The other chief motive for condensing or obscuring his text has a more
subtle foundation. Indeed, we are surprised that we should possess so
great a collection of recipes, representing to him who could use them
certain commercial and social value. The preservation of Apicius seems
entirely accidental. Experienced cooks were in demand in Apicii times;
the valuation of their ministrations increased proportionately to the
progress in gastronomy and to the prosperity of the nation. During
Rome's frugal era, up to 200 B.C. the primitive cooks were just slaves
and household chattels; but the development of their trade into an
art, stimulated by foreign precepts, imported principally from Greece,
Sicily and Asia Minor, opened up to the practitioners not only the
door to freedom from servitude but it offered even positions of wealth
with social and political standing, often arousing the envy, satire,
criticism of bona-fide politicians, journalists, moralists, satirists
and of the ever-present hordes of parasites and hangers-on. Some cooks
became confidants, even friends and advisors of men in high places,
emperors, (cf. life of Vitellius) and through their subtle influence
upon the mighty they may have contributed in no mean measure to the
fate of the nation. But such invisible string-pullers have not been
confined to those days alone. (Take Rasputin! Take the valet to
William I, reputed to have had more "say" than the mighty Bismarck,
who, as it developed, got "the air" while the valet died in his
berth.)
Such being the case, what potential power reposed in a greasy cookery
manuscript! And, if so, why bare such wonderful secrets to Tom, Dick
and Harry?
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account