SC - Kvass.

[Harold Tackett]

In a message dated 7/17/98 7:56:07 AM Eastern Daylight Time, troy at asan.com
writes:

<< Possibly, but the meat available in an urban setting _was_ what the
 enactors of laws were concerned about... .
 
 Adamantius >>

Asmare the laws that we have in the current middle ages concerning meat
safety. For instance, there are laws in every state dealing with trichonosis
in pork. A thousand years from now when these laws are found by then
"recreations" , is it logical to assume that we had a big problem with
trichonosis in pork during the later part of the 20th century in the USA?

If you base your observation on "law", the answer would be a resounding "yes".
Hopwever, since we live here we know that such is not the case. Trichonosis
has in fact virtually disappeared from commercial sources of pork and occurs
only rarely in rural areas with a large bear population. Never-the-less the
existence of widespread laws about it would lead one to think otherwise. This
is why I have a problem with blanket opinions about period laws being used to
extrapolate cultural practice and custom.

Lawmakers in all eras have passed their laws not because of some real
percieved or widespread danger but rather mostly on the basis of a few
isolated problems that could have a potential negative effect on the
population if allowed to continue without check.

Certainly there were probably isolated communities where butchers had to be
brought under control by leagal means. However, the existence of such laws do
not necessarily provide proof that a practice was particularly widespread. As
an example, a law forbidding the sale of rancid or tainted meat does not
translate into the conjecture that the population regularly ate tainted or
rotten meat.

OTOH, the medieval cookery manuscripts that we currently have access to were
clearly written for wealthy persons and nobility. These were the very people
who had access to their own herds, ponds, preserves, and rookeries. It would
take a very large stretch of the imagination, IMO, to believe that the
unscrupulous doings of a few merchants indicated a widespread dietary custom.
It would take even more imagination to believe that such observations would
have any influence on the ingredients and culinary techniques which we have
evidence for in period cookery manuals. And in the context of historical
cookery, we have only those manuals to guide us. 

In cultures that only recently stepped out of medievalism (this century) such
as China, India and perhaps the Middle East there is no socialogical or
historical evidence to support the view that "bad" food was regularly consumed
by noblemen or the wealthy. In the study of period cookery, it is only these
calsses that we have any evidence for.

A'aql (pronounced Ras)
============================================================================

To be removed from the SCA-Cooks mailing list, please send a message to
Majordomo at Ansteorra.ORG with the message body of "unsubscribe SCA-Cooks".

============================================================================