Talk:Regional cuisines of medieval Europe

Question

In the Poland section there is : Labrador tea, a mildly toxic herb, was often used as an ingredient to increase intoxication.

Was Labrador tea which seems to be a new world shrub known by the poles ?Chris CII 09:52, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Check that link again. The name is used for two different species, one of which is found all over the Old World.

Peter ^Isotalo 15:02, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Lithuania

Thanks for the addition to regional variations in medieval cuisine, but we really, really need a source for that, as per our policies. Where did you find the information?

Peter ^Isotalo 12:18, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Lithuania

Is it really "fried dear" and "bear". Or should it be "fried deer" and "beer" ?

Rishabhp 04:18, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

I have no idea, and I must say that the section looks pretty odd to me. I'm moving it here until someone provides references for it.

Although a part of the Northern European cultural context, Baltic cuisine has been extensively influenced by geopolitical changes. The Grand Duchy of Lithuania was the last country in Europe to convert to Christianity (1387). This and the fact that the nobility made up to 10% of the total population of the state (compared with 1-5% elswhere in Europe) contributed to preservation of many traditional foods until this day. Although refusing to accept christianity, medieval Lithuanian rulers (e.g. Grand duke Gediminas) favoured trade with foreigners of all religions which led to accumulation of substantial numbers of Jews, Germans, Caraims, Slavs, Italians, Romas, Tatars and Armenians in the country. Constant warfare with Teutonic knights, russians, swedes and mongols has also influenced traditional lithuanian eating habits.

As elswhere in northern Europe, the most popular and widely used drink was beer (not to mention water). Lithuanians were (and still are) especially fond of mead (honey liqour) and various herbal liqours. Commoners would usually eat various soups and broths with bread while the noblemans choice of meat varied depending on hunting skills and the season. This is how annals describe the easter dinner of Grand duke of Lithuania Žygimantas "Senasis" Jogailaitis (Sygismund "the Old" Jegellon) that took place in Vilnius in ~1520 AD: 1 stuffed grilled mutton, 4 fried deer with their horns plated with gold and stuffed with bird-meat, 12 fried wild boar stuffed with sausages, 356 loaves of Samogithian bread stuffed with mushrooms and cabbage, 12 barrels of Grand duke's reserved wine, 52 barrels of Italian, Spanish and Cypriotic wine, 356 bottles of Hungarian Tokaji wine, 8760 quorts of Lithuanian mead.

Tradidtional Lithuanian cuisine dishes: mead, bear, šaltibarščiai (cold soup), bulbonai, courland eal, fried beaver, fried dear, baronkos, pressed black grouse, goat chese, švilpikai, kindziulis, skilandis, palendvica, fried northern pike, fried carp, šakotis (baumkuchen), vėdarai, šaltiena, cepelinai, dumplings, pancakes, etc.

Peter ^Isotalo 08:36, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Some comments

I've made some copyedits to the article, and have a few other questions about phrasing and clarity.

In the section on Poland, "as hunting licenses were controlled by land owners" seems slightly anachronistic. "Rights to hunt game" might be better, although I don't know much about the structure of forest law in Poland. (See, however, this interesting page, which touches on the subject in discussing the aurochs.)

"...with an apple topping, reminiscent of pizza" is unclear; the description to me is reminiscent of Apfelküchen, not pizza! Is it the placki in general that resemble pizza?

Maybe this is drifting a little far afield for this article, but what was the mechanism by which the Sicilio-Norman culture "fed back" into Anglo-Norman cuisine? Joan of England, Queen of Sicily is the only prominent example of English-Sicilian contact from the period that leaps to my mind.

"Towards the Late Middle Ages the habit of eating roe and caviar was also imported from the Black Sea region in the 11th century," in Byzantine culture, appears to be contradictory, with the Late Middle Ages beginning around the 14th century.

Should the reference to religious dietary restrictions in the Byzantine Empire mention dairy products as well as meat?

Choess 03:52, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Bit late reply here, since I've been busy with other cuisine articles as well as working on the main article. I'll go about correcting some of the obvious mistakes you pointed out when I have time and motivation for it, and the suggestions are, as always, very good.

The Sicilio-Norman connection, though, is about the Norman conquest of Sicily under Roger I. At least that's how I understood things from the sources.

Peter ^Isotalo 16:52, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Regions

Try to put in the regional cuisines of parts of europe where dialects are spoken. places in Spain, Italy and Poland have thier own regional dialects and cultures. --Poflaco 15:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

You're right, Poflaco, but there's a catch here. We're talking about the Middle Ages. Local traditions certainly existed, but the problem is that there's not much detail known about them and the concept of the national or ethnic cuisine didn't really come into full bloom until a few centuries after the Middle Ages ended. All the authors of books on medieval cuisine that I've read so far seem to be in agreement that social class and wealth were far more important dividing lines, even if no one's denying that Scandinavians didn't eat the same thing as people in southern France.

Peter ^Isotalo 16:05, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Soft drinks? I call bullsh*t

"The Byzantine empire also became quite famous for its desserts, which included biscuits, rice pudding, quince marmalade, rose sugar and many types of soft drinks."

I find this impossible to believe. How could the Byzantines have pressurized their drinks with carbon dioxide? Is the technology for making carbonated beverages really that old? As far as I know, the only frothy or "fizzy" drinks in medieval Europe were alcoholic beverages like mead. (I realize the Wikipedia page on soft drinks states that the term "now commonly refers to almost any non-alcoholic beverage", but I han't ever heard the term used like this — not even a single time in the entirety of my life. Please correct (either me or the page)! --Þorstejnn 13:43, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

If you can come up with a more appropriate general term, please do so, but don't slap a rather inappropriate fact-tag to draw attention to the problem.

And do try to avoid unnecessarily harsh wording.

Peter ^Isotalo 17:22, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Harsh wording?! What was (or could even be interpreted as) harsh about my wording? Is "non-alcoholic beverage" really the meaning that was intended by "soft drink"? Wouldn't it be far less confusing simply to write "non-alcoholic drink", especially when the term "soft drink" refers exclusively to carbonated beferages? Honestly, I haven't ever heard or seen the word "soft drink" refer to anything but a carbonated beverage. The statement I saw on the soft drink page was the first time I'd ever heard/seen anyone say that the word "soft drink" could refer to a non-carbonated drink — and and a single statement found on a single Wikipedia page for which there is no support anywhere other than that one Wikipedia page hardly redefines a word with a well-established meaning. So of course I tagged the statement that Byzantines had soft drinks! There's nothing inappropriate about that. If the Byzantines really did have actual soft drinks, a reference for this need be cited. Would you say that a fact tag on a statement that Australopithecines had microwave ovens was inappropriate? I should certainly hope not. In fact, it'd be rather generous to put a fact-tag on the statement instead of deleting it outright as vandalism. And to be honest, the highly questionable statement on the soft drink page that it could refer to almost any non-alcoholic drink is the only reason I did use the fact-tag instead of just deleting the claim with "removed vandalism" in the edit summary. If "non-alcoholic drink/beverage" was the meaning intended, I would assume the article would say so outright instead of redefining a term that means something totally different without an explanation. --Þórrstejn [ˡθoɝ.staɪʲn]: Hammer of Thor ^talk 20:46, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not define the meaning of words and the article doesn't claim that the Byzantines made modern carbonated drinks. "I call bullsh*t" certainly was very unnecessary (which is why I removed it). As for references, you may refer to the footnote at the end of the section.

Peter ^Isotalo 06:35, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and by the way, here's a real reference to the definition of "soft drink".[1] Personal experience might not always be the best way of trying to support statements.

Peter ^Isotalo 06:44, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Does Andrew Dalby use the term soft drink in Flavours of Byzantium? That is the nearest citation, and the actual paragraph does not have one so I was wondering if that is the intended note for the paragraph mentioning the desserts. I will admit to not having ever seen a historian use the term soft drink myself, as in general as has been stated it usually refers to the commercial products created in the 17th century, with this article giving a bit more insight and along this time line A Timeline of Soft Drink History, Perhaps a description of the actual drinks in the article would relieve the issue along with the paragraph having its own citation?--Christopher Tanner, CCC 13:06, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Peter ^Isotalo wrote, at 06:35, on August 9th, 2007 (UTC)

"Wikipedia does not define the meaning of words"

It did in the article on soft drinks, saying that the term could refer to almost any non-alcoholic drink. The person who wrote that into the article is likely the only person who uses the term that way, seeing as how the term "non-alcoholic drink" works just fine for everyone else. It's more than a little hard to imagine more than one or two people having so much trouble thinking of a term for "non-alcoholic drink" that he/they can't even remember the term "non-alcoholic drink" itself and so have to misappropriate the term "soft drink".

"and the article doesn't claim that the Byzantines made modern carbonated drinks."

Yes, it does. It does so by claiming the Byzantines made soft-drinks.

"'I call bullsh*t' certainly was very unnecessary (which is why I removed it)."

THIS is the "unnecessarily harsh" wording you were refering to?! Jesus Camel-humping Christ, this isn't the 2nd grade. If you're going to get all pissy over a common, every day phrase that friends and associates use with one another all the time without any ill feelings whatever, then clearly it's pointless to expect you to behave rationally (hence, your position that the fact-tag was any more "inappropriate" on a statement that the Byzantines had Pepsi cola than it would be on a statement that Neanderthals had Big Mac meals -- though for all I know, you'd say a fact-tag was inappropriate there, too).

And by the way: Altering the text of other users on talk-pages is considered a vandalism here on Wikipedia. The fact that you'd commit an act of vandalism to remove a word you're apparently offended by, even though I was considerate enough to avoid spelling out the word completely for the sake of those dirty-minded folk who are offended by "dirty words" (there are no dirty words, only dirty minds, and no minds dirtier than those who are offended by the vocabularies of certain ethnic herritages), is an exemplary show of irrationality. Hence, I'm reverting the act of vandalism.

Please, for your own sake if not for the sake of others, from now on, try to remain level-headed, unprejudiced, and rational; avert your eyes if something you see offends you (or better yet, try not to be offended by words of Germanic etymology just because some stuffy, Victorian-era aristocrats decided they were "dirty" and that only Latinate substitutes should be tolerated) rather than commiting acts of vandalism, and be prepared to interact with average, blue-collar folks who don't share your Victorian-era sensibilities and who find it easier to use straight-forward language ("non-alcoholic drinks") than to misappropriate words with different meanings ("soft drinks"), because your uncalled-for, adversarial behavior thus far will get you nowhere but on people's nerves. --Þórrstejn [ˡθoɝ.staɪʲn]: Hammer of Thor ^talk 17:59, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

The article issue has been resolved as far as I'm concerned. Please stop ranting about unrelated personal issues.

Peter ^Isotalo 18:11, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

The only "ranting" here has been on your part. I advised you of Wikipedia policy (something you have proven yourself completely unaware of) and gave you a tip on how to better get along with others by not freaking out and ranting about your own personal prejudices. This last message by you, pleading me to stop ranting, is the mark of an internet troll whose only interest is in stirring up mahem; a fact supported by your actions (deleting text by other users, accusing other users of behavior you and you alone are guilty of, et cetera).

In short, *PLONK* --Þórrstejn [ˡθoɝ.staɪʲn]: Hammer of Thor ^talk 19:11, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

France

This is about the French section, but it could apply to the article overall. Some assertions are very likely wrong: "The use of dough and pastry, which was fairly popular in Britain at the time, was almost completely absent from recipe collections with the exception of a few pies." The fifteenth century version of the Viandier includes a long list of recipes for pasties (essentially pies), tarts and other pastries: https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k62367s/f149.item.r=tartes

In general, pies and tarts were a fundamental part of late medieval French cuisine; both in the streets and at dinner tables.

This assertion is dubious at best: "A specialty among finer French chefs was the preparation of so-called parti-colored dishes. These mimicked the late medieval fashion of wearing clothing with two colors contrasting one another on either side of the garment, a fashion that survived in the costumes of court jesters."

To the degree (limited) that such dishes did exist, I know of no evidence they were inspired by clothing. This sounds very much like an after-the-fact theory. Certainly, no source is provided for the assertion.

Overall, the article is under-sourced, so that it is very hard to tell what is solidly documented and what is simply based on vague, unsupported ideas. Also, despite mentioning the 5th century early on, nowhere does the article actually address early medieval cuisine (which was very different from late). 2600:1700:8D40:9B60:74E9:49C0:6166:339A (talk) 21:07, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

At the end of the paragraph that you're citing above, there's a reference provided. Have you checked it? Have you checked any of the sources provided in the article at all? Peter ^Isotalo 21:22, 9 November 2023 (UTC)