|
THE FORME OF CURY
THE FORME OF CURY SAMUEL PEGGE A ROLL OF ANCIENT ENGLISH COOKERY.
Compiled about A.D. 1390 by the Master-Cooks of King RICHARD II
Presented afterwards to Queen ELIZABETH by EDWARD Lord STAFFORD
And now in the Possession of GUSTAVUS BRANDER Esq.
Illustrated with NOTES And a copious INDEX or GLOSSARY.
A MANUSCRIPT of the EDITOR of the same Age and Subject with other
congruous Matters are subjoined.
"--ingeniosa gula est." MARTIAL.
TO GUSTAVUS BRANDER Esq. F.R.S. F.S.A. and Cur. Brit. Mus.
SIR
I return your very curious Roll of Cookery and I trust with some
Interest not full I confess nor legal but the utmost which your
Debtor from the scantiness of his ability can at present afford.
Indeed considering your respectable situation in life and that
diffusive sphere of knowledge and science in which you are acting it
must be exceedingly difficult for any one how well furnished soever
completely to answer your just or even most moderate demands. I
intreat the favour of you however to accept for once this short
payment in lieu of better
or at least as a public testimony of that profound regard wherewith I
am
SIR
Your affectionate friend
and most obliged servant
St. George's day 1780.
S. PEGGE.
PREFACE
TO THE
CURIOUS ANTIQUARIAN READER.
Without beginning _ab ovo_ on a subject so light (a matter of
importance however to many a modern Catius or Amasinius) by
investigating the origin of the Art of Cookery and the nature of it
as practised by the Antediluvians [1]; without dilating on the
several particulars concerning it afterwards amongst the Patriarchs
as found in the Bible [2] I shall turn myself immediately and
without further preamble to a few cursory observations respecting
the Greeks Romans Britons and those other nations Saxons Danes
and Normans with whom the people of this nation are more closely
connected.
The Greeks probably derived something of their skill from the East
(from the Lydians principally whose cooks are much celebrated [3])
and something from Egypt. A few hints concerning Cookery may be
collected from Homer Aristophanes Aristotle &c. but afterwards
they possessed many authors on the subject as may be seen in
Athenaus [4]. And as Diatetics were esteemed a branch of the study of
medicine as also they were afterwards [5] so many of those authors
were Physicians; and _the Cook_ was undoubtedly a character of high
reputation at Athens [6].
As to the Romans; they would of course borrow much of their culinary
arts from the Greeks though the Cook with them we are told was one
of the lowest of their slaves [7]. In the latter times however they
had many authors on the subject as well as the Greeks and the
practitioners were men of some Science [8] but unhappily for us
their compositions are all lost except that which goes under the name
of Apicius; concerning which work and its author the prevailing
opinion now seems to be that it was written about the time of
_Heliogabalus_ [9] by one _Calius_ (whether _Aurelianus_ is not so
certain) and that _Apicius_ is only the title of it [10]. However
the compilation though not in any great repute has been several
times published by learned men.
The Aborigines of Britain to come nearer home could have no great
expertness in Cookery as they had no oil and we hear nothing of
their butter they used only sheep and oxen eating neither hares
though so greatly esteemed at Rome nor hens nor geese from a
notion of superstition. Nor did they eat fish. There was little corn
in the interior part of the island but they lived on milk and flesh
[11]; though it is expressly asserted by Strabo that they had no
cheese [12]. The later Britons however well knew how to make the
best use of the cow since as appears from the laws of _Hoel Dda_
A.D. 943 this animal was a creature so essential so common and
useful in Wales as to be the standard in rating fines &c. [13].
Hengist leader of the Saxons made grand entertainments for king
Vortigern [14] but no particulars have come down to us; and
certainly little exquisite can be expected from a people then so
extremely barbarous as not to be able either to read or write.
'Barbari homines a septentrione (they are the words of Dr. Lister)
caseo et ferina subcruda victitantes omnia condimenta adjectiva
respuerunt' [15].
Some have fancied that as the Danes imported the custom of hard and
deep drinking so they likewise introduced the practice of
gormandizing and that this word itself is derived from _Gormund_
the name of that Danish king whom Alfred the Great persuaded to be
christened and called Athelstane [16] Now 'tis certain that
Hardicnut stands on record as an egregious glutton [17] but he is
not particularly famous for being a _curious Viander_; 'tis true
again that the Danes in general indulged excessively in feasts and
entertainments [18] but we have no reason to imagine any elegance
of Cookery to have flourished amongst them. And though Guthrum the
Danish prince is in some authors named _Gormundus_ [19]; yet this is
not the right etymology of our English word _Gormandize_ since it is
rather the French _Gourmand_ or the British _Gormod_ [20]. So that
we have little to say as to the Danes.
I shall take the later English and the Normans together on account
of the intermixture of the two nations after the Conquest since as
lord Lyttelton observes the English accommodated them elves to the
Norman manners except in point of temperance in eating and drinking
and communicated to them their own habits of drunkenness and
immoderate feasting [21]. Erasmus also remarks that the English in
his time were attached to _plentiful and splendid tables_; and the
same is observed by Harrison [22]. As to the Normans both William I.
and Rufus made grand entertainments [23]; the former was remarkable
for an immense paunch and withal was so exact so nice and curious
in his repasts [24] that when his prime favourite William Fitz-
Osberne who as steward of the household had the charge of the Cury
served him with the flesh of a crane scarcely half-roasted he was so
highly exasperated that he lifted up his fist and would have
strucken him had not Eudo appointed _Dapiser_ immediately after
warded off the blow [25].
_Dapiser_ by which is usually understood _steward of the king's
household_ [26] was a high officer amongst the Normans; and
_Larderarius_ was another clergymen then often occupying this post
and sometimes made bishops from it [27]. He was under the _Dapiser_
as was likewise the _Cocus Dominica Coquina_ concerning whom his
assistants and allowances the _Liber Niger_ may be consulted [28].
It appears further from _Fleta_ that the chief cooks were often
providers as well as dressers of victuals [29]. But _Magister
Coquina_ who was an esquire by office seems to have had the care of
pourveyance A.D. 1340 [30] and to have nearly corresponded with
our _clerk of the kitchen_ having authority over the cooks [31].
However the _Magnus Coquus_ _Coquorum Prapositus_ _Coquus Regius_
and _Grans Queux_ were officers of considerable dignity in the
palaces of princes; and the officers under them according to Du
Fresne were in the French court A.D. 1385 much about the time that
our Roll was made 'Queus Aideurs Asteurs Paiges Souffleurs
Enfans Saussiers de Commun Saussiers devers le Roy Sommiers
Poulliers Huissiers' [32].
In regard to religious houses the Cooks of the greater foundations
were officers of consequence though under the Cellarer [33] and if
he were not a monk he nevertheless was to enjoy the portion of a
monk [34]. But it appears from Somner that at Christ Church
Canterbury the _Lardyrer_ was the first or chief cook [35]; and this
officer as we have seen was often an ecclesiastic. However the
great Houses had Cooks of different ranks [36]; and manors and
churches [37] were often given _ad cibum_ and _ad victum monachorum_
[38]. A fishing at Lambeth was allotted to that purpose [39].
But whether the Cooks were Monks or not the _Magistri Coquina_
Kitcheners of the monasteries we may depend upon it were always
monks; and I think they were mostly ecclesiastics elsewhere: thus
when Cardinal Otto the Pope's legate was at Oxford A. 1238 and
that memorable fray happened between his retinue and the students
the _Magister Coquorum_ was the Legate's brother and was there
killed [40]. The reason given in the author why a person so nearly
allied to the Great Man was assigned to the office is this 'Ne
procuraretur aliquid venenorum quod nimis [i.e. valde] timebat
legatus;' and it is certain that poisoning was but too much in vogue
in these times both amongst the Italians and the good people of this
island [41]; so that this was a post of signal trust and confidence.
And indeed afterwards a person was employed to _taste_ or _take
the assaie_ as it was called [42] both of the messes and the water
in the ewer [43] at great tables; but it may be doubted whether a
particular person was appointed to this service or it was a branch
of the _Sewer's_ and cup-bearer's duty for I observe the _Sewer_ is
sometimes called _Pragustator_ [44] and the cup-bearer tastes the
water elsewhere [45]. The religious houses and their presidents the
abbots and priors had their days of _Gala_ as likewise their halls
for strangers whom when persons of rank they often entertained
with splendour and magnificence. And as for the secular clergy
archbishops and bishops their feasts of which we have some upon
record [46] were so superb that they might vie either with the
regal entertainments or the pontifical suppers of ancient Rome
(which became even proverbial [47]) and certainly could not be
dressed and set out without a large number of Cooks [48]. In short
the satirists of the times before and about the time of the
Reformation are continually inveighing against the high-living of
the bishops and clergy; indeed luxury was then carried to such an
extravagant pitch amongst them that archbishop Cranmer A. 1541
found it necessary to bring the secular clergy under some reasonable
regulation in regard to the furnishing of their tables not excepting
even his own [49].
After this historical deduction of the _Ars coquinaria_ which I
have endeavoured to make as short as possible it is time to say
something of the Roll which is here given to the public and the
methods which the Editor has pursued in bringing it to light.
This vellum Roll contains 196 _formula_ or recipes and belonged
once to the earl of Oxford [50]. The late James West esquire bought
it at the Earl's sale when a part of his MSS were disposed of; and
on the death of the gentleman last mentioned it came into the hands
of my highly-esteemed friend the present liberal and most
communicative possessor. It is presumed to be one of the most ancient
remains of the kind now in being rising as high as the reign of king
Richard II. [51]. However it is far the largest and most copious
collection of any we have; I speak as to those times. To establish
its authenticity and even to stamp an additional value upon it it
is the identical Roll which was presented to queen Elizabeth in the
28th year of her reign by lord Stafford's heir as appears from the
following address or inscription at the end of it in his own
hand writing:
'Antiquum hoc monumentum oblatum et missum
est majestati vestra vicesimo septimo die mensis
Julij anno regni vestri falicissimi vicesimo viij ab
humilimo vestro subdito vestraq majestati fidelissimo
E. Stafford
Hares domus subversa Buckinghamiens.' [52]
The general observations I have to make upon it are these: many
articles it seems were in vogue in the fourteenth century which
are now in a manner obsolete as cranes curlews herons seals [53]
porpoises &c. and on the contrary we feed on sundry fowls which
are not named either in the Roll or the Editor's MS. [54] as quails
rails teal woodcocks snipes &c. which can scarcely be numbered
among the _small birds_ mentioned 19. 62. 154. [55]. So as to fish
many species appear at our tables which are not found in the Roll
trouts flounders herrings &c. [56]. It were easy and obvious to
dilate here on the variations of taste at different periods of time
and the reader would probably not dislike it; but so many other
particulars demand our attention that I shall content myself with
observing in general that whereas a very able _Italian_ critic
_Latinus Latinius_ passed a sinister and unfavourable censure on
certain seemingly strange medlies disgusting and preposterous messes
which we meet with in _Apicius_; Dr. _Lister_ very sensibly replies
to his strictures on that head 'That these messes are not
immediately to be rejected because they may be displeasing to some.
_Plutarch_ testifies that the ancients disliked _pepper_ and the
sour juice of lemons insomuch that for a long time they only used
these in their wardrobes for the sake of their agreeable scent and
yet they are the most wholesome of all fruits. The natives of the
_West Indies_ were no less averse to _salt_; and who would believe
that _hops_ should ever have a place in our common beverage [57] and
that we should ever think of qualifying the sweetness of malt
through good housewifry by mixing with it a substance so egregiously
bitter? Most of the _American_ fruits are exceedingly odoriferous
and therefore are very disgusting at first to us _Europeans_: on the
contrary our fruits appear insipid to them for want of odour. There
are a thousand instances of things would we recollect them all
which though disagreeable to taste are commonly assumed into our
viands; indeed _custom_ alone reconciles and adopts sauces which are
even nauseous to the palate. _Latinus Latinius_ therefore very
rashly and absurdly blames _Apicius_ on account of certain
preparations which to him forsooth were disrelishing.' [58] In
short it is a known maxim that _de gustibus non est disputandum_;
And so Horace to the same purpose:
'Tres mihi conviva prope dissentire videntur
Poscentes vario multum diversa palato.
Quid dem? quid non dem? renuis tu quod jubet alter.
Quod petis id sane est invisum acidumque duobus.'
Hor. II. Epist. ii.
And our Roll sufficiently verifies the old observation of
Martial--_ingeniosa gula est_.
[Addenda: after _ingeniosa gula est_ add 'The _Italians_ now eat
many things which we think perfect carrion. _Ray_ Trav. p. 362. 406.
The _French_ eat frogs and snails. The _Tartars_ feast on horse-flesh
the _Chinese_ on dogs and meer _Savages_ eat every thing.
_Goldsmith_ Hist. of the Earth &c. II. p. 347 348. 395. III. p.
297. IV. p. 112. 121 &c.']
Our Cooks again had great regard to the eye as well as the taste
in their compositions; _flourishing_ and _strewing_ are not only
common but even leaves of trees gilded or silvered are used for
ornamenting messes see No. 175 [59]. As to colours which perhaps
would chiefly take place in suttleties blood boiled and fried (which
seems to be something singular) was used for dying black 13. 141.
saffron for yellow and sanders for red [60]. Alkenet is also used
for colouring [61] and mulberries [62]; amydon makes white 68; and
turnesole [63] _pownas_ there but what this colour is the Editor
professes not to know unless it be intended for another kind of
yellow and we should read _jownas_ for _jaulnas_ orange-tawney. It
was for the purpose of gratifying the sight that _sotiltees_ were
introduced at the more solemn feasts. Rabelais has comfits of an
hundred colours.
Cury as was remarked above was ever reckoned a branch of the Art
Medical; and here I add that the verb _curare_ signifies equally to
dress victuals [64] as to cure a distemper; that every body has
heard of _Doctor Diet kitchen physick_ &c. while a numerous band of
medical authors have written _de cibis et alimentis_ and have always
classed diet among the _non-naturals_; so they call them but with
what propriety they best know. Hence Junius '[Greek: Diaita] Gracis
est victus ac speciatim certa victus ratio qualis a _Medicis_ ad
tuendam valetudinem prascribitur [65].' Our Cooks expressly tell us
in their proem that their work was compiled 'by assent and avysement
of maisters of phisik and of philosophie that dwelliid in his [the
King's] court' where _physik_ is used in the sense of medecine
_physicus_ being applied to persons prosessing the Art of Healing
long before the 14th century [66] as implying _such_ knowledge and
skill in all kinds of natural substances constituting the _materia
medica_ as was necessiary for them in practice. At the end of the
Editor's MS. is written this rhyme
Explicit coquina que est optima medicina [67].
There is much relative to eatables in the _Schola Salernitana_; and
we find it ordered that a physcian should over-see the young
prince's wet-nurse at every meal to inspect her meat and drink [68].
But after all the avysement of physicians and philosophers our
processes do not appear by any means to be well calculated for the
benefit of recipients but rather inimical to them. Many of them are
so highly seasoned are such strange and heterogeneous compositions
meer olios and gallimawfreys that they seem removed as far as
possible from the intention of contributing to health; indeed the
messes are so redundant and complex that in regard to herbs in No.
6 no less than ten are used where we should now be content with two
or three: and so the sallad No. 76 consists of no less than 14
ingredients. The physicians appear only to have taken care that
nothing directly noxious was suffered to enter the forms. However in
the Editor's MS. No. 11 there is a prescription for making a _colys_
I presume a _cullis_ or Invigorating broth; for which see Dodsley's
Old Plays vol. II. 124. vol. V. 148. vol. VI. 355. and the several
plays mentioned in a note to the first mentioned passage in the Edit.
1780 [69].
I observe further in regard to this point that the quantities of
things are seldom specified [70] but are too much left to the taste
and judgement of the cook if he should happen to be rash and
inconsiderate or of a bad and undistinguishing taste was capable of
doing much harm to the guests to invalids especially.
Though the cooks at Rome as has been already noted were amongst the
lowest slaves yet it was not so more anciently; Sarah and Rebecca
cook and so do Patroclus and Automedon in the ninth Iliad. It were
to be wished indeed that the Reader could be made acquainted with
the names of our _master-cooks_ but it is not in the power of the
Editor to gratify him in that; this however he may be assured of
that as the Art was of consequence in the reign of Richard a prince
renowned and celebrated in the Roll [71] for the splendor and
elegance of his table they must have been persons of no
inconsiderable rank: the king's first and second cooks are now
esquires by their office and there is all the reason in the world to
believe they were of equal dignity heretofore [72]. To say a word of
king _Richard_: he is said in the proeme to have been 'acounted the
best and ryallest vyaund [curioso in eating] of all esten kynges.'
This however must rest upon the testimony of our cooks since it
does not appear otherwise by the suffrage of history that he was
particularly remarkable for his niceness and delicacy in eating like
Heliogabalus whose favourite dishes are said to have been the
tongues of peacocks and nightingales and the brains of parrots and
pheasants [73]; or like Sept. Geta who according to Jul.
Capitolinus [74] was so curious so whimsical as to order the
dishes at his dinners to consist of things which all began with the
same letters. Sardanapalus again as we have it in Athenaus [75] gave
a _pramium_ to any one that invented and served him with some novel
cate; and Sergius Orata built a house at the entrance of the Lucrine
lake purposely for the pleasure and convenience of eating the
oysters perfectly fresh. Richard II is certainly not represented in
story as resembling any such epicures or capriccioso's as these
[76]. It may however be fairly presumed that good living was not
wanting among the luxuries of that effeminate and dissipated reign.
[Addenda: after _ninth Iliad_ add 'And Dr. _Shaw_ writes p. 301
that even now in the East the greatest prince is not ashamed to
fetch a lamb from his herd and kill it whilst the princess is
impatient till she hath prepared her fire and her kettle to dress
it.']
[Addenda: after _heretofore_ add 'we have some good families in
England of the name of _Cook_ or _Coke_. I know not what they may
think; but we may depend upon it they all originally sprang from
real and professional cooks; and they need not be ashamed of their
extraction any more than the _Butlers_ _Parkers_ _Spencers_ &c.']
My next observation is that the messes both in the roll and the
Editor's MS are chiefly soups potages ragouts hashes and the
like hotche-potches; entire joints of meat being never _served_ and
animals whether fish or fowl seldom brought to table whole but
hacked and hewed and cut in pieces or gobbets [77]; the mortar also
was in great request some messes being actually denominated from it
as _mortrews_ or _morterelys_ as in the Editor's MS. Now in this
state of things the general mode of eating must either have been
with the spoon or the fingers; and this perhaps may have been the
reason that spoons became an usual present from gossips to their
god-children at christenings [78]; nnd that the bason and ewer for
washing before and after dinner was introduced whence the _ewerer_
was a great officer [79] and the _ewery_ is retained at Court to
this day [80]; we meet with _damaske water_ after dinner [81] I
presume perfumed; and the words _ewer_ &c. plainly come from the
Saxon e?e or French eau _water_.
Thus to return in that little anecdote relative to the Conqueror
and William Fitz-Osbern mentioned above not the crane but _the
flesh of the crane_ is said to have been under-roasted. Table or
case-knives would be of little use at this time [82] and the art of
carving so perfectly useless as to be almost unknown. In about a
century afterwards however as appears from archbishop Neville's
entertainment many articles were served whole and lord Wylloughby
was the carver [83]. So that carving began now to be practised and
the proper terms devised. Wynken de Worde printed a _Book of
Kervinge_ A. 1508 wherein the said terms are registered [84]. 'The
use of _forks_ at table says Dr. Percy did not prevail in England
land till the reign of James I. as we learn from a remarkable passage
in _Coryat_ [85]'; the passage is indeed curious but too long to be
here transcribed where brevity is so much in view; wherefore I shall
only add that forks are not now used in some parts of Spain [86].
But then it may be said what becomes of the old English hospitaliiy
in this case the _roast-beef of Old England_ so much talked of? I
answer these bulky and magnificent dishes must have been the product
of later reigns perhaps of queen Elizabeth's time since it is plain
that in the days of Rich. II. our ancestors lived much after the
French fashion. As to hospitality the households of our Nobles were
immense officers retainers and servants being entertained almost
without number; but then as appears from the Northumberland Book
and afterwards from the household establisliment of the prince of
Wales A. 1610 the individuals or at least small parties had their
_quantum_ or ordinary served out where any good oeconomy was kept
apart to themselves [87]. Again we find in our Roll that great
quantities of the respective viands of the hashes were often made at
once as No. 17 _Take hennes or conynges_. 24 _Take hares_. 29
_Take pygges_. And 31 _Take gees_ &c. So that hospitality and
plentiful housekeeping could just as well be maintained this way as
by the other of cumbrous unwieldy messes as much as a man could
carry.
As the messes and sauces are so complex and the ingredients
consequently so various it seems necessary that a word should be
spoken concerning the principal of them and such as are more
...
|
