There is a serious shortage of pigs in Shakespeare. This
terrible fact only became apparent in the last few months, since we
borrowed three from friends to clear brambles and weed from our field. Never
having had a great deal to do with the animal before, I found them sociable,
intelligent, hardy, playful and affectionate. And having found them delightful
creatures, I wondered why they featured so rarely in the plays.
There is of course one very good reason why nobody refers much to pigs,
because until the nineteenth century, ‘pig’, from the Old English ‘picq’,
designated the young animal, rather than the adult. Mercutio talks of a
‘tithe-pig’s tail’ (a pig being given as a form of tax to the church), Caliban
mentions pig-nuts and Llewellyn extols the pig saying, ‘Why,
I pray you, is not pig great? The pig, or the
great, or the mighty, or the huge, or the
magnanimous, are all one reckonings, save the phrase is a little variations’ – but since he is Welsh he is a
figure of fun and talking palpable nonsense, which is only what Shakespeare’s
audience would have expected.
In other words, not a great deal of pigs. The commonly used words for
the adult animal were either ‘swine’ or ‘hog’. Sadly, these make few
appearances either. There are fifteen references to swine in the complete
plays, nine to hogs and four to sows. That means there are fewer mentions of
pigs, swine, hogs or sows than there are plays. This of course is deeply
distressing to anybody who loves pigs. It is also surprising, since the animal
was ubiquitous in medieval England.
Omnivorous, it was able to live quite happily either in countryside or towns, where it was of great value chomping up waste left in the street. Unlike sheep or cattle that only the more prosperous peasants could afford, virtually everyone could own a few pigs, their salted meat a vital source of protein through the lean winter months.
Omnivorous, it was able to live quite happily either in countryside or towns, where it was of great value chomping up waste left in the street. Unlike sheep or cattle that only the more prosperous peasants could afford, virtually everyone could own a few pigs, their salted meat a vital source of protein through the lean winter months.
Shall I keep your hogs and eat husks with them?
What prodigal portion have I spent, that I should come to such penury?
Added to this, there’s a servant in the same play who says, ‘Master, there is three carters, three shepherds, three
neat-herds three swine-herds, that have made themselves all men of hair; they
call themselves saltiers, and they have a dance which the wenches say is a
gallimaufry of gambols’. Even if you didn’t know that ‘the men of hair’ they
have turned themselves into are ‘hairy men’ or ‘satyrs’ (and why should you?), you
would guess their performance is a ‘gallimaufry’ (a jumble or hodgepodge)
because undertaken by carters, swineherds, shepherds and neat (cow)-herds. What
else could you expect?
Their dance may have been called a 'pig's breakfast' except that the term as used to mean something unattractive, a muddle or mess wasn't first recorded until 1933. 'Pig-headed' meaning 'stubborn' or 'stupid' dates from 1647 while expressions such as 'sexist pig', 'chauvinist pig' or 'capitalist pig' are obviously modern - though calling somebody a pig of any sort has never been a compliment. Richard III is denounced by Richmond as 'this foul swine' while Queen Margaret calls him 'Thou elvish-marked abortive rooting hog' - but since Richard's personal badge was a boar, he was probably asking for it.It's hard to think of any linguistic associations with pigs that aren’t pejorative. ‘Lazy pig’, ‘ugly pig’, ‘greedy pig’, ‘smelly pig’… the list is endless. Most such expressions in Shakespeare identify the animal as either lazy or greedy. In The Taming of the Shrew Lord says of the drunken beggar, ‘How like a swine he lies!’ and in The Two Noble Kinsman Palamon argues that to delay action would be to allow people to think he ‘lay fatting like a swine’.
On top of all this, two world religions regard the animal as unclean, a fact touched upon in The Merchant when Launcelot complains, 'This making of Christians will raise the price of hogs; if we grow all to be pork-eaters, we shall not shortly have a rasher on the coals for money.'
Why pigs are regarded as unclean is open to question, but perhaps simply because they will eat anything, however apparently disgusting. One might have thought this a virtue. It’s precisely because pigs will eat practically anything that they are ideally suited to a peasant economy - nothing is wasted.
For centuries, pigs were a vital part of rural life. Of her childhood
in the nineteenth century, Flora Thompson wrote in Lark Rise to Candleford,
‘A good pig fattening in the sty promised a good winter... The family pig was everybody’s pride and
everybody’s business… The children on their way home from school, would fill
their arms with sow thistle, dandelion, and choice long grass, or roam along
the hedgerows on wet evenings collecting snails in a pail for the pig’s
supper.’
Pigs remained
important well into last century. A few years before his death in 2002, Alf
Davies recorded reminiscences of his Bronygarth childhood in the 1920s. His
father was a miner and on the pig-sty wall were two stone carved Celtic heads,
now in the British Museum. Of the pig, Alf said, ‘They cut its throat and they
drained it out and Mam would be there with a big pan, stirring the blood to
stop it curdling. She made black puddings with that, and sausage. We lived like
lords for a fortnight.’
The killing of the pigs was not necessarily pleasant. Flora Thompson
said it was ‘a noisy, bloody business… but country people of the day had little
sympathy for the sufferings of animals.’ Ours went to the local abattoir. It
was under half an hour’s drive from home and looked like a jumble of farm
buildings. It was only small and our pigs went through together. They didn’t
seem distressed and their end would have been swift. I was sorry to see them
go, but that was always part of the arrangement.
They were great companions and it felt a privilege to get to know them.
Friendly and gregarious, they were rarely away from one another’s company and
there were never any serious disputes. It’s true that we only had sows and that
a boar amongst them might have been more disruptive, but they were incredibly
tough (surviving the coldest spring for fifty years with several feet of snow
on the ground for weeks), inquisitive (though mostly because they liked to find
out if anything new was edible), and intelligent (on hot days they quickly
learnt to upend their bucket of water so as to make a wallow). They were also
great softies and loved being scratched, one of them almost instantly rolling
onto her side and closing her eyes with pleasure.
Shakespeare was right about almost everything but he was wrong about
pigs. Thanks to Colin and Cath Stevens for letting us have them on our land.
Three more arrive shortly…
Photos: Kevin Hall
Photos: Kevin Hall
No comments:
Post a Comment