[Trimaris] Re: SC - Highnesses, Lownesses, and Period Cooking.

[david friedman]

At 2:22 AM -0500 3/1/00, Jehanne Argentee wrote:

(I had written)

>  >So your position is that authenticity does matter in ordinary SCA
>  >activities, not just in contests, but only at a low level?
>
>Only to the level of practicality, and comfort. Above that, I concider it
>optional, and an individual choice.

Nobody is arguing with that--and it is irrelevant to the current controversy.

Her Highness didn't say that it was all right with her if groups 
chose to serve non-period foods because they didn't know how to make 
tasty period food--which would be the equivalent of your position. 
She asked people not to serve period foods--specifically, she asked 
them not to serve feasts that were all period, she asked them to 
provide strikingly non-period food for her and her consort, and she 
said she didn't mind if some of the food in the feasts was period.

>  >Once we
>  >get above that level, making things more authentic is only
>  >appropriate for contests?
>
>No, it is only REQUIRED for contests.

But nobody here is arguing that period feasts should be required, so 
that is irrelevant to what we are talking about.

>  >And you would actively discourage people
>  >from trying to figure out what clothing vikings would actually have
>  >worn in hot weather? (I don't think you  would, of course--my point
>  >is that that is what Her Highness is doing, in the case of cooking,
>  >and you are defending her).
>
>*sigh* No, but if I was going to be having someone pay money sight-unseen
>(and I rarely know a feast menu at the time when I send in the money) for a
>collection of Viking Garb, I'd like the collection to have a wide variety
>of sizes, cuts, and fabrics in hopes that something would fit and wear well
>in this weather. If throwing in a couple of cotton T-tunics into the
>collection would help guarentee that everyone who bought this grab-bag
>would find something wearable, I wouldn't object.

But Her Highness didn't say that she "didn't object" to feasts 
containing some non-period dishes. What she said she didn't "mind" 
was feasts containing some period dishes. And she did object to 
feasts containing only period dishes--that was precisely the point of 
what she wrote.

>  >>Similiarly, leaving pepper out of Leche Lumbard makes it taste better to
>  >>me, so I'll leave it out.
>  >
>  >On page 35 of _Two Fifteenth Century Cookery Books_ you will find a
>  >recipe for Leche lumbarde (v, not vi) that contains no pepper.
>
>Hmmm... Don't have that cookbook. Another to add to my wish-list.

You're getting leche lombard out of _Curye on Englysche_?

The reason I ask is that I am beginning to wonder if to you, and 
perhaps to Her Highness, "doing period cooking" means following 
someone else's secondary source recipe--which, unlike the original 
recipe, does contain quantities, hence is considerably more 
constraining than the original.

David Friedman
Professor of Law
Santa Clara University
ddfr at best.com
http://www.best.com/~ddfr/