Some Account of the Cuisine Bourgeoise of Ancient Rome

283 XV.—Some Account of the Cuisine Bourgeoise of Ancient Rome. By H. C. COOTE, Esq. F.S.A. Bead December 13th, 1866. No one has yet written the history of the Roman palate, such as it became when the successes of that people had given occasion for its artificial cultivation. The Roman, consequently, has never been contemplated on this side of his character. This is not merely an omission in archaeology, it is a blank left in the annals of taste. And the omission is the more remarkable, as most other subjects of antiquity have been fathomed by the learned, down even to the shoe and the caliga. This subject alone caret vate sacro.a In saying this I do not of course mean that the subject has not been imperfectly touched upon, for all the world is familiar with the rhombus of Domitian, the mullus trilibris of Horace, the oysters of Rutupium, and the slave-fed murence of Yidius Pollio; while the dishes of nightingales' tongues served up to that inventive madman Helio- gabalus, and the culinary wonders of the Augustan writers, are known alike to learned and unlearned. But all these allusions have been fragmentary merely, meant to point a feeble moral,—not to expound principles of the cuisine. In a word, the writers have never thought of treating Roman cookery en cuisinier—the only way in which the subject can afford a rational interest to any one. Virtually, therefore, this subject has been left untouched by these authors. There is no excuse, however, for this neglect of Roman Cookery, for the amplest materials exist for its mastery and complete illustration. The materials I allude to are to be found for the searching in a well-digested treatise upon all the appliances of the cuisine as they were in vogue and operation in the days of the Emperors. This treatise has at some time received the magniloquent name of " Apicius "— a fond reminiscence of the great gourmet of that name who flourished under a I do not mean to ignore the paper contributed by Professor Jowett to Dr. Smith's Classical Dictionary, though its position in that popular compilation is perhaps to be regretted. Mr. Jowett's contribution scatet mendis. He inflects the plural of tuber into tuberes; boletus (the large mushroom) is translated "truffle," the real Latin for which is tuber; and in the Ccena Metelli he explains lumbi (" cotelettes") by haunches; altilia ("poultry") by rich meats, &c. &c. 61 VOL. XII. 2 P 284 Some Account of the Tiberius, and whom all the world, from Juvenal and Martial down to the author of Querolus, have agreed to consider the type of the haute cuisine of Rome. It is of him that Pliny says " Ad omne luxus ingenium mirus."a As the real Apicius was no more a cook than Jean Grolier was a binder, the book itselfb is the actual compilation of a Roman Soyer or Erancatelli, who, availing himself of his predecessors' learning, has given recipes which range from the Republic to the age of Heliogabalus. I say this upon authority, for the names of the dishes occurring in the book supply us with these dates. We have dishes which owe their nomenclature to historical personages, some as familiar as household words, others though not so prominent still distinctly traceable. For the period of the Republic we have Varro, who gives his name to a dish of beets.0 Julius Matius, the. friend of Csesar and Cicero, who confers the same favour upon a mince, &c.d The Emperors and their high functionaries figure in the same manner. Vitellius,6 Commodus/ Didius Julianus,g shine as inventors. Julius Eronto, the prcetor urbanus of Vitellius, emulates his master.11 Celsinius, a relative of Clodius Albinus, lends his name to a sucking pig.' But above all Varius (or Heliogabalus) deserves mention. There were not only conditak attributed to him which have been long since for- gotten, but the book contains without his name those other inventions of his which Lampridius has recorded in these words:— " Primus fecit de piscibus isicia, primus de ostreis et leiostreis, et aliis hujus- modi marinis conchis et locustis et cammaris et squillis."1 The latter words the reader should note, for when he shall come to read that part of the present essay which refers to these isicia, he will see that to the odious Heliogabalus he owes his lobster rissoles. Apicius himself figures on several occasions in this culinary nomenclature. There are plats also in the book without his name, but which he was the first to introduce to public notice—cymes et coliculi—in other words, sprouts. These a Pliny, Hist. Nat. ix. 17, 30. b There have been several editions of this Roman Cookery Book. That of Dr. Martin Lister, Physician to Queen Anne, entitled " Apicii Coelii de Opsoniis et Condimentis sive Arte Coquinaria Libri Decem," was printed in the small number of 120 copies, by Bowyer, London, 1705. A second edition of this text, longe auctior et emendatior, was given by Theod. Jans. Almeloveen. Amsterdam, 1709. Since the present paper was read, a new Edition has appeared by Chr. Theophil. Schuch, Heidelberg, 1867, comprising a revised text founded on the collation of seven MSS. with the princeps editio (Venice s. a.) with notes critical and explanatory, which however do not appear to add much to our understanding of the book. 0 Apicius, lib. iii. c. 2. a Ib. lib. iv. c. 3. e Lib. viii. c. 7. * Dr. Lister's Preface. g Lib. v. c. 1. h Lib. viii. c 7. 1 Ibid. k In Vita Heliogabali, Peter's edit. vol. i. p. 215. 'Ibid. Cuisine Bourgeoise of Ancient Rome. 285 early delicacies won the heart of his imperial master, Tiberius; though, as Pliny also records, they shocked the rigid principle of the virtuous Drusus.a The book, however, notwithstanding the dates of the recipes may vary, is a compilation made by one man. It is complete in itself, and is duly proportioned and related to its parts." In its literal style it resembles Mrs. Glasse, in her pleasant pleonasms and sagacious comments.0 It is to its contents that I propose hereafter to call the reader's attention. Their interest is undeniable. They illustrate Plautus, Terence, Juvenal, and Seneca. The dishes, their material and sauce, which find fun for Plautus, make Martial impassioned, irritate Juvenal, and extract morality from Seneca, are all here. The dry narrations of the Scriptores Augustce Historice, the charming gos- sipings and delicious extracts of Athenseus, are all rendered intelligible by Apicius. Without him, the point of their allusions, even the meaning of their observa- tions, is simply unattainable. These are some of the indirect advantages which our author affords—directly, he of course does more, because he formulates and details his art, and all attempts to define and explain Roman cookery without him are merely futile. To resuscitate a Roman dinner out of the spreads of Nasidienus and Trimalchio is to explain ignotum per ignotius. The details cannot be under- stood, and the vues d'ensemble propounded by the farceurs who have described these imaginary dinners are not meant to be true. With such high claims upon our appreciation, it is very curious that this book should have sunk into entire oblivion since the days of its best editor, Dr. Lister.d So absolute, however, has been the oblivion, that Ruperti when commenting upon that passage in Juvenale where the satirist accuses a miser of keeping his minutal over to the next day in the middle of a Roman September, is obliged to have recourse to Isidore the Bishop for an incomplete gloss, when he could have found a series of exact definitions in the pages of a cook who had made the dish— our author. a Hist. Nat. xix. 41. b The references made in and to itself prove this: " Et hunc preecondies sicut hfedum Tarpeianum" (lib. viii. c. 8). " Minutal ex jeoinoribus et pulmonibus leporis, invenies inter lepores quemadmodum facies." (lib. iv. c. 3), &c. &c. c " Aceipies cumanam mundam" (lib. v. c. 4). " Aceipies pisces" (lib. iv. c. 2). "Accipies pullum" (lib. vi. c. 9). " Accipies cochleas" (lib. vii. c. 16.) d Dr. Lister's name is not mentioned in the Classical Dictionary sub voce Apicius. See note b on pre- ceding page. e Sat. xiv. vv. 129, 130. " Hesternum solitus medio servare minutal Septembri. 2P 2 286 Some Account of the Again, the great scholar Weise was at his wits' end when he came to the follow- ing passage in the Cistellaria of Plautus," " Di me omnes, magni minutique et patellarii, &c." Alcesimarchus, who makes this adjuration, only meant " Gods great and small," the latter as small as if they had been chopped up for that peculiar Roman dish which they sometimes called patella, and more generally patina.b (See post.) "Weise could only interpret this passage as meaning " Lares fed out of a patella," which they certainly never were. If he had consulted Apicius he would have found a better and more appropriate meaning. He shews also a corresponding ignorance of ancient cookery in other notes to his great and excellent edition of the Roman dramatist. These inadvertencies are but blots on the sun; but I mention them as strictly a propos of the utility and interest of our author. Porson, too, who formed the library of the Institution in Pinsbury Circus, intending to accumulate therein all that was excellent or curious in literary antiquity, never thought of adding this little book to that large collection, so utterly unknown had it become in his day.

Load more