SC - frozen pomegranate seeds

[Anne-Marie Rousseau]

Thorvald here:

At 12:32 -0500 1998-03-09, Philip & Susan Troy wrote:

> On the other hand, herbs are herbs, and we have no reason to think that
> an herb we automatically relegate to salads would have been so relegated
> in period. There are plenty of cases, both in period and today, of such
> green leaves being cooked with meat or meat stock. I don't think we can
> make the assumption that a perod cook wouldn't have done something
> because it seems strange to us.

Of course.  But it's not the sort of thing that Taillevent does in
Viandier, nor does Chiquart, nor does Menagier.  So that is at least 
a hint as to what might be the usual style.

I myself add salad greens in my modern cooking where others might not, 
so it isn't actually a strange idea to me.  But it is a strange idea 
when considered in the context of what I understand of medieval French 
(and English) cooking.


> What I think is happening here is that a colloquial expression is being
> employed, and sometimes these are hard to translate. My use of "tidbits"
> as an alternate term wasn't a guess, though. It was, I felt, the closest
> approximation of the alternate definition "to chew", in the form of a
> noun. I was going to use "chewings", which I felt didn't really say it
> very well. Bites? Better. Maybe morsels? Tidbits may have been
> stretching a bit, but wasn't done without careful consideration. Perhaps
> you could share with us your best guess, as you don't seem to buy either
> mine or Lady Philippa's.

When I first looked over your translation, I recognized instantly 
the care with which you had chosen 'tidbits', and could directly
reconstruct your reasoning.  And perhaps indeed improve on it.

For example, there is the Old French 'mache' with various meanings 
such as 'an instrument for grinding, a millstone', or 'a club'.  
The related verb 'machier' includes such meanings as 'crushing' 
(such as by using a mortar and pestle).

Note that the words related to 'machier' (to crush) are easy to 
confuse with the words related to 'maschier' (to chew) that you 
used.

Whether one starts from one or the other, both of them suggest 
breaking something into bits.

If I were doing an informal translation, I might have ventured
(and noted as being an inherently unsatisfactory speculation) 
'morsels' or 'tidbits' or some word of similar meaning.  So, my 
informal best guess might in fact have been identical to yours.

However, if I were doing a formal translation I would decline to 
guess.  I would go and pay a visit to the dozen or so Old French 
dictionaries at my local univerity.  If they (and other research 
and reflection) shed no light on the word, I would leave it 
untranslated.


Since 'machès' is an ingredient in the recipe, it is clearly of
some importance to try to get a good translation.

The precision of the rest of the recipe suggests that the author 
probably had an exact reference in mind.

The vague-seeming "small birds" that follows in the next line is 
not a counter-example.  In the 14th century in France the phrase 
seems to have had a fairly well-understood meaning for a cook or 
his hunter.

  Viandier has 'Small birds like larks, quails, thrushes and 
    others.'

  Chiquart has 'small birds (whatever they can find of these 
    without number)'.

It may well be that 'machès' is a colloquial reference similar
in both apparent vagueness and actual precision to the phrase 
"small birds".

It might also be, as you suggest, part of an elliptical reference 
to "the aforementioned ingredients".

It might also be, as I suggested earlier, a specific type of
bird not previously mentioned, and not normally included under 
the head of "small birds".

I prefer the last only because all of the ingredients otherwise
mentioned in the first verse, both earlier and later, are birds.


By the way, the presence of the accent in 'machès' is suspicious.
It suggests that the later author who is citing the recipe (or
some intermediate scribe) has altered it, at the very least by 
adding accents.  The accents were not used in Old French.

There is also the possibility that an error has crept in during
one or more removes from the original manuscript, and the word 
was not originally 'maches' at all.  If so, the problem becomes
nearly insoluble.


> > > : : : : :23.  Se tu le veulx de bonne guise,
> > > : : : : :24.  De verjus la grappe y soit mise,
> > > : : : : :25.  D'un bien poy de sel soit poudré,
> > > : : : : :26.  Si en sera plus savouré.
> > > : : :  
> > > : : :  23. Oneself it wishes of good pleasing 
> > > : : :  24. Of verjuice the grape there be placed
> > > : : :  25. Of one good (?poy?- measure?) of salt powder
> > > : : :  26. If it will be more savory
> > 
> > The phrase "un bien poy de" appears in Viandier as the Old French 
> > spelling for the more modern "un bien peu de".  In Viandier the 
> > meaning would be "just a little salt".
> 
> Actually, after an admittedly only moderate riffle through Le Viandier,
> I didn't run across that expression. Perhaps you could provide a more
> specific reference? I did find several occasions where the term "pou" is
> employed, as it is in this recipe, in connection with bacon or pork fat.
> This appears to be some small amount, but whether it is a specific unit
> or not, I don't know. Since you have translated "poy" in more or less
> the same way, do you think the same basic term is being used? If so, can
> you account for the varied spelling within a single text?

Yes, I am assuming that 'pou' and 'poy' are variant spellings
of the same word.

If you have any familiarity with old texts, you will know that 
variant spellings, even within a short passage, are one of the 
sublime 'joys' of the translator.

My small Old French dictionary (Greimas, A.J.  Dictionnaire de
l'ancien français.  Larousse.  1987.) lists 'poi, pou, pau, poie' 
as variant spellings with the meaning 'peu'.  Other spellings in 
Viandier and other cookbooks include 'pol, peu and poy'.  That's 
seven variant spellings gathered in a quick search.  There may 
well be others.

Specific references to the phrase "bien peu" in Viandier (regardless 
of spelling) are in "Chicken cumin dish", "German meat, rabbit and 
chicken soup", and "Stuffed chicken" (to stop after the first three
located).

The meaning for "bien pou" as "just a little" or "just a bit"
is from Huguet.  (Huguet, E.  Dictionnaire de la langue française 
du seizième siècle (7 vols).  Didier.  1961.)


> Also, I wonder if the spelling of the word may provide a clue. For
> instance, the term "moy" appears frequently, and we all seem to be in
> agreement that it is the equivalent of the modern French "moi". It
> occurs to me that over time, the spelling of "poy" may have changed
> similarly, giving us "poi", which could easily be a reference to peas,
> even if in a roundabout, colloquial way. Certainly a unit the size of a
> pea is not inappropriate for the amount of salt involved. When powdered,
> this would give our cook about 1/8 - 1/4 teaspoon, and the term would be
> universally understood as a fairly consistent unit by all European
> cooks.  

It is certainly correct that 'poi' and poy' may be interchangeable.

The spellings 'pois' or 'poys' or 'poes' (meaning peas) appear 
in Viandier, but do not appear without the 's'.  My Old French
dictionary gives 'pois' as the singular.  In modern French the 
singular for 'pea' is 'pois', not 'poi'.  Chopping the 's' off 
to get 'pea' is arbitrary, and is not supportable.

Also, if "bien poy" meant "good pea" (or good anything), then it 
would have to be "bon poy", since 'bien' is an adverb, even in
Old French.


> > > : : : : :27.  Se tu veulx que du pasté taste
> > > : : : : :28.  Fay mettre des oeufs en la paste;
> > > : : : : :29.  Les croutes, un poi rudement,
> > > : : : : :30.  Faictes de flour de pur froument,
> > > : : : 
> > > : : : 27. Oneself you wish the pastie tasty
> > > : : : 28. Make placed the eggs within the pastry
> > > : : : 29. The crusts, one pea harshly
> > > : : : 30. Make of the flour of pure grain.

I know it isn't your translation, but those last two lines just
don't read very elegantly, do they?


> > Similar misinterpretation.  The phrase "un poi rudement" is an old 
> > variant spelling for the more modern "un peu rudement".
> 
> And similar response. Possibly a colloquial expression. It may well be
> that "un poi" is an old variant spelling of the modern "un peu", but so
> far all I have is your word for that. I won't dispute your word, but I'm
> curious as to exactly how you reached your conclusion. Could you perhaps
> direct me to some more concrete documentation for the relation of these
> two terms? Please forgive me if I seem to be trying to poke holes in
> this claim; I'm not. It's just that when I hear a blanket statement of
> fact, like "x is y", with no admitted possibilility for alternate
> interpretation, as in "x is probably y", or "x could be y", alarm bells
> go off. You appear to clearly know this statement is true. I don't,
> probably due to ignorance on my part, since it's obvious I am not a
> student of medieval French. So, how do you know this?

I hadn't wanted to write a thesis, nor create a translation of my
own, so I had just put in my little suggestions without the supporting 
evidence.  That's what I meant by "informal suggestions".

Obviously more is requested, so okay, some supporting evidence, most
of which I've already covered.

The variant spellings for 'peu' I've listed above.  The variant
spellings for 'pois' show some of the same pattern.  Both are 
backed up by dictionaries and by transliterations of the Old 
French manuscripts.

The meaning for "bien pou" I've listed above.

For the phrase "un poi rudement" we get into syntax analysis.  We
have the indefinite article, then an as-yet-unknown word as an
as-yet-unknown part of speech, and finally what is clearly an 
adverb.

So, what part of speech can the middle word be?  Noun?  Unlikely.  
Verb?  Never.  Adjective?  No.  Not much left.  Adverb?  Almost 
certainly.

So we have an adverb spelled 'poi', an adverb that modifies the
following adverb 'rudement'.

In English, that would be "a ? crudely".  What words could fit
there?

If we look at our Old French dictionary, we find that 'poi' as
an adverb means either 'peu' ('little') or "à peine" ('scarcely').

So in English that would be "a little crudely", or some similar 
phrase (since both words can be translated in several ways).

Now, let's put the phrase in its wider context, which is "Les 
croutes un poi rudement faictes de flour de pur froument".  This 
fits even better, with the verbal phrase "un poi rudement faictes" 
flowing naturally across the line break.

The two lines then read in English "The crusts a bit crudely made 
of pure wheat flour."


I should perhaps mention that I do have some relevant previous 
experience translating Old French recipes.  I cite the first 
translation into English of Viandier (Prescott, J.  Le Viandier 
de Taillevent.  Alfarhaugr.  1987-1989.).  It is still in print.  
I get neither royalties nor any other financial benefit from 
sales.


- -- 
All my best,
Thorvald Grimsson / James Prescott <james at nucleus.com> (PGP user)


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

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".

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