Subject: SC - four humours/food

[Philip & Susan Troy]

> Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2000 22:58:08 -0500
> From: Donna Kepner Ford <evfemia at mail.com>
> Subject: SC - four humours/food
> 
> Does anyone have information they would like to pass on as to how the
> four humours, Sanguine, Choler, Phlegm, and Melancholy related to food
> in the middle ages. 
> 
>  I'd like to know how different foods and various ways of preparing them
> may have led to a better balance in the four humours to a medieval
> person's mind.

There's a fair amouint of this in Scully's translation of Taillevent, as
well as his editon of Chiquart. Even more in "The Art of Cookery In The
Middle Ages", same author. I'm not quite sure, though, what you're
asking for. It's kind of an involved topic, but like most scientific
endeavors, it's based on at least some level of observation and
interpretation. The four humors, generally speaking, are based on human
constitutions with certain characteristics ranging from warm to cold and
from moist to dry. Foods also have these characteristics, and if
improperly consumed, can upset the balance of a person's humors. Foods
can also be used to correct this.

The humors, again, generally speaking -- opinions and interpretations
vary -- are described as melancholic, characterized as cool and dry,
phlegmatic, or cool and moist, choleric, hot and dry, and sanguine, or
hot and moist. Thinking about the modern definitions of these words, the
only one that doesn't immediately make sense to me is melancholic.

Foods, and also cooking methods, have their own characteristics as well.
For example, pepper might be seen as hot and dry (are _you_
surprised???), while something like vinegar is cool and moist, etc. So,
a properly balanced person might develop some kind of illness when
eating an excess of, say, roast pheasant, which, as a hot and dry food,
might engender unhealthful choleric humors in the patient. This is
prevented by parboiling and larding the bird before roasting, to prevent
it from becoming dry and excessively hot (boiling is both moistening
_and_ cooling, for some reason), and it can be served with a verjuice or
vinegar sauce to further counteract the choleric influence.

This is just an example of the kind of reasoning involved; the pheasant
example may or may not be accurately described, but as I recall it's
pretty close to the kind of reasoning applied by a lot of medieval
physicians to food and eating practices.    
 
> As many of you have pointed out, there are countless, varying opinions
> today as to how foods should be balanced in our daily diet.  (Someone
> mentioned the lovely snack promoted by Dr. Atkins of cheese wrapped in
> fried bacon.  Most of us would probably cringe at the thought of all
> that cholesterol and fat.)
> 
> I'm sure opinions varied as much in medieval times.  But what was
> promoted by the different personalities of the time about this topic?

Apart from Anthimus, who seems to have had his own ideas, there actually
seems to have been a fair amount of agreement _among doctors_ in period
as to the various qualities of different foods. Most are largely
derivative of Galen's philosophies, including the Tacuina Sanitatis
manuscripts, which are derived from Middle Eastern originals, but then,
as I recall, so was Galen. Middle Eastern, that is.

I hope this helps. This is a difficult topic to cover in three or four
paragraphs, but then people spent their lives studying it, so you can
understand that, I'm sure. You might check one of the Scully books for
more information.
 
> Kingdom Arts and Sciences, hosted by the Barony of Iron Mountain, is the
> weekend of May 26th -29th at Camp Coleman in Trussville, Al.  Hope to
> see you there!  Check out your Pop' Chiv''.  Feast and bed spaces are
> still available.
 
That's kind of a long haul for me, but would you be kind enough to sneak
up and give my warmest regards to Rosemounde of Mercia? Thanks!

Adamantius
- -- 
Phil & Susan Troy

troy at asan.com