Manchester Memoirs, Vol. Ixvi. (1922), No. 3 



III.— Scottish Pork Taboo, 



By Donald A. Mackenzie. 

 (Communicated hy W. J. Perry, M.A.) 



(Read May gth^ ig22. Received for publication October I'jth, ig22.) 



Julius C^sar informs us that Ancient Britain was densely 

 populated ; that the coinage was of copper and gold while bar- 

 iron was used as a substitute for money ; that the houses were 

 very similar to those of Gaul, and that there were large flocks 

 and herds. He states, too, that the inhabitants had a religious 

 scruple against eating either the hare, domestic fowl or goose, 

 although they kept these animals for amusement or as pets. 

 The population on the south coast was Belgic while the inland 

 parts were inhabited by a race which, according to its own 

 traditions, was aboriginal (5, v, 12). 



Cagsar's reference to the existence of food taboos is of 

 special interest. Apparently these varied in different districts. 

 Dion Cassius, writing of certain of the inhabitants of North 

 Britain, informs us that although fish were abundant they 

 refused to eat them (6, Ixxvi, 12), which reminds us of Lucian's 

 statement (19, chap. 14) that at Hierapolis, fish were sacred and 

 not eaten, and that " amongst the Egyptians there are some 

 who will not touch fish as food." 



These ancient taboos are not yet entirely extinct. It is still 

 possible to find Highlanders who decline to partake of what 

 they call ''feathered flesh " or ''white flesh," and hare and 

 rabbit. Almost all modern Scots taboo eel. In 1918 the 

 Scottish Fresh-Water Fisheries Committee issued a pamphlet 

 entitled " The Common Eel and its Capture ; with suggestions 

 applicable to Scotland," in which it is stated, " The prejudice 

 which exists against the eel in Scotland is most unfortunate, 

 since it prevents Scotsmen taking advantage of a most nutri- 

 tious fish which appears to be well distributed throughout our 

 waters. No doubt," adds the writer of this official pamphlet, 

 " human beings have a natural aversion to creatures which 

 have a writhing motion like that of a snake, while the fact that 

 the eel is slimy as w^ell as wriggling adds to the aversion, till 



February^ iQ2j, 



