Kitabı oku: «Notes and Queries, Number 04, November 24, 1849», sayfa 3

Various

Yazı tipi:

FOOD OF THE PEOPLE.—BILLS OF FARE IN 1683—HUMBLE PIE

The food of the people must always be regarded as an important element in estimating the degree of civilization of a nation, and its position in the social scale. Mr. Macaulay, in his masterly picture of the state of England at the period of the accession of James II., has not failed to notice this subject as illustrative of the condition of the working classes of that day. He tells us that meat, viewed relatively with wages, was "so dear that hundreds of thousands of families scarcely knew the taste of it.... The great majority of the nation lived almost entirely on rye, barley, and oats." (Hist. Eng. vol. i. p. 418., 4th ed.)

It is not uninteresting to inquire (and having found, it is worth making a note of) what sort of fare appeared on the tables of the upper and middle classes,—who, unlike their poorer neighbours, were in a condition to gratify their gastronomic preferences in the choice and variety of their viands,—with the view of determining whether the extraordinary improvement which has taken place in the food of the labouring population has been equally marked in that of the wealthier orders.

Pepys, who was unquestionably a lover of good living, and never tired of recording his feastings off "brave venison pasty," or "turkey pye," has given in his Diary many curious notices of the most approved dishes of his day. The following "Bills of fare" of the period referred to speak, however, directly to the point; they are taken from a work entitled, The accomplisht Lady's Delight, in Preserving, Physick, Beautifying, and Cookery. London, printed for B. Harris, 1683.

"A Bill of fare for a Gentleman's House about Candlemas.
"1. A Pottage with a Hen. 2. A Chatham-pudding. 3. A Fricacie of Chickens. 4. A leg of mutton with a Sallet. Garnish your dishes with Barberries.
"Second Course. 1. A chine of Muton. 2. A chine of Veal. 3. Lark-pye. 4. A couple of Pullets, one larded. Garnished with orange slices.
"Third Course. 1. A dish of Woodcocks. 2. A couple of Rabbits. 3. A dish of Asparagus. 4. A Westphalia Gammon.
"Last Course. 1. Two orange tarts, one with herbs. 2. A Bacon Tart. 3. An apple Tart. 4. A dish of Bon-chriteen pears. 5. A dish of Pippins. 6. A dish of Pearmains.
"A Banquet for the same Season.
"1. A dish of Apricots. 2. A dish of marmalade of Pippins. 3. A dish of preserved Cherries. 4. A whole red Quince. 5. A dish of dryed sweet-meats.
"A Bill of Fare upon an extraordinary Occasion.
"1. A collar of brawn. 2. A couple of Pullets boyled. 3. A bisk of Fish. 4. A dish of Carps. 5. A grand boyled Meat. 6. A grand Sallet. 7. A venison pasty. 8. A roasted Turkey. 9. A fat pig. 10. A powdered Goose. 11. A haunch of Venison roasted. 12. A Neats-tongue and Udder roasted. 13. A Westphalia Ham boyled. 14. A Joll of Salmon. 15. Mince pyes. 16. A Surloyn of roast beef. 17. Cold baked Meats. 18. A dish of Custards.
"Second Course. 1. Jellies of all sorts. 2. A dish of Pheasants. 3. A Pike boyled. 4. An oyster pye. 5. A dish of Plovers. 6. A dish of larks. 7. A Joll of Sturgeon. 8. A couple of Lobsters. 9. A lamber pye. 10. A couple of Capons. 11. A dish of Partridges. 12. A fricacy of Fowls. 13. A dish of Wild Ducks. 14. A dish of cram'd chickens. 15. A dish of stewed oysters. 16. A Marchpane. 17. A dish of Fruits. 18. An umble pye."

The fare suggested for "Fish days" is no less various and abundant; twelve dishes are enumerated for the first course, and sixteen for the second. Looking at the character of these viands, some of which would not discredit the genius of a Soyer or a Mrs. Glasse, it seems pretty evident that in the article of food the labouring classes have been the greatest gainers since 1687.

Few things are more suggestive of queries—as everybody knows from experience—than the products of culinary art. I will not, however, further trespass on space which may be devoted to a more dignified topic, than by submitting the following.

Query.—Does the phrase "to eat humble pie," used to signify a forced humiliation, owe its origin to the "umble pye" specified above?

J.T. HAMMACK

BISHOP BARNABY

Mr. Editor,—Legour asks, why the people in Suffolk call a lady-bird "Bishop Barnaby?"

I give the following from the late Major Moor's Suffolk Words.

"Bishop-Barney. The golden bug. See Barnabee. In Tasser's Ten Unwelcome Guests in the Dairy, he enumerates 'the Bishop that burneth' (pp. 142. 144.), in an ambiguous way, which his commentator does not render at all clear. I never heard of this calumniated insect being an unwelcome guest in the dairy; but Bishop-Barney, or Burney, and Barnabee, or Burnabee, and Bishop-that-burneth, seem, in the absence of explanation to be nearly related—in sound at any rate. Under Barnabee it will be seen that burning has some connection with the history of this pretty insect."
"Barnabee," writes the Major, "the golden-bug, or lady-bird; also Bishop-Barney: which see. This pretty little, and very useful insect, is tenderly regarded by our children. One settling on a child is always sent away with this sad valediction:—

"Gowden-bug, gowden-bug, fly away home,
Yar house is bahnt deown and yar children all gone."

To which I add another nursery doggerel less sad:—

"Bishop, Bishop-Barnabee,
Tell me when your wedding be,
If it be to-morrow day
Take your wings and fly away."

The Major adds, "It is sure to fly off on the third repetition."

"Burnt down," continues the Major, "gives great scope to our country euphonic twang, altogether inexpressible in type; bahnt deeyown comes as near to it as my skill in orthography will allow."

Ray, in his South and East Country Words, has this:—

"Bishop, the little spotted beetle, commonly called the lady-cow or lady-bird. I have heard this insect in other places called golden-knop, and doubtless in other countries it hath other names. (E. W. p. 70) Golden-bugs the common Suffolk name."
J.G. Southwold, Nov. 16. 1849.

TRADE EDITIONS—COTTLE'S LIFE OF COLERIDGE

Sir,—In the 2nd vol. of Mr. Collier's valuable and interesting Extracts from the Registers of the Stationers' Company, p. 28, is the following entry:—

"Thos. Dason. Licensed unto him the praise of follie; to print not above xv° of any impression, with this condition, that any of the Company may laie on with him, reasonablie at every impression, as they think good, and that he shall gyve reasonable knowledge before to them as often as he shall print it."

This is both curious and important information as being, in all probability, the earliest recorded instance of a custom still kept up amongst booksellers, and which now passes under the designation of a "Trade edition;" the meaning of which being, that the copyright, instead of being the exclusive property of one person, is divided into shares and held by several. There are Trade editions of such voluminous authors as Shakspeare, Gibbon, Hume, and Robertson, for instance; and Alison's Europe, if published half a century back, might in all probability have been added to the list. The difference between the ancient and the modern usage appears to be this, that formerly when the type was set up for an edition "any of the company may laie on, (these two last words are still technically used by printers for supplying type with paper,) reasonablie at every impression," &c.; in other words, may print as many copies from the type "as they think good;" whereas now, the edition is first printed, and then the allotment of the copies, and the actual cost of them is made, according to the number of shares.

If this is a "Note" worth registering, it is much at your service, whilst for a "Query," I should be very glad to be informed, when a very able review, the date of which I neglected to make at the time, appeared in the Times newspaper, of the 2nd edition of Cottle's Life of Coleridge.

With many good wishes for the success of your register,

I remain, &c.

JOHN MILAND.

DIBDIN'S TYPOGRAPHICAL ANTIQUITIES

Sir,—I am very glad to have elicited the information contained in your number just published respecting the copy of Borde's work in the Chetham Library. As I have a great respect for Mr. Ames, I must remark that he had no share in the blunder, and whenever a new edition of his work is undertaken, it will be well to look rather curiously into the enlargements of Dibdin. In the mean time this information naturally leads to another Query—or rather, to more than one—namely, "Had Mr. Bindley's copy this unique imprint? and what became of it at the sale of his books? or is it only one of the imaginary editions which give bibliographers so much trouble?" Perhaps some one of your correspondents may be able to give information.

Yours, &c.