Today’s offering comes to us from SianLuc Asha Merlyn Heart, an amateur scholar in anthropology and history, interested in the history of religion and studying to become a scholar in religious history and theology at the University of New England, Australia.
A restrictive religious diet is something that is not often associated with modern Paganism. In fact there are many who would claim that such a system deciding upon the diet of its followers is too restrictive and falls out of the true nature of modern Paganism. However, when one looks at the history of pagan religions, it can be quite clear that, while not as pronounced as in other religions such as Judaism, Islam and Hinduism, there are still very clear guidelines on what food is considered appropriate or inappropriate to eat.
To begin with, it should be noted that there are food taboos that we have today that the ancients did not have. For instance, the popular taboo against eating horse meat is not usually found in ancient paganisms, where horses were not just sacrificed routinely but often consumed in important rituals such as the inauguration of a Gaelic King or the horse feast of the Norse Kings. In fact the taboo against the consumption of horse meat comes from Pope Gregory III, who was acting on the advice of St. Boniface.
Another shocking taboo for most readers is the consumption of dogs. It has been noted across multiple Gaulish sites that dogs seemed to have been sacrificed and butchered during certain feasts. Additionally, dog pelts seemed to have been a preference for the Celts, concerning not just dress but cushioning, as Diodorus Siculus mentions: “When dining they all sit on the chairs but on the earth, strewing beneath them the skins of wolves or dogs.”
We must also remember that wolf skins served a role in shamanic rituals as well, such as transforming the Norse into the fearsome Úlfhéðnar or “wolf warriors.” These two are some of the most notable examples of the stark difference between our modern day diets and those religious diets of the ancient pagans.
White horses in Srath a’ Ghlinne, Scotland – Image credit: Alan O’Dowd, CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=112718238
To start on the issue of removing food from the religious diet, there are generally three reasons for this. Either the animal is considered too important to eat or slaughter, which is theorised to have been part of the reason behind the beef taboos found in eastern Asia and India; the animal is held to be gross or improper to eat, which can be found in the hatred of pork or our modern taboo against rat meat; or the animal may have served an important sacral purpose.
While there are not many examples of animals being held as too important to eat, from archaeological finds it can be concluded that most animals were only slaughtered after their use ran out in another departments. However there is an example of an animal being too unclean or impractical to eat or even sacrifice. Herodotus makes a unique remark about the Scythian diet, remarking: “But these Scythians make no offerings of swine; nor are they willing for the most part to rear them in their country.”
Additionally he remarks a similar circumstance when discussing Egypt:
“Swine are held by the Egyptians to be unclean beasts. In the first place, if an Egyptian touches a hog in passing, he goes to the river and dips himself in it, clothed as he is; and in the second place, swineherds, though native born Egyptians, are alone of all men forbidden to enter any Egyptian temple; nor will any give a swineherd his daughter in marriage, nor take a wife from their women; but swineherds intermarry amongst themselves.”
Though this hatred of swine does not seem to be as extreme as in Scythia, as he continues to remark:
“Nor do the Egyptians think it right to sacrifice swine to any god except the moon and Dionysus, to these they sacrifice their swine at the same time, in the same season of the full moon; then they eat the meat. The Egyptians have an explanation of why they sacrifice swine at this festival, yet abominate them at others; I know it, but is not fitting that I relate it.”
Here there seems to be a unique hatred of pork, which can also be found in the Highland pork taboo that existed in Scotland up to the 18th century. There are many explanations of why the pig was considered so disgusting. The most popular notions is either the observation of the pig eating its own faeces or the fact that their stubby legs and plump bodies made them unfit for raising on the steppe, highlands, and desert, and thus too expensive for most to raise.
A hare [SvenZiegler, Pixabay]
Another more controversial example comes from the Britons. During his invasion of Britain, Caesar comments: “The Britons consider it contrary to divine law to eat the hare, the chicken, or the goose. They raise these, however, for their own amusement and pleasure.”
This would suggest that these animals were kept as pets or had important religious significance. This can to a degree be found in the history of the Britons themselves. In the story of Boudica, she briefly utilises a hare in a divination ritual. Some suggest that the hare was the sacred animal of Andraste, and on the continent a statue of Athena was created with a goose upon the helm.
Additionally, in Ireland, two important pieces of lore can be observed. Firstly, that the Swan, which is similar looking to the goose, was illegal to be killed or consumed, which can be seen from the Children of Lir: “and it was proclaimed by them [The men of Ireland] throughout Ireland, that no swan should be killed, however great the power which they might have to do it from that out.”
Additionally, the rooster holds a special place in Irish folk custom as the defender of the house against fairy and other supernatural threats. They were often kept in special reserved spaces in the house for this purpose and were even said to fight to the death to protect their master against invading spirits.
All of this serves to suggest that Caesar’s quote could have a basis in reality, and that the Britons and possibly other Insular Celts observed very strong rules against eating these animals. Finds across the British Isles, however, show that not only were they eaten, but the hare was a preferred animal for hunting trips and many finds all across Britain show fowl and chicken bones with signs of butchery. This suggests that Caesar is in fact incorrect and that the Britons held no sacred law against eating these animals, or perhaps it was tied to a particular tribe that he encountered.
There is another explanation for this, though. It could be that the butchering and eating of certain sacred animals was in fact part of a rite of some sort. Hunting itself was a semi-religious act that had many rules and religious practices associated with it, and this could theoretically mend the divide between Caesar’s report and the archaeological evidence.
Salmon on their way to spawn – Image credit: Marvina Munch, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
As a final interesting note of a particular animal not eaten, finds at a Pictish monastery demonstrate that the Picts may have had some sort of taboo against the eating of fish meat. The lack of fish remains is odd, as during certain fasts, such as lent, fish was famously a meat that could be consumed. The finds show, however, at the earliest levels fish was either reserved for the higher ups or not eaten at all. The reasoning behind this taboo may be linked to religious beliefs about the Otherworld, which is thought to have been accessed through water – fish perhaps being regarded as Otherworldly figures or even the dead.
On a less specific note, as stated in my previous article on totemism, in totemic societies there can be a general rule against the consumption or killing of one’s totem. This is because the totem is something akin to a member of the family, or perhaps it is the form that the spirits of the dead take, and as such it is often considered cannibalism or kin-slaying to hunt or eat one’s totem. However, some suggest that the eating of the animal totem may have occurred in certain religious settings as a rite of passage, such as the slaying of the Hound of Culann by Setanta before he becomes Cu Chulainn.
It has been seen that there were many dietary restrictions and allowances that show the ancient religious diet could be considered very different from what we practice today. Perhaps one day these restrictions will return and in the future people will be disgusted at the idea of eating chicken while biting into their horsemeat burger – an amusing thought, to say the least.
The Wild Hunt is not responsible for links to external content.
To join a conversation on this post:
Visit our The Wild Hunt subreddit! Point your favorite browser to https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Wild_Hunt_News/, then click “JOIN”. Make sure to click the bell, too, to be notified of new articles posted to our subreddit.