The, time of day at which the wealthy classes took their
meals was different from that at which they take them
now. Of course, the great majority of mankind always
took their principal meal at about noon -tide, and will
necessarily always do so. But a select minority did find it
more convenient, and will hereafter find it expedient, to
deviate from that habit, and take their meals at different
hours. And thus it has been during the last three hundred
years. In the beginning of the sixteenth century, under
Louis XII. and Francis I., the upper classes of the French
‘ dined ’ at ten o’clock in the morning ; they ‘ supped ’ at
four o’clock in the afternoon. In the seventeenth century
they ‘ dined ’ at noon, and ‘ supped ’ at seven o’clock p.m.
On the peculiarities of this period, the reader may consult
the ‘ Memoires ’ of the physician Herouard, who kept a
list of the breakfasts and dinners of Louis XIII. At this
time the dinner was announced by blowing a horn ; from
this came the order, •' Cornez le diner.’*
The social status of coohs has seen great fluctuations in
historical times. Athens had never what the Komans
termed a great — i.e., a grand — kitchen; nevertheless, the
best coohs at Rome were Greeks, as the best cooks in our
days are reputed to be Frenchmen. These officers were
highly valued, and enriched by their conquering masters ;
thus, Antony gave a town to one of his chefs de cuisine.
The office of carver also was considered of great importance.
All these arrangements were revived at the Renaissance,
and developed in extreme intensity. The office of cook, or
of privy cook, and of carver, or trinciante, were deemed
* Cj. ‘ Nouv. .Vlmanaeli J. Goumi.,’ iii. (1827), l>. 178.
632
THE SPIRIT or COOKERY
not incompatible with rank ; this is proved, e.tj., by an order
of the Council of Louis XI. of France, whereby an old cook
of a Madame de Beaujeux, named Cyrant de Bartas, had
his nohility maintained and confirmed. But the holders of
such offices, whose title was maitre qaeux or grand qiteux,
were probably not operative cooks at all, but such orna-
mental intermediaries of great households as we should
now describe as maitre da la bouche. The cuocos segretos of
some of the Popes, privy cooks, were in similar exalted
positions. The celebrated French jurisprudent author,
Montesquieu, was descended from Eobin, second cook of
the Connetable of Bourbon, ennobled by this prince.
Henry IV. raised to the noblesse Nicolas Fouquet, Seigneur
de la Varenne, and head-cook of Queen Marguerite, for
services rendered in his culinary office ; he had, moreover,
acquired property which returned him an annual income of
70,000 francs, acquired, as Queen Margot is reported to
have said, ‘ non pas en piquant ses poulets, mais en piquant
ceux du roi.’
Page 398
Presented as published in 1895. Historical recipes may not meet modern food-safety standards. Cook from the modern interpretation, not the original instructions.
AI-modernized reading of the original text
The time of day at which the wealthy classes took their meals was different from that at which they take them now. Of course, the great majority of mankind always took their principal meal at about noon -tide, and will necessarily always do so. But a select minority did find it more convenient, and will hereafter find it expedient, to deviate from that habit, and take their meals at different hours. And thus it has been during the last three hundred years. In the beginning of the sixteenth century, under Louis XII. and Francis I., the upper classes of the French ‘ dined ’ at ten o’clock in the morning ; they ‘ supped ’ at four o’clock in the afternoon. In the seventeenth century they 'dined' at noon, and 'supped' at seven o'clock p.m. On the peculiarities of this period, the reader may consult the 'Memoires' of the physician Herouard, who kept a list of the breakfasts and dinners of Louis XIII. At this time the dinner was announced by blowing a horn; from this came the order, "Cornez le diner."*
The social status of cooks has seen great fluctuations in historical times. Athens had never what the Romans termed a great—i.e., a grand—kitchen; nevertheless, the best cooks at Rome were Greeks, as the best cooks in our days are reputed to be Frenchmen. These officers were highly valued, and enriched by their conquering masters; thus, Antony gave a town to one of his chefs de cuisine. The office of carver also was considered of great importance. All these arrangements were revived at the Renaissance, and developed in extreme intensity. The office of cook, or of privy cook, and of carver, or trinciante, were deemed * Cf. 'Nouv. Almanach J. Goumi.,' iii. (1827), p. 178.
not incompatible with rank; this is proved, e.g., by an order of the Council of Louis XI. of France, whereby an old cook of a Madame de Beaujeux, named Cyrant de Bartas, had his nobility maintained and confirmed. But the holders of such offices, whose title was maitre queux or grand queux, were probably not operative cooks at all, but such ornamental intermediaries of great households as we should now describe as maitre de la bouche. The cuocos segretos of some of the Popes, privy cooks, were in similar exalted positions. The celebrated French jurisprudent author, Montesquieu, was descended from Eobin, second cook of the Connetable of Bourbon, ennobled by this prince.Henry IV. raised to the noblesse Nicolas Fouquet, Seigneur de la Varenne, and head-cook of Queen Marguerite, for services rendered in his culinary office; he had, moreover, acquired property which returned him an annual income of 70,000 francs, acquired, as Queen Margot is reported to have said, 'non pas en piquant ses poulets, mais en piquant ceux du roi.'’