're from, and the Pentateuch will suddenly seem far less extensive.



Also in Ancient Rome, pork was considered a peasant's food, probably because it was cheaper. (Pigs can, as mentioned above, be fed on scraps.)

I don't think this is correct. Patricians, at their lavish feasts had no qualms with serving massive roast pigs stuffed with pork sausages. Pork was eaten by all strata of society, and were a mainstay of (at least Italic) legionaries at camp.

 

[pa_dutch]

Also, don't most of the major religions prohibited eating any carrion eater/scavenger? Vultures, Crows, Ravens, any Raptors, Hyenas, most small predators.

Does that connect back to the disease concerns?

Would pigeons be classified as scavengers? Here in Xinjiang, many Uyghur farmers raise pigeons the same way they raise chickens, ducks, and other fowl. Pigeon soup and barbecued pigeon are very popular in Uyghur cuisine. I always find it a bit funny because in both Uyghur and Chinese languages, there's not a strong distinction between pigeons and doves. Many Uyghur students believe Westerners don't traditionally eat pigeon because we regard it as a symbol of peace... When the reality is that we think wild pigeons are dirty creatures like rats, that we associate with crowded, unkempt, urban areas like bus terminals and city parks.

 

[LSCatilina]

Actually, people in the Western world do eat pigeons, and there's breeding of pigeons for their meat. When I was younger, living in countryside, we had pigeon meat : not regularly but often enough.
Admittedly, it seems to be more of a mediterranean and peri-mediterranean thing.

 

[Green Painting]

Would pigeons be classified as scavengers? Here in Xinjiang, many Uyghur farmers raise pigeons the same way they raise chickens, ducks, and other fowl. Pigeon soup and barbecued pigeon are very popular in Uyghur cuisine. I always find it a bit funny because in both Uyghur and Chinese languages, there's not a strong distinction between pigeons and doves. Many Uyghur students believe Westerners don't traditionally eat pigeon because we regard it as a symbol of peace... When the reality is that we think wild pigeons are dirty creatures like rats, that we associate with crowded, unkempt, urban areas like bus terminals and city parks.

I don't think there is a fundamental difference. Here is one explanation that I found good:

Not being a native speaker of English I didn't even know there was a difference between dove and pigeon BUT it is often the case that there are two words in Eglish with the same or near the same meaning, which is due to the fact that they stem from French and German.

Taube = German -> dove = English
pigeon = French -> pigeon = English

The same goes for mutton vs sheep; freedom vs liberty; cow vs. beef and so on.

Hope this helps.

So basically, pigeon was French and dove was Germanic.
So the English, with two words in their glossary, later decided that "doves" must be a smaller breed of pigeons.

 

[pa_dutch]

I don't think there is a fundamental difference. Here is one explanation that I found good:



So basically, pigeon was French and dove was Germanic.
So the English, with two words in their glossary, later decided that "doves" must be a smaller breed of pigeons.

Before I came to Xinjiang, I never realized they were essentially the same type of bird, but I guess my mental association of a pigeon is a usually grey-colored bird that tends to congregate in urban areas, but a dove is a whitish bird found in less populous areas, or a tamed white bird.

Another interesting sort-of taboo I've discovered is water buffalo meat in southern China. When I visited Hunan, I asked my local friend if people there eat water buffalo, but contrary to the stereotype that Chinese will eat anything, my friend told me that growing up, the water buffalo was regarded as too important as a work animal to be wasted on meat. He told me the meat wasn't considered tasty compared to the standard yellow ox. I eventually did find barbecued water buffalo skewers in a restaurant, and he was right - the meat was dry, stringy, and tasteless.

The reasoning is odd, however, considering that the horse is the most important beast of burden for Kyrgyz and Kazakh people yet they still eat horse meat. I would figure that a culture that values not wasting anything would make use of old water buffaloes.