The Forme of Cury | Page 2

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 ?lfred the Great persuaded to be christened, and called ?thelstane [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 Dominic? Coquin?_, 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 Coquin?_, 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 Pr?positus_, _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 Coquin?_, 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