Without beginning _ab ovo_ on a subject so light (a matter of
importance, however, to many a modern Catius or Amasinius), by
investigating the origin of the Art of Cookery, and the nature of it
as practised by the Antediluvians [1]; without dilating on the
several particulars concerning it afterwards amongst the Patriarchs,
as found in the Bible [2], I shall turn myself immediately, and
without further preamble, to a few cursory observations respecting
the Greeks, Romans, Britons, and those other nations, Saxons, Danes,
and Normans, with whom the people of this nation are more closely
connected.
The Greeks probably derived something of their skill from the East,
(from the Lydians principally, whose cooks are much celebrated, [3])
and something from Egypt. A few hints concerning Cookery may be
collected from Homer, Aristophanes, Aristotle, &c. but afterwards
they possessed many authors on the subject, as may be seen in
Athenæus [4]. And as Diætetics were esteemed a branch of the study of
medicine, as also they were afterwards [5], so many of those authors
were Physicians; and _the Cook_ was undoubtedly a character of high
reputation at Athens [6].
As to the Romans; they would of course borrow much of their culinary
arts from the Greeks, though the Cook with them, we are told, was one
of the lowest of their slaves [7]. In the latter times, however, they
had many authors on the subject as well as the Greeks, and the
practitioners were men of some Science [8], but, unhappily for us,
their compositions are all lost except that which goes under the name
of Apicius; concerning which work and its author, the prevailing
opinion now seems to be, that it was written about the time of
_Heliogabalus_ [9], by one _Cælius_, (whether _Aurelianus_ is not so
certain) and that _Apicius_ is only the title of it [10]. However,
the compilation, though not in any great repute, has been several
times published by learned men.
The Aborigines of Britain, to come nearer home, could have no great
expertness in Cookery, as they had no oil, and we hear nothing of
their butter, they used only sheep and oxen, eating neither hares,
though so greatly esteemed at Rome, nor hens, nor geese, from a
notion of superstition. Nor did they eat fish. There was little corn
in the interior part of the island, but they lived on milk and flesh
[11]; though it is expressly asserted by Strabo that they had no
cheese [12]. The later Britons, however, well knew how to make the
best use of the cow, since, as appears from the laws of _Hoel Dda_,
A.D. 943, this animal was a creature so essential, so common and
useful in Wales, as to be the standard in rating fines, &c. [13].
Hengist, leader of the Saxons, made grand entertainments for king
Vortigern [14], but no particulars have come down to us; and
certainly little exquisite can be expected from a people then so
extremely barbarous as not to be able either to read or write.
'Barbari homines a septentrione, (they are the words of Dr. Lister)
caseo et ferina subcruda victitantes, omnia condimenta adjectiva
respuerunt' [15].
Some have fancied, that as the Danes imported the custom of hard and
deep drinking, so they likewise introduced the practice of
gormandizing, and that this word itself is derived from _Gormund_,
the name of that Danish king whom Ælfred the Great persuaded to be
christened, and called Æthelstane [16], Now 'tis certain that
Hardicnut stands on record as an egregious glutton [17], but he is
not particularly famous for being a _curious Viander_; 'tis true
again, that the Danes in general indulged excessively in feasts and
entertainments [18], but we have no reason to imagine any elegance
of Cookery to have flourished amongst them. And though Guthrum, the
Danish prince, is in some authors named _Gormundus_ [19]; yet this is
not the right etymology of our English word _Gormandize_, since it is
rather the French _Gourmand_, or the British _Gormod_ [20]. So that
we have little to say as to the Danes.
I shall take the later English and the Normans together, on account
of the intermixture of the two nations after the Conquest, since, as
lord Lyttelton observes, the English accommodated them elves to the
Norman manners, except in point of temperance in eating and drinking,
and communicated to them their own habits of drunkenness and
immoderate feasting [21]. Erasmus also remarks, that the English in
his time were attached to _plentiful and splendid tables_; and the
same is observed by Harrison [22]. As to the Normans, both William I.
and Rufus made grand entertainments [23]; the former was remarkable
for an immense paunch, and withal was so exact, so nice and curious
in his repasts [24], that when his prime favourite William Fitz-
Osberne, who as steward of the household had the charge of the Cury,
served him with the flesh of a crane scarcely half-roasted, he was so
highly exasperated, that he lifted up his fist, and would have
strucken him, had not Eudo, appointed _Dapiser_ immediately after,
warded off the blow [25].
_Dapiser_, by which is usually understood _steward of the king's
household_ [26], was a high officer amongst the Normans; and
_Larderarius_ was another, clergymen then often occupying this post,
and sometimes made bishops from it [27]. He was under the _Dapiser_,
as was likewise the _Cocus Dominicæ Coquinæ_, concerning whom, his
assistants and allowances, the _Liber Niger_ may be consulted [28].
It appears further from _Fleta_, that the chief cooks were often
providers, as well as dressers, of victuals [29]. But _Magister
Coquinæ_, who was an esquire by office, seems to have had the care of
pourveyance, A.D. 1340 [30], and to have nearly corresponded with
our _clerk of the kitchen_, having authority over the cooks [31].
However, the _Magnus Coquus_, _Coquorum Præpositus_, _Coquus Regius_,
and _Grans Queux_, were officers of considerable dignity in the
palaces of princes; and the officers under them, according to Du
Fresne, were in the French court A.D. 1385, much about the time that
our Roll was made, 'Queus, Aideurs, Asteurs, Paiges, Souffleurs,
Enfans, Saussiers de Commun, Saussiers devers le Roy, Sommiers,
Poulliers, Huissiers' [32].
In regard to religious houses, the Cooks of the greater foundations
were officers of consequence, though under the Cellarer [33], and if
he were not a monk, he nevertheless was to enjoy the portion of a
monk [34]. But it appears from Somner, that at Christ Church,
Canterbury, the _Lardyrer_ was the first or chief cook [35]; and this
officer, as we have seen, was often an ecclesiastic. However, the
great Houses had Cooks of different ranks [36]; and manors and
churches [37] were often given _ad cibum_ and _ad victum monachorum_
[38]. A fishing at Lambeth was allotted to that purpose [39].
But whether the Cooks were Monks or not, the _Magistri Coquinæ_,
Kitcheners, of the monasteries, we may depend upon it, were always
monks; and I think they were mostly ecclesiastics elsewhere: thus
when Cardinal Otto, the Pope's legate, was at Oxford, A. 1238, and
that memorable fray happened between his retinue and the students,
the _Magister Coquorum_ was the Legate's brother, and was there
killed [40]. The reason given in the author, why a person so nearly
allied to the Great Man was assigned to the office, is this, 'Ne
procuraretur aliquid venenorum, quod nimis [i.e. valde] timebat
legatus;' and it is certain that poisoning was but too much in vogue
in these times, both amongst the Italians and the good people of this
island [41]; so that this was a post of signal trust and confidence.
And indeed afterwards, a person was employed to _taste_, or _take
the assaie_, as it was called [42], both of the messes and the water
in the ewer [43], at great tables; but it may be doubted whether a
particular person was appointed to this service, or it was a branch
of the _Sewer's_ and cup-bearer's duty, for I observe, the _Sewer_ is
sometimes called _Prægustator_ [44], and the cup-bearer tastes the
water elsewhere [45]. The religious houses, and their presidents, the
abbots and priors, had their days of _Gala_, as likewise their halls
for strangers, whom, when persons of rank, they often entertained
with splendour and magnificence. And as for the secular clergy,
archbishops and bishops, their feasts, of which we have some upon
record [46], were so superb, that they might vie either with the
regal entertainments, or the pontifical suppers of ancient Rome
(which became even proverbial [47]), and certainly could not be
dressed and set out without a large number of Cooks [48]. In short,
the satirists of the times before, and about the time of, the
Reformation, are continually inveighing against the high-living of
the bishops and clergy; indeed luxury was then carried to such an
extravagant pitch amongst them, that archbishop Cranmer, A. 1541,
found it necessary to bring the secular clergy under some reasonable
regulation in regard to the furnishing of their tables, not excepting
even his own [49].
After this historical deduction of the _Ars coquinaria_, which I
have endeavoured to make as short as possible, it is time to say
something of the Roll which is here given to the public, and the
methods which the Editor has pursued in bringing it to light.
This vellum Roll contains 196 _formulæ_, or recipes, and belonged
once to the earl of Oxford [50]. The late James West esquire bought
it at the Earl's sale, when a part of his MSS were disposed of; and
on the death of the gentleman last mentioned it came into the hands
of my highly-esteemed friend, the present liberal and most
communicative possessor. It is presumed to be one of the most ancient
remains of the kind now in being, rising as high as the reign of king
Richard II. [51]. However, it is far the largest and most copious
collection of any we have; I speak as to those times. To establish
its authenticity, and even to stamp an additional value upon it, it
is the identical Roll which was presented to queen Elizabeth, in the
28th year of her reign, by lord Stafford's heir, as appears from the
following address, or inscription, at the end of it, in his own
hand writing:
'Antiquum hoc monumentum oblatum et missum
est majestati vestræ vicesimo septimo die mensis
Julij, anno regni vestri fælicissimi vicesimo viij ab
humilimo vestro subdito, vestræq majestati fidelissimo
E. Stafford,
Hæres domus subversæ Buckinghamiens.' [52]
The general observations I have to make upon it are these: many
articles, it seems, were in vogue in the fourteenth century, which
are now in a manner obsolete, as cranes, curlews, herons, seals [53],
porpoises, &c. and, on the contrary, we feed on sundry fowls which
are not named either in the Roll, or the Editor's MS. [54] as quails,
rails, teal, woodcocks, snipes, &c. which can scarcely be numbered
among the _small birds_ mentioned 19. 62. 154. [55]. So as to fish,
many species appear at our tables which are not found in the Roll,
trouts, flounders, herrings, &c. [56]. It were easy and obvious to
dilate here on the variations of taste at different periods of time,
and the reader would probably not dislike it; but so many other
particulars demand our attention, that I shall content myself with
observing in general, that whereas a very able _Italian_ critic,
_Latinus Latinius_, passed a sinister and unfavourable censure on
certain seemingly strange medlies, disgusting and preposterous messes,
which we meet with in _Apicius_; Dr. _Lister_ very sensibly replies
to his strictures on that head, 'That these messes are not
immediately to be rejected, because they may be displeasing to some.
_Plutarch_ testifies, that the ancients disliked _pepper_ and the
sour juice of lemons, insomuch that for a long time they only used
these in their wardrobes for the sake of their agreeable scent, and
yet they are the most wholesome of all fruits. The natives of the
_West Indies_ were no less averse to _salt_; and who would believe
that _hops_ should ever have a place in our common beverage [57], and
that we should ever think of qualifying the sweetness of malt,
through good housewifry, by mixing with it a substance so egregiously
bitter? Most of the _American_ fruits are exceedingly odoriferous,
and therefore are very disgusting at first to us _Europeans_: on the
contrary, our fruits appear insipid to them, for want of odour. There
are a thousand instances of things, would we recollect them all,
which though disagreeable to taste are commonly assumed into our
viands; indeed, _custom_ alone reconciles and adopts sauces which are
even nauseous to the palate. _Latinus Latinius_ therefore very
rashly and absurdly blames _Apicius_, on account of certain
preparations which to him, forsooth, were disrelishing.' [58] In
short it is a known maxim, that _de gustibus non est disputandum_;
And so Horace to the same purpose:
'Tres mihi convivæ prope dissentire videntur,
Poscentes vario multum diversa palato.
Quid dem? quid non dem? renuis tu quod jubet alter.
Quod petis, id sane est invisum acidumque duobus.'
Hor. II. Epist. ii.
And our Roll sufficiently verifies the old observation of
Martial--_ingeniosa gula est_.
[Addenda: after _ingeniosa gula est_, add, 'The _Italians_ now eat
many things which we think perfect carrion. _Ray_, Trav. p. 362. 406.
The _French_ eat frogs and snails. The _Tartars_ feast on horse-flesh,
the _Chinese_ on dogs, and meer _Savages_ eat every thing.
_Goldsmith_, Hist. of the Earth, &c. II. p. 347, 348. 395. III. p.
297. IV. p. 112. 121, &c.']
Our Cooks again had great regard to the eye, as well as the taste,
in their compositions; _flourishing_ and _strewing_ are not only
common, but even leaves of trees gilded, or silvered, are used for
ornamenting messes, see No. 175 [59]. As to colours, which perhaps
would chiefly take place in suttleties, blood boiled and fried (which
seems to be something singular) was used for dying black, 13. 141.
saffron for yellow, and sanders for red [60]. Alkenet is also used
for colouring [61], and mulberries [62]; amydon makes white, 68; and
turnesole [63] _pownas_ there, but what this colour is the Editor
professes not to know, unless it be intended for another kind of
yellow, and we should read _jownas_, for _jaulnas_, orange-tawney. It
was for the purpose of gratifying the sight that _sotiltees_ were
introduced at the more solemn feasts. Rabelais has comfits of an
hundred colours.
Cury, as was remarked above, was ever reckoned a branch of the Art
Medical; and here I add, that the verb _curare_ signifies equally to
dress victuals [64], as to cure a distemper; that every body has
heard of _Doctor Diet, kitchen physick_, &c. while a numerous band of
medical authors have written _de cibis et alimentis_, and have always
classed diet among the _non-naturals_; so they call them, but with
what propriety they best know. Hence Junius '[Greek: Diaita] Græcis
est victus, ac speciatim certa victus ratio, qualis a _Medicis_ ad
tuendam valetudinem præscribitur [65].' Our Cooks expressly tell us,
in their proem, that their work was compiled 'by assent and avysement
of maisters of phisik and of philosophie that dwellid in his [the
King's] court' where _physik_ is used in the sense of medecine,
_physicus_ being applied to persons prosessing the Art of Healing
long before the 14th century [66], as implying _such_ knowledge and
skill in all kinds of natural substances, constituting the _materia
medica_, as was necessiary for them in practice. At the end of the
Editor's MS. is written this rhyme,
Explicit coquina que est optima medicina [67].
There is much relative to eatables in the _Schola Salernitana_; and
we find it ordered, that a physcian should over-see the young
prince's wet-nurse at every meal, to inspect her meat and drink [68].
But after all the avysement of physicians and philosophers, our
processes do not appear by any means to be well calculated for the
benefit of recipients, but rather inimical to them. Many of them are
so highly seasoned, are such strange and heterogeneous compositions,
meer olios and gallimawfreys, that they seem removed as far as
possible from the intention of contributing to health; indeed the
messes are so redundant and complex, that in regard to herbs, in No.
6, no less than ten are used, where we should now be content with two
or three: and so the sallad, No. 76, consists of no less than 14
ingredients. The physicians appear only to have taken care that
nothing directly noxious was suffered to enter the forms. However, in
the Editor's MS. No. 11, there is a prescription for making a _colys_,
I presume a _cullis_, or Invigorating broth; for which see Dodsley's
Old Plays, vol. II. 124. vol. V. 148. vol. VI. 355. and the several
plays mentioned in a note to the first mentioned passage in the Edit.
1780 [69].
I observe further, in regard to this point, that the quantities of
things are seldom specified [70], but are too much left to the taste
and judgement of the cook, if he should happen to be rash and
inconsiderate, or of a bad and undistinguishing taste, was capable of
doing much harm to the guests, to invalids especially.
Though the cooks at Rome, as has been already noted, were amongst the
lowest slaves, yet it was not so more anciently; Sarah and Rebecca
cook, and so do Patroclus and Automedon in the ninth Iliad. It were
to be wished indeed, that the Reader could be made acquainted with
the names of our _master-cooks_, but it is not in the power of the
Editor to gratify him in that; this, however, he may be assured of,
that as the Art was of consequence in the reign of Richard, a prince
renowned and celebrated in the Roll [71], for the splendor and
elegance of his table, they must have been persons of no
inconsiderable rank: the king's first and second cooks are now
esquires by their office, and there is all the reason in the world to
believe they were of equal dignity heretofore [72]. To say a word of
king _Richard_: he is said in the proeme to have been 'acounted the
best and ryallest vyaund [curioso in eating] of all esten kynges.'
This, however, must rest upon the testimony of our cooks, since it
does not appear otherwise by the suffrage of history, that he was
particularly remarkable for his niceness and delicacy in eating, like
Heliogabalus, whose favourite dishes are said to have been the
tongues of peacocks and nightingales, and the brains of parrots and
pheasants [73]; or like Sept. Geta, who, according to Jul.
Capitolinus [74], was so curious, so whimsical, as to order the
dishes at his dinners to consist of things which all began with the
same letters. Sardanapalus again as we have it in Athenæus [75], gave
a _præmium_ to any one that invented and served him with some novel
cate; and Sergius Orata built a house at the entrance of the Lucrine
lake, purposely for the pleasure and convenience of eating the
oysters perfectly fresh. Richard II is certainly not represented in
story as resembling any such epicures, or capriccioso's, as these
[76]. It may, however, be fairly presumed, that good living was not
wanting among the luxuries of that effeminate and dissipated reign.
[Addenda: after _ninth Iliad_, add, 'And Dr. _Shaw_ writes, p. 301,
that even now in the East, the greatest prince is not ashamed to
fetch a lamb from his herd and kill it, whilst the princess is
impatient till she hath prepared her fire and her kettle to dress
it.']
[Addenda: after _heretofore_ add, 'we have some good families in
England of the name of _Cook_ or _Coke_. I know not what they may
think; but we may depend upon it, they all originally sprang from
real and professional cooks; and they need not be ashamed of their
extraction, any more than the _Butlers_, _Parkers_, _Spencers_, &c.']
My next observation is, that the messes both in the roll and the
Editor's MS, are chiefly soups, potages, ragouts, hashes, and the
like hotche-potches; entire joints of meat being never _served_, and
animals, whether fish or fowl, seldom brought to table whole, but
hacked and hewed, and cut in pieces or gobbets [77]; the mortar also
was in great request, some messes being actually denominated from it,
as _mortrews_, or _morterelys_ as in the Editor's MS. Now in this
state of things, the general mode of eating must either have been
with the spoon or the fingers; and this perhaps may have been the
reason that spoons became an usual present from gossips to their
god-children at christenings [78]; and that the bason and ewer, for
washing before and after dinner, was introduced, whence the _ewerer_
was a great officer [79], and the _ewery_ is retained at Court to
this day [80]; we meet with _damaske water_ after dinner [81], I
presume, perfumed; and the words _ewer_ &c. plainly come from the
Saxon eþe or French eau, _water_.
Thus, to return, in that little anecdote relative to the Conqueror
and William Fitz-Osbern, mentioned above, not the crane, but _the
flesh of the crane_ is said to have been under-roasted. Table, or
case-knives, would be of little use at this time [82], and the art of
carving so perfectly useless, as to be almost unknown. In about a
century afterwards, however, as appears from archbishop Neville's
entertainment, many articles were served whole, and lord Wylloughby
was the carver [83]. So that carving began now to be practised, and
the proper terms devised. Wynken de Worde printed a _Book of
Kervinge_, A. 1508, wherein the said terms are registered [84]. 'The
use of _forks_ at table, says Dr. Percy, did not prevail in England
land till the reign of James I. as we learn from a remarkable passage
in _Coryat_ [85]'; the passage is indeed curious, but too long to be
here transcribed, where brevity is so much in view; wherefore I shall
only add, that forks are not now used in some parts of Spain [86].
But then it may be said, what becomes of the old English hospitaliy
in this case, the _roast-beef of Old England_, so much talked of? I
answer, these bulky and magnificent dishes must have been the product
of later reigns, perhaps of queen Elizabeth's time, since it is plain
that in the days of Rich. II. our ancestors lived much after the
French fashion. As to hospitality, the households of our Nobles were
immense, officers, retainers, and servants, being entertained almost
without number; but then, as appears from the Northumberland Book,
and afterwards from the household establisliment of the prince of
Wales, A. 1610, the individuals, or at least small parties, had their
_quantum_, or ordinary, served out, where any good oeconomy was kept,
apart to themselves [87]. Again, we find in our Roll, that great
quantities of the respective viands of the hashes, were often made at
once, as No. 17, _Take hennes or conynges_. 24, _Take hares_. 29,
_Take pygges_. And 31, _Take gees_, &c. So that hospitality and
plentiful housekeeping could just as well be maintained this way, as
by the other of cumbrous unwieldy messes, as much as a man could
carry.
As the messes and sauces are so complex, and the ingredients
consequently so various, it seems necessary that a word should be
spoken concerning the principal of them, and such as are more
frequently employed, before we pass to our method of proceeding in
the publication.
Butter is little used. 'Tis first mentioned No. 81, and occurs but
rarely after [88]; 'tis found but once in the Editor's MS, where it
is written _boter_. The usual substitutes for it are oil-olive and
lard; the latter is frequently called _grees_, or _grece_, or
_whitegrece_, as No. 18. 193. _Capons in Grease_ occur in Birch's
Life of Henry prince of Wales, p. 459, 460. and see Lye in Jun. Etym.
v. _Greasie_. Bishop Patrick has a remarkable passage concerning
this article: 'Though we read of cheese in _Homer_, _Euripides_,
_Theocritus_, and others, yet they never mention _butter_: nor hath
Aristotle a word of it, though he hath sundry observations about
cheese; for butter was not a thing then known among the _Greeks_;
though we see by this and many other places, it was an ancient food
among the eastern people [89].' The Greeks, I presume, used oil
instead of it, and butter in some places of scripture is thought to
mean only cream. [90]
Cheese. See the last article, and what is said of the old Britons
above; as likewise our Glossary.
Ale is applied, No. 113, et alibi; and often in the Editor's MS. as
6, 7, &c. It is used instead of wine, No. 22, and sometimes along
with bread in the Editor's MS. [91] Indeed it is a current opinion
that brewing with hops was not introduced here till the reign of king
Henry VIII. [92] _Bere_, however, is mentioned A. 1504. [93]
Wine is common, both red, and white, No. 21. 53. 37. This article
they partly had of their own growth, [94] and partly by importation
from France [95] and Greece [96]. They had also Rhenish [97], and
probably several other sorts. The _vynegreke_ is among the sweet
wines in a MS of Mr. Astle.
Rice. As this grain was but little, if at all, cultivated in England,
it must have been brought from abroad. Whole or ground-rice enters
into a large number of our compositions, and _resmolle_, No. 96, is a
direct preparation of it.
Alkenet. _Anchusa_ is not only used for colouring, but also fried and
yfoundred, 62. yfondyt, 162. i. e. dissolved, or ground. 'Tis thought
to be a species of the _buglos_.
Saffron. Saffrwm, Brit. whence it appears, that this name ran through
most languages. Mr. Weever informs us, that this excellent drug was
brought hither in the time of Edward III. [98] and it may be true;
but still no such quantity could be produced here in the next reign
as to supply that very large consumption which we see made of it in
our Roll, where it occurs not only as an ingredient in the processes,
but also is used for colouring, for flourishing, or garnishing. It
makes a yellow, No. 68, and was imported from Egypt, or Cilicia, or
other parts of the Levant, where the Turks call it Safran, from the
Arabic Zapheran, whence the English, Italians, French, and Germans,
have apparently borrowed their respective names of it. The Romans
were well acquainted with the drug, but did not use it much in the
kitchen [99]. Pere Calmet says, the Hebrews were acquainted with
anise, ginger, saffron, but no other spices [100].
Pynes. There is some difficulty in enucleating the meaning of this
word, though it occurs so often. It is joined with dates, No. 20. 52.
with honey clarified, 63. with powder-fort, saffron, and salt, 161.
with ground dates, raisins, good powder, and salt, 186. and lastly
they are fried, 38. Now the dish here is _morree_, which in the
Editor's MS. 37, is made of mulberries (and no doubt has its name
from them), and yet there are no mulberries in our dish, but pynes,
and therefore I suspect, that mulberries and pynes are the same, and
indeed this fruit has some resemblance to a pynecone. I conceive
_pynnonade_, the dish, No. 51, to be so named from the pynes therein
employed; and quære whether _pyner_ mentioned along with powder-fort,
saffron, and salt, No. 155, as above in No. 161, should not be read
_pynes_. But, after all, we have cones brought hither from Italy full
of nuts, or kernels, which upon roasting come out of their _capsulæ_,
and are much eaten by the common people, and these perhaps may be the
thing intended.
[Addenda: after _intended_. add, 'See _Ray_, Trav. p. 283. 407. and
_Wright's_ Trav. p. 112.']
Honey was the great and universal sweetner in remote antiquity, and
particularly in this island, where it was the chief constituent of
_mead_ and _metheglin_. It is said, that at this day in _Palestine_
they use honey in the greatest part of their ragouts [101]. Our cooks
had a method of clarifying it, No. 18. 41. which was done by putting
it in a pot with whites of eggs and water, beating them well together;
then setting it over the fire, and boiling it; and when it was ready
to boil over to take it and cool it, No. 59. This I presume is called
_clere honey_, No. 151. And, when honey was so much in use, it
appears from Barnes that _refining_ it was a trade of itself [102].
Sugar, or Sugur [103], was now beginning here to take place of honey;
however, they are used together, No. 67. Sugar came from the Indies,
by way of Damascus and Aleppo, to Venice, Genoa, and Pisa, and from
these last places to us [104]. It is here not only frequently used,
but was of various sorts, as _cypre_, No. 41. 99. 120. named probably
from the isle of Cyprus, whence it might either come directly to us,
or where it had received some improvement by way of refining. There
is mention of _blanch-powder or white sugar_, 132. They, however,
were not the same, for see No. 193. Sugar was clarified sometimes
with wine [105].
Spices. _Species_. They are mentioned in general No. 133, and _whole
spices_, 167, 168. but they are more commonly specified, and are
indeed greatly used, though being imported from abroad, and from so
far as Italy or the Levant (and even there must be dear), some may
wonder at this: but it shouid be considered, that our Roll was
chiefly compiled for the use of noble and princely tables; and the
same may be said of the Editor's MS. The spices came from the same
part of the world, and by the same route, as sugar did. The _spicery_
was an ancient department at court, and had its proper officers.
As to the particular sorts, these are,
Cinamon. _Canell_. 14. 191. _Canel_, Editor's MS. 10. _Kanell_, ibid.
32. is the Italian _Canella_. See Chaucer. We have the flour or
powder, No. 20. 62. See Wiclif. It is not once mentioned in Apicius.
Macys, 14. 121. Editor's MS. 10. _Maces_, 134. Editor's MS. 27. They
are used whole, No. 158. and are always expressed plurally, though we
now use the singular, _mace_. See Junii Etym.
Cloves. No. 20. Dishes are flourished with them, 22. 158. Editor's MS.
10. 27. where we have _clowys gylofres_, as in our Roll, No. 104.
_Powdour gylofre_ occurs 65. 191. Chaucer has _clowe_ in the singular,
and see him v. Clove-gelofer.
Galyngal, 30. and elsewhere. Galangal, the long rooted cyperus [106],
is a warm cardiac and cephalic. It is used in powder, 30. 47. and was
the chief ingredient in _galentine_, which, I think, took its name
from it.
Pepper. It appears from Pliny that this pungent, warm seasoning, so
much in esteem at Rome [107], came from the East Indies [108], and,
as we may suppose, by way of Alexandria. We obtained it no doubt, in
the 14th century, from the same quarter, though not exactly by the
same route, but by Venice or Genoa. It is used both whole, No. 35,
and in powder, No. 83. And long-pepper occurs, if we read the place
rightly, in No. 191.
Ginger, gyngyn. 64. 136. alibi. Powder is used, 17. 20. alibi. and
Rabelais IV. c. 59. the white powder, 131. and it is the name of a
mess, 139. quære whether _gyngyn_ is not misread for _gyngyr_, for
see Junii Etym. The Romans had their ginger from Troglodytica [109].
Cubebs, 64. 121. are a warm spicy grain from the east.
Grains of Paradice, or _de parys_, 137. [110] are the greater
cardamoms.
Noix muscadez, 191. nutmegs.
The caraway is once mentioned, No. 53. and was an exotic from _Caria_,
whence, according to Mr. Lye, it took its name: 'sunt semina, inquit,
_carri_ vel _carrei_, sic dicti a Caria, ubi copiosissimè nascitur
[111].'
Powder-douce, which occurs so often, has been thought by some, who
have just peeped into our Roll, to be the same as sugar, and only a
different name for it; but they are plainly mistaken, as is evident
from 47. 51. 164. 165. where they are mentioned together as different
things. In short, I take powder-douce to be either powder of
galyngal, for see Editor's MS II. 20. 24, or a compound made of
sundry aromatic spices ground or beaten small, and kept always ready
at hand in some proper receptacle. It is otherwise termed _good
powders_, 83. 130. and in Editor's MS 17. 37. 38 [112]. or _powder_
simply, No. 169, 170. _White powder-douce_ occurs No. 51, which seems
to be the same as blanch-powder, 132. 193. called _blaynshe powder_,
and bought ready prepared, in Northumb. Book, p. 19. It is sometimes
used with powder-fort, 38. 156. for which see the next and last
article.
Powder-fort, 10. 11. seems to be a mixture likewise of the warmer
spices, pepper, ginger, &c. pulverized: hence we have _powder-fort of
gynger, other of canel_, 14. It is called _strong powder_, 22. and
perhaps may sometimes be intended by _good powders_. If you will
suppose it to be kept ready prepared by the vender, it may be the
_powder-marchant_, 113. 118. found joined in two places with powder-
douce. This Speght says is what gingerbread is made of; but Skinner
disapproves this explanation, yet, says Mr. Urry, gives none of his
own.
After thus travelling through the most material and most used
ingredients, the _spykenard de spayn_ occurring only once, I shall
beg leave to offer a few words on the nature, and in favour of the
present publication, and the method employed in the prosecution of it.
[Illustration: Take þe chese and of flessh of capouns, or of hennes
& hakke smal and grynde hem smale inn a morter, take mylke of
almandes with þe broth of freysh beef. oþer freysh flessh, & put the
flessh in þe mylke oþer in the broth and set hem to þe fyre, & alye
hem with flour of ryse, or gastbon, or amydoun as chargeaunt as þe
blank desire, & with zolks of ayren and safroun for to make hit zelow,
and when it is dressit in dysshes with blank desires; styk aboue
clowes de gilofre, & strawe powdour of galyugale above, and serue it
forth.]
The common language of the _formulæ_, though old and obsolete, as
naturally may be expected from the age of the MS, has no other
difficulty in it but what may easily be overcome by a small degree of
practice and application [113]: however, for the further illustration
of this matter, and the satisfaction of the curious, a _fac simile_
of one of the recipes is represented in the annexed plate. If here
and there a hard and uncouth term or expression may occur, so as to
stop or embarrass the less expert, pains have been taken to explain
them, either in the annotations under the text, or in the Index and
Glossary, for we have given it both titles, as intending it should
answer the purpose of both [114]. Now in forming this alphabet, as
it would have been an endless thing to have recourse to all our
glossaries, now so numerous, we have confined ourselves, except
perhaps in some few instances, in which the authorities are always
mentioned, to certain contemporary writers, such as the Editor's MS,
of which we shall speak more particularly hereafter, Chaucer, and
Wiclif; with whom we have associated Junius' Etymologicon Anglicanum.
As the abbreviations of the Roll are here retained, in order to
establish and confirm the age of it, it has been thought proper to
adopt the types which our printer had projected for Domesday-Book,
with which we find that our characters very nearly coincide.
The names of the dishes and sauces have occasioned the greatest
perplexity. These are not only many in number, but are often so
horrid and barbarous, to our ears at least, as to be inveloped in
several instances in almost impenetrable obscurity. Bishop Godwin
complains of this so long ago as 1616 [115]. The _Contents_ prefixed
will exhibit at once a most formidable list of these hideous names
and titles, so that there is no need to report them here. A few of
these terms the Editor humbly hopes he has happily enucleated, but
still, notwithstanding all his labour and pains, the argument is in
itself so abstruse at this distance of time, the helps so few, and
his abilities in this line of knowledge and science so slender and
confined, that he fears he has left the far greater part of the task
for the more sagacious reader to supply: indeed, he has not the least
doubt, but other gentlemen of curiosity in such matters (and this
publication is intended for them alone) will be so happy as to clear
up several difficulties, which appear now to him insuperable. It must
be confessed again, thatthe Editor may probably have often failed in
those very points, which he fancies and flatters himself to have
elucidated, but this he is willing to leave to the candour of the
public.
Now in regard to the helps I mentioned; there is not much to be
learnt from the Great Inthronization-feast of archbishop Robert
Winchelsea, A. 1295, even if it were his; but I rather think it
belongs to archbishop William Warham, A. 1504 [116]. Some use,
however, has been made of it.
Ralph Bourne was installed abbot of St. Augustine's, near Canterbury,
A. 1309; and William Thorne has inserted a list of provisions bought
for the feast, with their prices, in his Chronicle [117].
The Great Feast at the Inthronization of George Nevile archbishop of
York, 6 Edward IV. is printed by Mr. Hearne [118], and has been of
good service.
Elizabeth, queen of king Henry VII. was crowned A. 1487, and the
messes at the dinner, in two courses, are registered in the late
edition of Leland's Collectenea, A. 1770 [119], and we have profited
thereby.
The Lenten Inthronization-feast of archbishop William Warham, A. 1504
[120], given us at large by Mr. Hearne [121], has been also consulted.
There is a large catalogue of viands in Rabelais, lib. iv. cap. 59.
60. And the English translation of Mr. Ozell affording little
information, I had recourse to the French original, but not to much
more advantage.
There is also a Royal Feast at the wedding of the earl of Devonshire,
in the Harleian Misc. No. 279, and it has not been neglected.
Randle Holme, in his multifarious _Academy of Armory_, has an
alphabet of terms and dishes [122]; but though I have pressed him
into the service, he has not contributed much as to the more
difficult points.
The Antiquarian Repertory, vol. II. p. 211, exhibits an
entertainment of the mayor of Rochester, A. 1460; but there is little
to be learned from thence. The present work was printed before No. 31
of the Antiquarian Repertory, wherein some ancient recipes in Cookery
are published, came to the Editor's hand.
I must not omit my acknowledgments to my learned friend the present
dean of Carlisle, to whom I stand indebted for his useful notes on
the Northumberland-Household Book, as also for the book itself.
Our chief assistance, however, has been drawn from a MS belonging to
the Editor, denoted, when cited, by the signature _MS. Ed._ It is a
vellum miscellany in small quarto, and the part respecting this
subject consists of ninety-one English recipes (or _nyms_) in cookery.
These are disposed into two parts, and are intituled, 'Hic incipiunt
universa servicia tam de carnibus quam de pissibus.' [123] The second
part, relates to the dressing of fish, and other lenten fare, though
forms are also there intermixed which properly belong to flesh-days.
This leads me to observe, that both here, and in the Roll, messes are
sometimes accommodated, by making the necessary alterations, both to
flesh and fish-days. [124] Now, though the subjects of the MS are
various, yet the hand-writing is uniform; and at the end of one of
the tracts is added, 'Explicit massa Compoti, Anno Dñi M'lo CCC'mo
octogesimo primo ipso die Felicis et Audacti.' [125], i.e. 30 Aug.
1381, in the reign of Rich. II. The language and orthography accord
perfectly well with this date, and the collection is consequently
contemporary with our Roll, and was made chiefly, though not
altogether, for the use of great tables, as appears from the
_sturgeon_, and the great quantity of venison therein prescribed for.
As this MS is so often referred to in the annotations, glossary, and
even in this preface, and is a compilation of the same date, on the
same subject, and in the same language, it has been thought adviseable
to print it, and subjoin it to the Roll; and the rather, because it
really furnishes a considerable enlargement on the subject, and
exhibits many forms unnoticed in the Roll.
To conclude this tedious preliminary detail, though unquestionably a
most necessary part of his duty, the Editor can scarcely forbear
laughing at himself, when he reflects on his past labours, and recollects
those lines of the poet Martial;
Turpe est difficiles habere nugas,
Et stultus labor est ineptiarum. II. 86.
and that possibly mesdames _Carter_ and _Raffald_, with twenty others,
might have far better acquitted themselves in the administration of
this province, than he has done. He has this comfort and satisfaction,
however, that he has done his best; and that some considerable
names amongst the learned, Humelbergius, Torinus, Barthius, our
countryman Dr. Lister, Almeloveen, and others, have bestowed no less
pains in illustrating an author on the same subject, and scarcely of
more importance, the _Pseudo-Apicius_.
[1] If, according to Petavius and Le Clerc, the world was created in
autumn, when the fruits of the earth were both plentiful and in the
highest perfection, the first man had little occasion for much
culinary knowledge; roasting or boiling the cruder productions, with
modes of preserving those which were better ripened, seem to be all
that was necessary for him in the way of _Cury_, And even after he
was displaced from Paradise, I conceive, as many others do, he was
not permitted the use of animal food [Gen. i. 29.]; but that this was
indulged to us, by an enlargement of our charter, after the Flood,
Gen. ix, 3. But, without wading any further in the argument here, the
reader is referred to Gen. ii. 8. seq. iii. 17, seq. 23.
[Addenda: add 'vi. 22. where _Noah_ and the beasts are to live on the
same food.']
[2] Genesis xviii. xxvii. Though their best repasts, from the
politeness of the times, were called by the simple names of _Bread_,
or a _Morsel of bread_, yet they were not unacquainted with modes of
dressing flesh, boiling, roasting, baking; nor with sauce, or
seasoning, as salt and oil, and perhaps some aromatic herbs. Calmet v.
Meats and Eating, and qu. of honey and cream, ibid.
[3] Athenæus, lib. xii. cap. 3.
[4] Athenæus, lib. xii. cap. 3. et Cafaubon. See also Lister ad
Apicium, præf. p. ix. Jungerm. ad Jul. Polluccm, lib. vi. c. 10.
[5] See below. 'Tamen uterque [Torinus et Humelbergius] hæc scripta
[i, e. Apicii] ad medicinam vendicarunt.' Lister, præf. p. iv. viii.
ix.
[6] Athenaæus, p. 519. 660.
[7] Priv. Life of the Romans, p. 171. Lister's Præf, p. iii, but Ter.
An, i. 1. Casaub. ad Jul. Capitolin. cap. 5.
[8] Casaub. ad Capitolin. l. c.
[9] Lister's Præf. p. ii. vi. xii.
[10] Fabric. Bibl. Lat. tom. II. p. 794. Hence Dr. Bentley ad Hor. ii.
ferm. 8. 29. stiles it _Pseudapicius_. Vide Listerum, p. iv.
[11] Cæsar de B. G. v. § 10.
[12] Strabo, lib. iv. p. 200. Pegge's Essay on Coins of Cunob, p. 95.
[13] Archæologia, iv. p. 61. Godwin, de Præsul. p. 596, seq.
[14] Malmsb. p. 9. Galfr. Mon. vi. 12.
[15] Lister. ad Apic. p. xi. where see more to the same purpose.
[16] Spelm. Life of Ælfred, p. 66. Drake, Eboracum. Append, p. civ.
[17] Speed's History.
[18] Mons. Mallet, cap. 12.
[19] Wilkins, Concil. I. p. 204. Drake, Ebor. p. 316. Append, p. civ.
cv.
[20] Menage, Orig. v. Gourmand.
[21] Lord Lyttelton, Hist. of H. II. vol. iii. p. 49.
[22] Harrison, Descript. of Britain, p. 165, 166.
[23] Stow, p. 102. 128.
[24] Lord Lyttelton observes, that the Normans were delicate in their
food, but without excess. Life of Hen. II. vol. III. p. 47.
[25] Dugd. Bar. I. p. 109. Henry II. served to his son. Lord
Lyttelton, IV. p. 298.
[26] Godwin de Præsul. p. 695, renders _Carver_ by _Dapiser_, but
this I cannot approve. See Thoroton. p. 23. 28. Dugd. Bar. I. p. 441.
620. 109. Lib. Nig. p. 342. Kennet, Par. Ant. p. 119. And, to name no
more, Spelm. in voce. The _Carver_ was an officer inferior to the
_Dapiser_, or _Steward_, and even under his control. Vide Lel.
Collect. VI. p. 2. And yet I find Sir Walter Manny when young was
carver to Philippa queen of king Edward III. Barnes Hist. of E. III.
p. 111. The _Steward_ had the name of _Dapiser_, I apprehend, from
serving up the first dish. V. supra.
[27] Sim. Dunelm. col. 227. Hoveden, p. 469. Malms. de Pont. p. 286.
[28] Lib. Nig. Scaccarii, p. 347.
[29] Fleta, II. cap. 75.
[30] Du Fresne, v. Magister.
[31] Du Fresne, ibid.
[32] Du Fresne, v. Coquus. The curious may compare this List with Lib.
Nig. p. 347.
[33] In Somner, Ant. Cant. Append. p. 36. they are under the
_Magister Coquinæ_, whose office it was to purvey; and there again
the chief cooks are proveditors; different usages might prevail at
different times and places. But what is remarkable, the
_Coquinarius_, or Kitchener, which seems to answer to _Magister
Coquinæ_, is placed before the Cellarer in Tanner's Notitia, p. xxx.
but this may be accidental.
[34] Du Fresne, v. Coquus.
[35] Somner, Append. p. 36.
[36] Somner, Ant. Cant. Append. p. 36.
[37] Somner, p. 41.
[38] Somner, p. 36, 37, 39, sæpius.
[39] Somner, l. c.
[40] M. Paris, p4. 69.
[41] Dugd. Bar. I. p. 45. Stow, p. 184. M. Paris, p. 377. 517. M.
Westm. p. 364.
[42] Lel. Collectan. VI. p. 7. seq.
[43] Ibid. p. 9. 13.
[44] Compare Leland, p. 3. with Godwin de Præsul. p. 695. and so
Junius in Etymol. v. Sewer.
[45] Leland, p. 8, 9. There are now _two yeomen of the mouth_ in the
king's household.
[46] That of George Neville, archbishop of York, 6 Edw. IV. and that
of William Warham, archbishop of Canterbury, A.D. 1504. These were
both of them inthronization feasts. Leland, Collectan. VI. p. 2 and
16 of Appendix. They were wont _minuere sanguinem_ after these superb
entertainments, p. 32.
[47] Hor. II. Od. xiv. 28. where see Mons. Dacier.
[48] Sixty-two were employed by archbishop Neville. And the hire of
cooks at archbishop Warham's feast came to 23 l. 6 s. 8 d.
[49] Strype, Life of Cranmer, p. 451, or Lel. Coll. ut supra, p. 38.
Sumptuary laws in regard to eating were not unknown in ancient Rome.
Erasm. Colloq. p. 81. ed. Schrev. nor here formerly, see Lel. Coll.
VI. p. 36. for 5 Ed. II.
[50] I presume it may be the same Roll which Mr. Hearne mentions in
his Lib. Nig. Scaccarii, I. p. 346. See also three different letters
of his to the earl of Oxford, in the Brit. Mus. in the second of
which he stiles the Roll _a piece of antiquity, and a very great
rarity indeed_. Harl. MSS. No. 7523.
[51] See the Proem.
[52] This lord was grandson of Edward duke of Bucks, beheaded A. 1521,
whose son Henry was restored in blood; and this Edward, the grandson,
born about 1571, might be 14 or 15 years old when he presented the
Roll to the Queen.
[53] Mr. Topham's MS. has _socas_ among the fish; and see archbishop
Nevil's Feast, 6 E. IV. to be mentioned below.
[54] Of which see an account below.
[55] See Northumb. Book, p. 107, and Notes.
[56] As to carps, they were unknown in England t. R. II. Fulier,
Worth. in Sussex, p. 98. 113. Stow, Hist. 1038.
[57] The Italians still call the hop _cattiva erba_. There was a
petition against them t. H. VI. Fuller, Worth. p. 317, &c. Evelyn,
Sylva, p. 201. 469. ed. Hunter.
[58] Lister, Præf. ad Apicium, p. xi.
[59] So we have _lozengs of golde_. Lel. Collect. IV. p. 227. and a
wild boar's head _gylt_, p. 294. A peacock with _gylt neb_. VI. p. 6.
_Leche Lambart gylt_, ibid.
[60] No. 68. 20. 58. See my friend Dr. Percy on the Northumberland-
Book, p. 415. and MS Ed. 34.
[61] No. 47. 51. 84.
[62] No. 93. 132. MS Ed. 37.
[63] Perhaps Turmerick. See ad loc.
[64] Ter. Andr. I. 1. where Donatus and Mad. Dacier explain it of
Cooking. Mr. Hearne, in describing our Roll, see above, p. xi, by an
unaccountable mistake, read _Fary_ instead of _Cury_, the plain
reading of the MS.
[65] Junii Etym. v. Diet.
[66] Reginaldus Phisicus. M. Paris, p. 410. 412. 573. 764. Et in Vit.
p. 94. 103. Chaucer's _Medicus_ is a doctor of phisick, p.4. V. Junii
Etym. voce Physician. For later times, v. J. Rossus, p. 93.
[67] That of Donatus is modest 'Culina medicinæ famulacrix est.'
[68] Lel. Collect. IV. p. 183. 'Diod. Siculus refert primos Ægypti
Reges victum quotidianum omnino sumpsisse ex medicorum præscripto.'
Lister ad Apic. p. ix.
[69] See also Lylie's Euphues, p. 282. Cavendish, Life of Wolsey,
p. 151, where we have _callis_, malè; Cole's and Lyttleton's Dict. and
Junii Etymolog. v. Collice.
[70] See however, No. 191, and Editor's MS II. 7.
[71] Vide the proeme.
[72] See above.
[73] Univ. Hist. XV. p. 352. 'Æsopus pater linguas avium humana
vocales lingua cænavit; filius margaritas.' Lister ad Apicium, p. vii.
[74] Jul. Capitolinus, c. 5.
[75] Athenæus, lib. xii. c. 7. Something of the same kind is related
of Heliogabalus, Lister Præf. ad Apic. p. vii.
[76] To omit the paps of a pregnant sow, Hor. I. Ep. xv. 40. where
see Mons. Dacier; Dr. Fuller relates, that the tongue of carps were
accounted by the ancient Roman palate-men most delicious meat. Worth.
in Sussex. See other instances of extravagant Roman luxury in
Lister's Præf. to Apicius, p. vii.
[77] See, however, No. 33, 34, 35, 146.
[Addenda: add 'reflect on the Spanish _Olio_ or _Olla podrida_, and
the French fricassée.']
[78] The king, in Shakespeare, Hen. VIII. act iv. sc. 2. and 3. calls
the gifts of the sponsors, _spoons_. These were usually gilt, and,
the figures of the apostles being in general carved on them, were
called _apostle spoons_. See Mr. Steevens's note in Ed. 1778, vol.
VII. p. 312, also Gent. Mag. 1768, p. 426.
[79] Lel. Collect. IV. p. 328. VI. p. 2.
[80] See Dr. Percy's curious notes on the Northumb. Book, p. 417.
[81] Ibid. VI. p. 5. 18.
[82] They were not very common at table among the Greeks. Casaub. ad
Athenæum, col. 278. but see Lel. Coll. VI. p. 7.
[83] Leland, Collectan. VI. p. 2. Archbishop Warham also had his
carver, ibid. p. 18. See also, IV. p. 236. 240. He was a great
officer. Northumb. Book, p. 445.
[84] Ames, Typ. Ant. p. 90. The terms may also be seen in Rand. Holme
III. p. 78.
[85] Dr. Percy, 1. c.
[86] Thicknesse, Travels, p., 260.
[87] Dr. Birch, Life of Henry prince of Wales, p. 457. seq.
[88] No. 91, 92. 160.
[89] Bishop Patrick on Genesis xviii. 8.
[90] Calmer, v. Butter. So Judges iv, 19. compared with v. 25.
[91] Ib. No. 13, 14, 15.
[92] Stow, Hist. p. 1038.
[93] Lel. Coll. VI. p. 30. and see Dr. Percy on Northumb. Book, p.
414.
[94] Archæologia, I. p. 319. Ill, p. 53.
[95] Barrington's Observ. on Statutes, p. 209. 252. Edit. 3d.
Archæolog. I. p. 330. Fitz-Stephen, p. 33. Lel. Coll. VI. p. 14.
Northumb. Book, p. 6. and notes.
[96] No. 20. 64. 99.
[97] No. 99.
[98] Fun. Mon. p. 624
[99] Dr. Lister, Præf. ad Apicium, p. xii.
[100] Calmet. Dict. v. Eating.
[101] Calmet. Dict. v. Meats.
[102] Barnes, Hist. of E. III. p. 111.
[103] No. 70, Editor's MS. 17. alibi.
[104] Moll, Geogr. II. p. 130. Harris, Coll. of Voyages, I. p. 874.
Ed. Campbell.
[105] No. 20. 148.
[106] Glossary to Chaucer. See the Northumb. Book, p. 415 and 19.
also Quincy's Dispens. and Brookes's Nat. Hist. of Vegetables.
[107] Lister, Præf. ad Apicium, p. xii.
[108] Plinius, Nat. Hist. XII. cap. 7.
[109] Bochart. III. col. 332.
[110] See our Gloss. voce Greynes.
[111] Lye, in Junii Etymolog.
[112] But see the next article.
[113] Doing, hewing, hacking, grinding, kerving, &c. are easily
understood.
[114] By combining the Index and Glossary together, we have had an
opportunity of elucidating some terms more at large than could
conveniently be done in the notes. We have also cast the Index to the
Roll, and that to the Editor's MS, into one alphabet; distinguishing,
however, the latter from the former.
[115] Godwin de Præsul. p. 684.
[116] In Dr. Drake's edition of archbishop Parker, p. lxiii. it is
given to archbishop Winchelsea: but see Mr. Battely's Append. to
_Cantuaria Sacra_, p. 27. or the Archæologia, I. p. 330. and Leland's
Collectanea, VI. p. 30. where it is again printed, and more at large,
and ascribed to Warham.
[117] Thorne, Chron. inter X Script. Col. 2010. or Lel. Collect. VI.
p. 34. Ed. 1770.
[118] Leland, Collect. VI. p. 2. See also Randle Holme, III. p. 77.
Bishop Godwin de Præsul. p. 695. Ed. Richardson; where there are some
considerable variations in the messes or services, and he and the
Roll in Leland will correct one another.
[119] Vol. IV. p. 226.
[120] See first paragraph before.
[121] Leland's Collect. VI. p. 16.
[122] Holme, Acad. of Armory, III. p. 81.
[123] It is _pissibus_ again in the title to the Second Part.
[124] No. 7. 84. here No. 17. 35. 97.
[125] In the common calendars of our missals and breviaries, the
latter saint is called _Adauctus_, but in the Kalend. Roman. of Joh.
Fronto, Paris. 1652, p. 126, he is written _Audactus_, as here; and
see Martyrolog. Bedæ, p. 414.