The origin of Abrahamic dietary laws is not certain. There is no obvious benefit in terms of hygiene, also not in ancient times (they long predate “medieval” times). Keep in mind that poultry carries a significant risk of salmonella poisoning.
It has been suggested that the origin might have simply been that pigs are viewed as unclean due to their own diet including carrion. Another speculated reason is that rulers might have wanted to promote poultry due to it being a more economical way of raising livestock.
i have a specific unusual food allergy. I always presumed abraham or ishmael or jacob or moses or one of them mythical folk had a food allergy against pigs and said “you know what, if i started a religion about not eating pigs maybe i wouldn’t get the runs every time i went out to eat”
It reminds me of Northern Europeans stereotyping Southern Europeans as lazy. But Northern European don’t realise it is mainly because Southern Europe is very hot to work for longer hours. The Southern European “siesta” of course carried over to Spanish and Portuguese colonies. Before Cuba gained independence from Spain, they only work three hours a day, and this happened only about one hundred years ago.
No, that’s just an ad-hoc rationalization. Before refrigeration, people didn’t just leave fresh meat lying around. Either it was consumed immediately after cooking it, or it was smoked, cured or dried right away after butchering (people used much more salt than they do nowadays for e.g. modern hams to make sure the meat lasted a long time). The climate doesn’t really matter - in temperate climates fresh meat goes bad rapidly as well.
Could also just be an exaggerated case of “ew, poor people food”, since pigs will eat damn near anything.
I guess chickens are similarly omnivorous and take up less space though (plus, eggs). And are arguably easier to transport and defend (a rooster can fuck you up)
It was just medieval food safety to not eat pork in hot countries. They really need to update their software.
The origin of Abrahamic dietary laws is not certain. There is no obvious benefit in terms of hygiene, also not in ancient times (they long predate “medieval” times). Keep in mind that poultry carries a significant risk of salmonella poisoning.
It has been suggested that the origin might have simply been that pigs are viewed as unclean due to their own diet including carrion. Another speculated reason is that rulers might have wanted to promote poultry due to it being a more economical way of raising livestock.
i have a specific unusual food allergy. I always presumed abraham or ishmael or jacob or moses or one of them mythical folk had a food allergy against pigs and said “you know what, if i started a religion about not eating pigs maybe i wouldn’t get the runs every time i went out to eat”
Maybe they just thought pigs are too cute to eat.
Pigs of all animals?
I thought it was due to the parasites, worms?, that pork gets in hot arid countries which is why both the Jews and Muslims don’t eat it
It reminds me of Northern Europeans stereotyping Southern Europeans as lazy. But Northern European don’t realise it is mainly because Southern Europe is very hot to work for longer hours. The Southern European “siesta” of course carried over to Spanish and Portuguese colonies. Before Cuba gained independence from Spain, they only work three hours a day, and this happened only about one hundred years ago.
No, that’s just an ad-hoc rationalization. Before refrigeration, people didn’t just leave fresh meat lying around. Either it was consumed immediately after cooking it, or it was smoked, cured or dried right away after butchering (people used much more salt than they do nowadays for e.g. modern hams to make sure the meat lasted a long time). The climate doesn’t really matter - in temperate climates fresh meat goes bad rapidly as well.
Could also just be an exaggerated case of “ew, poor people food”, since pigs will eat damn near anything.
I guess chickens are similarly omnivorous and take up less space though (plus, eggs). And are arguably easier to transport and defend (a rooster can fuck you up)
Yeah. Religion is well-known for its acceptance of logic 😆
It’s religion, not science. Unfortunately, logic isn’t a requirement.