SC - Scottish oatcakes

[Philip & Susan Troy]

> > Peasants might > I've been under the impression that > They might
>
>Interesting. Could you give me a citation for some books on this?

Note all my qualifiers to indicate I'm winging it on accumulated ideas, not 
working from anything specific.  My point being that even casual research, 
one can get past the same tired assumptions that are in the review and 
possibly in the book.

> > those nifty 'stoves' that had a hole for the pot to sit on with the fire 
>in
> > a little hearth underneath, placed near a window for smoke to escape.
>
>Hm. Also interesting. Do you have handy any book titles of books,
>especially with pictures (artists impressions or whatnot)? I've been
>puzzling over fried food for  a bit.

I'm assuming you mean for the little stove-holes.  I'm sure there is a name 
for them, but I do not know it. I had "The medieval kitchen' by Redon et al 
from the library last week, and I"m pretty sure there is an illustration 
there. I also had Tannahills "history of food and drink in England" (or is 
it Britain?) so maybe the picture in my minds eye is from that.

>
> > >"We know sketchily what peasants ate and cooked and it was a much 
>simpler
> > >diet. There were fewer, if any, spices,
> > Your honest to goodness dirt grubbing peasant wouldn't have spices This 
>one I need documentation for, because peasants could and did have
>small amounts of negotiable cash in some places

OK, I wasn't willing to commit to that, though I thought it might be so.  I 
was willing to say the growing middle class did purchase spices. Perhaps I 
should have said "would rarely have had spices besides those received in 
lefteror food given as largesse."  Your peasant with a bit of cash could be 
a precursor to my middle class worker with a bit more!


>Furthermore, some things that were used for 'spices' (juniper berries, for
>instance, and mustard), were locally produced.

of course, I forgot that bit.

>
> > As to who ate what meats:
>
>Ok, this is the party line on SCA-Cooks, but I wish someone would write up
>all the documentary evidence

me too, so I could feel more confident saying it.

>
>Also, in some places, trapping animals was against church law; in others
>peasants got parts of the results of the hunt, and in some casescertain
>peasants appear to have had more access to venison through legal
>entitlements than many court people!

My point was that there were sources of meat other than raising a big animal 
and slaughtering it once a year, so we are in agreement

>
>Foods that don't fall in the usual discussion are kid, goat, mutton,
>coney, hare, and the wide variety of small birds.

I was attempting to include flesh meats that are often ignored. I didn't 
think of kid and goat, but meant rabbit as an all inclusive word 
encompassing hare and coney.


> > This somewhat true for some times and places.  Porridge is easier and 
>more
> > filling than raised bread or even flat breads.
>
>Gruels and porridges seem to be under-represented in SCA feasting custom,
>for obvious reasons. ;)

The thing is, they are useful for obvious reasons: cheap and filling. 
Frumenty and other grain dishes, essentially enriched porridge, were eaten 
by the upper class.  Very good if not allowed to become glue, but that can 
be hard when working in large quantity.

Bonne
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.