Dembinska Re: [Sca-cooks] large dayboard feast: need advice . . .

[jenne at fiedlerfamily.net]

> I only mention this for new folks who weren't around for the first go
> on this topic. (or the second)

By my count it's about the 5th or 6th.

> The standard I find not met is using marginally related cookbook
> sources to develop recipes included in a text presented as scholarly.

Yes. Though the recipes are set off in a separate section, and clearly
described as what they are, the entire section was written up by Weaver
who is clearly not a scholar -- one of the more annoying things he did was
remove sections of the original, translated text of Dembinska's PhD
dissertation, which forms the scholarly meat of the book, from the edition
that was published, because he did not feel that they were appropriate for
the American public.

> If you look at the sources they used, you'll find Forme of Curye and le
> Menagier among them (IIRC).

Ok, it's a bit difficult to tell this, because very few sources were cited
in the recipe section-- only recipes, like Pike in Polish Sauce, which
are pretty much based on another text (Welserin, in this case) really tell
you what sources they used. I strongly suspect that Weaver was working
from rough notes after Dembinska's death.

However, I don't find Forme of Curye or Le Menagier mentioned in the text
where the recipe books are concerned, or mentioned in the text that I
could find. However, _Le Viandier_ of Taillevent and the Liber de coquina,
along with German and 2 Danish texts, are mentioned as sources. There's a
reasonable argument for looking at _Le Viandier_ because Lewis of Anjou,
king of Hungary and Poland, and father to the queen of Poland in whose
time period many of the extant menus appeared, owned a copy of _Le
Viander_.

>  It is a bit of a stretch to use texts like
> those as foundations for recipes that "were documentably served" in
> Medieval Poland.

I have my doubts, not so much about the Viandier, but about those Danish
manuscripts whose names I can't recall but which I know we've all seen--
the mustard recipe in particular is indebted to them, and I feel using the
Danish manuscripts is definitely a stretch.

There is another book often used by SCA cooks (Maggie Black's _Medieval
Cookbook_) that mangles time and place in a similar fashion, but not with
such a wide geographical spread, and it's perfectly clear that she's doing
it because she's presenting (mostly) properly redacted recipes with the
originals-- it's just that, for instance, the chapter on Le Menagier
includes not one recipe from Le Menagier but recipes from older and newer
English Cookbooks, while recipes from Le Menagier are scattered throughout
other chapters.  Which makes that book a reasonable source for general
recipes but completely unreliable in terms of what recipe when and where.

>The authors did a thorough job describing foodstuffs
> and menus, then make no connection that I could find between that
> information and  the references they used to develop the recipes.

Some effort was made, but not enough. The text definitely reads as if a
non-medieval foodie had assembled it using someone else's incomplete notes
about the processes.

>One
> must make one's own ethical decisions about whether to call the recipes
> "medieval recipes" or not.  I personally quote the text, but not the
> recipes for any definitive evidence.

I don't usually recommend them to people unless they are looking for a
very specific Polish-style food and are not as concerned about SCA-Cooks
level of recipe authenticity. And of course I tell them that the recipes
are made up based on other recipes and extant knowlege of menus and
ingredients.

Unfortunately, I realize that this is an inconsistent ethical choice,
since I freely recommend Mint Sekanjabin as a drink and distribute recipes
for my own ginger-lemon drink syrup. *sigh*

> They even make a statement to the effect that the recipes are made up
> and are simply contrived by merging their documentation with the recipes
> they had available from other cultures.

Yes. I've been saying that repeatedly on this list.

> The info is useful, but the
> recipes should be used with caution and appropriate understanding as
> they are further from documentable than simply not including a period
> recipe.

I'm not sure if Niccolo (I'm glad you're back, I hadn't seen you for a
while on the list) is under the impression that someone might believe that
the recipes in Dembinska are redactions of extant recipes that are not
included. They certainly are not.

Certainly, if the recipe itself from which the item were created could be
produced, it would make the recipe more documentable. On the other hand,
simply handwaving at a period recipe as the source doesn't make a recipe
more documentable if it includes, for instance, recognizeably non-period
ingredients or simply doesn't follow the period recipe in any
recognizeable way.

I would NOT use the recipes in Dembinska as documentable for SCA-Cooks
purposes.

-- Jadwiga Zajaczkowa
jenne at fiedlerfamily.net OR jenne at tulgey.browser.net OR jahb at lehigh.edu
"I used to be one of them. Now I rather think I'm one of me." -- Terry
Prachett, _Thief of Time_