>Yes, experiments are very valuable for all the reasons you state but it
>would "get us further" if all written/epigraphical knowledge of these
>things have been collected organised, digested and then tested
>experimentally. Unfortunately, these problems that Mac and especially
>Stephen want to understand are very much in the fringe of what goes on in
>Classical studies. People talk & write about agriculture in the Classical
>period but most of the information is collected from written material.
I can see with all that physical evidence that experiments might
not seem
so important ":)
>Strangely enough less is known (first hand) about classical agriculture than
>Prehistoric agriculture in Greece due to the fact that botanical remains
>which are one -if not the most important body of data- do rarely get
>collected from Classical sites!!!
Strange it is!
>We believe we know it all from the various
>authors!! Little do we consider that these scholars were definitely not
>interested -most of the time- in providing information that they considered
>trivial for their readers and too well known for their day. Therefore, we
>fall in the trap of considering that what is mentioned in the texts is what
>was universally happening in the Greek world!! Yet, we should not forget
>that most of the writings are Atheno-centric!
Even with all the textual evidence - like that of Pliny - we have to
consider
what was meant by what they state - and there is much to consider there.
>
>Regarding the fact that cereal flour or meal would be more prone to get
>"quicker" insect infestation than whole grain or even husked grain, that is
>a fact but I do not know off-hand whether this has been measured
>experimentally. I have a feeling that salt would not protect very much but
>perhaps rather an insect repellent.
It might in fact attract - I was thinking more of bread than flour
or meal in
its raw state.
>Bread too would be attacked by other
>things...moss, rodents unless turned into hard tack (a double baked bread-
>but it could be done with any flour, e.g. barley, wheat) as that mentioned
>by Sabine, Dakos, kouloures, paximadi. If tightly kept without humidity,
>this is good to eat even after 1 year (tasted by me) and would have been
>probably -my guess- the staple used on boats and for long trips. It is light
>and can accompany any food. Bulgur could also be used such as a "fast food"!
Yes, lack of humidity is the issue. As an aside the British navy
for 200 years
thought salt was responsible for scurvy. On short trips the sailors got
vegetables
and fruit, thus Vit.C - but on long trips they didn't until they started
to take on
lemons and citrus enroute to Africa. Even then the Vit.C content varied
and it
was not until they isolated Vit.C in the laboratory (I think mid.19th c.)
that they
understood Vit.C was responsible for scurvy. But then salt has been
blamed for
many things erroneously over the centuries - as it still is!
>A discussion about Greek soldiers' food is discussed in the book by
>J.J.Coulton (ed.) 2002 The Fort at Phylla, Vrachos: excavations and
>researches at a Late Archaic Fort in Central Euboea. BSA, suplement 33, esp.
>chapter 7.
This brings to mind the thought about lack of variety of the diet of some
countries
like Mexico, Syria and from my limited experience, Greece. Am I right
about that?
>
>Some other questions also crop up as one thinks about this subject. Are we
>sure that all of the army got hulled barley? What about the higher ranks?
>Our assumption is based on how many inscriptions? Were they all from Attica?
>Or was that the same for all areas? Even the translations of terms such as
>"hulled" from Greek to English pose certain problems.
Absolutely, translations can get hairy - as I found with Pliny and Cato
on salt.
>
>Having said that, I believe what Stephen is trying to do is very important
>and most importantly has not been questioned before. So yes, we would like
>to see more of this type of work "awakening" for the Classical period of
>Greece and also -very important- we need to have MORE
>archaeobotanical samples from sites of this period which would enable us to
>view the inscriptions from the angle of the remains themselves.
Totally agree,
>
>Good luck to Stephen,
Anaya and Bea
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Beatrice Hopkinson" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 7:16 AM
>Subject: Yet more on barley and barley-flour
>
>
>> Everybody's input here has been most interesting and informative. But as
>> an
>> experimenter I would also venture to add something about the importance
>> of being
>> exact in trying to reproduce what went on in antiquity. My own
>> experiments showed that one learns unexpected things experimentally that
>> were not understood or could be foreseen from a modern point of view, and
>> in fact went against the grain (forgive the pun) of modern specialists.
>> There is also evidence of Mesopotamian diet from the 3rd and 2nd mbc that
>> shows food rations were distributed according to rank and gender, with
>> women and laborers and children getting less, higher ranking officials
>> getting more. But again, an
>> experiment that stays as close to the truth as we now know it, can still
>> reveal some surprises and therefore worth doing. So I don't agree that
>> it would be a 'fool's errand' :)
>>
>> With regard to the last question on barley flour or meal being
>> biologically more unstable than barley grains, or even bread. Wouldn't
>> the addition of salt stabilize all of these?
>>
>> Bea
>>
>>>A last word from Stephen.
>>>
>>>> Dear all,
>>>>
>>>> Again, thank you all for your comments and advice, which are proving
>>>> enormously helpful. And thank you, especially, Sabine: I did not
>>>> know about the twice-baked barley biscuit from Crete--this must be
>>>> very similar to the biscoctum (i.e. twice-cooked) barley biscuit
>>>> medieval and early modern Mediterranean galley crews ate. I will
>>>> definitely follow that up, in Athens, and in Crete, too, if I can
>>>> find the time and money.
>>>>
>>>> Nic, Anaya and Sabine have again pointed out some of the many
>>>> problems inherent in this question, and it may seem to some, or
>>>> most, of you that I am on a fool's errand. I may be, but I wanted
>>>> to post one more time in order to provide you with an outline of
>>>> what we know on this subject, in order to provide a sounder basis
>>>> for the discussion. As a start, I should say that Forbes and
>>>> Foxhall's article (Chiron 12 (1982): 41-90) was ground-breaking in
>>>> its collection and treatment of the literary and epigraphical
>>>> evidence (one of the things Anaya asks for in her e-mail) for
>>>> rations in classical antiquity, and remains the starting point for
>>>> any research on the topic, although new data and new insights have
>>>> emerged since they published their artice. Also:
>>>>
>>>> 1. We know that the predominant type of barley in classical Greece
>>>> was 6-rowed and hulled.
>>>>
>>>> 2. We do know, from many and various literary sources, that
>>>> barley-flour, olive oil, and wine were the basis of the diet of the
>>>> classical Greek soldier and sailor, together with some condiments
>>>> such as garlic and onions. We can also use the evidence of rations
>>>> handed out (we know in many cases that these were handed out and
>>>> were not just 'paper' rations) to sailors and soldiers in the
>>>> medieval and early modern Mediterranean as a control on our
>>>> calculations of the caloric content of the diets of Greek soldiers
>>>> and sailors (sometimes, of course, they will have needed more, but
>>>> we are aiming for a norm, in order to produce a minimum estimate,
>>>> or order of magnitude, rather than aiming at precision). The
>>>> caloric content of the diets of soldiers and sailors in the later
>>>> Mediterranean was roughly between 3,000 and 3,300 calories--with
>>>> some outliers--and cereals or cereal products made up 60-70% of the
>>>> caloric content. This figure of 60-70% is reflected in the diets of
>>>> most, if not all, pre-industrial Mediterranean populations.
>>>>
>>>> 3. There must have been different grades of flour and we know very
>>>> little about this for classical Greece, the period I'm interested
>>>> in, though we do know a little more about this subject for the
>>>> early Roman empire. I am assuming, for purposes of calculation,
>>>> that soldiers and sailors were buying roughly milled barley. As
>>>> for crop processing, there is M.-C. Amouretti, *Le pain et
>>>> l'huile*, and three books recently published in a new series by
>>>> Brill [Technology and Change in History] on ancient food
>>>> technology, processing, and milling, but still, for classical
>>>> Greece, we know very little.
>>>>
>>>> I will end with one more question--my last to the list, I promise, I
>>>> have already taken up too much of your time and thought--brought up
>>>> by Anaya. Barley-flour or meal is obviously far more biologically
>>>> unstable than barley grains, or even bread--does anybody know how
>>>> long it would last before it became inedible?
>>>>
>>>> Again, thank you all for your time and interest,
>>>> all the best,
>>>> Stephen.
>>>
>>>Mac Marston
>>>Cotsen Institute of Archaeology
>>>University of California, Los Angeles
>>>[log in to unmask]
>>>C: (310) 923-0640
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>> Version: 7.1.413 / Virus Database: 268.18.15/728 - Release Date: 20/3/2007
>>
>>
>
|