[Sca-cooks] Re: Irish Stew recipe

[Philip & Susan Troy]

Also sprach Hank:
>I found this very interesting, since the comment that it may have been
>common enough not to have been "documented" has been a theme in the past.
>This would suggest that there is a body of recipes, yet to be discovered,
>that "everybody" knew and so did not have to be written down.  Has anyone
>done any kind of a search for such a thing?  This draws to the concept of
>"if it was available in period, maybe it was used or cooked as we may
>today".  At the risk of unlidding that boiling pot, it opens up the range of
>possible feast options a great deal.

Sure it does. As long as one calls a spade a spade and speculation,
speculation. You can serve anything you want to at a feast, but it
could be seen as educationally irresponsible to present --for
example-- Irish Stew as coming from a documented period recipe if you
didn't have one. You might say something like, "This is my best guess
of how these foods were eaten in period, based on stomach contents of
bog remains, poetry, excarnation marks on animal bones found at the
Wadloo [made-up place name alert] dig, etc., which suggest that it's
possible that a dish somewhat similar to Irish Stew was eaten in
period." And this statement could be accurate.

However, what many, probably 98% of listeners who are not historical
foodies, will actually hear from your mouth is, "Blah blah blah blah
blah blah blaaah, blah _Irish Stew was eaten in period_."

Then they'll go and report to their buds that Muirghen has found a
period Irish Stew recipe. Shortly thereafter they'll plan feasts, go
and open up Kiki Moon-Unit McGrath's "Updated Recipes From the Auld
Sod's Emergence into the Crystal-Gazing Vegan 21st Century", or some
such, and make Irish TofStew Mexicaine, because _you told them_ (or
rather, they think you told them) that Irish Stew was a period dish,
and it has been given the Omminy-Pomminy-Domini Papal Seal of
Approval.

So, conclusion numero uno: possible feast options are already nearly
unlimited, so this doesn't really open up any new ones.

Conclusion numero-two-o (as Joe Bob Briggs used to say): it all
depends on what you're trying to accomplish.

While broadening the horizons of SCAdians who might feel that all the
pertinent research has already been done, and that we have a limited
menu of the 58 Officially Approved SCAdian Dishes from which to
choose and construct feast menus, is a good thing, sending them off
on an academic wild-goose chase is probably not as good a thing.
Whether or not you want to allow them to go off on one (even if
you're not directly responsible) by presenting information that is
perhaps ambiguous, is up to you.

Which brings me to conclusion numero three-o. While cases _can_ be
made for using all kinds of more-or-less [medievally] atypical, New
World or just plain modern foods at events, I mostly try to avoid
these, even if instances of their use in period can be documented.
(Of course, there are only two known cuskynole recipes... hmmm.
Doubtless an aberration that should be avoided. ;-)  ) Some people
seem to really enjoy presenting something that is widely believed to
be post-period, with some documentation, serious or not, for its
presence. "But I can document the deep-fried Mars Bar!!!!" This could
be considered an attempt to broaden people's horizons (see above), or
it could be seen as irresponsible (see above). It tends to lead to
the Mysterious Islamic Vikings With Guns phenomenon (Muslims are
period, Vikings are period, and so are guns, sooooo... .).

But ultimately, it's up to you to do what you want to do, for the
reasons you want to do them, and to explain clearly what your reasons
are. When you do that, it's up to others to learn what they want to,
and can, from your work.

Adamantius