p-pigs-msg - 8/10/18

Medieval pigs. Modern efforts to preserve older breeds. Differences between period and modern livestock.

NOTE: See also the files: butchering-msg, pig-to-sausag-art, rabbits-msg, horses-msg, fishing-msg, livestock-msg, cattle-msg, whole-pig-msg, pork-msg, larding-msg.

************************************************************************
NOTICE -

This file is a collection of various messages having a common theme that I  have collected from my reading of the various computer networks. Some messages date back to 1989, some may be as recent as yesterday.

This file is part of a collection of files called Stefan's Florilegium. These files are available on the Internet at: http://www.florilegium.org

I  have done  a limited amount  of  editing. Messages having to do  with separate topics  were sometimes split into different files and sometimes extraneous information was removed. For instance, the  message IDs  were removed to save space and remove clutter.

The comments made in these messages are not necessarily my viewpoints. I make  no claims  as  to the accuracy  of  the information  given  by the individual authors.

Please  respect the time  and  efforts of  those who have written  these messages. The  copyright status  of these messages  is  unclear  at this time. If  information  is  published  from  these  messages, please give credit to the originator(s).

Thank you,
    Mark S. Harris                  AKA:  THLord Stefan li Rous
                                          Stefan at florilegium.org
************************************************************************

From: Uduido at aol.com
To: sca-cooks at eden.com
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 18:51:30 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: sca-cooks Fatty meat

<< Possible, but it seems to me equally likely that modern meat animals are
 MORE fatty.  >>

Modern breeds of cows and chickens are, indeed more fatty, however, modern
pigs are decidedly LESS fatty. Until the early part of this century pigs were
specifically raised for fattiness, as lard was essential to cooking and
preserving and was generally used to make anything we would now use vegetable
shortening or cooking oil in. 

(REF: The 1975 USDA Agricultural Yearbook (That We May Eat), "Streamlining
the Hog, an Abused Individual by Ruth Steyn; pgs.133-138)


Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 09:47:31 EDT
From: LrdRas at aol.com
Subject: SC - Pork/Lard in Platina-Some proof

This excerpt occurs in Platina, 'On Right Pleasureand Good Health', A Critical
Edition and Translation of De Honesta Voluptate et Valetudine by Mary Ella
Milham. (Medieval & Renaissance Texts & Studies, Vol 168. The Renaissance
Society of America, Renaissance Texts Series, Vol. 17. 1998)

On Right Pleasure, Book II,  pg. 163

21. On Pork Cuts

...............The pig is surpassed by no other animal in fat. Varro affirms
he saw a pig in Arcadia which not only could not get up because of its gross
fatness but could not even drive away a mouse which had made a nest by
nibbling its flesh and had borne baby mice..........

When a pig is a year old, it is fit for salting............From it you can
take lard at will.......Fat pork meat , not only fresh but salted, although it
arouses the taste-buds, is still entirely dangerous and of bad juice, as
Celsus says. (NOTE:Celsus Med.2.18.10 and 20.2 seem rejected by Platina, for
Celsus considers the fat meat nutritious.)

22. On Fat

Fat is made from the fat of a pig or geese in this way: put finely cut fat in
a pot over live coals so that it does not absorb smoke as if you had put it
over flame. Put in as much salt as you think is enough. When it has melted and
before it cools, strain it into a collection jar, and lay it away for use so
you can use it when you wish. This is also made from the fat of goose and hen.
- ----------------------------------------------

To me this clearly indicates that Italian pigs in the 1460's and earlier were
FAT. And it indicates that the fat was rendered into lard. I know not what the
English barbarians have in the way of pigs but I would suspect that English
and Italian pigs were not too much different. :-)

Ras


Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1998 09:11:34 -0600
From: Marc Carlson <marc-carlson at utulsa.edu>
Subject: Re: SC - period pigs, fatter or not?

<"Decker, Terry D." <TerryD at Health.State.OK.US>>
>The difference as I see it is foraging as opposed to grain fed.  For most of
>"period", pigs were foragers, with possibly a little grain feeding before
>slaughter.

I'm not sure I want to get too much into this, since my interest in
medieval piggery is fairly limited at this time (I'm still a bit more
focused on the cattle thing), but my understanding from things like Jay
Anderson's _"A solid sufficiency" : an ethnography of yeoman foodways in
Stuart England_ and such is that this more or less the case.  You bring in
your pigs for the winter starting in September and October, but for the
most part they feed on whatever "mast" they can root out for themselves.
The surplus animals that you are going to sell (starting at Michaelmas) you
fatten up on "pease". (Thomas Tusser).

While I have not read these, I've had suggested to me

(forthcoming)  Malcolmson, Robert W.  The English pig : a history.  London
; Rio Grande, OH : Hambledon Press, 1998

The Sheep and pigs of Great Britain : being a series of articles on the
various breeds of sheep and pigs of the United Kingdom, their history,
management, etc. London : "The Field" Office, 1877

Stuart, Rob. Pigs, goats and poultry, 1580-1660  Bristol : Stuart Press,
1995

Wiseman, J. (Julian) A history of the British pig London : Duckworth, 1986

Diarmaid

I. Marc Carlson
McFarlin Library, University of Tulsa -or- Tulsa Community College West
Campus LRC


Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 23:07:26 -0600
From: "I. Marc Carlson" <LIB_IMC at centum.utulsa.edu>
Subject: Re: SC - Period pigs,-the final word for a while

<LrdRas at aol.com>
>Thank-you, m'lord for posting these references. As soon as I get my grubby
>hands  on these tomes and go over them I will post a synopsis and my
>conclusions...

You are welcome.  If it's of any furlther help, I did some rooting
around (much of it at "www.ansi.okstate.edu/swine" and it looks to me
like tracing the medieval pig breeds will be even more tricky than
the Cattle.  For one thing, the terms are deceptively similar, although
difference (for example: "Landrace" in cattle is a general term for an
unimproved ancetral breed, whereas in swine it is used to refer to a
specific breed, first found in Denmark in the 1890s, and the various
national breeds that derive from them).

It does appear that reproducing medieval pigs may be a bit of a problem
since the larger pigs we have today seem to be descended from an influx
of Chinese pigs in the 1700s.  You might look at the Welsh, the Tamworth
(which is probably derived from the "Old English Hog", the Berkshire
(which purports to date back to Cromwell), and the Ossaban Island Hogs,
in Georgia, which have been relatively untouched since a Spanish shipwreck
in the 1500s.

Good luck, if I can be of any help, please let me know.

Marc/Diarmaid


Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1998 13:40:16 -0500
From: Bagbane at ix.netcom.com
Subject: Re: SC - Period pigs,-the final word for a while

As to the question of Medieval pigs, Yes they were leaner. I was
watching a program at 2:30am on the local educational channel
about 'Old Breed' animals. It seems that there is an intrest in trying
to save 'Old Breed' animals among farmers. One of the examples
they gave was a breed of pig that was known back in medieval
times. It seems that this breed didn't grow as fast as the more
modern breed and took longer to get to a weight to go to market.
Modern breeds grow faster becouse of the fat content. This breed
was more muscle than fat thus a leaner cut of meat. They were
also talking about an 'Old Breed' of cow that could give milk for 7
years instead of the normal 3 for a Jersy. The Jersey gives more
milk but in the long run the old breed was cheaper to keep in the
long run and didn't have some of the problems associated with the
Jersey. It seems that some times faster and bigger isn't always
better. :-)

Badger


Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1998 21:05:10 EST
From: LrdRas at aol.com
Subject: SC - Period Pigs-Final Findings

<<Actually, Ras, looking at many, many paintings and illuminations of pigs
in period, there are a lot of us who agree with Anne Marie that pigs were
leaner, rather than with you, saying they were bred for fat.>>

The question that keeps repeatedly flowing through my mind is, 'How do you
justify the writings of Platina under the heading of lard, which clearly
state that there were pigs so fat they could not move around with period
illuminations? I really do not see how the justification of use of pictures
over-rides written text especially given that men are often portrayed as
larger than animals in period illumination signifying man's superior roll in
the creation.

While I now agree that there were pigs that were smaller this does not
necessarily translate into less fat in all instances. For example, Yorkshires
and a couple of other breeds weighing in at up to 1000 pounds in well-grown
specimens were not unknown. Most breeds averaged between 200 to 500 pounds
at market weight. With not a few averaging only 150 to 200 pounds.

So far, I have found that many local breeds were usually on the 'lean' side
but I have also found mention of 'bacon' pigs. That is, varities grown
specifically for lard production. These are mentioned as being larger than
the average pig.

In the 1800's, genetic material from Chinese pigs was introduced into the
herds for the specific purpose of producing pigs that would grow to market
weight faster and to produce sows that would keep a larger percentage of their
piglets alive. Prior to this careful breeding using pigs that were efficient
foragers was the norm. And those pigs were not, as has been suggested by at
least one other person on the the list, driven anywhere for slaughter.
Although pigs live in herds, they, unlike cattle, sheep or horses, are not
'herded' in the sense of being rushed about willy-nilly by dogs or man. The
distances they traveled about was in fact quite a small area being confines
for the most part to a few acres.

Therefore, I conclude that both bacon (e.g. lard) pigs and smaller meat pigs
were grown in period  According to the Domesday listings, the average English
holding was between 30 and 60 acres and pig herds numbered between 8 to 30
pigs with the lower number being the average size herd kept by any landholder.
It would only take one or 2 of these pigs, fattened specifically for
lard/bacon production to supply the needs of an average household on an
annual basis with the rest being grown for hams, loin bacon, puddings, etc.

Unfortunately, there is a lack of records on period pig production so any
further conclusions are impossible at this time. Any comments are welcome.

al-Sayyid A'aql ibn Ras al-Zib
(who found this whole process of studying the agricultural practices of the
barbaric Northerners an interesting learning experience)


Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 15:24:04 EST
From: LrdRas at aol.com
Subject: SC - Pigs revisited-long

allilyn at juno.com writes:
<< What else have you read?
Allison >>

My sources were included in 2 previous posts on the subject. One posted several 
months ago and the final one I posted referencing Yorksire that grew up to 1000
lbs. The FDA yearbook infactically states 2 things that are of particular interest. One was that pigs have been consistently bred for leanness ONLY since the inception of vegetable shortenings and oils in the last half of THIS century
made lard virtually unnecessary. And the second interesting tidbit was that
through modern breeding programs designed to produce LEANER pork, there has
been a deterioration of the quality of the flesh.

Also others have mentioned that Chinese pigs were bred into modern pig lines
in the 19th century. Since the introduction of those genes was SPECIFICALLY
used to increase survival of litters and to bring the pig to market weight
QUICKER, it clearly shows that pigs before such genetic manipulation had
smaller litters and took somewhat longer to reach market weight. Market weight
has remained pretty much constant for centuries (300 to 500 lbs. for pigs as
opposed to a 600 plus weight for hogs. According to the Domesday produced by
England's Norman conquerers, the average land-holder owned 30 to 60 acres of
land and possesed 8 to 30 pigs/hogs with lower numbers of pigs being the
norm

University of Oklahoma researchers state that it was not until THIS century
that intensive research and breeding programs were specifically geared toward
producing leaner pork. Before that breeding was geared exclusively toward
'bacon) (e.g. lard) production, reaching a pinnacle in the Victorian era when
hogs weighing over a half ton were not uncommon. During the Middle Ages stock
selection for breeding was based on foraging expertise, which translates into
the quality of a pig being able to quickly reach market weight through its
own devices.

So far as the boar vs. pig question, I would say that if a period picture of
a pig looks like a boar, then it is a boar. Boars are not only a different
species but also have a completely different body structure than domesticated
pigs. Basically, if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, etc. Since boar
hunting was a perogative of the medieval nobleman, it doesn't surprise me that
a large percentage of illuminations of pig-like creatures bear more of a
resemblance to 'boars' instead of pigs.

I agree that Platina's example of a pig so fat that it could not prevent a
mouse from gnawing a nest in it's side and rearing a family is unique. I do
not, however, think he meant it to be viewed as sensational. The fact that the
word he used is 'pig' and not 'hog' is what I find significant. He was not
stating that hogs that large were unsual. He was clearly staing that he found
the story of a 'pig' that large unusual. I agree with him.

Finally, a call to the local Agricultural extention officer, produced the
interesting comment that until 25 yrs ago, it was considered a 'good' thing to
have an excessively large percentage of back fat on a pig. What makes this
statement interesting is that the thickness of backfat is how the value of a
market pig is determined.

Couple this with  the small number of period recipes using pork as opposed to
bacon, there can be no other conclusion than one which views period pigs as a
major source of bacon/lard rather than meat, IMO.

Ras


Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 23:35:48 EST
From: LrdRas at aol.com
Subject: SC - Pigs and hogs

THLRenata at aol.com writes:
<< what is the difference between a pig and a hog?
            Renata >>

A pig is smaller at market weight and has less fat. Hogs are full grown and
have attained market weight.

According to the Domesday of the 'Manors of the Abbey of St. Peter,
Winchester, 1086', (County of Hants. Manor of Micheldever)- "The same
Abbey......<snip>...There are...<snip>... woods for four hogs.  The Domesday-
Book: Hecham, 1086 says that there were " woods for 300 swine" but that "At that
time there was 1 ox, now there are 15 cattle and I small horse and 18 swine".
( Swine is the term for a mixture of pigs and hogs). Asnapium: An Inventory of
One of Charlemagne's Estates, c. 800 states that "Of farm produce: ...<snip>
lard, from last year 10 sides; new sides, 200, with fragments and fats;
...<snip>.... 260 hogs; 100 pigs; 5 boars;

Of particular interest was the fact that Charlemagne's inventory shows 200 new
sides of lard. which indicates that there were 460 hogs on the estate that
had been recently butchered to provide lard.

Ras


Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 22:43:57 -0600
From: "Decker, Terry D." <TerryD at Health.State.OK.US>
Subject: RE: SC - Pigs revisited-long

> Please enlighten an ignorant city girl -- what is the difference between a
> pig and a hog?
>
> Renata

According to the quick ref, pig and hog are common terms for several members
of the family Suidae.  When applied to the domestic pig, Sus scrofa, a pig
is 120 pounds or less, while a hog is over 120 pounds.

Bear


Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 09:11:20 -0500
From: "Philippa Alderton" <phlip at bright.net>
Subject: Re: SC - Pigs revisited-long

Bear said:
>Thinking about this, I would first question the quality of the translation
and second I would wonder if Platina is trying to describe a species
differentiation without having the proper vocabulary to do so.<

>When did we start differentiating between a pig and a hog by the weight of
the animal?<

I don't know the answer to this one- I always thought a pig was a young,
immature animal, past nursing (ie, not a piglet), a hog was a gelded male,
being raised for butchering, a gilt was an unbred female, a boar was a
breeding male, and a sow was a breeding female.

Phlip
Caer Frig
Barony of the Middle Marches
Middle Kingdom


Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 10:55:57 -0500
From: Philip & Susan Troy <troy at asan.com>
Subject: Re: SC - Pigs revisited-long

"Decker, Terry D." wrote, in response to Ras and Mordonna:
>> The fact that the
>> word he used is 'pig' and not 'hog' is what I find significant. He was not
>> stating that hogs that large were unsual. He was clearly staing that he
>> found the story of a 'pig' that large unusual. I agree with him.
<snip>

> Thinking about this, I would first question the quality of the translation
> and second I would wonder if Platina is trying to describe a species
> differentiation without having the proper vocabulary to do so.

Platina uses the word porcus, which my Latin dictionary translates as a
pig or hog, with the feminine porca meaning sow. Another, slightly more
generic term is sus, which translates as sow, swine, pig, or hog.
Possibly the distinction as modernly applied simply didn't exist, or was
different.

I did just find a semi-clue in my (pfeh!) Webster's Dictionary: it seems
apparent both pigge and hogge are beginning to be used in Middle English
over the Anglo-Saxon schwein variant words. The gist of what I read
seems to be that a pig is a pig, whereas the word "hog" may be derived
from both Anglo Saxon and Old Norse words meaning to hew or cut. The
implication seems to be that the word "hog" is applied over "pig" when
the animal is castrated, which would certainly tend to produce a fatter
animal, if not necessarily a larger one. This doesn't mean all hogs are
necessarily castrated, but that all castrated pigs end up as hogs, more
or less.

Now we know capons are specified in many Middle English recipes, and
there seems to be little doubt as to how they were produced, but I don't
recall seeing any evidence regarding the production or consumption of
castrated steers (probably either because cattle were sometimes expected
to do a little work before slaughter, or else because even immature
bulls tend to become upset when you slice off delicate portions of their
anatomy, and express their displeasure in various violent ways). Has
anyone ever heard of a period example of castrating bulls or pigs to
produce large, docile meat animals?

Adamantius, off looking for Tacuinum Sanitatis
Østgardr, East


Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1998 10:23:03 -0500
From: "LHG, JRG" <liontamr at ptd.net>
Subject: RE: SC - Pork Assumptions: Pro and Con

Though OOP (17oos), I offer the following which seems to support Ras's view of
the introduction of Chinese pig genes to the pool specifically the timing
of reaching marketable weight---otherwise the directions would likely not
exist in the book containing special recipes and household instructions
known as "Lady Castlehill's Receipt Book" (Molendinar Press, Glasgow,
original and complete MS in the posession of the Mitchell Library and the
property of  Sir Muir Edward Sinclair-Lockhart. It was produced,
frustratingly, as a coffee-table book rather than a serious work but pretty
accurate for all that. Punctuation was slightly changed but not the
original wording or spelling. ISBN 0904002-20-9  1976, copyright Hamish
Whyte):

To Feed Brawne with Whey to be killed at Michaelmas to be up att midesunner
If you have a convenient place  tye the Brawne under a Tree; if not in a
Stye or Swyne house. Give only whey before it be boiled asit comes from the
cheese. You must give him butt a little at a time & give it often; be sure
to give it early and late. Sometimes you must put in the whey a little
Flower of Brimstone or Lye made with Ashes, doubting the Boare may have the
Meazels. A week before you kill him you must feed him with boiled barly.
The Brawne must be put up att midesummer.

(Note Michaelmas is in autumn, and I believe the end instructions  note that
it will not keep forever: It must be further preserved when the weather
gets warm--midesummer). A further note for cheesemakers is that whey is
apparently boiled before consumption (in very late period there were
whey-houses much as we have coffee houses today).

Aoife


Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 22:55:05 -0400
From: Bernadette Crumb <kerelsen at ptd.net>
Subject: Re: SC - Recipe 4-Weekend of Wisdom

Seton1355 at aol.com wrote:
> OK, but why is salt pork used over fresh?  Didn't they have fresh?  Were they
> on a long sea voyage? I always understood that salt anything was saved for
> when you didn't have fresh something.  And having a pig for meat seems common
> enough.
> Phillipa Seton

While my experience with pig slaughtering dealt more with 1700s
and 1800s, I would be surprised if things had changed too
drastically from the middle ages.

Pigs are generally born in the spring.  They are usually fattened
over the course of the summer and early autumn, and then
slaughtered in November (or at least after the daily temperature
has approached the freezing mark--no refrigeration back then.)
After slaughtering, the pig carcass was scraped free of bristles,
skinned and butchered.  All the meat was salted for preservation
because it would need to last until the following butchering
season to be used throughout the next year.  Perhaps a meal or
two worth of meat might be withheld from the salting process, to
be eaten right away, but in general the meat was salted and
packed in barrels.  Some may have been smoked (not sure of when
smoking meat for preservation was used in Medieval Europe).
Perhaps wealthy people would be able to have fresh pork at other
times of the year (probably having enough pigs that killing one
out of season wouldn't hurt their annual food supply) but the
non-rich would have kept the pig alive as long as possible to
have it as fat as possible when slaughtering time came.

Bernadette Crumb
(Formerly Lady Sarra Bradhurst
and desperately seeking a name for
my new Moorish persona)


Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 11:26:32 -0500
From: harper at idt.net
Subject: SC - Pigs

The Honorable Lord Stephan asked about pigs.

Gabriel Alonso de Herrera, in his 1513 "Work on Agriculture", has 
this to say about pigs:

"Quien quisiere ruido compre cochino"
"Who wants a noise that's big, should buy a pig"
(not quite a literal translation, but it rhymes in the original Spanish)

"They are animals that fatten marvelously, so much so that it 
happens many times that they cannot rise onto their feet, nor even 
walk, but if you must raise them at home to stuff* them, let it be in 
an enclosed place..." 

*the word used here, "cebar", has the connotation of deliberately 
over-feeding, in order to fatten the animal.

 He goes on to say that it's dangerous to let pigs roam about, 
because they are dangerous and destructive, and will eat almost 
anything, including the young of other animals, as well as their own.

Lessee...  Pregnant sows should be well-fed, especially in the 
winter, so that they will produce plenty of milk.  Herrera 
recommends barley soaked in water.  As for the piglets, he says 
you can feed them wheat, either boiled or toasted, but not raw, or 
boiled rye.  If the weather is nice, you can send them out to 
pasture with their mamas to eat good grass.

"But always before they go out to pasture give them something to 
eat, especially in the Spring when the grass is wet with dew, which 
harms them, or in the Winter, when it is icy, which makes them 
jaundiced and makes them very ill; it is good to give them some 
mash, either of bran or of fava bean flour, and with it they will fatten 
a lot, or boiled fava beans or any other thing..."

Herrera gives instructions for taking a herd of pigs out to pasture, 
recommending certain types of terrain, according to the season 
and time of day.  He has a lot to say about leading them to places 
where they can eat acorns and wild cherries and grubs.

He makes a distinction between those pigs which are merely well-
fed and those which are shut up for fattening.

This is the gist of it; I may be overlooking some things.  And, of 
course, this is *recommended* practice; like the health manuals of 
the time, it may reflect what people should have done, but not 
necessarily what they did do.

Brighid, not overly interested in pigs at the pre-bacon stage of life

Lady Brighid ni Chiarain
Settmour Swamp, East (NJ)


Date: Sun, 03 Dec 2000 21:53:17 -0600
From: "Mark S. Harris" <stefan at texas.net>
Subject: SC - Period pig info

From "The Year 1000" by Robert Lacey & Danny Danziger:
page 58 -
"Mutton was not a particular delicacy, Wulfstan's memorandum of estate
management described mutton as a food for slaves, and pork seems also
to have been considered routine.

The relatively small amounts of fat on all these meats would be viewed
by modern nutritionists with quite a kindly eye. Saturated fat, the
source of cholesterol with its related contemporary health problems, 
is a problem of the intensively reared factory-farmed animals of recent
years, with their overabundant "scientific" diets and their lack of
exercise. All Anglo-Saxons would have been shocked at the idea of
ploughing land to produce animal feed. Ploughland was for feeding
humans. So farm animals were lean and rangey, their meat containing
three times as much protein as fat. With modern, intensively reared
animals that ratio is often reversed. 42"

That footnote is:
42   Hagen, Second Handbook, p93.

The Bibliography has:
Hagen, Anne, A Second Handbook of Anglo-Saxon Food and Drink: Production
and Distribution.  Hockwold-cum-Wilson: Anglo-Saxon Books, 1995.

This pretty much echos my thoughts on the situation.

Ann Hagen has quite a lot to say about Anglo-Saxon pigs and their
raising. I will quote some of her info in another message.
- -- 
THL Stefan li Rous    Barony of Bryn Gwlad    Kingdom of Ansteorra
Mark S. Harris             Austin, Texas           stefan at texas.net


Date: Sun, 03 Dec 2000 22:22:40 -0600
From: "Mark S. Harris" <stefan at texas.net>
Subject: SC - more period pig info

I mentioned in another message that the book "The Year 1000", footnotes
the section on period pigs not being particularly fat with the book
"A Second Handbook of Anglo-Saxon Food & Drink". It indicates page 97.
I believe this off somewhere, but my point to Ann Hagen's chapter on
pigs, which starts on page 102.

Here is a little bit from Anne Hagen's conclusion for that chapter:
"The pig is generally associated with the poorer classes, and most
households may have kept at least one pig although the pig does not
have the very poor/rural connotation of sheep. 193  However, they
were run in herds on the estates of the aristocracy, and in such
numbers that some must have been sold for meat. The will referring
to the funeral feast implies pork and bacon could be bought easily
abd that they were feast food. 194" ...

"Pigs would have been important to the Anglo-Saxons as a source of
essential fat. 197  How much of the carcass of a Dark Age pig was
fat can only be guesses at, though this may have been about 10-15%.
198" [Doesn't seem all that fat to me. Nor does it seem like such
an animal would be raised primarily for the fat/lard. - Stefan]
"For this reason fat pigs were particularly valued, as food rents
indicate, and this continued to be the case into the seventeenth
century...". [Yes, valued, but not the usual - Stefan]

"The fat in the meat would have provided calories, which would
otherwise have had to be derived from lean meat, nutritionally more
valuable as a source of protein." "The fat from pigs was used to
lard other roast and boiled meats and fish. 201"

"Because of it's high proportion of fat, pig meat was comparatively
easy to preserve, and was important because it could be preserved."

"Pigs were also valuable because they did not compete with man for
food, being fattened primarily on woodland or grass, rather than
grain. 202 They would be in better condition than other stock in
late winter since they could find natural forage, and may have been
useful for fresh meat at a time of year unfavorable for the slaughter
of rumiinants."

So while pigs might have sometimes been fattened with grain just
before market, it doesn't look like feeding grains to pigs at
least in England around the first millennium was common.
- -- 
THL Stefan li Rous    Barony of Bryn Gwlad    Kingdom of Ansteorra
Mark S. Harris             Austin, Texas           stefan at texas.net


Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 00:42:39 -0600
From: Stefan li Rous <stefan at texas.net>
Subject: SC - Ann Hagen's footnotes on Anglo-Saxon pigs

Ok, here are the footnotes that I left off of my quotes on period, or at
least Anglo-Saxon, pigs.

193   Bonser 1963, 249-50, Wiseman 1986, viii.

194   Robertson 1939, 227.

197   Wiseman 1986, 5.

198   Prummel 1983, 261.

201   Moryson, 1617, IV 29, Robertson 1939, 199.

202   Wiseman 1986, 5.

Bonser W. 1963 "The Medical background of Anglo-Saxon England" Wellcome
   Historical Medical Library.

Moryson, F. 1617 "An Itinerary" Vols. I-IV Glasglw 1907.

Prummel, W. 1983 "Excavations at Dorestad 2" Amersfoort.

Robertson, A. J. 1939 "Anglo-Saxon Charters" CUP

Wiseman, J. 1986 "A History of the British Pig" Duckworth

I wonder in particular how easy it might be to find a copy of Wiseman's
book.
- -- 
THLord  Stefan li Rous    Barony of Bryn Gwlad    Kingdom of Ansteorra
Mark S. Harris             Austin, Texas         stefan at texas.net


Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 07:08:45 -0500
From: Philip & Susan Troy <troy at asan.com>
Subject: Re: SC - Period pig info

LrdRas at aol.com wrote:
> I do have a reference  from Platina which you
> should have in your swine files which specifically states that  at least one
> pig was so fat it had a nest of mice living  in it's flesh'. I take that as
> at least  ONE valid primary source that does not conjecture but rather
> indicates that pigs were fat.

Just as a qualifier on the quality of this reference, it really should
be noted that Platina is quoting Varro (presumably the real,
classical-age Varro, not one of his friends' pseudonyms), who claims to
have seen the pig in question in Arcadia. Therefore, what we have is a
secondary account of a report by a Roman author reporting on something
he claims to have seen in a Greek province.

I don't mean to cast doubt on this so much as to put it in
perspective... looking at some of what Pliny the Elder wrote, there's at
least the possibility that some of it is fantasy. I mean, look at Marco
Polo. On the other hand, Varro's claim is better than nothing.

Adamantius


Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 11:19:04 -0500
From: "Daniel Phelps" <phelpsd at gate.net>
Subject: SC - Fat Pig, Lean Pig

I would think that a partial solution to this debate would be to look for
period depictions, possibly they might be found in some of 16th century
Flemish paintings as I seem to recall one with a peasant holding a pig by
its hind legs.  If one were to identify the breed of pig to be an antecedent
of a modern breed then, as a first order approximation, it might be
possible, by using the axiom that the present is the key to the past, to
compare one to the other and achieve an index of period porcine corpulence
given enough data points.

As an alternative hypothesis we may indeed find, as I suggested recently,
that like some livestock certain breeds of swine were raised to maximize
some product over another.  Certain breeds of sheep were after all bred for
wool, rather than meat or milk and it is a historical fact that certain
breeds of swine were bred until recently to maximize lard production.  Thus
as a working hypothesis we should be able to determine if "lard" pigs were
the fat ones and "meat" pigs the lean.  There may also have been a dichotomy
between rural and urban swine rearing.  Rural pigs may have been more
general utility beasts while urban or suburban swine rearing might been more
specialized.  Additionally I  seem to recall, like cattle drives in the US,
that there were pig drives in England.  This would suggest more intensive
swine husbandry in localized areas.

Regarding the feeding of acorns to swine Rosengarten writes regarding
Quercus ilex in southern Europe that it produces a sweet nut like a chestnut
which is called "bellotas" in "Don Quixote" by Cervantes.  These nuts were
fed to swine.  Single well developed oaks are said by him to yield enough
acrons for 100 pounds of pork.  He futher states that Portuguese hogs often
double or triple their weight in three months on acorns "while lolling about
in open pasture beneath the trees."  The forests are thinned periodically to
maximize production of acorns and cork from cork oaks and "very little
expense is need to maintain these woodlands."  This would suggest
possible variations in swine production by country.

Daniel Raoul, who, from his childhood, recalls the distinctive aroma of pig
rearing with little fondness and no affection.


Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 12:52:21 -0500
From: "Phlip" <phlip at 99main.com>
Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Boar vs. Pig
To: "Cooks within the SCA" <sca-cooks at ansteorra.org>

> I need some educational input. I was talking about slow roasting wild
> boar shanks with an orange & port glaze for part of my Christmas dinner,
> when a friend asked what the difference was between boar and the wild
> pigs they are shooting with abandon down in his area of South Georgia.
>
> Well, I don't have a clue.
>
> So, without reference to social behavior, can someone tell me what the
> difference is between pigs, wild pigs, and boars?
>
> Aoghann

A boar is a male of the porcine species, like a stallion is a male of the equine species. Pigs are technically immature swine, although in a broader sense, the term is used for any swine, regardless of gender or sexual maturity or state of domestication, just as "cow" is used for cattle, when the actual meaning is a mature female of the various species of cattle (and a few other species, but I won't get into that).

Wild pigs are usually actually domesticated swine in this country who went feral. There are, however, several varieties of swine which have never been domesticated, although they've been imported, such as the Russian Wild Boar- often, the word "boar" will (inaccurately) refer to any undomesticated swine.

Like all sexually mature and uncastrated male animals, a true boar will tend to be stronger flavored with tougher connective tissues, so stronger spicing and slow cooking methods are usually required. Most pork we get in this country comes from pigs- ie, immature animals, so be advised.

Saint Phlip,
CoD


Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 12:54:58 -0600
From: "Terry Decker" <t.d.decker at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Boar vs. Pig
To: "Cooks within the SCA" <sca-cooks at ansteorra.org>

Just to add a little to Phlip's answer, wild pig is sometimes used to refer to the peccary (AKA javelina).  What they are hunting down south are probably feral pigs, but it could also be peccaries, which have had a very wide range in North and South America.

Bear


Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 07:23:48 -0500
From: "Terry Decker" <t.d.decker at worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Pigs help New Forest ponies
To: "Cooks within the SCA" <sca-cooks at lists.ansteorra.org>

Ear notching was and is the method used to identify pigs.  It is an inexpensive, permanent system of marking that can easily identify individual animals.  There is a standardized system of notching commonly used in the US, the details of which can be had from extension services or the 4-H. Notching and tail docking is usually done when the animal is between one and three days old.

Unlike sheep, pigs don't need much attention, so letting them run loose isn't much of a problem.  Swineherds are employed when one is raising a large number of pigs, gathering the pigs or driving the pigs to market.

Bear

----- Original Message -----
It sounds like the pigs were just set free to browse. I had gotten the idea somewhere that several pigs were set loose together with a swinehard to keep track of them and perhaps herd them.

If this isn't the case, how do you get *your* pig back at the end of grazing season. Are/were the pigs branded?

Stefan


To:  gleannabhann at yahoogroups.com
Subject:  Re: period bacon question
Posted by: "Sperry Workman" sperryw at yahoo.com sperryw
Date: Thu Jun 28, 2012 11:18 am ((PDT))

<<< And Mistress Rebecca, please know I really, really, really, wouldn't want 
anyone trying a period hunt! Too dangerous for the dogs!

Lewen >>>

Actually, there are a good number of folks who DO go out and re-create wild hog hunts just for the challenge of it.  Google St. Hubert's Rangers.  We have several members of this hunting group here in Gleann Abhann.  The dogs are trained and usually wear modern protective vests and collars.  The humans... well... they're usually in medieval kit.
 
One of the things that they've noticed on the hogs they've gotten is that there is not enough body fat on the pigs to make a good bacon.  Everything else is QUITE tasty, but the animals are SO lean that they just won't make bacon.
 
If you're really interested in how to make your own bacon, Duke Gunter from Ansteorra, who was Laureled for his medival cooking expertise, regularly teaches hands-on smoking and curing classes.  I'd love to get over there for a weekend.
 
HRM Kenna, who is glad for the intelligent bacon conversation.


Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 14:06:45 -0500
From: JIMCHEVAL at aol.com
To: sca-cooks at lists.ansteorra.org
Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Keeping pork moist in a recipe

"The medieval pig was a wilder, thinner and blacker creature than the  
modern pig."

The Westminster Corridor: An Exploration of the Anglo-Saxon History of  
Westminster Abbey and Its Nearby Lands and People

David Sullivan
Jan 1, 1994 

https://books.google.com/books?id=ejqAAAAAIAAJ&q=medieval+pigs+thinner&dq=me
dieval+pigs+thinner&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjE5OmsmaXLAhVLHT4KHTa4DnoQ6AEIHTAA

"Although the Romans, had practiced selective breeding to produce large  
farm animals, the Middle Ages saw a reversal of this trend and animals becamse 
on average smaller. Medieval pigs were only about one-third the size of a 
modern  pig."

All Things Medieval: An Encyclopedia of the Medieval World, Volume 1
By  Ruth A Johnston
https://books.google.com/books?id=h1s8K0_hCfoC&lpg=PA17&dq=medieval%20pigs%2
0size&pg=PA17#v=onepage&q&f=false

Jim  Chevallier

<the end>
Edited by Mark S. Harris	p-pigs-msg	Page 2 of 16