SC - Question

[Philip & Susan Troy]

LrdRas at aol.com wrote:
> 
> << The question that keeps repeatedly flowing through my mind is , 'How do you
>  justify the writings of Platina under the heading of lard, which clearly
> state
>  that there were pigs so fat they could not move around with the paintings in
> period
>  illuminations? I really do not see how the justification of use of pictures
>  over-rides  written text especially given that men are often portrayed as
>  larger than animals in period illumination signifying man's superior roll in
>  the creation.  >>
> 
> I have recieved no treply to either of theese questions and wojld really like
> some dialog on this , privately if not on the list. 

What Platina says is that his friend Varro reports having seen a pig in
Arcadia that was so fat it could not get up [possibly an ancestor of Mr.
Limbaugh?] , and so fat that it could not defend itself from the
depredatons of a mouse who burrowed into its flesh, built a nest, and
gave birth to babies. So, the bottom line is what we have is a
second-hand report of one particular incident/case fairly far away in
what is now Greece. Yes, it shows both imagery and imagination, whether
it's literally true or not. So, what I would say to the question of how
it might be reconciled with period illustrations of long-legged, lean,
boarlike hogs, is that it might..._might_... be either untrue or
exaggerated. Platina might have been the victim of some kind of joke. (I
looked for some evidence of this in Millham's introductory chapter on
Platina's friends, but found no reference to Varro, even though he
appears to be mentioned in the text more than once.)

Another possibility is that ultra-fat pigs were more common in some
parts of Europe than in others. Bear in mind that in Northern Europe
during various parts of our period climate conditions were such that it
would have been a lot harder to build up fat reserves than at other
times. Some court cookery suggests that those who could afford to had
quite a high fat content in their diets, compared to many modern healthy
Americans, but at times in period many of the extra calories might have
been metabolized simply in keeping warm in houses without central
heating. This may also have been true of pigs.

Lastly, I recall reading someplace that many breeds of pigs now raised
in Europe and America are derived from Asian stock, which, while
unknown, in, say, England in 1200, might have been far more accessible
in Italy 150 years _after_ people like Marco Polo and William of Rubrick
did their respective stints in the Far East. In short there may simply
be a difference, genetically, between the "typical" pig in early period
Europe and late period Europe, which might account for the differences
in their portrayal in illustrations and text documents.

Uh, what's the second question? Or is that the question of whether
textual references are overridden by illustration, etc.? My opinion is
that they're not. Nor, on the other hand, are illustrations negated by
text. Both represent points of view which may or may not be accurate. I
think part of the problem here is that we're being asked to weigh
evidence against evidence and make a judgement when in some cases it's
simply impossible to make the call even with what we know. Sometimes
it's better to simply acknowledge the possibility that either or both of
two conflicting explanations to a phenomenon may be the truth. Or, for
that matter, maybe neither is the truth. We may never actually know the
nature of The One True Hog.

Adamantius
Østgardr, East      
- -- 
Phil & Susan Troy

troy at asan.com
============================================================================

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".

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