The Heretic's Feast: A History of Vegetarianism

Rating:
Summary: I agree, humans should have priority
Review: "A reader" says that humans should have priority. I agree with that. That is why I'm vegetarian. By doing so, I make more food available to others, and decrease my chances of degenerate disease in the process.

I thought the book sometime spent too much time on some subjects, and too little on others. But still, overall, a good book.

Lots of people have tried to make an issue about Hitler's claimed vegetarianism. Of course whether he was or wasn't has no bearing on his actions. But since so many people make an issue of it, Spencer had to cover Hitler. What Spencer says about Hitler isn't the same as what I had heard from other sources. Most other sources I thought said Hitler enjoyed meat, but gave up most meat due to digestion problems. Spencer says that Hitler was vegetarian just to be different then everybody else. Which is true, I don't know, but I would assume that Spencer knows what he is talking about.

Rating:
Summary: I agree, humans should have priority
Review: "A reader" says that humans should have priority. I agree with that. That is why I'm vegetarian. By doing so, I make more food available to others, and decrease my chances of degenerate disease in the process.

I thought the book sometime spent too much time on some subjects, and too little on others. But still, overall, a good book.

Lots of people have tried to make an issue about Hitler's claimed vegetarianism. Of course whether he was or wasn't has no bearing on his actions. But since so many people make an issue of it, Spencer had to cover Hitler. What Spencer says about Hitler isn't the same as what I had heard from other sources. Most other sources I thought said Hitler enjoyed meat, but gave up most meat due to digestion problems. Spencer says that Hitler was vegetarian just to be different then everybody else. Which is true, I don't know, but I would assume that Spencer knows what he is talking about.

Rating:
Summary: An excellent starting point
Review: Colin Spencer does an excellent job of covering the last couple million years of vegetarianism. This book is not an easy read, especially in the sections about the diet of early man, and the analysis of some of the early Christian sects. You'll learn why mainstream society traditionally looks at vegetarians as "cranks" Puritanical, or just plain heretical. This is slowly beginning to change, but I think that in some areas of the world, (esp. where I live) vegetarians are still those weird outsiders who are thumbing their nose at the hallowed institution of eating meat. You'll also learn that early vegetarians weren't vegetarians for animal welfare reasons. For the Greeks like Plutarch or Pythagoras it was all about reincarnation (metempsychosis or transmigration of souls) For the early Christian sects eating meat was a symbol of man's Fall from grace. Some early Christian hermits also abstained from meat & alcohol because they thought consuming these didn't jive with the ascetic lifestyle; you had to deprive yourself of luxuries to become spiritually closer with your God.

My only quibble is that Spencer could've covered the last 100 years in more depth. The last 50 pages is surprisingly lacking in the same kind of detail that Spencer devoted to, (for instance) the Early Christian era. Maybe the last 100 years has been covered better in other books? I don't know, since this is the first book of its type that I've read.

OK, actually I have one other quibble.....In the last 20 pages, Spencer goes off on a rant about corporate farming, the effects of livestock farming on the environment, the dangers of eating meat (salmonella, heart disease, cancer). I thought this was a "history" of vegetarianism??? I mean, I agree with all the things he says about the above topics. I'm an ardent vegetarian myself, but I wish he had devoted more space to the last 100 years of vegetarianism, instead of the polemic.

Another thing to consider is tha Spencer goes go more in detail about vegetarianism in Europe and the UK. If you want a lengthier discussion on vegetarianism in the U.S try somewhere else. This is still an excellent book for a history of vegetarianism. I hope that other authors will take up this topic.

Rating:
Summary: An excellent starting point
Review: Colin Spencer does an excellent job of covering the last couple million years of vegetarianism. This book is not an easy read, especially in the sections about the diet of early man, and the analysis of some of the early Christian sects. You'll learn why mainstream society traditionally looks at vegetarians as "cranks" Puritanical, or just plain heretical. This is slowly beginning to change, but I think that in some areas of the world, (esp. where I live) vegetarians are still those weird outsiders who are thumbing their nose at the hallowed institution of eating meat. You'll also learn that early vegetarians weren't vegetarians for animal welfare reasons. For the Greeks like Plutarch or Pythagoras it was all about reincarnation (metempsychosis or transmigration of souls) For the early Christian sects eating meat was a symbol of man's Fall from grace. Some early Christian hermits also abstained from meat & alcohol because they thought consuming these didn't jive with the ascetic lifestyle; you had to deprive yourself of luxuries to become spiritually closer with your God.

My only quibble is that Spencer could've covered the last 100 years in more depth. The last 50 pages is surprisingly lacking in the same kind of detail that Spencer devoted to, (for instance) the Early Christian era. Maybe the last 100 years has been covered better in other books? I don't know, since this is the first book of its type that I've read.

OK, actually I have one other quibble.....In the last 20 pages, Spencer goes off on a rant about corporate farming, the effects of livestock farming on the environment, the dangers of eating meat (salmonella, heart disease, cancer). I thought this was a "history" of vegetarianism??? I mean, I agree with all the things he says about the above topics. I'm an ardent vegetarian myself, but I wish he had devoted more space to the last 100 years of vegetarianism, instead of the polemic.

Another thing to consider is tha Spencer goes go more in detail about vegetarianism in Europe and the UK. If you want a lengthier discussion on vegetarianism in the U.S try somewhere else. This is still an excellent book for a history of vegetarianism. I hope that other authors will take up this topic.

Rating:
Summary: answer to the "reader"
Review: Som people want to excuse their meat eating on the base of Bible, but theirs attempts are futile,just because quoted often Letters of Paul are simply false ones,introduced to the Bible by clergymen who had been in opposition to true teaching of Jesus. Specially letters to Timothy I,and Timothy II are recognized by modern biblists as forgeries. I didn't know that not harm any creature is...."demonic teaching" It is rather false teaching of the "false apostles" -can be clled

DEMONIC TEACHING.

Rating:
Summary: The Heretic's Feast: One Spicy Banquet
Review: This excellent book presents a vast smorgasbord of history. From the Dawn of Man to the Ancient Greeks to the Early Christians and onwards, the book looks at the different practicalities and philosophies underlying vegetarianism and their impact on believers. The section on Pythagoras, more famous for his mathematics than his diet, is especially interesting in demonstrating how the Greek may fairly be considered "the first humanist."

The central part of the book deals with early Christian sects and is a genuine eye-opener, although it is not the lightest reading in the book. Quoting the Dead Sea Scrolls and other ancient sources, it is clear that the success of the Pauline concept of Christianity was not a foregone conclusion. It is fascinating to read about other opinions, some of which painted Jesus Christ as an enlightened teacher in the style of Buddha rather than as divine. Many of these sects were vegetarian but also shared many views that came to be considered as the foulest heresies, including the equality of women. The author shows the unfriendliness of Pauline Christianity towards animals and it is easy to see how a religion where humanity is promised the power to terrorize animals could result in centuries of abuse and horror. As well, the Established Church conducted hideous crusades against Christians who interpreted their religion in a different way. For many of these heretics, the refusal to eat meat was a sign of asceticism and sacrifice. The issues of animal rights and human health seem to be quite recent in terms of vegetarian philosophy.

The book is somewhat weaker as it moves into more modern times when it takes on a primarily English focus, although Asian vegetarianism does receive some attention in the appendices. It becomes a catalogue of movements and less of an overview. There are some striking errors in this well-researched book. For example, the author states the Canary Islands were named after the songbirds as support for his comment that new discoveries were named after birds. In fact, the Canaries were named after the dogs (from the Latin Canus) found there. There are also references that require more local knowledge. For example, "the snoek saga of 1948, which was a complete Government fiasco..." has no further details. My Oxford Concise defines "snoek" as the South African term for barracuda, so there is probably a fascinating story here too.

"The Heretic's Feast" suggests that throughout history, the desire to be vegetarian has required some courage. It runs counter to received wisdom although its logic is unassailable. Whether seeking to find a closer road to God, to exercise compassion in avoiding the killing of sentient fellow-creatures or just to protect one's own health and environment, the vegetarian in history has, with a few noteworthy exceptions, suffered a range of punishments from ridicule to murder.

With our knowledge of the environmental impact of intensive meat production, the effects of meat consumption on human health and the well-publicized horrors of factory-farming and slaughterhouses, coupled with the extraordinary array of fruits and vegetables now available in the industrialized world, there is simply no rational reason to consume dead animals. Mr. Spencer's thoughtful and entertaining book shows how far people have come towards this ideal as they have grappled with these troubling issues for millennia.

Many of the people quoted in the book demonstrate high intelligence and unquestionable compassion. I am particularly fond of the quotation from American naturalist Henry Beston, who wrote about animals in 1928: "They are not brethren; they are not underlings; they are other nations, caught with ourselves in the net of life and time, fellow prisoners of the splendour and travail of the earth."