from the flood, and without the eating of flesh, our fathers, vegetable aliments, preserved themselves unto longer lives than their posterity by any other. For whereas it is plainly said, "I have given you every herb which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree; to you it shall be for meat:"presently after the deluge, when the same had destroyed or infirmed1 the nature of vegetables, by an expression of enlargement it is again delivered, "Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things." And therefore, although it be said that Abel was a shepherd, and it be not readily conceived the first man would keep sheep, except they made food thereof; great expositors will tell us, that it was partly for their skins wherewith they were clothed, partly for their milk whereby they were sustained, and partly for sacrifices, which they also offered. And though it may seem improbable that they offered flesh yet ate none thereof, and Abel can hardly be said to offer the firstlings of his stock, and the fat or acceptable part, if men used not to taste the same, whereby to raise such distinctions; some will confine the eating of flesh unto the line of Cain, who extended their luxury, and confined not unto the rule of God. That if at any time the line of Seth ate flesh, it was extraordinary, and not only at their sacrifices; or else, as Grotius hinteth, if any such practice there were, it was not from the beginning, but from that time when the ways of men were corrupted, and whereof it is said, that the wickedness of man's heart was great; the more righteous part of mankind probably conforming unto the diet prescribed in Paradise, and the state of innocency; and yet however the practice of man conformed, this was the injunction of God, and might be therefore sufficient, without the food of flesh. That they fed not on flesh, at least the faithful party, before the flood, may become more probable, because they refrained the same for some time after. For so it was gene rally delivered of the golden age and reign of Saturn, which is conceived the time of Noah, before the building of Babel. 1 infirmed.] What scriptural evidence have we that the flood had impaired the properties of the vegetables which had been and still remained as food for man? And he that considereth how agreeable this is unto the traditions of the Gentiles; that that age was of one tongue; that Saturn devoured all his sons but three; that he was the son of Oceanus and Thetis; that a ship was his symbol; that he taught the culture of vineyards, and the art of husbandry, and was therefore described with a sickle, may well conceive these traditions had their original in Noah. Nor did this prac tice terminate in him, but was continued at least in many after; as (beside the Pythagoreans of old, and Banyans now in India, who, upon single opinions refrain the food of flesh) ancient records do hint or plainly deliver; although we descend not so low as that of Asclepiades delivered by Porphyrius, that men began to feed on flesh in the reign of Pygmaleon, brother of Dido, who invented several torments to punish the eaters of flesh. And if Nor did men only refrain from the flesh of beasts at first, but, as some will have it, beasts from one another. we should believe very grave conjectures, carnivorous animals now were not flesh devourers then, according to the expres sion of the divine provision for them; " To every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, I have given every green herb for meat, and it was so." And is also collected from the store laid up in the ark, wherein there seems to have been no fleshy provision for carnivorous animals. For of every kind of unclean beast there went but two into the ark, and therefore no stock of flesh to sustain them many days, much less almost a year. But whenever it be acknowledged that men began to feed on flesh, yet how they betook themselves after to particular kinds thereof, with rejection of many others, is a point not clearly determined. As for the distinction of clean and unclean beasts, the original is obscure, and salveth not our practice. For no animal is naturally unclean, or hath this character in nature, and therefore whether in this distinction there were not some mystical intention; whether Moses, after the distinction made of unclean beasts, did not name these so before the flood by anticipation; whether this distinction before the flood were not only in regard of sacrifices, as that delivered after was in regard of food (for many were * περὶ ἀποχῆς. clean for food, which were unclean for sacrifice), or whether the denomination were but comparative, and of beasts less commodious for food, although not simply bad, is not yet resolved. And as for the same distinction in the time of Moses, long after the flood, from thence we hold no restriction, as being no rule unto nations beside the Jews, in dietetical consideration or natural choice of diet, they being enjoined or prohibited certain foods upon remote and secret intentions. Especially thereby to avoid community with the Gentiles upon promiscuous commensality, or to divert them from the idolatry of Egypt, whence they came, they were enjoined to eat the gods of Egypt in the food of sheep and oxen. Withal in this distinction of animals the consideration was hieroglyphical, in the bosom and inward sense implying an abstinence from certain vices symbolically intimated from the nature of those animals, as may be well made out in the prohibited meat of swine, cony, owl, and many more. At least the intention was not medical, or such as might oblige unto conformity, or imitation: for some we refrain which that law alloweth, as locusts and many others; and some it prohibiteth, which are accounted good meat in strict and medical censure, as (beside many fishes which have not fins and scales) the swine, cony, and hare, a dainty dish with the ancients; as is delivered by Galen, testified by Martial, as the popular opinion implied that men grew fair by the flesh thereof, by the diet of Cato, that is, hare and cabbage, and the jus nigrum,* or black broth of the Spartans, which was made with the blood and bowels of an hare. And if we take a view of other nations we shall discover that they refrained many meats upon like considerations. For in some the abstinence was symbolical: so Pythagoras enjoined abstinence from fish, that is, luxurious and dainty dishes; so, according to Herodotus, some Egyptians refrained swine's flesh, as an impure and sordid animal, which whoever but touched was fain to wash himself. Some abstained superstitiously or upon religious considerations: so the Syrians refrained fish and pigeons; the * Inter quadrupedes mattya prima lepus. Egyptians of old, dogs, eels, and crocodiles, though Leo Africanus delivers that many of late do eat them with good gust; and Herodotus also affirmeth that the Egyptians of Elephantina (unto whom they were not sacred) did eat thereof in elder times; and writers testify that they are eaten at this day in India and America. And so, as Cæsar reports,* unto the ancient Britains it was piaculous2 to taste which dish at present no table is without. a goose, Unto some nations the abstinence was political, and for some civil advantage: so the Thessalians refrained storks, because they destroyed their serpents; and the like in sundry animals is observable in other nations. And under all these considerations were some animals refrained so the Jews abstained from swine at first symbolically, as an emblem of impurity, and not fear of the leprosy, as Tacitus would put upon them. The Cretians superstitiously, upon tradition that Jupiter was suckled into that country by a sow. Some Egyptians politically, because they supplied the labour of plowing by rooting up the ground. And upon like considerations, perhaps, the Phonicians and Syrians fed not on this animal; and, as Solinus reports, the Arabians also and Indians. A great part of mankind refraining one of the best foods, and such as Pythagorus himself would eat; who, as Aristoxenus records,t refused not to feed on pigs. Moreover, while we single out several dishes, and reject others, the selection seems but arbitrary, or upon opinion; for many are commended and cried up in one age, which are decried and nauseated in another. Thus, in the days of Mæcenas, no flesh was preferred before young asses; which notwithstanding became abominable unto succeeding appetites. At the table of Heliogabalus the combs of cocks were an esteemed service; which country stomachs will not admit at ours. The sumen, or belly and dugs of swine with pig, and sometimes beaten and bruised unto death; the womb of the same animal, especially that was barren, or else had cast her young ones, though a tough and membranous part, was magnified by Roman palates; whereunto + Aul. Gell. lib. iv. * Lib. v. De Bello Gall. nevertheless, we cannot persuade our stomachs. How alec, muria, and garum, would humour our gust I know not; but surely few there are that could delight in their cyceon, that is, the common draught of honey, cheese, parched barleyflower, oil, and wine; which notwithstanding was a commended mixture, and in high esteem among them. We mortify ourselves with the diet of fish, and think we fare coarsely if we refrain from the flesh of other animals. But antiquity held another opinion hereof; when Pythagoras, in prevention of luxury, advised not so much as to taste of fish. Since the Rhodians were wont to call them clowns that eat flesh; and since Plato, to evidence the temperance of the noble Greeks before Troy, observed, that it was not found they fed on fish, though they lay so long near the Hellespont, and it was only observed in the companions of Menelaus,* that, being almost starved, they betook themselves to fishing about Pharos. Nor will (I fear) the attest or prescript of philosophers and physicians be a sufficient ground to confirm or warrant common practice, as is deducible from ancient writers, from Hippocrates, Galen, Simeon, Sethi, and the latter tracts of Nonnust and Castellanus. So Aristotle and Albertus commend the flesh of young hawks; Galen § the flesh of foxes about autumn, when they feed on grapes; but condemneth quails; and ranketh geese but with ostriches: which, notwithstanding, present practice and every table extolleth. Men think they have fared hardly, if in times of extremity they have descended so low as dogs: but Galen delivereth,|| that young, fat, and gelded, they were the food of many nations: and Hippocrates ranketh the flesh of whelps with that of birds, who also commends them against the spleen, and to promote conception. The opinion in Galen's time, which Pliny also followeth, deeply condemneth horse-flesh, and conceived the very blood thereof destructive; but no diet is more common among the Tartars, who also drink their blood. And though this may only seem an adventure of northern stomachs, yet as Herodotus tells us, in the hotter clime of Persia the same was a convivial dish, * Odyss. iv. Cast. De Esu Carnium. Il Gal. Simpl. fac. lib. iii. Non. De Re Cibaria. Hip. De Morbis de supersit. |