Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
Cows, sheep and goats are ruminants; their digestive system, with mutiple stomachs, is
designed to extract carbohydrates and proteins from low quality fibrous vegetable materi-
al, in particular grass. Horses are not ruminants, but they have a long colon which enables
them to subsist on a diet of coarse grass. Though cattle can subsist in woodland, their pre-
ferred terrain, and the terrain where they excel, is savannah. Grassland, when it occurs nat-
urally, is usually dry, and a relatively small percentage of the nutrients are available above
ground in the form of leaves. Large grass-eating mammals have to migrate over large dis-
tances to locate sufficient food and water, and because the terrain is open, they prefer to
move in large herds as a defence against predators, which in turn tend to hunt in packs.
Pigs on the other hand are omnivores, and like humans they are monogastrics (equipped
with only one stomach). They cannot survive on a high fibre diet of leaves and grass, they
need higher quality foods such as grains, nuts, roots, insects and carrion. Chickens are
much the same. Neither animal is adapted for living in open grassland (except the special-
ized warthog) and pigs, who have no sweat glands and sparse fur, are not fond of prolonged
sunshine. Neither pigs nor chickens migrate over long distances or move around in herds.
For these reasons, cows and horses were the animals favoured by the Kurgans, Aryans,
Mongols, Huns and the other tribes who emerged out of the East and swept in waves across
Russia and Europe, down into the Indian subcontinent and through the North of Africa over
a period of 5,000 years until, in a sense, they were finally stopped by Charles Martel's cav-
alry at Poitiers in 732. We have only to imagine, briefly, the picture of Genghis Khan and
his followers trying to herd thousands of swine across the Asiatic steppes, to appreciate
why nomads didn't mess with pigs.
The pig, on the other hand, became the dominant domestic animal of those cultures
which preferred to stay put. For the sedentary civilizations of China, and the forest dwellers
and farmers of South East Asia and Polynesia, the pig was a much more sensible choice.
Where there were trees and little grass it was more at home. And in areas where forests had
been substantially replaced by intensive agriculture, the pig had a great advantage over the
cow: because its digestive system is geared towards high value foodstuffs, a pig is about
twice as efficient as a cow at turning substandard grains, waste foods and faeces into meat.
Most animals are good at mopping up waste, but the omnivorous pig is king of the midden,
and it is sedentary human societies which require scavengers. Nomads move on and leave
their rubbish behind.
It is possible to pursue the distinction between pig-loving sedentary cultures and
herbivore-dependent nomads a good deal further: for example it can hardly be a coin-
cidence that it is Judaism, Islam, and Coptic Christianity, religions of nomadic herders,
which forbid the eating of pig meat. 'Whatsoever parteth the hoof and is cloven-footed and
cheweth the cud among the beasts that shall ye eat … The swine, though he divide the
hoof, and be cloven footed, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you. Of their flesh
shall ye not eat.' These dietary rulings in Leviticus 11 are a clear endorsement for eating
Search WWH ::




Custom Search