sca-cooks Transport of Foodstuffs

[Jeffrey Miller]

First, let me say that I by no means intended to open a authenticity VS
non-authenticity debate, nor did I expect (or apreciate) any of the
acromony that made its way into my e-mail box.

Beth Morris wrote:
> 
> Should we be attempting to cook feasts that are *typical* of medieval
> feasts (or at least as typical of medieval foodstuffs as we have access
> to them today - I don't get to cook with swan, heron, etc very
> often...)?
> 
> Or should we stretch and strain to include modern foods because it is
> possible that somewhere in Western Europe, or countries contacted by
> Western Europe, somebody may have once tried to eat this thing?

I never was asking about including modern dishes - I'm not "childish"
(as another poster insinuated) with my food tastes - I dove into my
first turnip/parsnip dish last night and loved it. I was asking about
the historical problem of 1) when did "new world" foods, including corn,
chocolate, and squashes get over to Europe, and 2) how were they
accepted into the diets of different members of Europe and its castes?


> Now, in all the cookbooks I've been through (and I've been through a
> *lot*) and in all the supply orders & household records, I don't recall
> seeing major orders for chocolate.  Sorry.  Or potatoes.  Or corn.  Or
> half a dozen other things that I've had people tell me are period
> because one person somewhere might have nibbled on one.  So are we
> trying to cook 'typical' things of the period, or scrounge documentation
> for oddities?

I'm not questioning your research :) I'm simply asking a couple
question, not positing a viewpoint - I have no agenda or menu to
justify.

One thing I do disagree on is corn - recent research has turned up
references to it in 13 and 14th century Chinese and Indian texts about
the medicinal and nutritional values of different plants and animals -
that's certainly not enough to include corn tortillas at a Saxon feast,
but it was around in some places besides the Americas.


Ron Martino Jr wrote:
> 
> ...warning, rant to follow...

Oops, my apologies, it would seem. I didn't mean to trod on "sacred"
ground.

>         Rather than spend time and effort trying to prove the presence of
> paprika in Europe before 1600, so we can serve 'traditional Hungarian
> cuisine', why not put our energies towards educating our fellow Society
> members in what (to the best of our knowledge) medieval cooking was
> *really* like?

I bet you'll find it amazing that I agree with you.. but I do believe a
balance must be struck between plausible medieval dishes, that is,
dishes of quasi-medieval nature prepared in a medieval way, and those
that are truely authentic that everyone at a feast will turn their nose
up at. Educating 150 feasters would be wonderful, but I'd also like to
feed them. The menu for my upcoming feast (<plug type=shameless>
Panteria II, in north-central Vermont </plug>) is all very easy,
tasteful medieval dishes that try to be faithful, a few dishes that are
90% authentic, and some that are probable pretty modern, but are
prepared in a "medieval" fashion. My shire finds that acceptable and
edible.

So I do agree with you, and also need to apologize _yet again_ for
opening a debate that has obviously been going on for some time, with
some bad feelings still floating around. I would ask, however, that I
never again recieve the nasty, spite-filled mail that I did receive on
this issue - I simply posed a historical question and wold have liked to
have recieved a knowledgable answer rather than the diatribes I did
receive. To those that posted, sent privately, or pointed me in a
direction positive sources of _real_ info rather than a position paper,
my thanks.

- -Eogan of the Open Kitchen-

- -- 
- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-		
	      jeffm at genghis.com
    http://luna.genghis.com/jeff/index.htm
- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-