SC - Re: SC- feast options was rant

[LrdRas@aol.com]

<<<<<<Jadwiga Zajaczkowa, mka Jennifer Heis on sca-cooks at ansteorra.org wrote:
One thing I think about from time to time: there is an assumption in this list that every recipe that appeared in the cookery books accurately represents a recipe that was cooked multiple times. There is also an assumption that the advice of period diet doctors is an accurate representation of period food practice among the majority of the population who could afford it. My impression from medical history is that while many people who were concerned about their healths, bored, or otherwise given to quacking themselves, did follow the advice of physicians, there were plenty of people who didn't bother and/or disagreed with the theories of physicians.  >>>>>>>


You present plausible ideas and beliefs.  My position is that when a recipe is provided in original language or translation, then I have definite proof that is incontrovertable that this recipe existed in a given time and place in history.  Any supposition relying on logic and/or deductive reasoning moves farther away on the continuum of probability and reliability.  Written accounts are primary, any deductions based on information and synthesis of same is, by definition, less reliable and more hypothetical.  While it may be plausible and well thought out, accepted by the community of scholars, it is still theory and has inherent risk of inaccuracy.  There is certainly a time a place for both, and I will always seek primary support over even strong deduction every time.

niccolo difrancesco