peasants-msg

This document is also available in: text or RTF formats.

peasants-msg – 7/22/12

Peasants in period and SCA. Peasant personas. Peasant diets.

************************************************************************

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: Chris Zakes / Tivar Moondragon <102435.2644 at CompuServe.COM>

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca

Subject: Re: Yes--the Middle Ages as they should have

Date: 28 Oct 1995 04:03:04 GMT

Our Barony did a "Peasants Revel" a few years ago; most folk came

as their own servants, and had a grand time griping about how

cruelly they were treated. One fellow came as the town drunk (he

is actually a teetotaller) and was so convincing that several

people offered him rides home.

Tivar Moondragon

Chris or Elisabeth Zakes

Tivar or Aethelyan of Moondragon

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca

From: bb512 at torfree.net (Susan Carroll-Clark)

Subject: Re: Yes--the Middle Ages as they should have

Organization: Toronto Free-Net

Date: Sun, 22 Oct 1995 00:24:30 GMT

I, too wish that there was more encouragement given to folks who

wish to do lower- or middle- class personae. I've heard a new person

discouraged from doing so more than once with words such as "You don't

want to be a peasant--we're all lords and ladies here". Too often folks

equate "peasant" with low class--in other words, peasant means "wench"

( and the appropriate male equivalent--if there is one) with the usual

stereotypes (ie, lower class garb is 'less authentic" and prone to leather

cookie-tray bodices--or if not that, lower class garb is seen as requiring

little or no research--aka the "simple t-tunic" we all hear so much about).

In fact, lower class personae are in many cases more interesting

and more fun to do, so long as there are no harsh overlords around. I

would not encourage that temporary serfdom ever be made a punishment--

this would do even more to discourage folks from doing this as a regular

thing. I would also encourage people to develop a persona who shares

their regular persona's time period, but is of a different class--just

to get a different perspective from time to time. (Pennsic is a great

place to do this--after all, court garb is a little excessive there,

and the living conditions are closer to what lower class folks would

have experienced than what upper class folks normally would have)

Finally, I'd love to see some peasants bringing a case before

an overlord--barons and baronesses would be perfect. It could give

a really unique insight into law and would amuse me to no end (to see

how much SCA law parallels or does not parallel the real thing).

Nicolaa/Susan

stillat bb512 at torfree.net for now

******************************************************************************

Susan Carroll-Clark | "Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?"

University of Toronto | "Yes, Brain, but where are we going to find

Department of History | rubber pants our size?"

From: IVANOR at delphi.com

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca

Subject: Scottish Ladies' Skirts

Date: 26 May 1996 02:25:03 GMT

Quoting an790 from a message in rec.org.sca

>Oh, you are correct, few people in the SCA choose lower-class

>personnas. This is partially because members of the SCA are

>understood to be of the 'upper crust' in one way or another. At

>least, this is what I have been told by older members of the

>organization. This understood 'rule' (I'm not sure if it's

This is what I was told, too, and it works quite well for reminding us to

treat each other like ladies and gentlemen (in period, few nobles treated

the lower classes with any such courtesy... courtesy, in fact, meant court

behavior). We've had a peasant event in our Barony, and it was a lot of

fun, and I got to go barefoot. Some of us have peasant personas, either

principal or secondary. I know one lady who works in the kitchen at every

event she is able to attend, and won't wear "noble persona garb" because it

isn't suited to kitchen work. She got her AoA years ago, and is officially

Lady Diana, but she still does the peasant thing because it is her way of

enjoying what we do. Our "everyone starts equal" gives her that privilege

too.

Granted, a single-class society, or even an all-noble society is not period,

but neither is the use of antiseptics to treat cuts, etc. What we do, it

seems to me, is recreate whatever crafts and other customs interest us in a

milieu where all are welcome and respected (unless and until they show

themselves unworthy) and all crafts are valued. (In period, an armorer

would never have eaten at the same table as a Baron, but it happens here all

the time, to our benefit.)

This is part of what we mean by selective recreation. I think the

"authentic recreationists" do the same. Who sits in the stocks at Plimouth

Plantation? What crime did he commit? (If there is anyone there, trust me,

it is just for show.)

Carolyn Boselli ivanor at delphi.com Host of CF35..SCAdians on Delphi

ivanor at localnet.com

From: tjordan001 at aol.com (TJorDan001)

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca

Subject: Re: advice for a peasant

Date: 28 Sep 1996 11:36:11 -0400

> I was doing my usual scanning of articles here and

>a question popped to mind. Since by recent threads it has become

>clear that there are other peasants out there, I was hoping they

>would have some advice for the rest of us.

>Covering:

>*Behavior;

>*Garb and sources;

>*Proper way to be treated by others;

>*excuses for attending "Gentry" events;

>*Naming or what do you do when you get an AOA; and

>*any cool stories from being a peasant.

>Lady Aoife MacLoed

>Incipient Shire of Eirtun

>Atenveldt

Lady,

Speaking as one of the 'bloody peasants' let me offer these thoughts.

*Behaviour

Any way I want to (in theory) since I can't be expected to know the

proper forms. In practice I try to act with courtesy and kindness because

that's the way I'd like to be treated. Also, I didn't join the SCA to bow

and scrape.

*Garb

A little more difficult, peasants weren't really a popular subject for

painters and were often idealised when they were. Since peasant garb

wasn't the sort that gets preserved (unless you happened to be killed near

a peat-bog) we don't have many physical examples either. Warriors will

have little difficulty finding illustrations for some garb and for the

other I go with less ostentatious forms of the garb of the nobility.

*Way to be treated by others

See Behaviour, above.

*Excuses for attending 'gentry' events

I'm a mercenary, I get paid to show up.

*What to do when you get an AoA

Do the period thing, become one of the 'gentry'. (It helps if you have

a daughter to marry off to some 'well-bred' but dirt poor lordling.)

*Good stories

No shit, there I was..... nah.

Good luck to you Lady.

Jester of Anglesea

From: Elaine Ragland <er37 at columbia.edu>

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca

Subject: Re: Margery Kempe

Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 12:32:14 -0500

Organization: Columbia University

For a lower class point of view, you might try Barbara Hanawalt's, _The

Ties That Bind_. She uses post-mortem inquisition reports to reconstruct

the lifestyle and environment of the typical peasant. She also discusses

the legal rights of the peasant housewife. Can she be held accountable if

her husband hides stolen property in their house, etc.

Elaine Ragland

aka Melanie de la Tour

Date: Tue, 20 May 1997 22:29:09 -0500

From: theodelinda at webtv.net (linda webb)

To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu

Subject: Re: Chickens & eggs & thoughts on period practices

For more details about commoner's diets, see Piers Plowman--there's a

section where his neighbors bring him food to help him through rough

times. As I recall, the principal meat mentioned is bacon.

From: bronwynmgn at aol.com (Bronwynmgn)

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca

Subject: Re: Peasant Persona

Date: 1 Sep 1997 16:45:19 GMT

"Michael Logue" <mplogue at SPAMLESS.mindless.com> writes:

> Although there is much documentation as to the

>lifestyles of the gentry (clothing, armor, et al), I havent come accross any

>references concerning commoners. I can't see someone of such low standing

>being able to afford or even make the type of cloth used in even a simple

>T-tunic. What did they wear? Rough homespun/sack-cloth?

Look for a book by Joseph and Frances Gies called "Life in a Medieval

Village", ISBN 89-33759. You should be able to find it in a local library

or bookstore in the History section. I know Borders Bookstore carries

their books, and I recall seeing at least one of theirs in Walden's or

Dalton's recently.

A simple T-tunic (or the pair of them that was more commonly worn) would

be made of either linen or wool. Linen comes from the flax plant, and

there are numerous representations of peasant women spinning flax. It is a

plant that a peasant could have grown in his toft (the plot of land

surrounding his house), along with a lot of food plants and herbs, not to

mention a few chickens or geese. Wool, of course, comes from sheep, and

even peasants commonly owned a few sheep.

Brangwayna Morgan

From: Joe Wolf <JOE.B.WOLF at conoco.dupont.com>

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca

Subject: Re: Peasant Persona

Date: Thu, 04 Sep 1997 08:16:52 -0700

Organization: Conoco, Inc. - IT Sourcing/Purchasing

I've seen something like what you desire done before... but the fighter

didn't wear a water bucket. (I don't think even a peasant would have

done that... they were poor, not stupid!! <grin>)

The gentle covered his helm with a large liripipe (hood with long, thin,

dangling end) tucked into his rope belt. He had "homespun" trews

(pants) and homespun tunic and wielded a scythe (modified glaive).

The thing that I really remember well were his "flesh toned" gauntlets!!

He painted a pair of heavy welders gloves with a hobby paint used for

painting ceramic dolls... from 10ft+ he looked bare handed!

Good luck and have fun!

Lord Manfred Wolf mka Joe Wolf

Barony of the StarGate Houston

Ansteorra TX

Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 08:24:43 -0800

From: Anne-Marie Rousseau <acrouss at gte.net>

Subject: Re: SC - Nobility and Feasts

Hi all from Anne-Marie

The Known World Handbook says that we're all supposed to be assumed to be

of noble birth, if that helps.

Me, and my household, have decided to re-enact the life and times of a

bunch of upstart middle class people, the household staff and servants of

Antoine the Bastard of Burgundy. He treats us pretty well, so we dress OK,

and we cook food for him (ie from the latest cookbooks and soooo chic chic!

:))

Since we decided to stick with the middle class thing, things have gotten

SO Much easier! gold isnt appropriate, but silver and pewter and brass are.

Silks arent appropriate but linen and wool is. The upper classes in the

15th century wore goofy clothes anyway (especially the womens hats. Ugh!),

the middle and lower classes wore very reasonable and practical garments.

Once a year, we in the Culinary Guild put on Peasants revel, and its

amazing to see all these SCA "nobles" dress up in ratty clothes and play

stupid field games (a la Brugel). So I guess there's a little peasant in us

all :D

Its not a matter of lack of imagination, its all about what kind of game

you want to play. When I first joined, I wanted nothing more than to be a

Lady out of Mists of Avalon, all floaty veils and flowers in my hair. I

wanted boys to kiss my hand and call me m'lady and put me on a pedestal

like the books said they did. Now I'm older, and I'm more interested in

historical re-enactment. According to the sources, in medieval Europe,

80% of the people were rural serf types, only 1-2% were aristocrats. Of

course, of those farmers, the majority were actually self employed and

owned their own lands. The dirt grubbing peasant is not the norm. We have

inventories for people where even the peasant pig farmer has a couple coins

stashed away. (ack! my books are out in the car from teaching a class on

agriculture last week!! I can give citations if you like).

anyway, lets just say that while the SCA was likely set up so everyone

could be a magical princess in their own right :), real history says most

people would have been independent farmers, managing a comfortable enough

living, barring unforeseen plagues, famines, etc. Just like today! What

game you choose to play is entirely up to you.

- --AM

Date: Mon, 2 Aug 1999 15:09:12 -0500

From: "Decker, Terry D." <TerryD at Health.State.OK.US>

Subject: RE: SC - Fw: [Mid] Last Post : Knowne Worlde Potters Meeting

> I am getting a handle on how such things were used, their special needs

> (since they are not metal) during cooking and such, What i need to learn

> now is what was cooked in them. More specifically, I want to know what

> the common man regularly ate in the 13th to 14th century in England. some

> of my pottery books make brief referance to the analysis of matter found

> within pottery vessels, and seem to suggest a relatively high calory

> diet, (around 1800 calories a day, or so they say) but this tells me

> nothing of just what was eaten.

> All this leads to helping me create as Period an experience as

> possible. Since English potters were not of noble birth, I am really not

> looking to or expecting elaborate food..or is this wrong?

> Hroar

As far as I can tell, the primary food of the Middle Ages was grain; barley,

rye and wheat, and to a lesser extent oats and rice. A couple of studies I

quoted previously on this list suggest that the average consumption was 2

pounds of bread and 1 gallon of beer a day.

Christine de Pisan (1420) describes the fare of the laborer's wife as "black

bread, milk and water."

According to Chaucer (I believe), "poor folk in cottages, charged with

children and the chief lord's rent: that they with spinning may spare,

spend they it in house-hire, both in milk and in meal, to make therewith

pap, to glut therewith their children that cry after food. Also themselves

suffer much hunger.... There is bread and penny-ale taken for a pittance

(luxury); cold flesh and cold fish is to them as baked venison; on Fridays

and fastingdays, a farthing's (1/4 penny) worth of mussels were a feast for

such folk..."

A day labor for the monks at Glastonbury in the 12th Century received a

daily loaf and two gallons of beer with a weekly penny to pay for all other

food stuffs. Servants of the Abbey received a daily ration from the monk's

kitchen in lieu of the penny.

Harvest carters received 1 loaf of second rate bread (wastel) and beer per

day at Ramsey. On the first day, the harvesters received "bread, beer,

pottage (of peas or beans), flesh and cheese, and three loaves for every two

men...of wheat and rye, with more wheat than rye". On the second day,

"bread, pottage, water, herrings and cheese." The accounts show roughly the

same amounts each day alternating between flesh and fish days.

You also need to consider the Black Death. Real wages increased about

five-fold after the plague and general wealth increased as estates were

settled. Between mid-14th Century and the beginning of the 17th Century,

real income was almost 50 percent higher than between the late 17th Century

and the middle of the 21st Century. Except for periods of famine and war,

many places in Europe had a wide variety of meat, fish, and vegetables

available and the money to enjoy them.

England, with its ocean moat and growing fleet, fared well so that by 1470,

Sir John Fortesque said of the general population, "They eat plentifully of

all kinds of flesh and fish: they wear fine woolen cloth in all their

apparel." At the same time, parts of France still suffering the effects of

the Hundred Years War were living on gruel.

In the late 14th Century, the poet John Gower commented upon the cost of

labor after the plague, "Labourers of olden time were not want to eat

wheaten bread; their bread was of either corn (probably barley) or of beans,

and their drink was of the spring. Then cheese and milk were a feast to

them; rarely they had other feast than this."

The ideal laborer of Piers Plowman would eat yesterday's cabbage with

penny-ale and a piece of bacon, but instead required, "fresh flesh or fish,

fried or y-baken," served hot from the kitchen. When food was scarce, the

laborer made do with, "two green cheeses, a few curds and cream, and a cake

of oats, and bread for my bairns of beans and of pease." And the commonly

available leeks, onions, parsley and cherries.

When meat was available for the laborer, it would likely be chicken, goose,

pork, bacon or herring.

A potter would be a townsman and a skilled laborer and would likely have

better food. The owner of the pottery would probably eat as well as most

nobles. I would recommend looking at Menagier (even though he's French) for

recipes suitable for a wealthy townsman. I would also recommend reading C.

Anne Wilson's Food and Drink in Britian.

Bear

Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 03:27:10 -0400

From: Melanie Wilson <MelanieWilson at compuserve.com>

To: "INTERNET:sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu" <sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu>

Subject: What exactly are the differences between serfs and peasants?

Villeins were tied to the land, they were not slaves in that they could

not be bought & sold.

They had a complex set of rights and duties , so the Lord had duty to care

for them to some extent, also their widows and children (ie those unable to

look after themselves) should their man die. They could buy themselves out

of this situation.

It should not be assumed they were poor. They could be much richer than

cotters who were freemen for instance, and often chose NOT to buy their

freedom as they were happier (more secure) as bondsmen. (Talking of which

Bondsmen made Free whilst a marxist view of the situation is woirth a

read).

I'm not sure about the town dwellers/freedom issue you mention, as viliens

were tied to the land, I think if a villien took off to the town a Lord

would rarely bother to chase after him, he could loose his privalages &

land & if he returned he would be subject to fines generally.

We have a bondsman in out group, known for lazyness who dissappeared before

the harvest, he has returned he claims he was abducted by the welsh, his

cousin is the Reeve and the Lord fined him for his cousins dissappearence.

It is all much more about pulling your weight in many ways than abusing

somebody, there were no machines so if it didn't get done by man power you

didn't eat (no supermarkets either!) It was the Lords job to oversee that

things went OK in the grand scale & each had tasks within that to perform.

Problems came yes with taxes, but also mechanisation which worried the

peasantry (see The Medieval Machine for instance) and caused more riots

than and social unjustice we might perceive as such, as they saw it as

taking away their jobs & uses.... ie why will the Lord do his duty by us

when he dosen't need us to...... logical & right, we see the eventual

result in societies where many jobs are service industries and there will

never be full employment as there was then. In farming in 50 years here a

farm that used to employ 25 men full time maybe 50 at harvest & shearing

time, may employe 3 full time maybe 6 at busy times now.

Anyway I hope this helps a bit, it is a very complex question and even

after years of reading you still find new bits. This brief message I'm

afraid nowhere near covers the complexities!

Mel

Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 19:47:53 -0400

From: Robin Carroll-Mann <rcmann4 at earthlink.net>

Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Rotten meat and spices...

To: Cooks within the SCA <sca-cooks at ansteorra.org>

Laura C. Minnick wrote:

> Personally, I think our preoccupation with meat is in part due to our

> own habits of meat consumption (in general- quite a bit) and for us in

> particular, the fact that the extant menus and recipes are basically

> those of the upper classes, which ate more meat. If Matilda, John the

> Farmer's wife had written down her recipes and menus, we might see a

> very different picture.

FWIW, here's Chaucer's description of the diet of a poor widow:

Three large sows had she, and no more, 'tis plain,

Three cows and a lone sheep that she called Moll.

Right sooty was her bedroom and her hall,

Wherein she'd eaten many a slender meal.

Of sharp sauce, why she needed no great deal,

For dainty morsel never passed her throat;

Her diet well accorded with her coat.

Repletion never made this woman sick;

A temperate diet was her whole physic,

And exercise, and her heart's sustenance.

The gout, it hindered her nowise to dance,

Nor apoplexy spun within her head;

And no wine drank she, either white or red;

Her board was mostly garnished, white and black,

With milk and brown bread, whereof she'd no lack,

Broiled bacon and sometimes an egg or two,

For a small dairy business did she do.

Canterbury Tales, "The Nun's Priest's Tale"

(modern English translation, translator unidentified )

Brighid ni Chiarain

Barony of Settmour Swamp, East Kingdom

Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 18:11:04 -0700

From: "Laura C. Minnick" <lcm at jeffnet.org>

Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Rotten meat and spices...

To: Cooks within the SCA <sca-cooks at ansteorra.org>

> Laura C. Minnick wrote:

>> Personally, I think our preoccupation with meat is in part due to our own

>> habits of meat consumption (in general- quite a bit) and for us in

>> particular, the fact that the extant menus and recipes are basically

>> those of the upper classes, which ate more meat. If Matilda, John the

>> Farmer's wife had written down her recipes and menus, we might see a

>> very different picture.

> FWIW, here's Chaucer's description of the diet of a poor widow:

Except it is not a description of her diet, but of her possessions.

First, the starting with lines immediately above (in the Middle English,

but I'll gloss it where needed):

A povre wydwe, somdeel stape in age,

Was whilom dwellyng in a nawre cotage,

Biside a grove, stondynge in a dale.

This wydwe, of which I telle yow my tale,

Syn thilke day that she was last a wyf

In pacience ladde a ful symple lyf,

For litel was hir catel and hir rente

[So we have a poor widow, advanced in age, who is living in a small

cottage, beside a grove, in a dale. This widow, since she was widowed, has

patiently led a simple life, for she has few possessions (chattel) and

little income (rente).]

By housbondrie pf swich as God hir sente

She foond hirself and eek hir doughtren two.

[Through careful management (husbandry) she provided for (foond hirself)

herself and her two daughters.]

Thre large sowes hadde she, and namo,

Three keen, and eek a sheep that highte Malle.

[She has three sows, no more, three cows, and also a sheep named Molly.]

Ful sooty was hir bour and eek hir halle,

In which she eet ful many a sklendre meel.

Of poynaunt sauce hir neded never a deel.

No deyntee morsel passed thrugh hir throte;

Hir diete was accordant to hir cote.

[Her chamber and her hall are sooty- (except this is being used in an

ironic sense rather than literal- she has no such rooms in her cottage,

they are found in a manor house), wherein she has eaten many slender

(scant) meals. She has not needed a bit of spicy sauce. She's eaten no

dainty morsels. Her diet is in agreement with the modestness of her

small farmyard.]

[From there are a few lines about her health, then:]

No wyn drank she, neither whit ne reed;

Hir bord was served moost with whit and blak-

Milk and broun breed, in which she foond no lak,

Seynd bacon, and sometyme an ey or tweye,

For she was, as it were, a maner deye.

[She drank no wine, neither white nor red; her table was set white and

black- milk and brown bread, which she was not short of. Smoked bacon, and

sometimes an egg or two, for she was something of a dairywoman.]

Of course later we get to hear of her rooster, Chaunticleer.

So she has three sows, three cows, and a sheep. And a few chickens. It is

clear that these animals are where she gets her meager income- she milks

the cows (and possibly Molly) and sells the milk. Possibly sells eggs. She

likely has the sows bread and sells the resulting piglets. She may butcher

a pig now and then, but not often, as the only mention of meat is a bit of

smoked bacon. What she eats apparently is the products of her animals, and

bread. (God help her in Lent!) She doesn't eat the animals themselves (at

least until they are old and no longer producing) any more than a wheat

farmer eats his seed.

'Lainie

Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 21:55:16 -0400

From: Robin Carroll-Mann <rcmann4 at earthlink.net>

Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Rotten meat and spices...

To: Cooks within the SCA <sca-cooks at ansteorra.org>

Laura C. Minnick wrote:

>> FWIW, here's Chaucer's description of the diet of a poor widow:

> Except it is not a description of her diet, but of her possessions.

[snip]

> So she has three sows, three cows, and a sheep. And a few chickens. It

> is clear that these animals are where she gets her meager income- she

> milks the cows (and possibly Molly) and sells the milk. Possibly sells

> eggs. She likely has the sows bread and sells the resulting piglets.

> She may butcher a pig now and then, but not often, as the only mention

> of meat is a bit of smoked bacon. What she eats apparently is the

> products of her animals, and bread. (God help her in Lent!) She

> doesn't eat the animals themselves (at least until they are old and no

> longer producing) any more than a wheat farmer eats his seed.

> 'Lainie

I didn't mean to imply that she ate her beasts. Her diet is bread,

milk, eggs, and sometimes bacon. I left in the description of her

farmstead to give an idea of her economic position. She is a poor

widow, but not utterly impoverished (ie., not a beggar).

Brighid ni Chiarain

Barony of Settmour Swamp, East Kingdom

Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 21:51:54 -0400

From: Jadwiga Zajaczkowa / Jenne Heise <jenne at fiedlerfamily.net>

Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Rotten meat and spices...

To: Cooks within the SCA <sca-cooks at ansteorra.org>

> That's reading quite a bit into it, I think. The mention of bacon

> alone indicates that she did have ample pork as a protein source,

Gies and Gies and other sources indicate that bacon and other small

portions of meat were often given to day laborers as hire or given out

among the customary exchanges for harvest help. So she might not have

had a pig in order to have bacon.

-- Jadwiga Zajaczkowa, Knowledge Pika jenne at fiedlerfamily.net

Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 19:06:33 -0700

From: "Laura C. Minnick" <lcm at jeffnet.org>

Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Rotten meat and spices...

To: jenne at fiedlerfamily.net, Cooks within the SCA

<sca-cooks at ansteorra.org>

> Gies and Gies and other sources indicate that bacon and other small

> portions of meat were often given to day laborers as hire or given out

> among the customary exchanges for harvest help. So she might not have

> had a pig in order to have bacon.

Thank you, Jadwiga. Saved me the trouble.

If you look at fabliaux traditions (and your random 'fairy tales' generally

fall into that category), a flitch of bacon was often that 'little bit' of

meat that would be found in a poor household. When it gets pinched by a

thief or the dog makes off with it while the goodwife's back is turned. And

it keeps well, unlike much of the rest of the poor beast.

And William, 'reading a bit into it' is what I'm about. It's why I have

that piece of paper.

'Lainie

Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 21:57:49 -0400

From: "Phil Troy / G. Tacitus Adamantius"

<adamantius.magister at verizon.net>

Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Rotten meat and spices...

To: jenne at fiedlerfamily.net, Cooks within the SCA <sca-cooks at ansteorra.org>

Also sprach Jadwiga Zajaczkowa / Jenne Heise:

>> That's reading quite a bit into it, I think. The mention of

>> bacon alone indicates that she did have ample pork as a protein source,

> Gies and Gies and other sources indicate that bacon and other small

> portions of meat were often given to day laborers as hire or given out

> among the customary exchanges for harvest help. So she might not have

> had a pig in order to have bacon.

Flitches of bacon were apparently being given out as prizes for

various competitions and achievements in English county fairs in the

20th century... I wouldn't be at all surprised to find this was a

very old custom.

Adamantius

Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 22:50:48 -0700

From: "Laura C. Minnick" <lcm at jeffnet.org>

Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Rotten meat and spices...

To: mooncat at in-tch.com, Cooks within the SCA <sca-cooks at ansteorra.org>

At 09:48 PM 4/12/2005, you wrote:

> Also, what no one seems to be considering (at least, not in the posts I

> read), is that the widow might not have been a free woman? (oh, gack,

> Lainie, help me with the correct term, will you?)

Depending on when and where? serf, villein, early on they were called what

they really were, which was slaves. The difference between a free tenant

and a bond tenant (villein) is not much, and sometimes academic- the free

tenant _could_ go, but where could he go? And with what?

Given the list of stuff she has, I would hazard a guess that she is at best

a cottager, or small free-holder- however, as a widow, without sons to

perform the tenancy duties due to the overlord, she probably has given up

part of what her husband left, in return for alleviation from those duties.

(This could well explain the missing mention of fields.) Not to mention,

that there were death taxes- when her husband died, she could not take

possession without turning over the 'best beast' to the lord as the fee for

her right of inheritance. She may have only half to two-thirds of what she

and her husband had when he was alive.

> I wonder if the widow could have had some use from the livestock, but

> not owned them to the extent that they could have been freely butchered.

Unlikely- once she gave up the best beast, the rest were hers.

> She also would have had to find a way to purchase fodder and other food

> for the larger animals--I don't recall seeing anything in the description

> of her in Chaucer about her owning or having access to fields? Just the

> grove her house was near? (I suppose the pigs could maybe be let loose

> there, but logistically that would depend on local laws and customs.)

Actually, there was pasturage in common- the herders (middle-school aged

boys usually) would drive the animals out to the pasture in the morning,

and back in the evening. When you really needed fodder was in the

winter.

Yes, if there were oaks in the grove, the sows probably fed there (and yes,

the lords figured out that cash source pretty early- between licenses and

fines, it was pretty lucrative).

> I don't recall, either, if Chaucer ever said what her husband's

> occupation was, which could have had a strong effect on what she had

> available for her use after his death. We don't know if she owned the

> land and cottage outright, or just until her death, for instance, or if

> they'd been given to her as an act of charity....Lots and lots of

> variables! ;-)

Well, after this brief description, we hear no more of the widow- the story

is about her cock, Chaunticleer, and his hen, Pertelote.

But think about it like this- for this to have been an effective frame for

the tale, it would have to be recognizable to the reader- i.e., a familiar

situation, a poor widow and her children, ekeing out a living on a small

holding. And it was familiar, given the death rates- if a woman survived

her childbearing, she was likely to outlive her husband by some years.

Enough that there is whole sections of law codes devoted to the rights of

widows to inheritance, to have power over their children, to carry on their

husband's occupation.

> It's far more likely, by the way, that she kept the sheep for wool. A

> more livestock-experienced friend than I says they're pretty difficult

> to milk

I'll take your word for it. I'll admit that I'm frightened of sheep, and

really don't want to get that close to one!

> --wool could be sold to someone as raw goods, or could have been spun

> and sold to local weavers, or even traded.

Yes. Quite readily.

> Cows would be more productive (does the middle english specify

> gender?)

Nope. That's one of the things it loses in the change from the Anglo-Saxon.

There's still vestiges of gendered meanings in borrowed French or Latin

words, but none in the English. (Fine with me- one less thing to worry

about gender equity!)

> ...they could be bred, and then milked. 3 would have given her at least

> enough milk to make cheese and butter in season, which could be sold.

Particularly since Chaucer notes her as a dairywoman.

> Pigs, ditto, but sold for meat or taxes.

<snip>

> I don't recall seeing anything in the Chaucer that folks quoted about

> other possible sources of income for the widow and her daughters,

Nope, that's where he leaves us- after that he starts talking about

Chaunticleer.

> I definitely think the livestock were kept for income sources--how else

> would she pay taxes? Buy grain for herself and the animals? Buy household

> goods? Salt to cure the bacon? Thatching for the cottage? Wood for her

> fire, unless she had rights to wood from the grove?

Some of these could be obtained by barter- butter in exchange for flour,

cheese to the boy who drives the cows out and back. Maybe a piglet to the

carpenter for a new axle on the cart. She might be able to convert some

livestock or dairy goods into cash- which she needed to pay taxes, to pay

tithes, and to pay for firewood or a permit to gather. And sooner or

later she needs money for the girls' futures.

Not to mention a snare to catch that pesky fox!

'Lainie

Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 05:45:32 -0700 (PDT)

From: Pat <mordonna22 at yahoo.com>

Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Rotten meat and spices...

To: Cooks within the SCA <sca-cooks at ansteorra.org>

Then you would also give her credit for being smarter than modern farm

widows. I lived and worked in farm country for 20 years. While my

husband at the time was (unfortunately) not dead, he was an alcoholic

and gambler, and absent most of the time. I had several friends and

relatives who WERE widows. I can tell you that quite often we made do

with the vegetables we could grow and some lard or fat back (or "bacon"

if you will) while we fed the pigs and cows so that we could use the

proceeds to pay taxes, buy flour and salt, and put the kids through

school. On a poor farm, your livestock are your resources, not your

larder.

Mordonna

Chris Stanifer <jugglethis at yahoo.com> wrote:

--- Pat wrote:

> She probably kept them for breeding stock, and sold or bartered the

> pigs for flour, salt, and

> other necessities. If she just ate them, they wouldn't last her long.

> Mordonna

I seriously doubt this. If she was breeding the pigs, then she most likely had plenty of little piglets running around during the mating season. I find it very

difficult to believe that, with a litter of piglets running the yard, she would have traded them all for salt and flour without taking at least a few for the dinner table. I'm pretty convinced that these medieval types were just a wee bit smarter than we give them credit for.

WdG

Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 02:41:56 -0700

From: "Laura C. Minnick" <lcm at jeffnet.org>

Subject: [Sca-cooks] More about meat-

To: sca-cooks at anstorra.org

Ok, so I pulled a bunch of economic histories off my shelf, and have a

couple of things of interest to note here...

One of my favorite questions when tackling subjects like these, is Where

and When? It does make a difference, and when considering meat in the

medieval diet, it is no different- except perhaps to add Who? to the

line of inquiry

In the Early Middle Ages, it appears that many people ate a diverse diet

that included a decent amount of meat. This we can surmise from evidences

given through archeological finds, records of land under cultivation, and

early manorial records. Sheep, goats, pigs most frequently; it appears that

in Italy young sheep and goats were often kept for milk production, and

only butchered when old. There are scattered reports or eating horseflesh-

the Church began railing against it in the eighth century, and later in the

Middle Age it appeared that eating horses was only done in truly

exceptional circumstances.

There was a shift however sometime in the 10th century, as the increase in

population forced grazing land to be brought under cultivation. Animals

were significantly more scarce by the late 13th-early 14th c. than they

were at the turn of the millenium. Available land was brought under the

plow to grow grains to support the increase in population. (This indeed

follows with modern understanding of world hunger issues- the same field of

grain can feed x amount of people, or the animals that will be slaughtered

and feed <x amount of people. The more people that must be maintained, the

fewer animals and more grain must be raised.) At that point the average

diet was quite high in grains and pulses, with less animal proteins. Wheat,

rye, maslin, oats, and barley were grown in different areas (most barley

was grown for brewing, but apparently a dense bread of barley and oats,

called 'drege' was eaten by the very poor).

(It occurs to me that there is a fairly extended description of peasants

eating a meal in Adam de la Halle's _Robin et Marion_, but I don't have a

translation at hand, and the copy I have found is in the Picard dialect of

Middle French. Mentions bread and cheese and shallots and salt, and probably

more that I'm missing.)

John Gower complained in the late 14th c that "Laborers of old were wont to

eat of wheaten bread; their meat was of beans and coarser corn, and their

drink water alone. Cheese and milk were a feast to them and rarely ate they

of other dainties." And why is he looking back at these peasants 'of old'?

Two things happened that changed the economy of eating again: the Great

Famine, and the Black Death.

The Great Famine (in roughly 135-1322) was largely the result of the

burden of population coupled with a spell of lousy weather. A series of

cold, wet years, rotted seed before it could be planted, and ruined crops

in the fields (helpful hint- there are some very interesting books on the

subject, but don't open them if you're prone to depression. Trust me on

this). Remember that balance of grain to population? Look at this: the

population in England went from between 1.3 and 1.5 million in the late

11th century to *5 million* by 1300. That increase in population was

heavily dependent on that increase in grain production. A failed crop was a

problem- several years of failed crops meant disaster. On top of that, as

if it weren't enough, a disease called murrain (actually a group of diseases) hit the livestock- sheep and cows. The animals were already

somewhat weakened by the foul weather, and dropped by the score. As

example, the flocks at Bolton Priory in 1316/1317 went from over 3,000 animals to 913. A combination of crop and animal disease took it's toll on the humans-

we can reckon something of the mortality rates by evaluating related records;

for instance, in 1316/1317, the heriot ('best beast') payments on manors in

Winchester were nearly three times the normal (The 'best beast' was given

to the lord as payment by whoever claimed an inheritance, thereby giving an

indication of an estate changing hands due to death). Records such as these

indicate a reduction in population as high as 10-15%.

Roughly a generation later, as the population stabilized and began to creep

back up, it was visited with crisis anew when the Black Death hit western

Europe (1348). Estimates vary, but somewhere between 25-30% of the

population succumbed in the first wave (subsequent waves, such as in

1360-61 did not hit as hard). With deaths at those rates, the delicate

Malthusian balance was completely upended- and as a result, fields that had

grown grains could be used for pasturage, and with fewer people competing

for the same calories a peasant who survived the plague could eat better

than he ever had- he could scorn the bread made of beans that Gower talks

of, and demand white wheat bread. (There was of course several legislative

attempts to put the peasants back in their place but the shortage of

workers made those efforts effectively futile.)

And yet standards varied. The peasant in a lovely ditty called "How the

Ploughman Learned His Paternoster"-

"His hall rofe was full of bakon flytches,

The chambre charged was with wychs

Full of egges, butter, and chese,

Men that were hungry for to ese;

To make good ale, malte had he plentye;

And Martylmas fefe to hin was not deyntye;

Onyons and garlyke had he inowe;

And good creme, and mylke of the cow."

Contrast with the picture that Langland paints for us:

"Also in winter they suffer much hunger and woe

It would be a charity to help them

Bread and penny-ale are a luxury

Cold flesh and cold fish is to them like baked venison

On Fridays and fasting-days, a farthing's worth of mussels

or so many cockles were a feast for such folk."

It really does come down to When, Where, and Who.

Spread me with butter- I'm toast. Good night-

'Lainie

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 18:01:42 -0600 (CST)

From: "Pixel, Goddess and Queen" <pixel at hundred-acre-wood.com>

To: Cooks within the SCA <sca-cooks at lists.ansteorra.org>

Subject: [Sca-cooks] Farmer's feasts question

Besides in Rumpolt, does anyone know of any other late-period references

to what a feast menu for the lower classes should be like? I am

researching an A&S entry for 12th Night and my research library is

woefully inadequate for Tudor/Elizabethan era anything, let alone feast

menus.

The goal is to base the entry off of "a Shakespeare quote". So I am going

with a quote from the play "A Winter's Tale" in which one of the

characters is reciting his shopping list for the sheepshearing feast they

are going to have.

"I cannot do't without counters. Let me see; what am

I to buy for our sheep-shearing feast? Three pound

of sugar, five pound of currants, rice,--what will

this sister of mine do with rice? But my father

hath made her mistress of the feast, and she lays it

on. She hath made me four and twenty nose-gays for

the shearers, three-man-song-men all, and very good

ones; but they are most of them means and bases; but

one puritan amongst them, and he sings psalms to

horn-pipes. I must have saffron to colour the warden

pies; mace; dates?--none, that's out of my note;

nutmegs, seven; a race or two of ginger, but that I

may beg; four pound of prunes, and as many of

raisins o' the sun."

Specifically I am looking for info on what the upper classes thought would

be appropriate for a farmer's feast. I have a reference that says that a

roast joint of mutton is expected at a shearer's dinner, and later there's

a discussion of what grains to make the pie crusts and puddings out of,

but that's all I have.

Any help is appreciated.

Margaret FitzWilliam

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 21:11:40 -0500

From: Johnna Holloway <johnnae at mac.com>

To: Cooks within the SCA <sca-cooks at lists.ansteorra.org>

Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Farmer's feasts question

Go with Thomas Tusser.

He's even a contemporary of Shakespeare.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Tusser

His Five hundred pointes of good husbandrie (1573 is one edition) is

up now on Google Books.

http://preview.tinyurl.com/yct6m39

Page 69 starts the December Husbandrie section where the Christmas

section reads:

Christmas husbandly fare. chap. 26.

GOod husband & huswyfe, now chiefly be glad,

things h?dsom to haue, as they ought to be had

They both do prouide, against Christmas do come

to welcom their neighbour, good chere to haue som

Good bread & good drinke, a good fyer in the hall,

brawne pudding & souse & good mustarde withal.

Biefe, mutton, & porke, shred pyes of the best,

pig, veale, goose & capon, & Turkey wel drest:

Chese, apples & nuttes, iollie Caroles to here,

as then, in the cuntrey, is counted good chere.

What cost to good husbande, is any of this?

good housholde prouision, onely it is.

Of other the like, I do leaue out a meny,

that costeth the husbandman, neuer a peny.

Will this do?

Johnnae

On Dec 17, 2009, at 7:01 PM, Pixel, Goddess and Queen wrote:

<<< Besides in Rumpolt, does anyone know of any other late-period

references to what a feast menu for the lower classes should be

like? I am researching an A&S entry for 12th Night and my research

library is woefully inadequate for Tudor/Elizabethan era anything,

let alone feast menus.snipped

Specifically I am looking for info on what the upper classes thought

would be appropriate for a farmer's feast. I have a reference that

says that a roast joint of mutton is expected at a shearer's dinner,

and later there's a discussion of what grains to make the pie crusts

and puddings out of, but that's all I have.

Any help is appreciated.

Margaret FitzWilliam >>>

Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:54:59 -0500

From: Johnna Holloway <johnnae at mac.com>

To: Cooks within the SCA <sca-cooks at lists.ansteorra.org>

Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Farmer's feasts question

There's also this:

The regiment for Winter, December, January, and February.

THe shepheards in winter are clothed in thick gowns of rough cloth hie

shorne well furred with foxe. For it is the warmest furring that is,

and Cats, Conies, Lambs, and diverse other thicke furres that be good

and wholsome.

In the winter shepheards do eat beef, Pork, Brawn of Harts, Hinds and

all kind of venison, Partriges, Fesants, Hares, fowles of the river

and other meats that they love best: for that is the season of the

year that nature suffereth greatest plenty of vittle for the naturall

heat that is drawn with in the body.

In this season also they drink oft strong wines, after their

c?plexion, bastard or Osey. Twice or thrice in the week they use good

spices in their meats: For this is the wholsomest season of all the

yeer in the which chanceth no sicknesse, but by great excesse and

outrages done to nature, or by evill government. Shepheards say also

that Prime time is hot & moist, of the nature of ayr, complexion of

the sanguine, and that in the same season nature reioyceth, and the

pores open, and the bloud spreads through the veins more than another

time. Summer is hot and dry of the nature of fire, of complexion of

cholerick, when one ought to keep him from all things that procure

heat, all excesse, and hot meats. Harvest is cold and dry of the

nature of earth & complexion of melancholy, in the which time one

ought to keep him from doing excesse more th? at other times. But

winter is cold and moist, of the nature of water, and complexion of

flegmatick, then ought a man to keep him warm and meanly to live in

health.

from The Shepheards kalender newly augmented and corrected. London,

1656.

A revision of The shepardes kalender. [1570?]]

Markham offers this humble menu:

Now for a more humble Feast, or an ordinary proportion which any good

man may keepe in his family for the entertainment of his true and

worthy friends, it must hold limitation with his prouision, and the

season of the yeere: for Summer affords what Winter wantes, & Winter

is master of that which Summer can but with difficulty haue: it is

good then for him that intends to feast, to set downe the full number

of his full dishes, that is, dishes of meate that are of substance,

and not emptie or for shew; and of these sixteene is a good proportion

for one course vnto one messe, as thus for example,

First, a shield of Brawne with mustard: Secondly, a boyld capon;

Thirdly, a boyld peece of Beefe: Fourthly, a chine of beefe rosted:

Fiftly, a neates tongue rosted: Sixtly, a Pigge rosted:

Seuenthly, chewets back't; Eightly, a goose rosted: Ninethly, a swan

rosted: Tenthly, a turkey rosted; the eleuenth, a haunch of venison

rosted; the twelfth, a pasty of venison;

the thirteenth, a Kid with a pudding in the belly; the fourteenth, an

oliue pye; the fifteenth, a couple of capons; the sixteenth, a custard

or dousets.

Now to these full dishes may be added in sallets, fricases,

quelquechoses, and deuised paste, as many dishes more, which make the

full seruice no lesse then two and thirty dishes, which is as much as

can conueniently stand on one table, and in one messe: and after this

manner you may proportion both your second and third course, holding

fulnesse in one halfe of the dishes, and shew in the other, which will

be both frugall in the spendor, contentment to the guest, and much

pleasure and delight to the beholders. And thus much touching the

ordering of great feasts and ordinary contentments.

The English house-vvife. 1631.

Time is probably too short but there's this volume:

Christmas in Shakespeare?s England. Compiled by Maria Hubert. Stroud,

Gloucestershire, UK: Sutton Publishing, 1998. ISBN: 0-7509-1719-9.

It's rather expensive even if you can locate a used copy, but it's a

good book.

Liza Picard's book Elizabeth's London might be good too and it's more

available,

Johnnae llyn Lewis