[Sca-cooks] Re: Fettiplace was Dayboard Handouts

[johnna holloway]

There are a number of problems with Fettiplace. Back in 1987,
yes 1987, C. Anne Wilson did an extensive article in PPC 25 entitled
"A Cookery-book and Its Context: Elizabethan Cookery and
Lady Fettiplace" pages 7-26. Wilson thought that the manuscript had
been added to between a 1589 original MSS and 1604 when it was recopied.
Recipes
were then added to it later as time passed.

Those wanting to work with Fettiplace might want to
buy:
The Complete Receipt Book of Ladie Elynor Fetiplace. Bristol, England:
Stuart Press. 3 volumes.
Volume I: 1994.
Volume 2 [titled: The Complete Elinor Fettiplace's Receipt Book]: 1999.
Volume 3 [titled as volume1]: 1999.
[This three volume set reproduces the entire
 Fetiplace or Fettiplace manuscript.
 Spurling published only a selection. Available in USA from Acanthus
Books.
 Amanda Ferris Anderson of Acanthus (www.acanthus-books.com) has also
 complied and published an "Index to Receiptes" which cross-indexes the
three volumes.]

This gives a more complete picture as to the full measure of what the
manuscript actually
contains.

Johnnae llyn Lewis  Johnna Holloway


> >You need to correct your date on Lady Elinor
> >Fettiplace's Receipt Book.  It is not "16th
> >Century".  The compilation date is 1604 [which
> >makes it 17th Century], but unfortunately, what
> >we have is a family cookbook that was added to
> >long after Elinor died, so it is unclear what
> >recipes are within period and what were added
> >long afterwards.>
> >Huette

---------------------------
> Diamond Randall wrote:snipped for length
>
> >From my examination of the book, I would classify (to novices)
> this specifically to be a collection of 16th century recipes collected
> very, very early in the seventeenth centry.   By using the vague and
> arbitary skips of 100 year intervals to define "period", SCA authorities
> miss the forest for the trees.  This is clearly an Elizabethan document,
> whether or not 4 years pass before it was all written down.
> snipped  The bulk of the work of compilation, illustration and
> authorship though was pre 1600.
> Fettiplace has a convenient and clear date of 1604, which IMHO is
> good enough to be considered Elizibethan and in period for the spirit
> of what the SCA purports to do.
>
> Akim