82 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



as easily assimilated as the prepared grass which we call beef and 

 mutton." 



This has brought me in communication with a very earnest body 

 of men and women, who at considerable social inconvenience are ab- 

 staining from flesh-food, and doing it purely on principle. Some peo- 

 ple sneer at them, call them, " crotchety," " faddy," etc., but for my 

 own part I have a great respect for crotchety people, having learned 

 long ago that every first great step that has ever been taken in the 

 path of human progress was denounced as a crotchet by those it was 

 leaving behind. This respect is quite apart from the consideration of 

 whether I agree or disagree with the crotchets themselves. 



I therefore willingly respond to the request that I should devote 

 one short paper of this series to the subject. The fact that there are 

 now in London nine exclusively vegetarian restaurants, and all of them 

 flourishing, shows that it is one of wide interest. 



At the outset it is necessary to brush aside certain false issues that 

 are commonly raised in discussing this subject. The question is not 

 whether we are herbivorous or carnivorous animals. It is perfectly 

 certain that we are neither. The carnivora feed on flesh alone, and eat 

 that flesh raw. Nobody proposes that we should do this. The her- 

 bivora eat raw grass. Nobody suggests that we should follow their 

 example. 



It is perfectly clear that man can not be classed either with the 

 carnivorous animals nor the herbivorous animals, nor with the grami- 

 nivorous animals. His teeth are not constructed for munching and 

 grinding raw grain, nor his digestive organs for assimilating such grain 

 in this condition. 



He is not even to be classed with the omnivorous animals. He 

 stands apart from all as The Cooking Animal. 



It is true that there was a time when our ancestors ate raw flesh, 

 including that of each other. 



In the limestone caverns of this and other European countries we 

 find human bones gnawed by human teeth, and split open by flint im- 

 plements for the evident purpose of extracting the marrow, according 

 to the domestic economy of the period. 



The shell-mounds that these prehistoric bipeds have left behind 

 show that mussels, oysters, and other mollusca were also eaten raw, 

 and they doubtless varied the menu with snails, slugs, and worms, as 

 the remaining Australian savages still do. Besides these they probably 

 included roots, succulent plants, nuts, and such fruit as then existed. 



There are many among us who are very proud of their ancient 

 lineage, and who think it honorable to go back as far as possible, and 

 to maintain the customs of their forefathers ; but they all seem to 

 draw a line somewhere, none desiring to go as far back as to their in- 

 terglacial trogloditic ancestors, and therefore I need not discuss the 

 desirability of restoring their dietary. 



