[Sca-cooks] Pennsic Iron Chef Results

[jenne at fiedlerfamily.net]

> There's a very important difference between cooks having a contest of their
> own accord versus fulfilling a bet or whim by their masters.  In period, no
> one was independent and autonomous in the way we understand and experience
> it today in our democracies.  Everyone had a master, up to the king/chief
> monarch, whose master was God.  Everyone except the king had an earthly
> master.  That's why Shakespeare's players were the "Lord Chamberlain's
> men."  Though in reality they operated very independently for their day,
> they had to have a master.  Cooks served their masters, so if they
> competed, it would be on their masters' bet, whim, or desire.

If you're thinking of terms of employment, I can't quibble with that. On
the other hand, this sounds like the 'Great Chain of Being'. Recent
scholars have begun to quibble with the idea that the poor iggnrnt people
of the Middle Ages could not think of themselves outside the Great Chain
of Being.

For instance, in your example, what would be the reason for
knights to travel from afar to enter tournaments? From what I've read,
though rich men sometimes 'sponsored' groups of knights in tournaments
(Henry II's son Henry, for instance, took William Marshall into his
service for the sake of William's success in tourneys), one did not
compete in tournaments for the glory of one's liege lord but for one's own
glory -- and enrichment, based on ransoms, if one was good enough.


-- Jadwiga Zajaczkowa
jenne at fiedlerfamily.net OR jenne at tulgey.browser.net OR jahb at lehigh.edu
"Are you finished? If you're finished, you'll have to put down the spoon."