Bureaucrat, administrator, widgeteditor
146,870
edits
Changes
no edit summary
<center>'''Monique Chastanet<ref>Historian, CNRS, Paris.<monique.chastanet@wanadoo.fr></ref>, February 2022'''</center>
Maurizio provides an inventory of food species that M. Chauvet puts in an historical perspective between applied botany publications from the early 20th century and recent work, such as that of the FAO, Slow Food or the many studies carried out on local terroir products. Without forgetting M. Chauvet’s ''Encyclopédie des plantes alimentaires'' (Belin Publishing, 2018) and the collaborative website Pl@ntUse, which he created. This re-edition of Maurizio’s book is available there with the agreement of Ulmer Publishing and is accompanied by an update on species names, whether cultivated or not, indicated in the table “Plantes de ramassage” [“Gathered plants”] and in the Index. He notes around 700 “wild” species utilized in times of food shortage or dearth. Today, we speak more of the varying status of food plants, some eaten in times of need, others lying along a continuum among wild and cultivated species. This selection of mainly European vegetables reflects his concern with periods of food scarcity and famine that affected the continent.
These crisis periods “gave rise to survivals in habits and often showed there were returns to the past with consumption of bark and leaves, for example” (A. Maurizio, 1931, p. 165). All the while set within the evolutionist conception of history dominant at the time, which led from the “primitives” to the “civilized”, Maurizio does not have a strictly linear perception. What is more, his text is a goldmine of information on plant foods such as lichen, moss and roots used by Northern peoples, which can be eaten fresh but also dried or put up in “sour preserves” or “sauerkrauts” (2019, p. 43-44) <ref>[Peoples of Northern Europe, Asia and America let the leaves, young flowering or leafy shoots, as well as lichens, ferment. Fresh, dried or fermented, these were often used with other plant or animal resources. On the diversity of this gathering (berries, bark, tubers, etc.) and preparation ways, see A. Maurizio, 2019, p. 39-50.]</ref>. Maurizio minutely describes these ancient strategies against hunger right up to the substitutes European countries had recourse to during the First World War. If societies affected by food scarcity try to remain faithful to their usual foodways, the seriousness of a food crisis subsequently wipes out the differences “between peoples of diverse civilizations” (2019, p. 168). He compares this famine behaviour to similar observations from other areas of the world, thus rehabilitating the know-how associated with gathered foods and defending a critical vision of “progress” that led, in his opinion, to a pauperization in food resources (A. Maurizio, 1931, p. 168). In this, he has a very similar attitude to today’s concerns. However M. Chauvet adds nuance to this idea by referring to recent plant domestications linked to urban growth, mainly in tropical countries.
Fig. 3. Islandic moss, Cetraria islandica (L.) Ach. An old food resource in Northern Europe, mentioned by Maurizio as among gathered foods (2019, p. 44), still used today even beyond its region of origin. It was kept dried or fermented and played a considerable role in famine times (2019, p. 44-45), as well as having therapeutic uses. Today, it is utilized for its medicinal properties in Europe and North America. © Rémy Poncet, INPN, MNHN, Paris.
Maurizio also elaborated an inventory and classification of foodstuffs that often gives rise to problems of translation and terminology, recalling the remarks by F. Sigaut who called for establishing reference terms in the field of food technology linked to the analysis of ''chaînes opératoires'' <ref>See his article « Nomenclature et identification des produits », ''in'' H. Franconie, M. Chastanet et F. Sigaut (éd.), ''Couscous, boulgour et polenta. Transformer et consommer les céréales dans le monde'', Paris, Karthala, 2010, p. 443-456.</ref>. If this hope was not fulfilled, it is doubtless because this taxonomy is more difficult to develop than in life sciences, considering individual researchers’ practices, regional traditions and agro-alimentary norms. Also, this is perceived as less necessary, since people continue to use local names with their own definitions – with all the risks of confusion and misunderstanding they involve.
As one example of this complexity, let us take that of ''crêpes'' and ''galettes'', the preparation of which varies from place to place and period to period in France. If we limit ourselves to cereal-grain ''crêpes'' and ''galettes'', they may be different in their thickness and the way they are cooked, in a pan or in the oven, or they may be the same thickness, in fact quite thin, while being made from wheat or buckwheat flour. In this case, they are highly varied: salty or sweet, fermented or not, not to mention all the other ingredients that can be added (milk, eggs, cider, potatoes, etc.) or the cooking oil or fat (butter or walnut oil). To really see into this diversity, we must turn to vernacular terms while explaining them through written sources and enquiries. Maurizio must not have been familiar with the cuisines of Normandy, Brittany or Limousin… His Index has twenty entries under ''galettes'', according to their “ancientness”, composition or geography. Among them, the ''galettes (crêpes) de sarrasin'' [sic] in fact refer, with an entry entitled ''crêpes de sarrasin'', to a note by the French translator who remarks on their “common use” on farms and at fairs in Normandy (2019, p. 505-506) <ref>[On the subject of crêpes and galettes in France, see especially A-G. Chaussat, ''Les populations du massif armoricain au crible du sarrasin. Etude d’un marqueur culturel du Bocage normand (XVIe-XXe siècle)'', doctorate dissertation in History at the University of Caen - Normandie, 2017.]</ref>. The “Russian blinis” have an Index entry, although they are described in the text as galettes, with recipes and times when they are eaten (2019, p. 464). But without any trace of the North American “pancakes”, doubtless of German origin. In his commentary, M. Chauvet notes other shortcomings and ambiguities, due to the vast scope of the project.
''Bouillies'' (mushes or porridges) and breads are really the strong point of the book and many case studies are provided. Although porridge or mush as existing prior to bread is no longer questioned today, archaeology has yet other scenarios to propose. For instance, the remains of a flat bread-like were recently found in a Middle Eastern site occupied by hunter-gatherers some 4000 years before the beginnings of the Neolithic and cereal-grain-growing <ref>A. Arranz-Otaegui ''et alii'', "Archeobotanical evidence reveals the origins of bread 14,400 years ago in northeastern Jordan", ''PNAS'', 2018, 31, p. 7925-7930.</ref>. Analysis of the 24 residues indicated that the dough was made of wild grass flour, and sometimes of tuber flour, mixed with water. Their slightly alveolate texture, doubtless unleavened, led the authors to speak of “bread-like products” made by kneading. Not having ovens, the Natufians cooked these breads in ashes or on a hot stone, shown by traces of charring. This discovery has revolutionized our older explanations by dissociating the invention of baking from the appearance of agriculture in the Fertile Crescent.
Fig. 4. Domestic oven: observed and drawn by Maurizio in a village of the Grison canton in Switzerland in 1917. The rounded cavity where the baking took place was heated from the inside of the house, but the oven itself was outside, forming a kind of outjut with a built-up support (2019, Fig. 79, p. 438). This type of oven was commonly found in this region when Maurizio wrote the book.
Mediterranean and tropical countries are little represented, outside of the study of gathered plants (wild asparagus, grasses, etc.). Still, Maurizio describes precisely the preparation of “koukoussou” in the Maghreb with wheat flour, maize, sorghum or oats. He classifies these “sorts of spherical noodles” in the category of food pasta <ref>[As also the case in current studies: according to F. Sabban and S. Serventi, “food pasta products are set in a continuum running from couscous to vermicelli” in ''Les pâtes. Histoire d’une culture universelle'', Arles, Actes Sud, 2001, p. 67. Also see M. Oubahli, ''La main et le pétrin. Alimentation céréalière et pratiques culinaires en Occident musulman au Moyen Âge'', Casablanca, Fondation du Roi Abdul-Aziz Al Saoud pour les Etudes Islamiques et les Sciences Humaines, 2012, chap. VII, Deuxième partie, « Ces pâtes qu’on appelle couscous ».]</ref>. This staple food, the production of which requires much work and skill, is eaten with various condiments and as a travel food. He notes it is present in the Sahel, based on “millet” – that is to say pearl millet, ''Pennisetum glaucum'' <ref>[Long called ''Pennisetum glaucum'' (L.) R. Br., the botanical name of pearl millet changed recently. Belonging to the genus of ''Cenchrus'', it was renamed ''Cenchrus americanus'' (L.) Morrone by some authors in 2010. However, this new name is not unanimously accepted: see discussion in M. Chauvet, [[:fr:Pennisetum glaucum|Pl@ntUse]].]</ref> – or sorghum (2019, p. 476-478). This should especially be noticed, since Sahelian couscous is not well known <ref>See M. Chastanet, « Couscous ‘à la sahélienne’ (Sénégal, Mali, Mauritanie) », in H. Franconie, M. Chastanet et F. Sigaut F. (éd.), ''Couscous, boulgour et polenta. Transformer et consommer les céréales dans le monde'', Paris, Karthala, 2010, p. 149-187.</ref>.
Availing himself of all the references, M. Chauvet takes stock of the research carried out since Maurizio’s time, whether in food physico-chemistry, microbiology (as for fermentation), the study of ''chaînes opératoires'', or the many contributions from ethnology, history and archaeology, different from the work mentioned above. He also points out the development of industrial food production no longer dependent on the seasons but on the geography of transport and new commercial structures. Among these changes, M. Chauvet points out some that escaped Maurizio, such as the choice of European countries to seek supplies of low-cost oil seeds from colonial sources in the late 19th century.