SC - non-member submission - broth information

[Seton1355@aol.com]

> On another note, I would venture the opinion that  technologically superior 
> plows, 3 field systems and moving planting seasons have little to do with the 
> manner in which pigs were raised. Similarly neither does the modern mass 
> commercial production of any type of animal. We are talking the average 
> holding here. 

A better question is, whose average holding? I think we are muddling our
discussion by mixing different levels of farming/holding. It is true even
today that those who have large numbers of animals treat them differently
than those who have only a few.

We have several hypotheses about different methods of pig-raising:
1. flocks of pigs tended by a pigherder, foraging in the forest 
2. pigs running wild in the streets of the cities, foraging in the garbage
heaps (we don't know for sure if these consitute multiple small flocks
belonging to a small group of owners, or individual pigs belonging each to
a single separate owner)
3. individual pigs kept in relatively small enclosures and fed slops, as
on
some modern small farms
4. flocks of pigs kept in extremely large hedged enclosures, presumably
including some sort of oak woods so that they could feed on acorns
5. individual pigs or small flocks of pigs allowed to forage at will
through un-enclosed forested areas, and captured later for slaughter.

There's also a postulate that medieval pigs' diets may have been
supplemented with swill made from sour milk, if I remember correctly.

I, personally, have definitely seen documentation for 1 (specifically in
France) and 2, and believe I've seen documentation for 5. I haven't seen
any documentation for large pig enclosures-- which of course would be only
economical for those with large pig herds-- or for small pig enclosures.

Of course, depending on the terrain, the number of pigs, and the amount of
labor available to the pigherder, there's no logical reason that all of
the above couldn't have been practiced in different places in the Middle
Ages.
 
> The  records of the large number of animals sent to slaughter  in Paris on a 
> daily basis, the high ratio of butchers to the  general population, as well 
> as the recommended  numbers of animals to be acquired for certain feasts lead 
> me to believe that agriculture simply was not the backwards inefficient 
> system  some people seem to think it was. We are speaking of an agricultural 
> society here. That is a society whose existence and culture  centered 
> entirely on agriculture in the SAME scope and ways that our current society 
> is centtered on technology.

I have no idea where this is coming from. I certainly do not now or have
I ever claimed that medieval agriculture was backwards or inefficient, and
I would appreciate not having it implied that I did. 

Agriculture has changed. Enclosures for sheep, for instance, ARE a
relatively recent trend (last 300 years or so). The clearing of previously
forested land also has changed agriculture-- in the time covered by the
middle ages, a great proportion of the forests of Europe were cleared,
thus reducing the amount of certain kinds of fodder but increasing the
ability to split up land and changing the kinds of animals it is practical
to raise on that land. 

- -- 
Jadwiga Zajaczkowa, mka Jennifer Heise	      jenne at tulgey.browser.net
disclaimer: i speak for no-one and no-one speaks for me.
"A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to 
get its pants on. " - Sir Winston Churchill