Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)

Expand Messages
  • RM
    Sorry for the late answer. I wasn’t at home yesterday and therefore not able to sit down and reply immediately. Meanwhile I had a look at some editions of
    Message 1 of 25 , Jul 18 4:18 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      Sorry for the late answer. I wasn’t at home yesterday and therefore not able to sit down and reply immediately.
      Meanwhile I had a look at some editions of the Naturalis Historia – one by Roderich König with German translation, the other the one by John Bostock et al. included in Perseus (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0137%3Abook%3D31%3Achapter%3D44). Essentially those two interpreted the passage as to be referred not only to allex but also to garum (“In process of time, alex has become quite an object of luxury, and the various kinds that are now made are infinite in number. The same, too, with garum, which is now prepared in imitation of the colour of old honied wine, and so pleasantly flavoured as to admit of being taken as a drink.” from: The Natural History. Pliny the Elder. John Bostock, M.D., F.R.S. H.T. Riley, Esq., B.A. London. Taylor and Francis, Red Lion Court, Fleet Street. 1855.). So, at least, I am not hopelessly alone with my interpretation.
      Certainly there were a lot of different types of garum during and before the 1st century and even after. Martial cites the garum made from the blood of scomber, Plinius said that the most praised garum was indeed made from scomber – this implies that there were other, less praised types of garum – and that intestina and other parts of the fish were used. The fishermen of Manilius seem to use tunny. Horace mentioned garum “de sucis piscis” (Hor. Serm. 2, 8, 46). But those citations are all about garum, not about liquamen because the word “liquamen” was a very new creation in the 1st century that hadn’t made yet its way into the language of Pliny, Horace, Seneca and Martial. Ausonius said that he wasn’t used to and couldn’t say the Latin word (“nec solere nec posse dicere”) for “garum” and that those who knew well old Latin and were disgusted with Greek vocabulary (“scientissimi veterum et Graeca vocabula fastidientes”) hadn’t a Latin word for it. So he called it “liquor iste sociorum” instead – but the normal Latin word at the time of Ausonius was “liquamen” (which wasn’t an old Latin word and Ausonius obviously didn’t like it; “muria” has been mentioned in a similar context by Plinius in 31, 94 – probabely this muria wasn’t just salty water). And this is what we can deduce also from the Price Edict: “garum” is doubtlessly a Greek word, equal to “garon”, and the correct Latin translation is “liquamen” at those times, i. e. at the beginning of the 4th century. As it is a legal text, what we find in the Price Edict is certainly not an arbitrary appellation. So if therein “liquamen” is the translation of “garon” (which is identical to the Latin “garum” which, according to Ausonius, is still a Greek word) why should we believe that there was a fundamental difference between those two? There were certainly varieties that may have had different trade names sometimes but the Geoponika show us that in late antiquity the word “likouamen” could substitute the original “garon” even in Greek. The same, of course in Apic. 7, 13, 1: “ita ut piper cum liquamine teres” is an specification for “in garo piper<ato>” (I prefer this version because the other one is grammatically disputable and we have Petronius using a “garum piperatum” in Sat. 36, 3). Probabely this is an old recipe of the 1st century where someone added the explanation because he was in doubt if the people could understand what “garum piperatum” meant.
      From the references we have we can derive that the word “liquamen” has been created in the 1st century and was used more and more – perhaps driven by culinary experts like Apicius – until being an equivalent of the word “garum” at the beginning of the 4th century even in legal texts like the Price Edict. It has also been accepted as a synonym of “garon” in Greek as we see from the Geoponika. There are some detailled descriptions of the production of “garum” but only in the Geoponika we find the same for “likouamen” which in that context is to be considered a synonym of “garon”. The word “liquamen” is used in a similar way – i.e. as a translation of “garum” or “garon” – in the Price Edict and in Apic. 7.13.1. Well, we may get much more examplesfor “liquamen” and “garum” out of the epigraphic data base (http://oracle-vm.ku-eichstaett.de:8888/epigr/epigraphik_de) but we wouldn’t find many differences between “liquamen” and “garum” there. We have “liquamen optimum scombri” and “garum flos scombri” and so on. From my point of view it is not possible to clearly distinguish the both, “garum” and “liquamen”, as both appear to be exchangeable in various contexts. They vary in frequency of occurrence: “Garum” was used more frequently before the 2nd century, “liquamen” was used more frequently from the end of the 1st century.

      Best wishes,

      Robert


      From: sallygrain@...
      Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2012 2:11 PM
      To: Apicius@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)



      Your ref to Pliny is as follows in English for the rest ' then allec became a luxury and its various kinds have come to be inumerable' These refer to enumerable kinds of allec or fish paste made from sea food and not neccesarily the liquid fish sauce derived from one kind of allec. The liquid fish sauce was not enumerable in kind but basically 2 types or 3 if you include muria 1, liquefied whole fish sauce. 2 fish blood and viscera 3. brine from salted fish which corresponds to coluratura die alici from the Naples area as this is made with eviscerated salted anchovy.

      Ultimately then, you are basing your argument that liquamen is not a synonym for garum but is for garon on Apicius 7.13.1 which is one recipes out of 450+ That garum and liquamen appear in this recipes and only this one suggest to me that the pepper is ground with liquamen and them served with garum at table. Otherwise it makes no sence to use both terms. If they are there because whome ever wanted to translate the one with the other we would at least find this construction - using both terms more often in the rest of the text. The use of garum in the compound terms oenogarum, hydrogarum etc is not relavant as they are transliterated Greek.

      You almost get it - The generic term only exists in Greek In latin technically there is no generic term but as they are so similar many ancient as well as modern scholars assume that the generic function was transferred to the Latin when it was translated. I will even allow that some ancients used garum when they actually meant liquamen but the manufacturer, trader, merchant and cook never would have got them mixed up - one was black and bloody, dark and strong used in drops while the other was pale brown and used in quantity. There simply had to be a way to distinguish them in trade. The acetabulum little vinegar cup in some recipes (p 83 ff our edition) hold 60ml and was blended with a similar amount of wine and fish sauce. The resulting oenogarum was delicious as i am sure you know. I have made blood garum and it is disgusting in those quantities. Check out http://www.ishiri.jp/en/ for the Japanese squid blood and viscera fish sauce which is pitch black and smells distinctly of blood - iron in fact, a frind who was a nurse told me it smells of digested blood after smelling the human gut in surgery.

      You do know Ausonius' letter I am sure. He specifically says there is no latin word that he can use instead of garum which he rejects as its Greek in origin and he rejects Greek words. If liquamen was the equivelent of garum in Latin he would have no problem. Instead of cause he fuels our confussion with the use of muria which we cannot get tied up in now.

      sally

      -----Original Message-----
      From: RM <mailto:apicius%40maierphil.de>
      To: Apicius <mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 0:15
      Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)

      Hi Sally,

      the fact that a lot of differt types of “garum” existed is obviously true but it is not my idea. This has already been reported by Pliny in the half sentence I cited before: “... , creveruntque genera ad infinitum, ...” (Plin. NH 31, 95). So why shouldn’t Pliny be right? I am sure that there were not only the two forms of “garum” that you mentioned but a lot of other varieties, too. So why shouldn’t they have been sold eventually under the same name “garum”? In the Price Edict and even in the Geoponika “liquamen” (or in Greek letters “likouamen”) is clearly a synonym / translation of the Greek word garon. The Price Edict has a first and a second quality of garon / liquamen. The name of both qualities was the same but to produce different qualities probabely the ingredients were somewhat different. And then there is also the Apicius recipe 7, 13, 1 garum and liquamen do mean exactly the same: “fungi farnei: elixi, calidi, exsiccati in garo piper<ato> accipiuntur, ita ut piper cum liquamine teres.” – I cited this from my own Apicius edition where it is numbered 7, 15, 1 (ed. Robert Maier, Reclam, Stuttgart 1991), the text of your edition has “piper” instead of “piper<ato>”. Unfortunately Manilius doesn’t tell us the names of what his fishermen were creating in the Astronomica 5, 667 sqq.
      To conclude: I think it’s an alluring hypothesis to believe in a real difference between “garum” and “liquamen” but it’s a hypothesis that lacks evidence. As we can deduce from the Price Edict and the Geoponika “liquamen” was a synonym at least of the Greek “garon” and probabely also of the Roman “garum”, as we see in Apic. 7, 13, 1. What we eventually could assume is that “liquamen” in some contexts might have been understood as a specific quality of “garum” (some filtered high quality “garum”) but there is certainly no general distinction. On the amphorae one should expect some trade names, as we use today the word “balsamico” for a specific type of vinegar, while the product class remains “vinegar”. So in our case the product class would be “garum” including more specific appellations like “garum sociorum”, “garum scombri”, “liquamen” etc. At the end “liquamen” was used as a general term (because everyone tends to use only the very best quality), just as it happened in the case of “iecur” which, at the end, was called always “ficatum” and became “fegato”, “foie” etc. in the different modern languages.

      Best wishes,

      Robert

      From: mailto:sallygrain%40aol.com
      Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 7:57 PM
      To: mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)

      Hi

      Your approach to fish sauce is too simplistic I am afraid. Do you not even recognise the fact of a separate blood and viscera sauce different from the whole-fish sauce. They cannot both be garum!, the former black and bloody, the latter pale golden according to Pliny. They have different uses, the garon melan was used at table and so became a fashionable ingredient to discuss in satire, the cooking liquamen was only used in the kitchen by slaves and therefore was not recognised as a separate sauce by the elite. The tituli picti associated with amphorae from Pompeii and Rome reflect the frequent usage of liquamen in the 1st century along side garum. We find garum scombri flos and liquamen flos in contempory sites: they have to mean two separate sauces, there is no way out of that one!

      sally

      -----Original Message-----
      From: RM <mailto:apicius%40maierphil.de>;
      To: Apicius <mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com>;
      Sent: Sun, 15 Jul 2012 22:24
      Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)

      Just a little correction and an addition: The Geoponika have been written down about 600 years after the Price Edict (not 800!). The word “garum” is found twice within the Apicius recipes, in 7, 13, 1 (with “liquamen” in the same recipe!) and Exc. 29 (according to Vollmer & Milham).

      Best regards

      RM

      From: RM
      Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2012 8:36 PM
      To: mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)

      Well, we don’t know exactly when the Apicius collection has been compiled but it is quite sure that has been compiled from a base of earlier recipes from which about a third is to be considered to be from an original cookbook probabely written by the same Apicius who has been mentioned in Plinius’ Naturalis Historia (see Brandt: “Untersuchungen zum römischen Kochbuch” in Philologus Suppl. XIX, 3). From the Historia Augusta we learn that Aelius Verus who died in 138 took three books into his bed: Amores by Ovid, Apicius and Martial. We may believe this or not. If we believe it there should have been an edition of Apicius at those times. I didn’t say that Apicius was the only one who ever mentioned “liquamen” – I said he was the only one who used it in this sense in antiquity, Vegetius and Pelagonius lived in very late antiquity, but you wouldn’t find the term before Columella where it signified just a liquid. The question is therefore if your “liquamen”, that may differ from “garum”, was invented after the 1st or 2nd century. There is no doubt that there were many different types and qualities of garum (“... , creveruntque genera ad infinitum, ...” Plin. NH 31, 95). Plinius tells us that Apicius used the so called “garum sociorum” which is just a type of garum. In his Naturalis Historia Plinius mentioned “garum” sometimes – liquamen never. I personally believe that Plinius did know very well what he was writing about in book 31 where he describes the production of “garum” – there he calls it a “liquor” (not “liquamen” of course). What you can find in the Diocletian’s Price Edict are two terms (3.6): “garou geúmatos prwteíou” in Greek, “liquaminis primi” in Latin – there the word “liquamen” appears as a simple translation of “garon” (why do you think it should be “garos”?). The Geoponika, of course, has been compiled 800 years later, using authors of the late antiquity but it is very interesting that in the Geoponika the Latin word “liquamen” appears twice as “tò kaloúmenon likouamen” (=“the so called liquamen”) in the chapter "Garwn piohsis" (20, 46, 1+2).

      Well, I better stop here because it would end up with some kind of endless discussion. There is – in my opinion – no real evidence for any difference of liquamen and garum, especially if we consider the Price Edict and the Geoponika. I think “liquamen” is just a word that may have been introduced by people like Apicius as a terminus technicus to substitute “garum” in technical language and then spread more and more until Anthimus did only use the term “liquamen” ("Nam liquamen ex omni parte prohibimus."). Even the “so called liquamen” in the Geoponika leads to this direction.

      Best regards

      RM
      From: mailto:sallygrain%40aol.com
      Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2012 5:06 PM
      To: mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)

      OK

      garum liquamen and the differences: i recently presented a paper at the British School at Rome to archaeologist of the fish trade in the Med. and therefore what follows is a pressi of what i said to them

      To start with you talk about Apicius as if he was the sole author and originator of the text when it is clear from our textual analysis that the recipe collection has multiple authors and they are slave cooks rather than a single gourmet. In terms of food at this level there were consumers and producers and it is the producers - the cooks - who we must trust to use the terminology correctly. You cannot argue that Apicius wrote this or that way, logically all the slave cooks wrote liquamen rather than garum for a reason. Equally you cannot place Apicius as a text in the late Empire reflecting a late usage for fish sauce. The terms used in it must reflect the way in which cooks expressed themselves throughout the classical period. The whole argument and justification for Vulgar Latin/Late Latin is based on elite usage. You say garum was the more commonplace term but in fact it is the other way round: Caelius Aurelianus says that the vulgar latin term in every day usage is liquamen. You also state that liquamen only occurs in Apicius but this is not the case. It is found in the Greek agricultural manual The Geoponica - you do all know that Andrew Dalby has recently published a new translation of this dont you ? - where it is a direct translation of the Greek garon but wait ...garon does not necessarily mean garum. It is also found frequently along with garum in the same veterinary recipe collections, particularly Vegetius and Pelagonius.
      (Pelagonius: liquamen: 9; 11.2; 13;98; 455; 457, garum: 428;13. Vegetius liquamen: 1.10.1; 1.17.10, 16; 2.91.2; 2.108.2; 2.132.4; 4.6.1, garum: 2.28.8; 3.28.10). In Galen it is also clear that two sauces were used: he refers simply to garon many times but only once or twice to garon melan. We have two names and two sauces so there shouldn't have been a problem!

      (Pelagonius: liquamen: 9; 11.2; 13;98; 455; 457, garum: 428;13. Vegetius liquamen: 1.10.1; 1.17.10, 16; 2.91.2; 2.108.2; 2.132.4; 4.6.1, garum: 2.28.8; 3.28.10). In Galen it is also clear that two sauces were used: he refers simply to garon many times but only once or twice to garon melan. We have two names and two sauces so there shouldn't have been a problem!

      Apicius - this is the title not the author - is an organic collection of recipes originally compiled, in it's earliest form, in Greek and we consider this to be in the late 1st century AD and possibly even earlier. We see no evidence of a formal publication date, only a finish date which is clearly 5/6th century. The chapter heading are in Greek and there are numerous terms that are not translated but transliterated i.e the Greek endings are converted into Latin endings so oenogaron: the Greek sauce made from the original Greek fish sauce and wine becomes oenogarum. Bare in mind the whole idea of fish sauce was originally Greek

      So if the cooks dont use garum qua garum one has to ask why? At this point I am pasting from the delivered paper

      What we first must do is acknowledge the presence of a blood and viscera sauce in the Ancient Mediterranean cuisine that we think of as Roman food. This sauce was a strong black and bloody condiment called in Greek garon melan or haimation that I believe was almost certainly handled by the consumer at table. This sauce was completely separate to the primary product in terms of archaeology (the amphora and fish bones) which was a cooking sauce made from whole-fish with extra viscera which provided enzymes which aided the liquefaction of the muscle tissue.
      The development and use of the primary product: a fish sauce made with whole fish, initially began in Greece and was a simple sauce made of very small fish (otherwise of no value) and salt used in everyday cooking. It is clear from references in 3rd century new comedy in Athens that this sauce was used with oil and vinegar or wine as a dressing for vegetables and pulses and was not considered particularly elite. My colleague Andrew Dalby has stated it to be a commonplace ingredient and it is noteworthy that Archestratus, the 2nd century Greek gourmet poet writing from Sicily about the best fish does not mention fish sauce at all. Later Galen in the 2nd Century AD is also suggesting the use of garos in dressing of oil and vinegar to accompany simple vegetables. The Apicius recipes collection includes a whole section on vegetables which are also largely accompanied by oil, wine and fish sauce. These simple blended sauces are basically like vinaigrette and are throughout the Apicius recipe text in various forms. The most common was an oenogarum a transliterated term from the Greek. In fact when oenogarum is translated into Latin - it is found in Ps. Gargilius Martialis recipe - it appears as Confectio liquaminis. So there rearly is no garum in Apicius. This means of cause that there is no blood and viscera garum, because as a table sauce it was used on food rather than in the cooking and was also used to make elite oenogarum that may have been blended at table by the gourmet or slaves attendants.

      This simple Greek whole fish sauce almost certainly came to Rome as garon transliterated into garum but was still this simple liquefied fish sauce. As fish sauce became popular in Rome the elite were concerned with differentiating their foods from everybody else’s and I believe they may have instigated new developments in fish sauce types, one of which was the blood and viscera sauce and one was the use of much larger fish that did have a market value such as mackerel and larger clupeidae and sparidae which could have been used as salted fish.
      I believe the confusion over the terminology occurred when the elite retained the term garum - the transliterated and now fashionable Greek term to designate their new table sauce made from blood and viscera and the manufacturer, trader , merchant and cook had to coin a new term in Latin to designate the original and commonplace fish sauce, called garon made from whole fish. This was liquamen, the derivation of which is ‘to liquefy so it is aptly titled.
      We have mentioned the absence of garum from Apicius but we must also mention the absence of the separate Latin blood garum from Diocletians price edict in 301 AD . Here liquamen is equivalent to garos not garum just as we find in the Geoponica. These two absences are of cause the primary reason for the 'single sauce hypothesis' advovated by Curtis. If however you see these absences as evidence that the blood garum was no longer sufficiently popular in the early 4th century AD to warrant its own price on the edict or a mention in the recipes, then the later dominance of liquamen is explained. In fact (a guess) I believe the elite blood viscera garum had a relatively small market in comparison to liquamen and was made to appear more important because of the unusually close view we get of the elite at table in the early empire through satire. It was still made in the late empire as we know Ausonius acquired a jar in the mid 4th century but it seems it was a special delivery and therefore probably not readily available in southern France, and he is also very confused as to what to call it!
      The original Greek sauce – garos equivalent to liquamen - remained the primary product. We can I think come to see how it was that later sources began to say that garum was liquamen. Caelius Aurelianus says that the vulgar latin term in every day usage is liquamen – I don’t think he means just the poor here - and the elite prefer garum but in principle it’s the same product. if Pliny can fail to see the two sauces when it was popular, when the blood sauce has become rare it would seem quite logical to revert to the earlier usage and make the assumption that everyone has - ancient and modern - that the Greek and Latin meant the same thing'.
      note: I have not pasted the bit from Pliny but he is the cause of most of the confusion as he conflates both sauces into one. His elite expensive garum is made from viscera and most interpretations of his definition of fish sauce presupposed that he also meant to say small fish as he goes on to suggest that allec was the residue of garum but the blood viscera sauce has no bones or fish paste to make an allec. Only the primary fish sauce generates a fish paste.
      Hope this helps. It is a theory i will own but a thoroughly rational and logical one according to the archaeologists (and Robert Curtis who has been an adviser), I spoke to and they will be moving forward in analysing amphorae shapes and fish bone residues with the idea that there were two basic types of sauce in the 1st century AD when all the archaeology is most prolific.

      Sally Grainger

      -----Original Message-----
      From: RM <mailto:apicius%40maierphil.de>;;
      To: Apicius <mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com>;;
      Sent: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 14:05
      Subject: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)

      I am sorry, but are you really sure that there is any evidence for a difference between garum and the Apician “liquamen”? “liquamen” is a word used only by Apicius instead of the more common word “garum”. A good example is the following recipe:
      “Hydrogarata isicia sic facies: teres piper, ligusticum, pyrethrum minimum, suffundes liquamen. temperas aquam cisterninam, dum inducet, exinanies in caccabo, et tum isicia ad vaporem ignis pones, ut caleat, et sic sorbendum inferes.”
      This means that to make “hydrogarum” Apicius used “liquamen” et “aqua cisternina”. “liquamen” for Apicius is just a terminus technicus. The word “liquamen” has been used in antiquity just by Columella (who used it in a different context) and once by Flavius Vopiscus Syracusius on Aurelius where it meant “garum”. The hypothesis of a difference between garum and liquamen sounds interesting but I think Apicius just introduced the word “liquamen” as a t.t. in order to substitute the common word “garum”.

      Best regards

      RM

      From: mailto:sallygrain%40aol.com
      Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2012 1:49 PM
      To: mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [Apicius] Recent Cook Out

      good to know the dishes worked
      Can i just point out - as i am a bit of a stickler for such things - that the recipes in Apicius use the word liquamen rather than garum because they represent two different sauces - one whole-fish sauce, one a blood viscera fish sauce and I don't want to see an inaccurate ref that puports to be from my book where you have changed liquamen into garum in the belief that they are synonymous - they were not.

      thanks so much
      sally

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • sallygrain@aol.com
      Hi So why shouldn’t Pliny be right? I am sure that there were not only the two forms of “garum” that you mentioned but a lot of other varieties The
      Message 2 of 25 , Jul 19 10:06 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi


        'So why shouldn’t Pliny be right? I am sure that there were not only the two forms of “garum” that you mentioned but a lot of other varieties'

        The varieties are determined by the species of fish, their quality and origin. The fish bone evidence from ship wrecks which I have studies extensively reveal tiny anchovy or sardine or a mixed variety of small clupiedae and sparidae and they would make one kind - the most basic i think - of fish sauce, while mackerel is common in fish sauce amphorae and the tituli picti make it clear this was the best. Apicius - the gourmet rather than the recipe text - suggest mullet or nd we can assume any other specified and selected fish would make a superior kind. The subsequent sauce would not be named by its fish type but by the process it underwent. To liquefy i.e. liquamen or the juice from them i.e. the blood and viscera sauce.



        You still havnt explained to me how the manufacturer, merchant trader and cook was able to distinguish between the blood and viscera sauce and the whole fish variety. You cannot deny the existance of a blood viscera sauce - its in the Geoponica as a distinctly separate entity and it is also defined as 'luxury' Martial 'made from the blood of a still breathing mackerel' afirms its existance. As i said it matters not one jot what the stupid ill informed gourmet thinks he is eating - the manufacturer needs to be able to distinguish between them. You note that liquamen is rare and late but it is also only found in didactic texts written by the practitioner and producer - slave cook, vet, writers of agricultural material. The same kind of people as the manufacturer and merchant who need specific and precise terminology to identify their products. The absence of liquamen in elite literature as I have already said is due to the obvious fact that poets such as Martial etc consume garum at table and do not cook so they dont recognise the existence of a separate cooking sauce which is weaker.


        (“In process of time, alex has become quite an object of luxury, and the various kinds that are now made are infinite in number. The same, too, with garum, which is now prepared in imitation of the colour of old honied wine, and so pleasantly flavoured as to admit of being taken as a drink'

        This is very poor translation i think - Justine jump in when ever you want! 'The same too' does not sound right at all for secuti garum The loeb has 'for instance' implying a single example ' garum for instance ... rather than suggesting that garum had multiple varieties as well.

        'this implies that there were other, less praised types of garum – and that intestina and other parts of the fish were used'

        You cannot separate the blood and viscera here and suggest that blood is valuable and viscera not - thats utterly confused. The
        most prized type of garum was made from mackerel viscera and blood with salt and nothing else.

        'but the normal Latin word at the time of Ausonius was “liquamen” (which wasn’t an old Latin word and Ausonius obviously didn’t like it'
        You simply cannot say this, Its the worst kind of special pleading when your argument fails you. Ausonius didnt use the term liquamen because he didn't receive liquamen, he received garum He calls it liquor iste sociorum. 'that liquor of our allies' which directly links in with Martials' 'made from the blood of a still breathing mackerel' which he also calls garum sociorum, the most expensive kind of garum according to Pliny too, when garum is a blood/viscera sauce. Garum can also be cheap and cheerful and made from any old bit of fish blood and viscera.

        The crucial thing about the epigraphic evidence which you have failed to recognise is that in Pompeii there are amphorae with garum and there are amphorae with liquamen labels in the same context. This is indisputable evidence, that makes it absolutely clear, without a doubt, that for the people who made and bought fish sauce in Pompeii in 69 AD garum and liquamen represented different products. By the 4th century as i have already said the blood viscera sauce was insufficiently popular to warrant attention - in Apicius or the price edict and as a result the differences had ceased to mean anything which is why they appear to be the same in the late Empire

        all the best sally

        -----Original Message-----
        From: RM <apicius@...>
        To: Apicius <Apicius@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 0:18
        Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)




        Sorry for the late answer. I wasn’t at home yesterday and therefore not able to sit down and reply immediately.
        Meanwhile I had a look at some editions of the Naturalis Historia – one by Roderich König with German translation, the other the one by John Bostock et al. included in Perseus (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0137%3Abook%3D31%3Achapter%3D44). Essentially those two interpreted the passage as to be referred not only to allex but also to garum (“In process of time, alex has become quite an object of luxury, and the various kinds that are now made are infinite in number. The same, too, with garum, which is now prepared in imitation of the colour of old honied wine, and so pleasantly flavoured as to admit of being taken as a drink.” from: The Natural History. Pliny the Elder. John Bostock, M.D., F.R.S. H.T. Riley, Esq., B.A. London. Taylor and Francis, Red Lion Court, Fleet Street. 1855.). So, at least, I am not hopelessly alone with my interpretation.
        Certainly there were a lot of different types of garum during and before the 1st century and even after. Martial cites the garum made from the blood of scomber, Plinius said that the most praised garum was indeed made from scomber – this implies that there were other, less praised types of garum – and that intestina and other parts of the fish were used. The fishermen of Manilius seem to use tunny. Horace mentioned garum “de sucis piscis” (Hor. Serm. 2, 8, 46). But those citations are all about garum, not about liquamen because the word “liquamen” was a very new creation in the 1st century that hadn’t made yet its way into the language of Pliny, Horace, Seneca and Martial. Ausonius said that he wasn’t used to and couldn’t say the Latin word (“nec solere nec posse dicere”) for “garum” and that those who knew well old Latin and were disgusted with Greek vocabulary (“scientissimi veterum et Graeca vocabula fastidientes”) hadn’t a Latin word for it. So he called it “liquor iste sociorum” instead – but the normal Latin word at the time of Ausonius was “liquamen” (which wasn’t an old Latin word and Ausonius obviously didn’t like it; “muria” has been mentioned in a similar context by Plinius in 31, 94 – probabely this muria wasn’t just salty water). And this is what we can deduce also from the Price Edict: “garum” is doubtlessly a Greek word, equal to “garon”, and the correct Latin translation is “liquamen” at those times, i. e. at the beginning of the 4th century. As it is a legal text, what we find in the Price Edict is certainly not an arbitrary appellation. So if therein “liquamen” is the translation of “garon” (which is identical to the Latin “garum” which, according to Ausonius, is still a Greek word) why should we believe that there was a fundamental difference between those two? There were certainly varieties that may have had different trade names sometimes but the Geoponika show us that in late antiquity the word “likouamen” could substitute the original “garon” even in Greek. The same, of course in Apic. 7, 13, 1: “ita ut piper cum liquamine teres” is an specification for “in garo piper<ato>” (I prefer this version because the other one is grammatically disputable and we have Petronius using a “garum piperatum” in Sat. 36, 3). Probabely this is an old recipe of the 1st century where someone added the explanation because he was in doubt if the people could understand what “garum piperatum” meant.
        From the references we have we can derive that the word “liquamen” has been created in the 1st century and was used more and more – perhaps driven by culinary experts like Apicius – until being an equivalent of the word “garum” at the beginning of the 4th century even in legal texts like the Price Edict. It has also been accepted as a synonym of “garon” in Greek as we see from the Geoponika. There are some detailled descriptions of the production of “garum” but only in the Geoponika we find the same for “likouamen” which in that context is to be considered a synonym of “garon”. The word “liquamen” is used in a similar way – i.e. as a translation of “garum” or “garon” – in the Price Edict and in Apic. 7.13.1. Well, we may get much more examplesfor “liquamen” and “garum” out of the epigraphic data base (http://oracle-vm.ku-eichstaett.de:8888/epigr/epigraphik_de) but we wouldn’t find many differences between “liquamen” and “garum” there. We have “liquamen optimum scombri” and “garum flos scombri” and so on. From my point of view it is not possible to clearly distinguish the both, “garum” and “liquamen”, as both appear to be exchangeable in various contexts. They vary in frequency of occurrence: “Garum” was used more frequently before the 2nd century, “liquamen” was used more frequently from the end of the 1st century.

        Best wishes,

        Robert

        From: sallygrain@...
        Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2012 2:11 PM
        To: Apicius@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)

        Your ref to Pliny is as follows in English for the rest ' then allec became a luxury and its various kinds have come to be inumerable' These refer to enumerable kinds of allec or fish paste made from sea food and not neccesarily the liquid fish sauce derived from one kind of allec. The liquid fish sauce was not enumerable in kind but basically 2 types or 3 if you include muria 1, liquefied whole fish sauce. 2 fish blood and viscera 3. brine from salted fish which corresponds to coluratura die alici from the Naples area as this is made with eviscerated salted anchovy.

        Ultimately then, you are basing your argument that liquamen is not a synonym for garum but is for garon on Apicius 7.13.1 which is one recipes out of 450+ That garum and liquamen appear in this recipes and only this one suggest to me that the pepper is ground with liquamen and them served with garum at table. Otherwise it makes no sence to use both terms. If they are there because whome ever wanted to translate the one with the other we would at least find this construction - using both terms more often in the rest of the text. The use of garum in the compound terms oenogarum, hydrogarum etc is not relavant as they are transliterated Greek.

        You almost get it - The generic term only exists in Greek In latin technically there is no generic term but as they are so similar many ancient as well as modern scholars assume that the generic function was transferred to the Latin when it was translated. I will even allow that some ancients used garum when they actually meant liquamen but the manufacturer, trader, merchant and cook never would have got them mixed up - one was black and bloody, dark and strong used in drops while the other was pale brown and used in quantity. There simply had to be a way to distinguish them in trade. The acetabulum little vinegar cup in some recipes (p 83 ff our edition) hold 60ml and was blended with a similar amount of wine and fish sauce. The resulting oenogarum was delicious as i am sure you know. I have made blood garum and it is disgusting in those quantities. Check out http://www.ishiri.jp/en/ for the Japanese squid blood and viscera fish sauce which is pitch black and smells distinctly of blood - iron in fact, a frind who was a nurse told me it smells of digested blood after smelling the human gut in surgery.

        You do know Ausonius' letter I am sure. He specifically says there is no latin word that he can use instead of garum which he rejects as its Greek in origin and he rejects Greek words. If liquamen was the equivelent of garum in Latin he would have no problem. Instead of cause he fuels our confussion with the use of muria which we cannot get tied up in now.

        sally

        -----Original Message-----
        From: RM <mailto:apicius%40maierphil.de>;
        To: Apicius <mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com>;
        Sent: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 0:15
        Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)

        Hi Sally,

        the fact that a lot of differt types of “garum” existed is obviously true but it is not my idea. This has already been reported by Pliny in the half sentence I cited before: “... , creveruntque genera ad infinitum, ...” (Plin. NH 31, 95). So why shouldn’t Pliny be right? I am sure that there were not only the two forms of “garum” that you mentioned but a lot of other varieties, too. So why shouldn’t they have been sold eventually under the same name “garum”? In the Price Edict and even in the Geoponika “liquamen” (or in Greek letters “likouamen”) is clearly a synonym / translation of the Greek word garon. The Price Edict has a first and a second quality of garon / liquamen. The name of both qualities was the same but to produce different qualities probabely the ingredients were somewhat different. And then there is also the Apicius recipe 7, 13, 1 garum and liquamen do mean exactly the same: “fungi farnei: elixi, calidi, exsiccati in garo piper<ato> accipiuntur, ita ut piper cum liquamine teres.” – I cited this from my own Apicius edition where it is numbered 7, 15, 1 (ed. Robert Maier, Reclam, Stuttgart 1991), the text of your edition has “piper” instead of “piper<ato>”. Unfortunately Manilius doesn’t tell us the names of what his fishermen were creating in the Astronomica 5, 667 sqq.
        To conclude: I think it’s an alluring hypothesis to believe in a real difference between “garum” and “liquamen” but it’s a hypothesis that lacks evidence. As we can deduce from the Price Edict and the Geoponika “liquamen” was a synonym at least of the Greek “garon” and probabely also of the Roman “garum”, as we see in Apic. 7, 13, 1. What we eventually could assume is that “liquamen” in some contexts might have been understood as a specific quality of “garum” (some filtered high quality “garum”) but there is certainly no general distinction. On the amphorae one should expect some trade names, as we use today the word “balsamico” for a specific type of vinegar, while the product class remains “vinegar”. So in our case the product class would be “garum” including more specific appellations like “garum sociorum”, “garum scombri”, “liquamen” etc. At the end “liquamen” was used as a general term (because everyone tends to use only the very best quality), just as it happened in the case of “iecur” which, at the end, was called always “ficatum” and became “fegato”, “foie” etc. in the different modern languages.

        Best wishes,

        Robert

        From: mailto:sallygrain%40aol.com
        Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 7:57 PM
        To: mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)

        Hi

        Your approach to fish sauce is too simplistic I am afraid. Do you not even recognise the fact of a separate blood and viscera sauce different from the whole-fish sauce. They cannot both be garum!, the former black and bloody, the latter pale golden according to Pliny. They have different uses, the garon melan was used at table and so became a fashionable ingredient to discuss in satire, the cooking liquamen was only used in the kitchen by slaves and therefore was not recognised as a separate sauce by the elite. The tituli picti associated with amphorae from Pompeii and Rome reflect the frequent usage of liquamen in the 1st century along side garum. We find garum scombri flos and liquamen flos in contempory sites: they have to mean two separate sauces, there is no way out of that one!

        sally

        -----Original Message-----
        From: RM <mailto:apicius%40maierphil.de>;;
        To: Apicius <mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com>;;
        Sent: Sun, 15 Jul 2012 22:24
        Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)

        Just a little correction and an addition: The Geoponika have been written down about 600 years after the Price Edict (not 800!). The word “garum” is found twice within the Apicius recipes, in 7, 13, 1 (with “liquamen” in the same recipe!) and Exc. 29 (according to Vollmer & Milham).

        Best regards

        RM

        From: RM
        Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2012 8:36 PM
        To: mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)

        Well, we don’t know exactly when the Apicius collection has been compiled but it is quite sure that has been compiled from a base of earlier recipes from which about a third is to be considered to be from an original cookbook probabely written by the same Apicius who has been mentioned in Plinius’ Naturalis Historia (see Brandt: “Untersuchungen zum römischen Kochbuch” in Philologus Suppl. XIX, 3). From the Historia Augusta we learn that Aelius Verus who died in 138 took three books into his bed: Amores by Ovid, Apicius and Martial. We may believe this or not. If we believe it there should have been an edition of Apicius at those times. I didn’t say that Apicius was the only one who ever mentioned “liquamen” – I said he was the only one who used it in this sense in antiquity, Vegetius and Pelagonius lived in very late antiquity, but you wouldn’t find the term before Columella where it signified just a liquid. The question is therefore if your “liquamen”, that may differ from “garum”, was invented after the 1st or 2nd century. There is no doubt that there were many different types and qualities of garum (“... , creveruntque genera ad infinitum, ...” Plin. NH 31, 95). Plinius tells us that Apicius used the so called “garum sociorum” which is just a type of garum. In his Naturalis Historia Plinius mentioned “garum” sometimes – liquamen never. I personally believe that Plinius did know very well what he was writing about in book 31 where he describes the production of “garum” – there he calls it a “liquor” (not “liquamen” of course). What you can find in the Diocletian’s Price Edict are two terms (3.6): “garou geúmatos prwteíou” in Greek, “liquaminis primi” in Latin – there the word “liquamen” appears as a simple translation of “garon” (why do you think it should be “garos”?). The Geoponika, of course, has been compiled 800 years later, using authors of the late antiquity but it is very interesting that in the Geoponika the Latin word “liquamen” appears twice as “tò kaloúmenon likouamen” (=“the so called liquamen”) in the chapter "Garwn piohsis" (20, 46, 1+2).

        Well, I better stop here because it would end up with some kind of endless discussion. There is – in my opinion – no real evidence for any difference of liquamen and garum, especially if we consider the Price Edict and the Geoponika. I think “liquamen” is just a word that may have been introduced by people like Apicius as a terminus technicus to substitute “garum” in technical language and then spread more and more until Anthimus did only use the term “liquamen” ("Nam liquamen ex omni parte prohibimus."). Even the “so called liquamen” in the Geoponika leads to this direction.

        Best regards

        RM
        From: mailto:sallygrain%40aol.com
        Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2012 5:06 PM
        To: mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)

        OK

        garum liquamen and the differences: i recently presented a paper at the British School at Rome to archaeologist of the fish trade in the Med. and therefore what follows is a pressi of what i said to them

        To start with you talk about Apicius as if he was the sole author and originator of the text when it is clear from our textual analysis that the recipe collection has multiple authors and they are slave cooks rather than a single gourmet. In terms of food at this level there were consumers and producers and it is the producers - the cooks - who we must trust to use the terminology correctly. You cannot argue that Apicius wrote this or that way, logically all the slave cooks wrote liquamen rather than garum for a reason. Equally you cannot place Apicius as a text in the late Empire reflecting a late usage for fish sauce. The terms used in it must reflect the way in which cooks expressed themselves throughout the classical period. The whole argument and justification for Vulgar Latin/Late Latin is based on elite usage. You say garum was the more commonplace term but in fact it is the other way round: Caelius Aurelianus says that the vulgar latin term in every day usage is liquamen. You also state that liquamen only occurs in Apicius but this is not the case. It is found in the Greek agricultural manual The Geoponica - you do all know that Andrew Dalby has recently published a new translation of this dont you ? - where it is a direct translation of the Greek garon but wait ...garon does not necessarily mean garum. It is also found frequently along with garum in the same veterinary recipe collections, particularly Vegetius and Pelagonius.
        (Pelagonius: liquamen: 9; 11.2; 13;98; 455; 457, garum: 428;13. Vegetius liquamen: 1.10.1; 1.17.10, 16; 2.91.2; 2.108.2; 2.132.4; 4.6.1, garum: 2.28.8; 3.28.10). In Galen it is also clear that two sauces were used: he refers simply to garon many times but only once or twice to garon melan. We have two names and two sauces so there shouldn't have been a problem!

        (Pelagonius: liquamen: 9; 11.2; 13;98; 455; 457, garum: 428;13. Vegetius liquamen: 1.10.1; 1.17.10, 16; 2.91.2; 2.108.2; 2.132.4; 4.6.1, garum: 2.28.8; 3.28.10). In Galen it is also clear that two sauces were used: he refers simply to garon many times but only once or twice to garon melan. We have two names and two sauces so there shouldn't have been a problem!

        Apicius - this is the title not the author - is an organic collection of recipes originally compiled, in it's earliest form, in Greek and we consider this to be in the late 1st century AD and possibly even earlier. We see no evidence of a formal publication date, only a finish date which is clearly 5/6th century. The chapter heading are in Greek and there are numerous terms that are not translated but transliterated i.e the Greek endings are converted into Latin endings so oenogaron: the Greek sauce made from the original Greek fish sauce and wine becomes oenogarum. Bare in mind the whole idea of fish sauce was originally Greek

        So if the cooks dont use garum qua garum one has to ask why? At this point I am pasting from the delivered paper

        What we first must do is acknowledge the presence of a blood and viscera sauce in the Ancient Mediterranean cuisine that we think of as Roman food. This sauce was a strong black and bloody condiment called in Greek garon melan or haimation that I believe was almost certainly handled by the consumer at table. This sauce was completely separate to the primary product in terms of archaeology (the amphora and fish bones) which was a cooking sauce made from whole-fish with extra viscera which provided enzymes which aided the liquefaction of the muscle tissue.
        The development and use of the primary product: a fish sauce made with whole fish, initially began in Greece and was a simple sauce made of very small fish (otherwise of no value) and salt used in everyday cooking. It is clear from references in 3rd century new comedy in Athens that this sauce was used with oil and vinegar or wine as a dressing for vegetables and pulses and was not considered particularly elite. My colleague Andrew Dalby has stated it to be a commonplace ingredient and it is noteworthy that Archestratus, the 2nd century Greek gourmet poet writing from Sicily about the best fish does not mention fish sauce at all. Later Galen in the 2nd Century AD is also suggesting the use of garos in dressing of oil and vinegar to accompany simple vegetables. The Apicius recipes collection includes a whole section on vegetables which are also largely accompanied by oil, wine and fish sauce. These simple blended sauces are basically like vinaigrette and are throughout the Apicius recipe text in various forms. The most common was an oenogarum a transliterated term from the Greek. In fact when oenogarum is translated into Latin - it is found in Ps. Gargilius Martialis recipe - it appears as Confectio liquaminis. So there rearly is no garum in Apicius. This means of cause that there is no blood and viscera garum, because as a table sauce it was used on food rather than in the cooking and was also used to make elite oenogarum that may have been blended at table by the gourmet or slaves attendants.

        This simple Greek whole fish sauce almost certainly came to Rome as garon transliterated into garum but was still this simple liquefied fish sauce. As fish sauce became popular in Rome the elite were concerned with differentiating their foods from everybody else’s and I believe they may have instigated new developments in fish sauce types, one of which was the blood and viscera sauce and one was the use of much larger fish that did have a market value such as mackerel and larger clupeidae and sparidae which could have been used as salted fish.
        I believe the confusion over the terminology occurred when the elite retained the term garum - the transliterated and now fashionable Greek term to designate their new table sauce made from blood and viscera and the manufacturer, trader , merchant and cook had to coin a new term in Latin to designate the original and commonplace fish sauce, called garon made from whole fish. This was liquamen, the derivation of which is ‘to liquefy so it is aptly titled.
        We have mentioned the absence of garum from Apicius but we must also mention the absence of the separate Latin blood garum from Diocletians price edict in 301 AD . Here liquamen is equivalent to garos not garum just as we find in the Geoponica. These two absences are of cause the primary reason for the 'single sauce hypothesis' advovated by Curtis. If however you see these absences as evidence that the blood garum was no longer sufficiently popular in the early 4th century AD to warrant its own price on the edict or a mention in the recipes, then the later dominance of liquamen is explained. In fact (a guess) I believe the elite blood viscera garum had a relatively small market in comparison to liquamen and was made to appear more important because of the unusually close view we get of the elite at table in the early empire through satire. It was still made in the late empire as we know Ausonius acquired a jar in the mid 4th century but it seems it was a special delivery and therefore probably not readily available in southern France, and he is also very confused as to what to call it!
        The original Greek sauce – garos equivalent to liquamen - remained the primary product. We can I think come to see how it was that later sources began to say that garum was liquamen. Caelius Aurelianus says that the vulgar latin term in every day usage is liquamen – I don’t think he means just the poor here - and the elite prefer garum but in principle it’s the same product. if Pliny can fail to see the two sauces when it was popular, when the blood sauce has become rare it would seem quite logical to revert to the earlier usage and make the assumption that everyone has - ancient and modern - that the Greek and Latin meant the same thing'.
        note: I have not pasted the bit from Pliny but he is the cause of most of the confusion as he conflates both sauces into one. His elite expensive garum is made from viscera and most interpretations of his definition of fish sauce presupposed that he also meant to say small fish as he goes on to suggest that allec was the residue of garum but the blood viscera sauce has no bones or fish paste to make an allec. Only the primary fish sauce generates a fish paste.
        Hope this helps. It is a theory i will own but a thoroughly rational and logical one according to the archaeologists (and Robert Curtis who has been an adviser), I spoke to and they will be moving forward in analysing amphorae shapes and fish bone residues with the idea that there were two basic types of sauce in the 1st century AD when all the archaeology is most prolific.

        Sally Grainger

        -----Original Message-----
        From: RM <mailto:apicius%40maierphil.de>;;;
        To: Apicius <mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com>;;;
        Sent: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 14:05
        Subject: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)

        I am sorry, but are you really sure that there is any evidence for a difference between garum and the Apician “liquamen”? “liquamen” is a word used only by Apicius instead of the more common word “garum”. A good example is the following recipe:
        “Hydrogarata isicia sic facies: teres piper, ligusticum, pyrethrum minimum, suffundes liquamen. temperas aquam cisterninam, dum inducet, exinanies in caccabo, et tum isicia ad vaporem ignis pones, ut caleat, et sic sorbendum inferes.”
        This means that to make “hydrogarum” Apicius used “liquamen” et “aqua cisternina”. “liquamen” for Apicius is just a terminus technicus. The word “liquamen” has been used in antiquity just by Columella (who used it in a different context) and once by Flavius Vopiscus Syracusius on Aurelius where it meant “garum”. The hypothesis of a difference between garum and liquamen sounds interesting but I think Apicius just introduced the word “liquamen” as a t.t. in order to substitute the common word “garum”.

        Best regards

        RM

        From: mailto:sallygrain%40aol.com
        Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2012 1:49 PM
        To: mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [Apicius] Recent Cook Out

        good to know the dishes worked
        Can i just point out - as i am a bit of a stickler for such things - that the recipes in Apicius use the word liquamen rather than garum because they represent two different sauces - one whole-fish sauce, one a blood viscera fish sauce and I don't want to see an inaccurate ref that puports to be from my book where you have changed liquamen into garum in the belief that they are synonymous - they were not.

        thanks so much
        sally

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]








        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Justin Mansfield
        ... I have been summoned. I just hope you re pronouncing Justine as three syllables! ;) Sorry, I haven t had time to follow this debate in any detail: I m
        Message 3 of 25 , Jul 20 10:55 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          >
          > Justine jump in when ever you want!


          I have been summoned. I just hope you're pronouncing "Justine" as three
          syllables! ;)

          Sorry, I haven't had time to follow this debate in any detail: I'm rushing
          around in my final days before the Conventiculum Latinum Lexintoniense,
          which is of course when I have my annual Cena Romana (Incidentally I tried
          making Columella's recipe for pickled purslane... but I suspect I did it
          wrong. We'll see how it tastes when I open the jar) Not much focus to spare
          on so detailed an argument.

          This just gets worse when I look at the text:

          (�In process of time, alex has become quite an object of luxury, and the
          > various kinds that are now made are infinite in number. The same, too, with
          > garum, which is now prepared in imitation of the colour of old honied wine,
          > and so pleasantly flavoured as to admit of being taken as a drink'
          > This is very poor translation i think - Justine jump in when ever you
          > want! 'The same too' does not sound right at all for secuti garum The loeb
          > has 'for instance' implying a single example ' garum for instance ...
          > rather than suggesting that garum had multiple varieties as well.


          Oy vey. My first instinct is indeed "for instance," but yeah, given that
          its most basic meaning is "just as," I can see how "the same, too" is a
          possibility. But as is so often the case with Pliny it's not so much a
          question of what the word could or could not mean, the real problem is
          trying to follow his stream of thought. For starters:

          *Vitium huius est allex atque inperfecta nec colata faex. coepit tamen et
          privatim ex inutili pisciculo minimoque confici. *
          Its blemish and unfinished, unstrained dregs is *allex*. But it was
          originally made specifically from useless, tiny finish.

          What was originally made this way? On first reading it sounds like he means
          *allex*. But I'm pretty sure the topic of this entire paragraph is fish
          sauce in general (the *huius* of the first sentence), not the *vitium *thereof.
          In other words, the "it" in the second sentence refers back not to *allex* but
          rather the "Its" of the first sentence! I mean, why would he be talking
          about what kind of fish they use to make lees with in *Forum Iulii*, right?
          You don't set out to make *faex*, *faex* is a byproduct of something else.

          If you still think those sentences are only about *allex*, then yeah, he
          must be saying something like "[*allex*] became a luxury, and its varieties
          grew to be innumerable, *just as* [happened with] *garum*, which
          has [nowadays] been diluted to the color of old *mulsum*, and such
          sweetness that you could drink it."

          But if you accept that he's talking about fish sauce in general, he seems
          to be saying "[fish sauce] became a luxury, and its varieties grew to be
          innumerable, *for instance* [the variety of] *garum* which is diluted to
          the color of old *mulsum*, and such sweetness that you could drink it."

          It seems to me pretty clear that the latter translation is preferable, and
          this jibes well with my point that the rest of the paragraph makes better
          sense if we assume the sentence about *allex* was essentially a
          parenthetical gloss.

          I tell you, every time I read Pliny the Elder something like this happens:
          every sentence in the paragraph could be interpreted in multiple ways, and
          the key is finding the thread so that it all makes sense.

          As I said, I'm very distracted right now, so please forgive any sloppiness,
          or inattention to what has already been said.

          Valete

          On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 12:06 PM, <sallygrain@...> wrote:

          > **
          >
          >
          >
          > Hi
          >
          > 'So why shouldn�t Pliny be right? I am sure that there were not only the
          > two forms of �garum� that you mentioned but a lot of other varieties'
          >
          > The varieties are determined by the species of fish, their quality and
          > origin. The fish bone evidence from ship wrecks which I have studies
          > extensively reveal tiny anchovy or sardine or a mixed variety of small
          > clupiedae and sparidae and they would make one kind - the most basic i
          > think - of fish sauce, while mackerel is common in fish sauce amphorae and
          > the tituli picti make it clear this was the best. Apicius - the gourmet
          > rather than the recipe text - suggest mullet or nd we can assume any other
          > specified and selected fish would make a superior kind. The subsequent
          > sauce would not be named by its fish type but by the process it underwent.
          > To liquefy i.e. liquamen or the juice from them i.e. the blood and viscera
          > sauce.
          >
          >
          >
          > You still havnt explained to me how the manufacturer, merchant trader and
          > cook was able to distinguish between the blood and viscera sauce and the
          > whole fish variety. You cannot deny the existance of a blood viscera sauce
          > - its in the Geoponica as a distinctly separate entity and it is also
          > defined as 'luxury' Martial 'made from the blood of a still breathing
          > mackerel' afirms its existance. As i said it matters not one jot what the
          > stupid ill informed gourmet thinks he is eating - the manufacturer needs to
          > be able to distinguish between them. You note that liquamen is rare and
          > late but it is also only found in didactic texts written by the
          > practitioner and producer - slave cook, vet, writers of agricultural
          > material. The same kind of people as the manufacturer and merchant who need
          > specific and precise terminology to identify their products. The absence of
          > liquamen in elite literature as I have already said is due to the obvious
          > fact that poets such as Martial etc consume garum at table and do not cook
          > so they dont recognise the existence of a separate cooking sauce which is
          > weaker.
          >
          > (�In process of time, alex has become quite an object of luxury, and the
          > various kinds that are now made are infinite in number. The same, too, with
          > garum, which is now prepared in imitation of the colour of old honied wine,
          > and so pleasantly flavoured as to admit of being taken as a drink'
          >
          > This is very poor translation i think - Justine jump in when ever you
          > want! 'The same too' does not sound right at all for secuti garum The loeb
          > has 'for instance' implying a single example ' garum for instance ...
          > rather than suggesting that garum had multiple varieties as well.
          >
          > 'this implies that there were other, less praised types of garum � and
          > that intestina and other parts of the fish were used'
          >
          > You cannot separate the blood and viscera here and suggest that blood is
          > valuable and viscera not - thats utterly confused. The
          > most prized type of garum was made from mackerel viscera and blood with
          > salt and nothing else.
          >
          > 'but the normal Latin word at the time of Ausonius was �liquamen� (which
          > wasn�t an old Latin word and Ausonius obviously didn�t like it'
          > You simply cannot say this, Its the worst kind of special pleading when
          > your argument fails you. Ausonius didnt use the term liquamen because he
          > didn't receive liquamen, he received garum He calls it liquor iste
          > sociorum. 'that liquor of our allies' which directly links in with
          > Martials' 'made from the blood of a still breathing mackerel' which he also
          > calls garum sociorum, the most expensive kind of garum according to Pliny
          > too, when garum is a blood/viscera sauce. Garum can also be cheap and
          > cheerful and made from any old bit of fish blood and viscera.
          >
          > The crucial thing about the epigraphic evidence which you have failed to
          > recognise is that in Pompeii there are amphorae with garum and there are
          > amphorae with liquamen labels in the same context. This is indisputable
          > evidence, that makes it absolutely clear, without a doubt, that for the
          > people who made and bought fish sauce in Pompeii in 69 AD garum and
          > liquamen represented different products. By the 4th century as i have
          > already said the blood viscera sauce was insufficiently popular to warrant
          > attention - in Apicius or the price edict and as a result the differences
          > had ceased to mean anything which is why they appear to be the same in the
          > late Empire
          >
          > all the best sally
          >
          > -----Original Message-----
          > From: RM <apicius@...>
          > To: Apicius <Apicius@yahoogroups.com>
          > Sent: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 0:18
          > Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)
          >
          > Sorry for the late answer. I wasn�t at home yesterday and therefore not
          > able to sit down and reply immediately.
          > Meanwhile I had a look at some editions of the Naturalis Historia � one by
          > Roderich K�nig with German translation, the other the one by John Bostock
          > et al. included in Perseus (
          > http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0137%3Abook%3D31%3Achapter%3D44).
          > Essentially those two interpreted the passage as to be referred not only to
          > allex but also to garum (�In process of time, alex has become quite an
          > object of luxury, and the various kinds that are now made are infinite in
          > number. The same, too, with garum, which is now prepared in imitation of
          > the colour of old honied wine, and so pleasantly flavoured as to admit of
          > being taken as a drink.� from: The Natural History. Pliny the Elder. John
          > Bostock, M.D., F.R.S. H.T. Riley, Esq., B.A. London. Taylor and Francis,
          > Red Lion Court, Fleet Street. 1855.). So, at least, I am not hopelessly
          > alone with my interpretation.
          > Certainly there were a lot of different types of garum during and before
          > the 1st century and even after. Martial cites the garum made from the blood
          > of scomber, Plinius said that the most praised garum was indeed made from
          > scomber � this implies that there were other, less praised types of garum �
          > and that intestina and other parts of the fish were used. The fishermen of
          > Manilius seem to use tunny. Horace mentioned garum �de sucis piscis� (Hor.
          > Serm. 2, 8, 46). But those citations are all about garum, not about
          > liquamen because the word �liquamen� was a very new creation in the 1st
          > century that hadn�t made yet its way into the language of Pliny, Horace,
          > Seneca and Martial. Ausonius said that he wasn�t used to and couldn�t say
          > the Latin word (�nec solere nec posse dicere�) for �garum� and that those
          > who knew well old Latin and were disgusted with Greek vocabulary
          > (�scientissimi veterum et Graeca vocabula fastidientes�) hadn�t a Latin
          > word for it. So he called it �liquor iste sociorum� instead � but the
          > normal Latin word at the time of Ausonius was �liquamen� (which wasn�t an
          > old Latin word and Ausonius obviously didn�t like it; �muria� has been
          > mentioned in a similar context by Plinius in 31, 94 � probabely this muria
          > wasn�t just salty water). And this is what we can deduce also from the
          > Price Edict: �garum� is doubtlessly a Greek word, equal to �garon�, and the
          > correct Latin translation is �liquamen� at those times, i. e. at the
          > beginning of the 4th century. As it is a legal text, what we find in the
          > Price Edict is certainly not an arbitrary appellation. So if therein
          > �liquamen� is the translation of �garon� (which is identical to the Latin
          > �garum� which, according to Ausonius, is still a Greek word) why should we
          > believe that there was a fundamental difference between those two? There
          > were certainly varieties that may have had different trade names sometimes
          > but the Geoponika show us that in late antiquity the word �likouamen� could
          > substitute the original �garon� even in Greek. The same, of course in Apic.
          > 7, 13, 1: �ita ut piper cum liquamine teres� is an specification for �in
          > garo piper<ato>� (I prefer this version because the other one is
          > grammatically disputable and we have Petronius using a �garum piperatum� in
          > Sat. 36, 3). Probabely this is an old recipe of the 1st century where
          > someone added the explanation because he was in doubt if the people could
          > understand what �garum piperatum� meant.
          > From the references we have we can derive that the word �liquamen� has
          > been created in the 1st century and was used more and more � perhaps driven
          > by culinary experts like Apicius � until being an equivalent of the word
          > �garum� at the beginning of the 4th century even in legal texts like the
          > Price Edict. It has also been accepted as a synonym of �garon� in Greek as
          > we see from the Geoponika. There are some detailled descriptions of the
          > production of �garum� but only in the Geoponika we find the same for
          > �likouamen� which in that context is to be considered a synonym of �garon�.
          > The word �liquamen� is used in a similar way � i.e. as a translation of
          > �garum� or �garon� � in the Price Edict and in Apic. 7.13.1. Well, we may
          > get much more examplesfor �liquamen� and �garum� out of the epigraphic data
          > base (http://oracle-vm.ku-eichstaett.de:8888/epigr/epigraphik_de) but we
          > wouldn�t find many differences between �liquamen� and �garum� there. We
          > have �liquamen optimum scombri� and �garum flos scombri� and so on. From my
          > point of view it is not possible to clearly distinguish the both, �garum�
          > and �liquamen�, as both appear to be exchangeable in various contexts. They
          > vary in frequency of occurrence: �Garum� was used more frequently before
          > the 2nd century, �liquamen� was used more frequently from the end of the
          > 1st century.
          >
          > Best wishes,
          >
          > Robert
          >
          > From: sallygrain@...
          > Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2012 2:11 PM
          > To: Apicius@yahoogroups.com
          > Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)
          >
          > Your ref to Pliny is as follows in English for the rest ' then allec
          > became a luxury and its various kinds have come to be inumerable' These
          > refer to enumerable kinds of allec or fish paste made from sea food and not
          > neccesarily the liquid fish sauce derived from one kind of allec. The
          > liquid fish sauce was not enumerable in kind but basically 2 types or 3 if
          > you include muria 1, liquefied whole fish sauce. 2 fish blood and viscera
          > 3. brine from salted fish which corresponds to coluratura die alici from
          > the Naples area as this is made with eviscerated salted anchovy.
          >
          > Ultimately then, you are basing your argument that liquamen is not a
          > synonym for garum but is for garon on Apicius 7.13.1 which is one recipes
          > out of 450+ That garum and liquamen appear in this recipes and only this
          > one suggest to me that the pepper is ground with liquamen and them served
          > with garum at table. Otherwise it makes no sence to use both terms. If they
          > are there because whome ever wanted to translate the one with the other we
          > would at least find this construction - using both terms more often in the
          > rest of the text. The use of garum in the compound terms oenogarum,
          > hydrogarum etc is not relavant as they are transliterated Greek.
          >
          > You almost get it - The generic term only exists in Greek In latin
          > technically there is no generic term but as they are so similar many
          > ancient as well as modern scholars assume that the generic function was
          > transferred to the Latin when it was translated. I will even allow that
          > some ancients used garum when they actually meant liquamen but the
          > manufacturer, trader, merchant and cook never would have got them mixed up
          > - one was black and bloody, dark and strong used in drops while the other
          > was pale brown and used in quantity. There simply had to be a way to
          > distinguish them in trade. The acetabulum little vinegar cup in some
          > recipes (p 83 ff our edition) hold 60ml and was blended with a similar
          > amount of wine and fish sauce. The resulting oenogarum was delicious as i
          > am sure you know. I have made blood garum and it is disgusting in those
          > quantities. Check out http://www.ishiri.jp/en/ for the Japanese squid
          > blood and viscera fish sauce which is pitch black and smells distinctly of
          > blood - iron in fact, a frind who was a nurse told me it smells of digested
          > blood after smelling the human gut in surgery.
          >
          > You do know Ausonius' letter I am sure. He specifically says there is no
          > latin word that he can use instead of garum which he rejects as its Greek
          > in origin and he rejects Greek words. If liquamen was the equivelent of
          > garum in Latin he would have no problem. Instead of cause he fuels our
          > confussion with the use of muria which we cannot get tied up in now.
          >
          > sally
          >
          > -----Original Message-----
          > From: RM <mailto:apicius%40maierphil.de>;
          > To: Apicius <mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com>;
          > Sent: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 0:15
          > Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)
          >
          > Hi Sally,
          >
          > the fact that a lot of differt types of �garum� existed is obviously true
          > but it is not my idea. This has already been reported by Pliny in the half
          > sentence I cited before: �... , creveruntque genera ad infinitum, ...�
          > (Plin. NH 31, 95). So why shouldn�t Pliny be right? I am sure that there
          > were not only the two forms of �garum� that you mentioned but a lot of
          > other varieties, too. So why shouldn�t they have been sold eventually under
          > the same name �garum�? In the Price Edict and even in the Geoponika
          > �liquamen� (or in Greek letters �likouamen�) is clearly a synonym /
          > translation of the Greek word garon. The Price Edict has a first and a
          > second quality of garon / liquamen. The name of both qualities was the same
          > but to produce different qualities probabely the ingredients were somewhat
          > different. And then there is also the Apicius recipe 7, 13, 1 garum and
          > liquamen do mean exactly the same: �fungi farnei: elixi, calidi, exsiccati
          > in garo piper<ato> accipiuntur, ita ut piper cum liquamine teres.� � I
          > cited this from my own Apicius edition where it is numbered 7, 15, 1 (ed.
          > Robert Maier, Reclam, Stuttgart 1991), the text of your edition has �piper�
          > instead of �piper<ato>�. Unfortunately Manilius doesn�t tell us the names
          > of what his fishermen were creating in the Astronomica 5, 667 sqq.
          > To conclude: I think it�s an alluring hypothesis to believe in a real
          > difference between �garum� and �liquamen� but it�s a hypothesis that lacks
          > evidence. As we can deduce from the Price Edict and the Geoponika
          > �liquamen� was a synonym at least of the Greek �garon� and probabely also
          > of the Roman �garum�, as we see in Apic. 7, 13, 1. What we eventually could
          > assume is that �liquamen� in some contexts might have been understood as a
          > specific quality of �garum� (some filtered high quality �garum�) but there
          > is certainly no general distinction. On the amphorae one should expect some
          > trade names, as we use today the word �balsamico� for a specific type of
          > vinegar, while the product class remains �vinegar�. So in our case the
          > product class would be �garum� including more specific appellations like
          > �garum sociorum�, �garum scombri�, �liquamen� etc. At the end �liquamen�
          > was used as a general term (because everyone tends to use only the very
          > best quality), just as it happened in the case of �iecur� which, at the
          > end, was called always �ficatum� and became �fegato�, �foie� etc. in the
          > different modern languages.
          >
          > Best wishes,
          >
          > Robert
          >
          > From: mailto:sallygrain%40aol.com
          > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 7:57 PM
          > To: mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com
          > Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)
          >
          > Hi
          >
          > Your approach to fish sauce is too simplistic I am afraid. Do you not even
          > recognise the fact of a separate blood and viscera sauce different from the
          > whole-fish sauce. They cannot both be garum!, the former black and bloody,
          > the latter pale golden according to Pliny. They have different uses, the
          > garon melan was used at table and so became a fashionable ingredient to
          > discuss in satire, the cooking liquamen was only used in the kitchen by
          > slaves and therefore was not recognised as a separate sauce by the elite.
          > The tituli picti associated with amphorae from Pompeii and Rome reflect the
          > frequent usage of liquamen in the 1st century along side garum. We find
          > garum scombri flos and liquamen flos in contempory sites: they have to mean
          > two separate sauces, there is no way out of that one!
          >
          > sally
          >
          > -----Original Message-----
          > From: RM <mailto:apicius%40maierphil.de>;;
          > To: Apicius <mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com>;;
          > Sent: Sun, 15 Jul 2012 22:24
          > Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)
          >
          > Just a little correction and an addition: The Geoponika have been written
          > down about 600 years after the Price Edict (not 800!). The word �garum� is
          > found twice within the Apicius recipes, in 7, 13, 1 (with �liquamen� in the
          > same recipe!) and Exc. 29 (according to Vollmer & Milham).
          >
          > Best regards
          >
          > RM
          >
          > From: RM
          > Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2012 8:36 PM
          > To: mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com
          > Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)
          >
          > Well, we don�t know exactly when the Apicius collection has been compiled
          > but it is quite sure that has been compiled from a base of earlier recipes
          > from which about a third is to be considered to be from an original
          > cookbook probabely written by the same Apicius who has been mentioned in
          > Plinius� Naturalis Historia (see Brandt: �Untersuchungen zum r�mischen
          > Kochbuch� in Philologus Suppl. XIX, 3). From the Historia Augusta we learn
          > that Aelius Verus who died in 138 took three books into his bed: Amores by
          > Ovid, Apicius and Martial. We may believe this or not. If we believe it
          > there should have been an edition of Apicius at those times. I didn�t say
          > that Apicius was the only one who ever mentioned �liquamen� � I said he was
          > the only one who used it in this sense in antiquity, Vegetius and
          > Pelagonius lived in very late antiquity, but you wouldn�t find the term
          > before Columella where it signified just a liquid. The question is
          > therefore if your �liquamen�, that may differ from �garum�, was invented
          > after the 1st or 2nd century. There is no doubt that there were many
          > different types and qualities of garum (�... , creveruntque genera ad
          > infinitum, ...� Plin. NH 31, 95). Plinius tells us that Apicius used the so
          > called �garum sociorum� which is just a type of garum. In his Naturalis
          > Historia Plinius mentioned �garum� sometimes � liquamen never. I personally
          > believe that Plinius did know very well what he was writing about in book
          > 31 where he describes the production of �garum� � there he calls it a
          > �liquor� (not �liquamen� of course). What you can find in the Diocletian�s
          > Price Edict are two terms (3.6): �garou ge�matos prwte�ou� in Greek,
          > �liquaminis primi� in Latin � there the word �liquamen� appears as a simple
          > translation of �garon� (why do you think it should be �garos�?). The
          > Geoponika, of course, has been compiled 800 years later, using authors of
          > the late antiquity but it is very interesting that in the Geoponika the
          > Latin word �liquamen� appears twice as �t� kalo�menon likouamen� (=�the so
          > called liquamen�) in the chapter "Garwn piohsis" (20, 46, 1+2).
          >
          > Well, I better stop here because it would end up with some kind of endless
          > discussion. There is � in my opinion � no real evidence for any difference
          > of liquamen and garum, especially if we consider the Price Edict and the
          > Geoponika. I think �liquamen� is just a word that may have been introduced
          > by people like Apicius as a terminus technicus to substitute �garum� in
          > technical language and then spread more and more until Anthimus did only
          > use the term �liquamen� ("Nam liquamen ex omni parte prohibimus."). Even
          > the �so called liquamen� in the Geoponika leads to this direction.
          >
          > Best regards
          >
          > RM
          > From: mailto:sallygrain%40aol.com
          > Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2012 5:06 PM
          > To: mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com
          > Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)
          >
          > OK
          >
          > garum liquamen and the differences: i recently presented a paper at the
          > British School at Rome to archaeologist of the fish trade in the Med. and
          > therefore what follows is a pressi of what i said to them
          >
          > To start with you talk about Apicius as if he was the sole author and
          > originator of the text when it is clear from our textual analysis that the
          > recipe collection has multiple authors and they are slave cooks rather than
          > a single gourmet. In terms of food at this level there were consumers and
          > producers and it is the producers - the cooks - who we must trust to use
          > the terminology correctly. You cannot argue that Apicius wrote this or that
          > way, logically all the slave cooks wrote liquamen rather than garum for a
          > reason. Equally you cannot place Apicius as a text in the late Empire
          > reflecting a late usage for fish sauce. The terms used in it must reflect
          > the way in which cooks expressed themselves throughout the classical
          > period. The whole argument and justification for Vulgar Latin/Late Latin is
          > based on elite usage. You say garum was the more commonplace term but in
          > fact it is the other way round: Caelius Aurelianus says that the vulgar
          > latin term in every day usage is liquamen. You also state that liquamen
          > only occurs in Apicius but this is not the case. It is found in the Greek
          > agricultural manual The Geoponica - you do all know that Andrew Dalby has
          > recently published a new translation of this dont you ? - where it is a
          > direct translation of the Greek garon but wait ...garon does not
          > necessarily mean garum. It is also found frequently along with garum in the
          > same veterinary recipe collections, particularly Vegetius and Pelagonius.
          > (Pelagonius: liquamen: 9; 11.2; 13;98; 455; 457, garum: 428;13. Vegetius
          > liquamen: 1.10.1; 1.17.10, 16; 2.91.2; 2.108.2; 2.132.4; 4.6.1, garum:
          > 2.28.8; 3.28.10). In Galen it is also clear that two sauces were used: he
          > refers simply to garon many times but only once or twice to garon melan. We
          > have two names and two sauces so there shouldn't have been a problem!
          >
          > (Pelagonius: liquamen: 9; 11.2; 13;98; 455; 457, garum: 428;13. Vegetius
          > liquamen: 1.10.1; 1.17.10, 16; 2.91.2; 2.108.2; 2.132.4; 4.6.1, garum:
          > 2.28.8; 3.28.10). In Galen it is also clear that two sauces were used: he
          > refers simply to garon many times but only once or twice to garon melan. We
          > have two names and two sauces so there shouldn't have been a problem!
          >
          > Apicius - this is the title not the author - is an organic collection of
          > recipes originally compiled, in it's earliest form, in Greek and we
          > consider this to be in the late 1st century AD and possibly even earlier.
          > We see no evidence of a formal publication date, only a finish date which
          > is clearly 5/6th century. The chapter heading are in Greek and there are
          > numerous terms that are not translated but transliterated i.e the Greek
          > endings are converted into Latin endings so oenogaron: the Greek sauce made
          > from the original Greek fish sauce and wine becomes oenogarum. Bare in mind
          > the whole idea of fish sauce was originally Greek
          >
          > So if the cooks dont use garum qua garum one has to ask why? At this point
          > I am pasting from the delivered paper
          >
          > What we first must do is acknowledge the presence of a blood and viscera
          > sauce in the Ancient Mediterranean cuisine that we think of as Roman food.
          > This sauce was a strong black and bloody condiment called in Greek garon
          > melan or haimation that I believe was almost certainly handled by the
          > consumer at table. This sauce was completely separate to the primary
          > product in terms of archaeology (the amphora and fish bones) which was a
          > cooking sauce made from whole-fish with extra viscera which provided
          > enzymes which aided the liquefaction of the muscle tissue.
          > The development and use of the primary product: a fish sauce made with
          > whole fish, initially began in Greece and was a simple sauce made of very
          > small fish (otherwise of no value) and salt used in everyday cooking. It is
          > clear from references in 3rd century new comedy in Athens that this sauce
          > was used with oil and vinegar or wine as a dressing for vegetables and
          > pulses and was not considered particularly elite. My colleague Andrew Dalby
          > has stated it to be a commonplace ingredient and it is noteworthy that
          > Archestratus, the 2nd century Greek gourmet poet writing from Sicily about
          > the best fish does not mention fish sauce at all. Later Galen in the 2nd
          > Century AD is also suggesting the use of garos in dressing of oil and
          > vinegar to accompany simple vegetables. The Apicius recipes collection
          > includes a whole section on vegetables which are also largely accompanied
          > by oil, wine and fish sauce. These simple blended sauces are basically like
          > vinaigrette and are throughout the Apicius recipe text in various forms.
          > The most common was an oenogarum a transliterated term from the Greek. In
          > fact when oenogarum is translated into Latin - it is found in Ps. Gargilius
          > Martialis recipe - it appears as Confectio liquaminis. So there rearly is
          > no garum in Apicius. This means of cause that there is no blood and viscera
          > garum, because as a table sauce it was used on food rather than in the
          > cooking and was also used to make elite oenogarum that may have been
          > blended at table by the gourmet or slaves attendants.
          >
          > This simple Greek whole fish sauce almost certainly came to Rome as garon
          > transliterated into garum but was still this simple liquefied fish sauce.
          > As fish sauce became popular in Rome the elite were concerned with
          > differentiating their foods from everybody else�s and I believe they may
          > have instigated new developments in fish sauce types, one of which was the
          > blood and viscera sauce and one was the use of much larger fish that did
          > have a market value such as mackerel and larger clupeidae and sparidae
          > which could have been used as salted fish.
          > I believe the confusion over the terminology occurred when the elite
          > retained the term garum - the transliterated and now fashionable Greek term
          > to designate their new table sauce made from blood and viscera and the
          > manufacturer, trader , merchant and cook had to coin a new term in Latin to
          > designate the original and commonplace fish sauce, called garon made from
          > whole fish. This was liquamen, the derivation of which is �to liquefy so it
          > is aptly titled.
          > We have mentioned the absence of garum from Apicius but we must also
          > mention the absence of the separate Latin blood garum from Diocletians
          > price edict in 301 AD . Here liquamen is equivalent to garos not garum just
          > as we find in the Geoponica. These two absences are of cause the primary
          > reason for the 'single sauce hypothesis' advovated by Curtis. If however
          > you see these absences as evidence that the blood garum was no longer
          > sufficiently popular in the early 4th century AD to warrant its own price
          > on the edict or a mention in the recipes, then the later dominance of
          > liquamen is explained. In fact (a guess) I believe the elite blood viscera
          > garum had a relatively small market in comparison to liquamen and was made
          > to appear more important because of the unusually close view we get of the
          > elite at table in the early empire through satire. It was still made in the
          > late empire as we know Ausonius acquired a jar in the mid 4th century but
          > it seems it was a special delivery and therefore probably not readily
          > available in southern France, and he is also very confused as to what to
          > call it!
          > The original Greek sauce � garos equivalent to liquamen - remained the
          > primary product. We can I think come to see how it was that later sources
          > began to say that garum was liquamen. Caelius Aurelianus says that the
          > vulgar latin term in every day usage is liquamen � I don�t think he means
          > just the poor here - and the elite prefer garum but in principle it�s the
          > same product. if Pliny can fail to see the two sauces when it was popular,
          > when the blood sauce has become rare it would seem quite logical to revert
          > to the earlier usage and make the assumption that everyone has - ancient
          > and modern - that the Greek and Latin meant the same thing'.
          > note: I have not pasted the bit from Pliny but he is the cause of most of
          > the confusion as he conflates both sauces into one. His elite expensive
          > garum is made from viscera and most interpretations of his definition of
          > fish sauce presupposed that he also meant to say small fish as he goes on
          > to suggest that allec was the residue of garum but the blood viscera sauce
          > has no bones or fish paste to make an allec. Only the primary fish sauce
          > generates a fish paste.
          > Hope this helps. It is a theory i will own but a thoroughly rational and
          > logical one according to the archaeologists (and Robert Curtis who has been
          > an adviser), I spoke to and they will be moving forward in analysing
          > amphorae shapes and fish bone residues with the idea that there were two
          > basic types of sauce in the 1st century AD when all the archaeology is most
          > prolific.
          >
          > Sally Grainger
          >
          > -----Original Message-----
          > From: RM <mailto:apicius%40maierphil.de>;;;
          > To: Apicius <mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com>;;;
          > Sent: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 14:05
          > Subject: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)
          >
          > I am sorry, but are you really sure that there is any evidence for a
          > difference between garum and the Apician �liquamen�? �liquamen� is a word
          > used only by Apicius instead of the more common word �garum�. A good
          > example is the following recipe:
          > �Hydrogarata isicia sic facies: teres piper, ligusticum, pyrethrum
          > minimum, suffundes liquamen. temperas aquam cisterninam, dum inducet,
          > exinanies in caccabo, et tum isicia ad vaporem ignis pones, ut caleat, et
          > sic sorbendum inferes.�
          > This means that to make �hydrogarum� Apicius used �liquamen� et �aqua
          > cisternina�. �liquamen� for Apicius is just a terminus technicus. The word
          > �liquamen� has been used in antiquity just by Columella (who used it in a
          > different context) and once by Flavius Vopiscus Syracusius on Aurelius
          > where it meant �garum�. The hypothesis of a difference between garum and
          > liquamen sounds interesting but I think Apicius just introduced the word
          > �liquamen� as a t.t. in order to substitute the common word �garum�.
          >
          > Best regards
          >
          > RM
          >
          > From: mailto:sallygrain%40aol.com
          > Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2012 1:49 PM
          > To: mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com
          > Subject: Re: [Apicius] Recent Cook Out
          >
          > good to know the dishes worked
          > Can i just point out - as i am a bit of a stickler for such things - that
          > the recipes in Apicius use the word liquamen rather than garum because they
          > represent two different sauces - one whole-fish sauce, one a blood viscera
          > fish sauce and I don't want to see an inaccurate ref that puports to be
          > from my book where you have changed liquamen into garum in the belief that
          > they are synonymous - they were not.
          >
          > thanks so much
          > sally
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
          >
          >


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Justin Mansfield
          ... Distracted? I ll say! Sorry about that, please read useless, tiny fish. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          Message 4 of 25 , Jul 20 11:51 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            >
            > ... But it was originally made specifically from useless, tiny finish.
            >
            >
            Distracted? I'll say!

            Sorry about that, please read "useless, tiny fish."


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • sallygrain@aol.com
            Hi justine and all this is getting wonderfully complicated but as i have always wanted to get to grips with what Pliny says here i do think we might continue
            Message 5 of 25 , Jul 21 10:27 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi justine and all

              this is getting wonderfully complicated but as i have always wanted to get to grips with what Pliny says here i do think we might continue if no one minds ? Take care of your feast first by all means! Hope it goes well.

              Your theory is probably not on the case as it is pretty certain that allec was made specifically, that was somewhat the point of the
              sentance. It was a residue - ie a fish paste derived from the manufacture of fish sauce and now it is being made especially from very small fish - tiny 'born of rain ' he says which means no bones at all. It resembles pissalat - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pissalat and anchovy pate generally as it is not fermented and made to be a fish paste. There are a few ref to this product becoming a desirable item at table though it is always difficult to comprehend. Martial epi gram III. 77 where capers and onions are served with allec. There is another but i cannot find it where a women devoures a platter of allec. He then goes on to say that allec was then a luxury item when made from bone free sea food such as oysters and mullet livers etc.

              So i would maintain that the allec was still enumerable i.e. made with every kind of fish and sea food and that seems to be the point here.

              i have some what lost the point of the original argument - no - it was that garum or liquamen could be enumerable in kind but i would maintain that the differences are all about what kind of fish are used - the process remains either to liquefy = liquamen or to take the juice from = blood viscera garum

              sally


              -----Original Message-----
              From: Justin Mansfield <iustinus@...>
              To: Apicius <Apicius@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 18:55
              Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)


              >
              Justine jump in when ever you want!

              have been summoned. I just hope you're pronouncing "Justine" as three
              yllables! ;)
              Sorry, I haven't had time to follow this debate in any detail: I'm rushing
              round in my final days before the Conventiculum Latinum Lexintoniense,
              hich is of course when I have my annual Cena Romana (Incidentally I tried
              aking Columella's recipe for pickled purslane... but I suspect I did it
              rong. We'll see how it tastes when I open the jar) Not much focus to spare
              n so detailed an argument.
              This just gets worse when I look at the text:
              (�In process of time, alex has become quite an object of luxury, and the
              various kinds that are now made are infinite in number. The same, too, with
              garum, which is now prepared in imitation of the colour of old honied wine,
              and so pleasantly flavoured as to admit of being taken as a drink'
              This is very poor translation i think - Justine jump in when ever you
              want! 'The same too' does not sound right at all for secuti garum The loeb
              has 'for instance' implying a single example ' garum for instance ...
              rather than suggesting that garum had multiple varieties as well.

              y vey. My first instinct is indeed "for instance," but yeah, given that
              ts most basic meaning is "just as," I can see how "the same, too" is a
              ossibility. But as is so often the case with Pliny it's not so much a
              uestion of what the word could or could not mean, the real problem is
              rying to follow his stream of thought. For starters:
              *Vitium huius est allex atque inperfecta nec colata faex. coepit tamen et
              rivatim ex inutili pisciculo minimoque confici. *
              ts blemish and unfinished, unstrained dregs is *allex*. But it was
              riginally made specifically from useless, tiny finish.
              What was originally made this way? On first reading it sounds like he means
              allex*. But I'm pretty sure the topic of this entire paragraph is fish
              auce in general (the *huius* of the first sentence), not the *vitium *thereof.
              n other words, the "it" in the second sentence refers back not to *allex* but
              ather the "Its" of the first sentence! I mean, why would he be talking
              bout what kind of fish they use to make lees with in *Forum Iulii*, right?
              ou don't set out to make *faex*, *faex* is a byproduct of something else.
              If you still think those sentences are only about *allex*, then yeah, he
              ust be saying something like "[*allex*] became a luxury, and its varieties
              rew to be innumerable, *just as* [happened with] *garum*, which
              as [nowadays] been diluted to the color of old *mulsum*, and such
              weetness that you could drink it."
              But if you accept that he's talking about fish sauce in general, he seems
              o be saying "[fish sauce] became a luxury, and its varieties grew to be
              nnumerable, *for instance* [the variety of] *garum* which is diluted to
              he color of old *mulsum*, and such sweetness that you could drink it."
              It seems to me pretty clear that the latter translation is preferable, and
              his jibes well with my point that the rest of the paragraph makes better
              ense if we assume the sentence about *allex* was essentially a
              arenthetical gloss.
              I tell you, every time I read Pliny the Elder something like this happens:
              very sentence in the paragraph could be interpreted in multiple ways, and
              he key is finding the thread so that it all makes sense.
              As I said, I'm very distracted right now, so please forgive any sloppiness,
              r inattention to what has already been said.
              Valete
              On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 12:06 PM, <sallygrain@...> wrote:
              > **



              Hi

              'So why shouldn�t Pliny be right? I am sure that there were not only the
              two forms of �garum� that you mentioned but a lot of other varieties'

              The varieties are determined by the species of fish, their quality and
              origin. The fish bone evidence from ship wrecks which I have studies
              extensively reveal tiny anchovy or sardine or a mixed variety of small
              clupiedae and sparidae and they would make one kind - the most basic i
              think - of fish sauce, while mackerel is common in fish sauce amphorae and
              the tituli picti make it clear this was the best. Apicius - the gourmet
              rather than the recipe text - suggest mullet or nd we can assume any other
              specified and selected fish would make a superior kind. The subsequent
              sauce would not be named by its fish type but by the process it underwent.
              To liquefy i.e. liquamen or the juice from them i.e. the blood and viscera
              sauce.



              You still havnt explained to me how the manufacturer, merchant trader and
              cook was able to distinguish between the blood and viscera sauce and the
              whole fish variety. You cannot deny the existance of a blood viscera sauce
              - its in the Geoponica as a distinctly separate entity and it is also
              defined as 'luxury' Martial 'made from the blood of a still breathing
              mackerel' afirms its existance. As i said it matters not one jot what the
              stupid ill informed gourmet thinks he is eating - the manufacturer needs to
              be able to distinguish between them. You note that liquamen is rare and
              late but it is also only found in didactic texts written by the
              practitioner and producer - slave cook, vet, writers of agricultural
              material. The same kind of people as the manufacturer and merchant who need
              specific and precise terminology to identify their products. The absence of
              liquamen in elite literature as I have already said is due to the obvious
              fact that poets such as Martial etc consume garum at table and do not cook
              so they dont recognise the existence of a separate cooking sauce which is
              weaker.

              (�In process of time, alex has become quite an object of luxury, and the
              various kinds that are now made are infinite in number. The same, too, with
              garum, which is now prepared in imitation of the colour of old honied wine,
              and so pleasantly flavoured as to admit of being taken as a drink'

              This is very poor translation i think - Justine jump in when ever you
              want! 'The same too' does not sound right at all for secuti garum The loeb
              has 'for instance' implying a single example ' garum for instance ...
              rather than suggesting that garum had multiple varieties as well.

              'this implies that there were other, less praised types of garum � and
              that intestina and other parts of the fish were used'

              You cannot separate the blood and viscera here and suggest that blood is
              valuable and viscera not - thats utterly confused. The
              most prized type of garum was made from mackerel viscera and blood with
              salt and nothing else.

              'but the normal Latin word at the time of Ausonius was �liquamen� (which
              wasn�t an old Latin word and Ausonius obviously didn�t like it'
              You simply cannot say this, Its the worst kind of special pleading when
              your argument fails you. Ausonius didnt use the term liquamen because he
              didn't receive liquamen, he received garum He calls it liquor iste
              sociorum. 'that liquor of our allies' which directly links in with
              Martials' 'made from the blood of a still breathing mackerel' which he also
              calls garum sociorum, the most expensive kind of garum according to Pliny
              too, when garum is a blood/viscera sauce. Garum can also be cheap and
              cheerful and made from any old bit of fish blood and viscera.

              The crucial thing about the epigraphic evidence which you have failed to
              recognise is that in Pompeii there are amphorae with garum and there are
              amphorae with liquamen labels in the same context. This is indisputable
              evidence, that makes it absolutely clear, without a doubt, that for the
              people who made and bought fish sauce in Pompeii in 69 AD garum and
              liquamen represented different products. By the 4th century as i have
              already said the blood viscera sauce was insufficiently popular to warrant
              attention - in Apicius or the price edict and as a result the differences
              had ceased to mean anything which is why they appear to be the same in the
              late Empire

              all the best sally

              -----Original Message-----
              From: RM <apicius@...>
              To: Apicius <Apicius@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 0:18
              Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)

              Sorry for the late answer. I wasn�t at home yesterday and therefore not
              able to sit down and reply immediately.
              Meanwhile I had a look at some editions of the Naturalis Historia � one by
              Roderich K�nig with German translation, the other the one by John Bostock
              et al. included in Perseus (
              http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0137%3Abook%3D31%3Achapter%3D44).
              Essentially those two interpreted the passage as to be referred not only to
              allex but also to garum (�In process of time, alex has become quite an
              object of luxury, and the various kinds that are now made are infinite in
              number. The same, too, with garum, which is now prepared in imitation of
              the colour of old honied wine, and so pleasantly flavoured as to admit of
              being taken as a drink.� from: The Natural History. Pliny the Elder. John
              Bostock, M.D., F.R.S. H.T. Riley, Esq., B.A. London. Taylor and Francis,
              Red Lion Court, Fleet Street. 1855.). So, at least, I am not hopelessly
              alone with my interpretation.
              Certainly there were a lot of different types of garum during and before
              the 1st century and even after. Martial cites the garum made from the blood
              of scomber, Plinius said that the most praised garum was indeed made from
              scomber � this implies that there were other, less praised types of garum �
              and that intestina and other parts of the fish were used. The fishermen of
              Manilius seem to use tunny. Horace mentioned garum �de sucis piscis� (Hor.
              Serm. 2, 8, 46). But those citations are all about garum, not about
              liquamen because the word �liquamen� was a very new creation in the 1st
              century that hadn�t made yet its way into the language of Pliny, Horace,
              Seneca and Martial. Ausonius said that he wasn�t used to and couldn�t say
              the Latin word (�nec solere nec posse dicere�) for �garum� and that those
              who knew well old Latin and were disgusted with Greek vocabulary
              (�scientissimi veterum et Graeca vocabula fastidientes�) hadn�t a Latin
              word for it. So he called it �liquor iste sociorum� instead � but the
              normal Latin word at the time of Ausonius was �liquamen� (which wasn�t an
              old Latin word and Ausonius obviously didn�t like it; �muria� has been
              mentioned in a similar context by Plinius in 31, 94 � probabely this muria
              wasn�t just salty water). And this is what we can deduce also from the
              Price Edict: �garum� is doubtlessly a Greek word, equal to �garon�, and the
              correct Latin translation is �liquamen� at those times, i. e. at the
              beginning of the 4th century. As it is a legal text, what we find in the
              Price Edict is certainly not an arbitrary appellation. So if therein
              �liquamen� is the translation of �garon� (which is identical to the Latin
              �garum� which, according to Ausonius, is still a Greek word) why should we
              believe that there was a fundamental difference between those two? There
              were certainly varieties that may have had different trade names sometimes
              but the Geoponika show us that in late antiquity the word �likouamen� could
              substitute the original �garon� even in Greek. The same, of course in Apic.
              7, 13, 1: �ita ut piper cum liquamine teres� is an specification for �in
              garo piper<ato>� (I prefer this version because the other one is
              grammatically disputable and we have Petronius using a �garum piperatum� in
              Sat. 36, 3). Probabely this is an old recipe of the 1st century where
              someone added the explanation because he was in doubt if the people could
              understand what �garum piperatum� meant.
              From the references we have we can derive that the word �liquamen� has
              been created in the 1st century and was used more and more � perhaps driven
              by culinary experts like Apicius � until being an equivalent of the word
              �garum� at the beginning of the 4th century even in legal texts like the
              Price Edict. It has also been accepted as a synonym of �garon� in Greek as
              we see from the Geoponika. There are some detailled descriptions of the
              production of �garum� but only in the Geoponika we find the same for
              �likouamen� which in that context is to be considered a synonym of �garon�.
              The word �liquamen� is used in a similar way � i.e. as a translation of
              �garum� or �garon� � in the Price Edict and in Apic. 7.13.1. Well, we may
              get much more examplesfor �liquamen� and �garum� out of the epigraphic data
              base (http://oracle-vm.ku-eichstaett.de:8888/epigr/epigraphik_de) but we
              wouldn�t find many differences between �liquamen� and �garum� there. We
              have �liquamen optimum scombri� and �garum flos scombri� and so on. From my
              point of view it is not possible to clearly distinguish the both, �garum�
              and �liquamen�, as both appear to be exchangeable in various contexts. They
              vary in frequency of occurrence: �Garum� was used more frequently before
              the 2nd century, �liquamen� was used more frequently from the end of the
              1st century.

              Best wishes,

              Robert

              From: sallygrain@...
              Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2012 2:11 PM
              To: Apicius@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)

              Your ref to Pliny is as follows in English for the rest ' then allec
              became a luxury and its various kinds have come to be inumerable' These
              refer to enumerable kinds of allec or fish paste made from sea food and not
              neccesarily the liquid fish sauce derived from one kind of allec. The
              liquid fish sauce was not enumerable in kind but basically 2 types or 3 if
              you include muria 1, liquefied whole fish sauce. 2 fish blood and viscera
              3. brine from salted fish which corresponds to coluratura die alici from
              the Naples area as this is made with eviscerated salted anchovy.

              Ultimately then, you are basing your argument that liquamen is not a
              synonym for garum but is for garon on Apicius 7.13.1 which is one recipes
              out of 450+ That garum and liquamen appear in this recipes and only this
              one suggest to me that the pepper is ground with liquamen and them served
              with garum at table. Otherwise it makes no sence to use both terms. If they
              are there because whome ever wanted to translate the one with the other we
              would at least find this construction - using both terms more often in the
              rest of the text. The use of garum in the compound terms oenogarum,
              hydrogarum etc is not relavant as they are transliterated Greek.

              You almost get it - The generic term only exists in Greek In latin
              technically there is no generic term but as they are so similar many
              ancient as well as modern scholars assume that the generic function was
              transferred to the Latin when it was translated. I will even allow that
              some ancients used garum when they actually meant liquamen but the
              manufacturer, trader, merchant and cook never would have got them mixed up
              - one was black and bloody, dark and strong used in drops while the other
              was pale brown and used in quantity. There simply had to be a way to
              distinguish them in trade. The acetabulum little vinegar cup in some
              recipes (p 83 ff our edition) hold 60ml and was blended with a similar
              amount of wine and fish sauce. The resulting oenogarum was delicious as i
              am sure you know. I have made blood garum and it is disgusting in those
              quantities. Check out http://www.ishiri.jp/en/ for the Japanese squid
              blood and viscera fish sauce which is pitch black and smells distinctly of
              blood - iron in fact, a frind who was a nurse told me it smells of digested
              blood after smelling the human gut in surgery.

              You do know Ausonius' letter I am sure. He specifically says there is no
              latin word that he can use instead of garum which he rejects as its Greek
              in origin and he rejects Greek words. If liquamen was the equivelent of
              garum in Latin he would have no problem. Instead of cause he fuels our
              confussion with the use of muria which we cannot get tied up in now.

              sally

              -----Original Message-----
              From: RM <mailto:apicius%40maierphil.de>;
              To: Apicius <mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com>;
              Sent: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 0:15
              Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)

              Hi Sally,

              the fact that a lot of differt types of �garum� existed is obviously true
              but it is not my idea. This has already been reported by Pliny in the half
              sentence I cited before: �... , creveruntque genera ad infinitum, ...�
              (Plin. NH 31, 95). So why shouldn�t Pliny be right? I am sure that there
              were not only the two forms of �garum� that you mentioned but a lot of
              other varieties, too. So why shouldn�t they have been sold eventually under
              the same name �garum�? In the Price Edict and even in the Geoponika
              �liquamen� (or in Greek letters �likouamen�) is clearly a synonym /
              translation of the Greek word garon. The Price Edict has a first and a
              second quality of garon / liquamen. The name of both qualities was the same
              but to produce different qualities probabely the ingredients were somewhat
              different. And then there is also the Apicius recipe 7, 13, 1 garum and
              liquamen do mean exactly the same: �fungi farnei: elixi, calidi, exsiccati
              in garo piper<ato> accipiuntur, ita ut piper cum liquamine teres.� � I
              cited this from my own Apicius edition where it is numbered 7, 15, 1 (ed.
              Robert Maier, Reclam, Stuttgart 1991), the text of your edition has �piper�
              instead of �piper<ato>�. Unfortunately Manilius doesn�t tell us the names
              of what his fishermen were creating in the Astronomica 5, 667 sqq.
              To conclude: I think it�s an alluring hypothesis to believe in a real
              difference between �garum� and �liquamen� but it�s a hypothesis that lacks
              evidence. As we can deduce from the Price Edict and the Geoponika
              �liquamen� was a synonym at least of the Greek �garon� and probabely also
              of the Roman �garum�, as we see in Apic. 7, 13, 1. What we eventually could
              assume is that �liquamen� in some contexts might have been understood as a
              specific quality of �garum� (some filtered high quality �garum�) but there
              is certainly no general distinction. On the amphorae one should expect some
              trade names, as we use today the word �balsamico� for a specific type of
              vinegar, while the product class remains �vinegar�. So in our case the
              product class would be �garum� including more specific appellations like
              �garum sociorum�, �garum scombri�, �liquamen� etc. At the end �liquamen�
              was used as a general term (because everyone tends to use only the very
              best quality), just as it happened in the case of �iecur� which, at the
              end, was called always �ficatum� and became �fegato�, �foie� etc. in the
              different modern languages.

              Best wishes,

              Robert

              From: mailto:sallygrain%40aol.com
              Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 7:57 PM
              To: mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com
              Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)

              Hi

              Your approach to fish sauce is too simplistic I am afraid. Do you not even
              recognise the fact of a separate blood and viscera sauce different from the
              whole-fish sauce. They cannot both be garum!, the former black and bloody,
              the latter pale golden according to Pliny. They have different uses, the
              garon melan was used at table and so became a fashionable ingredient to
              discuss in satire, the cooking liquamen was only used in the kitchen by
              slaves and therefore was not recognised as a separate sauce by the elite.
              The tituli picti associated with amphorae from Pompeii and Rome reflect the
              frequent usage of liquamen in the 1st century along side garum. We find
              garum scombri flos and liquamen flos in contempory sites: they have to mean
              two separate sauces, there is no way out of that one!

              sally

              -----Original Message-----
              From: RM <mailto:apicius%40maierphil.de>;;
              To: Apicius <mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com>;;
              Sent: Sun, 15 Jul 2012 22:24
              Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)

              Just a little correction and an addition: The Geoponika have been written
              down about 600 years after the Price Edict (not 800!). The word �garum� is
              found twice within the Apicius recipes, in 7, 13, 1 (with �liquamen� in the
              same recipe!) and Exc. 29 (according to Vollmer & Milham).

              Best regards

              RM

              From: RM
              Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2012 8:36 PM
              To: mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com
              Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)

              Well, we don�t know exactly when the Apicius collection has been compiled
              but it is quite sure that has been compiled from a base of earlier recipes
              from which about a third is to be considered to be from an original
              cookbook probabely written by the same Apicius who has been mentioned in
              Plinius� Naturalis Historia (see Brandt: �Untersuchungen zum r�mischen
              Kochbuch� in Philologus Suppl. XIX, 3). From the Historia Augusta we learn
              that Aelius Verus who died in 138 took three books into his bed: Amores by
              Ovid, Apicius and Martial. We may believe this or not. If we believe it
              there should have been an edition of Apicius at those times. I didn�t say
              that Apicius was the only one who ever mentioned �liquamen� � I said he was
              the only one who used it in this sense in antiquity, Vegetius and
              Pelagonius lived in very late antiquity, but you wouldn�t find the term
              before Columella where it signified just a liquid. The question is
              therefore if your �liquamen�, that may differ from �garum�, was invented
              after the 1st or 2nd century. There is no doubt that there were many
              different types and qualities of garum (�... , creveruntque genera ad
              infinitum, ...� Plin. NH 31, 95). Plinius tells us that Apicius used the so
              called �garum sociorum� which is just a type of garum. In his Naturalis
              Historia Plinius mentioned �garum� sometimes � liquamen never. I personally
              believe that Plinius did know very well what he was writing about in book
              31 where he describes the production of �garum� � there he calls it a
              �liquor� (not �liquamen� of course). What you can find in the Diocletian�s
              Price Edict are two terms (3.6): �garou ge�matos prwte�ou� in Greek,
              �liquaminis primi� in Latin � there the word �liquamen� appears as a simple
              translation of �garon� (why do you think it should be �garos�?). The
              Geoponika, of course, has been compiled 800 years later, using authors of
              the late antiquity but it is very interesting that in the Geoponika the
              Latin word �liquamen� appears twice as �t� kalo�menon likouamen� (=�the so
              called liquamen�) in the chapter "Garwn piohsis" (20, 46, 1+2).

              Well, I better stop here because it would end up with some kind of endless
              discussion. There is � in my opinion � no real evidence for any difference
              of liquamen and garum, especially if we consider the Price Edict and the
              Geoponika. I think �liquamen� is just a word that may have been introduced
              by people like Apicius as a terminus technicus to substitute �garum� in
              technical language and then spread more and more until Anthimus did only
              use the term �liquamen� ("Nam liquamen ex omni parte prohibimus."). Even
              the �so called liquamen� in the Geoponika leads to this direction.

              Best regards

              RM
              From: mailto:sallygrain%40aol.com
              Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2012 5:06 PM
              To: mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com
              Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)

              OK

              garum liquamen and the differences: i recently presented a paper at the
              British School at Rome to archaeologist of the fish trade in the Med. and
              therefore what follows is a pressi of what i said to them

              To start with you talk about Apicius as if he was the sole author and
              originator of the text when it is clear from our textual analysis that the
              recipe collection has multiple authors and they are slave cooks rather than
              a single gourmet. In terms of food at this level there were consumers and
              producers and it is the producers - the cooks - who we must trust to use
              the terminology correctly. You cannot argue that Apicius wrote this or that
              way, logically all the slave cooks wrote liquamen rather than garum for a
              reason. Equally you cannot place Apicius as a text in the late Empire
              reflecting a late usage for fish sauce. The terms used in it must reflect
              the way in which cooks expressed themselves throughout the classical
              period. The whole argument and justification for Vulgar Latin/Late Latin is
              based on elite usage. You say garum was the more commonplace term but in
              fact it is the other way round: Caelius Aurelianus says that the vulgar
              latin term in every day usage is liquamen. You also state that liquamen
              only occurs in Apicius but this is not the case. It is found in the Greek
              agricultural manual The Geoponica - you do all know that Andrew Dalby has
              recently published a new translation of this dont you ? - where it is a
              direct translation of the Greek garon but wait ...garon does not
              necessarily mean garum. It is also found frequently along with garum in the
              same veterinary recipe collections, particularly Vegetius and Pelagonius.
              (Pelagonius: liquamen: 9; 11.2; 13;98; 455; 457, garum: 428;13. Vegetius
              liquamen: 1.10.1; 1.17.10, 16; 2.91.2; 2.108.2; 2.132.4; 4.6.1, garum:
              2.28.8; 3.28.10). In Galen it is also clear that two sauces were used: he
              refers simply to garon many times but only once or twice to garon melan. We
              have two names and two sauces so there shouldn't have been a problem!

              (Pelagonius: liquamen: 9; 11.2; 13;98; 455; 457, garum: 428;13. Vegetius
              liquamen: 1.10.1; 1.17.10, 16; 2.91.2; 2.108.2; 2.132.4; 4.6.1, garum:
              2.28.8; 3.28.10). In Galen it is also clear that two sauces were used: he
              refers simply to garon many times but only once or twice to garon melan. We
              have two names and two sauces so there shouldn't have been a problem!

              Apicius - this is the title not the author - is an organic collection of
              recipes originally compiled, in it's earliest form, in Greek and we
              consider this to be in the late 1st century AD and possibly even earlier.
              We see no evidence of a formal publication date, only a finish date which
              is clearly 5/6th century. The chapter heading are in Greek and there are
              numerous terms that are not translated but transliterated i.e the Greek
              endings are converted into Latin endings so oenogaron: the Greek sauce made
              from the original Greek fish sauce and wine becomes oenogarum. Bare in mind
              the whole idea of fish sauce was originally Greek

              So if the cooks dont use garum qua garum one has to ask why? At this point
              I am pasting from the delivered paper

              What we first must do is acknowledge the presence of a blood and viscera
              sauce in the Ancient Mediterranean cuisine that we think of as Roman food.
              This sauce was a strong black and bloody condiment called in Greek garon
              melan or haimation that I believe was almost certainly handled by the
              consumer at table. This sauce was completely separate to the primary
              product in terms of archaeology (the amphora and fish bones) which was a
              cooking sauce made from whole-fish with extra viscera which provided
              enzymes which aided the liquefaction of the muscle tissue.
              The development and use of the primary product: a fish sauce made with
              whole fish, initially began in Greece and was a simple sauce made of very
              small fish (otherwise of no value) and salt used in everyday cooking. It is
              clear from references in 3rd century new comedy in Athens that this sauce
              was used with oil and vinegar or wine as a dressing for vegetables and
              pulses and was not considered particularly elite. My colleague Andrew Dalby
              has stated it to be a commonplace ingredient and it is noteworthy that
              Archestratus, the 2nd century Greek gourmet poet writing from Sicily about
              the best fish does not mention fish sauce at all. Later Galen in the 2nd
              Century AD is also suggesting the use of garos in dressing of oil and
              vinegar to accompany simple vegetables. The Apicius recipes collection
              includes a whole section on vegetables which are also largely accompanied
              by oil, wine and fish sauce. These simple blended sauces are basically like
              vinaigrette and are throughout the Apicius recipe text in various forms.
              The most common was an oenogarum a transliterated term from the Greek. In
              fact when oenogarum is translated into Latin - it is found in Ps. Gargilius
              Martialis recipe - it appears as Confectio liquaminis. So there rearly is
              no garum in Apicius. This means of cause that there is no blood and viscera
              garum, because as a table sauce it was used on food rather than in the
              cooking and was also used to make elite oenogarum that may have been
              blended at table by the gourmet or slaves attendants.

              This simple Greek whole fish sauce almost certainly came to Rome as garon
              transliterated into garum but was still this simple liquefied fish sauce.
              As fish sauce became popular in Rome the elite were concerned with
              differentiating their foods from everybody else�s and I believe they may
              have instigated new developments in fish sauce types, one of which was the
              blood and viscera sauce and one was the use of much larger fish that did
              have a market value such as mackerel and larger clupeidae and sparidae
              which could have been used as salted fish.
              I believe the confusion over the terminology occurred when the elite
              retained the term garum - the transliterated and now fashionable Greek term
              to designate their new table sauce made from blood and viscera and the
              manufacturer, trader , merchant and cook had to coin a new term in Latin to
              designate the original and commonplace fish sauce, called garon made from
              whole fish. This was liquamen, the derivation of which is �to liquefy so it
              is aptly titled.
              We have mentioned the absence of garum from Apicius but we must also
              mention the absence of the separate Latin blood garum from Diocletians
              price edict in 301 AD . Here liquamen is equivalent to garos not garum just
              as we find in the Geoponica. These two absences are of cause the primary
              reason for the 'single sauce hypothesis' advovated by Curtis. If however
              you see these absences as evidence that the blood garum was no longer
              sufficiently popular in the early 4th century AD to warrant its own price
              on the edict or a mention in the recipes, then the later dominance of
              liquamen is explained. In fact (a guess) I believe the elite blood viscera
              garum had a relatively small market in comparison to liquamen and was made
              to appear more important because of the unusually close view we get of the
              elite at table in the early empire through satire. It was still made in the
              late empire as we know Ausonius acquired a jar in the mid 4th century but
              it seems it was a special delivery and therefore probably not readily
              available in southern France, and he is also very confused as to what to
              call it!
              The original Greek sauce � garos equivalent to liquamen - remained the
              primary product. We can I think come to see how it was that later sources
              began to say that garum was liquamen. Caelius Aurelianus says that the
              vulgar latin term in every day usage is liquamen � I don�t think he means
              just the poor here - and the elite prefer garum but in principle it�s the
              same product. if Pliny can fail to see the two sauces when it was popular,
              when the blood sauce has become rare it would seem quite logical to revert
              to the earlier usage and make the assumption that everyone has - ancient
              and modern - that the Greek and Latin meant the same thing'.
              note: I have not pasted the bit from Pliny but he is the cause of most of
              the confusion as he conflates both sauces into one. His elite expensive
              garum is made from viscera and most interpretations of his definition of
              fish sauce presupposed that he also meant to say small fish as he goes on
              to suggest that allec was the residue of garum but the blood viscera sauce
              has no bones or fish paste to make an allec. Only the primary fish sauce
              generates a fish paste.
              Hope this helps. It is a theory i will own but a thoroughly rational and
              logical one according to the archaeologists (and Robert Curtis who has been
              an adviser), I spoke to and they will be moving forward in analysing
              amphorae shapes and fish bone residues with the idea that there were two
              basic types of sauce in the 1st century AD when all the archaeology is most
              prolific.

              Sally Grainger

              -----Original Message-----
              From: RM <mailto:apicius%40maierphil.de>;;;
              To: Apicius <mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com>;;;
              Sent: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 14:05
              Subject: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)

              I am sorry, but are you really sure that there is any evidence for a
              difference between garum and the Apician �liquamen�? �liquamen� is a word
              used only by Apicius instead of the more common word �garum�. A good
              example is the following recipe:
              �Hydrogarata isicia sic facies: teres piper, ligusticum, pyrethrum
              minimum, suffundes liquamen. temperas aquam cisterninam, dum inducet,
              exinanies in caccabo, et tum isicia ad vaporem ignis pones, ut caleat, et
              sic sorbendum inferes.�
              This means that to make �hydrogarum� Apicius used �liquamen� et �aqua
              cisternina�. �liquamen� for Apicius is just a terminus technicus. The word
              �liquamen� has been used in antiquity just by Columella (who used it in a
              different context) and once by Flavius Vopiscus Syracusius on Aurelius
              where it meant �garum�. The hypothesis of a difference between garum and
              liquamen sounds interesting but I think Apicius just introduced the word
              �liquamen� as a t.t. in order to substitute the common word �garum�.

              Best regards

              RM

              From: mailto:sallygrain%40aol.com
              Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2012 1:49 PM
              To: mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com
              Subject: Re: [Apicius] Recent Cook Out

              good to know the dishes worked
              Can i just point out - as i am a bit of a stickler for such things - that
              the recipes in Apicius use the word liquamen rather than garum because they
              represent two different sauces - one whole-fish sauce, one a blood viscera
              fish sauce and I don't want to see an inaccurate ref that puports to be
              from my book where you have changed liquamen into garum in the belief that
              they are synonymous - they were not.

              thanks so much
              sally

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




              Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

              ------------------------------------
              Post message: Apicius@yahoogroups.com
              nsubscribe: Apicius-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              ist owner: Apicius-owner@yahoogroups.com
              ahoo! Groups Links
              Individual Email | Traditional
              http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Phoenix
              Salve Iustino, I have a nice small crop of white goosefoot (lambs quarters) in my garden. You are welcome to it if it can help you with a second preparation
              Message 6 of 25 , Jul 21 11:54 AM
              • 0 Attachment
                Salve Iustino,

                I have a nice small crop of white goosefoot (lambs' quarters) in my
                garden.
                You are welcome to it if it can help you with a second preparation for
                the C.L.L.

                It is very nice raw or cooked.

                Good luck with your purslane pickles.

                Vale,
                Demetria


                --- In Apicius@yahoogroups.com, Justin Mansfield <iustinus@...> wrote:
                >
                > >
                > > Justine jump in when ever you want!
                >
                >
                > I have been summoned. I just hope you're pronouncing "Justine" as
                three
                > syllables! ;)
                >
                > Sorry, I haven't had time to follow this debate in any detail: I'm
                rushing
                > around in my final days before the Conventiculum Latinum
                Lexintoniense,
                > which is of course when I have my annual Cena Romana (Incidentally I
                tried
                > making Columella's recipe for pickled purslane... but I suspect I did
                it
                > wrong. We'll see how it tastes when I open the jar) Not much focus to
                spare
                > on so detailed an argument.
                >
                > This just gets worse when I look at the text:
                >
                > (�In process of time, alex has become quite an object of luxury,
                and the
                > > various kinds that are now made are infinite in number. The same,
                too, with
                > > garum, which is now prepared in imitation of the colour of old
                honied wine,
                > > and so pleasantly flavoured as to admit of being taken as a drink'
                > > This is very poor translation i think - Justine jump in when ever
                you
                > > want! 'The same too' does not sound right at all for secuti garum
                The loeb
                > > has 'for instance' implying a single example ' garum for instance
                ...
                > > rather than suggesting that garum had multiple varieties as well.
                >
                >
                > Oy vey. My first instinct is indeed "for instance," but yeah, given
                that
                > its most basic meaning is "just as," I can see how "the same, too" is
                a
                > possibility. But as is so often the case with Pliny it's not so much
                a
                > question of what the word could or could not mean, the real problem is
                > trying to follow his stream of thought. For starters:
                >
                > *Vitium huius est allex atque inperfecta nec colata faex. coepit tamen
                et
                > privatim ex inutili pisciculo minimoque confici. *
                > Its blemish and unfinished, unstrained dregs is *allex*. But it was
                > originally made specifically from useless, tiny finish.
                >
                > What was originally made this way? On first reading it sounds like he
                means
                > *allex*. But I'm pretty sure the topic of this entire paragraph is
                fish
                > sauce in general (the *huius* of the first sentence), not the *vitium
                *thereof.
                > In other words, the "it" in the second sentence refers back not to
                *allex* but
                > rather the "Its" of the first sentence! I mean, why would he be
                talking
                > about what kind of fish they use to make lees with in *Forum Iulii*,
                right?
                > You don't set out to make *faex*, *faex* is a byproduct of something
                else.
                >
                > If you still think those sentences are only about *allex*, then yeah,
                he
                > must be saying something like "[*allex*] became a luxury, and its
                varieties
                > grew to be innumerable, *just as* [happened with] *garum*, which
                > has [nowadays] been diluted to the color of old *mulsum*, and such
                > sweetness that you could drink it."
                >
                > But if you accept that he's talking about fish sauce in general, he
                seems
                > to be saying "[fish sauce] became a luxury, and its varieties grew to
                be
                > innumerable, *for instance* [the variety of] *garum* which is diluted
                to
                > the color of old *mulsum*, and such sweetness that you could drink
                it."
                >
                > It seems to me pretty clear that the latter translation is preferable,
                and
                > this jibes well with my point that the rest of the paragraph makes
                better
                > sense if we assume the sentence about *allex* was essentially a
                > parenthetical gloss.
                >
                > I tell you, every time I read Pliny the Elder something like this
                happens:
                > every sentence in the paragraph could be interpreted in multiple ways,
                and
                > the key is finding the thread so that it all makes sense.
                >
                > As I said, I'm very distracted right now, so please forgive any
                sloppiness,
                > or inattention to what has already been said.
                >
                > Valete
                >
                > On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 12:06 PM, sallygrain@... wrote:
                >
                > > **
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > Hi
                > >
                > > 'So why shouldn�t Pliny be right? I am sure that there were not
                only the
                > > two forms of �garum� that you mentioned but a lot of other
                varieties'
                > >
                > > The varieties are determined by the species of fish, their quality
                and
                > > origin. The fish bone evidence from ship wrecks which I have studies
                > > extensively reveal tiny anchovy or sardine or a mixed variety of
                small
                > > clupiedae and sparidae and they would make one kind - the most basic
                i
                > > think - of fish sauce, while mackerel is common in fish sauce
                amphorae and
                > > the tituli picti make it clear this was the best. Apicius - the
                gourmet
                > > rather than the recipe text - suggest mullet or nd we can assume any
                other
                > > specified and selected fish would make a superior kind. The
                subsequent
                > > sauce would not be named by its fish type but by the process it
                underwent.
                > > To liquefy i.e. liquamen or the juice from them i.e. the blood and
                viscera
                > > sauce.
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > You still havnt explained to me how the manufacturer, merchant
                trader and
                > > cook was able to distinguish between the blood and viscera sauce and
                the
                > > whole fish variety. You cannot deny the existance of a blood viscera
                sauce
                > > - its in the Geoponica as a distinctly separate entity and it is
                also
                > > defined as 'luxury' Martial 'made from the blood of a still
                breathing
                > > mackerel' afirms its existance. As i said it matters not one jot
                what the
                > > stupid ill informed gourmet thinks he is eating - the manufacturer
                needs to
                > > be able to distinguish between them. You note that liquamen is rare
                and
                > > late but it is also only found in didactic texts written by the
                > > practitioner and producer - slave cook, vet, writers of agricultural
                > > material. The same kind of people as the manufacturer and merchant
                who need
                > > specific and precise terminology to identify their products. The
                absence of
                > > liquamen in elite literature as I have already said is due to the
                obvious
                > > fact that poets such as Martial etc consume garum at table and do
                not cook
                > > so they dont recognise the existence of a separate cooking sauce
                which is
                > > weaker.
                > >
                > > (�In process of time, alex has become quite an object of
                luxury, and the
                > > various kinds that are now made are infinite in number. The same,
                too, with
                > > garum, which is now prepared in imitation of the colour of old
                honied wine,
                > > and so pleasantly flavoured as to admit of being taken as a drink'
                > >
                > > This is very poor translation i think - Justine jump in when ever
                you
                > > want! 'The same too' does not sound right at all for secuti garum
                The loeb
                > > has 'for instance' implying a single example ' garum for instance
                ...
                > > rather than suggesting that garum had multiple varieties as well.
                > >
                > > 'this implies that there were other, less praised types of garum
                � and
                > > that intestina and other parts of the fish were used'
                > >
                > > You cannot separate the blood and viscera here and suggest that
                blood is
                > > valuable and viscera not - thats utterly confused. The
                > > most prized type of garum was made from mackerel viscera and blood
                with
                > > salt and nothing else.
                > >
                > > 'but the normal Latin word at the time of Ausonius was
                �liquamen� (which
                > > wasn�t an old Latin word and Ausonius obviously didn�t
                like it'
                > > You simply cannot say this, Its the worst kind of special pleading
                when
                > > your argument fails you. Ausonius didnt use the term liquamen
                because he
                > > didn't receive liquamen, he received garum He calls it liquor iste
                > > sociorum. 'that liquor of our allies' which directly links in with
                > > Martials' 'made from the blood of a still breathing mackerel' which
                he also
                > > calls garum sociorum, the most expensive kind of garum according to
                Pliny
                > > too, when garum is a blood/viscera sauce. Garum can also be cheap
                and
                > > cheerful and made from any old bit of fish blood and viscera.
                > >
                > > The crucial thing about the epigraphic evidence which you have
                failed to
                > > recognise is that in Pompeii there are amphorae with garum and there
                are
                > > amphorae with liquamen labels in the same context. This is
                indisputable
                > > evidence, that makes it absolutely clear, without a doubt, that for
                the
                > > people who made and bought fish sauce in Pompeii in 69 AD garum and
                > > liquamen represented different products. By the 4th century as i
                have
                > > already said the blood viscera sauce was insufficiently popular to
                warrant
                > > attention - in Apicius or the price edict and as a result the
                differences
                > > had ceased to mean anything which is why they appear to be the same
                in the
                > > late Empire
                > >
                > > all the best sally
                > >
                > > -----Original Message-----
                > > From: RM apicius@...
                > > To: Apicius Apicius@yahoogroups.com
                > > Sent: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 0:18
                > > Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)
                > >
                > > Sorry for the late answer. I wasn�t at home yesterday and
                therefore not
                > > able to sit down and reply immediately.
                > > Meanwhile I had a look at some editions of the Naturalis Historia
                � one by
                > > Roderich K�nig with German translation, the other the one by
                John Bostock
                > > et al. included in Perseus (
                > >
                http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.01\
                37%3Abook%3D31%3Achapter%3D44).
                > > Essentially those two interpreted the passage as to be referred not
                only to
                > > allex but also to garum (�In process of time, alex has become
                quite an
                > > object of luxury, and the various kinds that are now made are
                infinite in
                > > number. The same, too, with garum, which is now prepared in
                imitation of
                > > the colour of old honied wine, and so pleasantly flavoured as to
                admit of
                > > being taken as a drink.� from: The Natural History. Pliny the
                Elder. John
                > > Bostock, M.D., F.R.S. H.T. Riley, Esq., B.A. London. Taylor and
                Francis,
                > > Red Lion Court, Fleet Street. 1855.). So, at least, I am not
                hopelessly
                > > alone with my interpretation.
                > > Certainly there were a lot of different types of garum during and
                before
                > > the 1st century and even after. Martial cites the garum made from
                the blood
                > > of scomber, Plinius said that the most praised garum was indeed made
                from
                > > scomber � this implies that there were other, less praised
                types of garum �
                > > and that intestina and other parts of the fish were used. The
                fishermen of
                > > Manilius seem to use tunny. Horace mentioned garum �de sucis
                piscis� (Hor.
                > > Serm. 2, 8, 46). But those citations are all about garum, not about
                > > liquamen because the word �liquamen� was a very new
                creation in the 1st
                > > century that hadn�t made yet its way into the language of
                Pliny, Horace,
                > > Seneca and Martial. Ausonius said that he wasn�t used to and
                couldn�t say
                > > the Latin word (�nec solere nec posse dicere�) for
                �garum� and that those
                > > who knew well old Latin and were disgusted with Greek vocabulary
                > > (�scientissimi veterum et Graeca vocabula fastidientes�)
                hadn�t a Latin
                > > word for it. So he called it �liquor iste sociorum�
                instead � but the
                > > normal Latin word at the time of Ausonius was �liquamen�
                (which wasn�t an
                > > old Latin word and Ausonius obviously didn�t like it;
                �muria� has been
                > > mentioned in a similar context by Plinius in 31, 94 � probabely
                this muria
                > > wasn�t just salty water). And this is what we can deduce also
                from the
                > > Price Edict: �garum� is doubtlessly a Greek word, equal to
                �garon�, and the
                > > correct Latin translation is �liquamen� at those times, i.
                e. at the
                > > beginning of the 4th century. As it is a legal text, what we find in
                the
                > > Price Edict is certainly not an arbitrary appellation. So if therein
                > > �liquamen� is the translation of �garon� (which
                is identical to the Latin
                > > �garum� which, according to Ausonius, is still a Greek
                word) why should we
                > > believe that there was a fundamental difference between those two?
                There
                > > were certainly varieties that may have had different trade names
                sometimes
                > > but the Geoponika show us that in late antiquity the word
                �likouamen� could
                > > substitute the original �garon� even in Greek. The same,
                of course in Apic.
                > > 7, 13, 1: �ita ut piper cum liquamine teres� is an
                specification for �in
                > > garo piper<ato>� (I prefer this version because the other one
                is
                > > grammatically disputable and we have Petronius using a �garum
                piperatum� in
                > > Sat. 36, 3). Probabely this is an old recipe of the 1st century
                where
                > > someone added the explanation because he was in doubt if the people
                could
                > > understand what �garum piperatum� meant.
                > > From the references we have we can derive that the word
                �liquamen� has
                > > been created in the 1st century and was used more and more �
                perhaps driven
                > > by culinary experts like Apicius � until being an equivalent of
                the word
                > > �garum� at the beginning of the 4th century even in legal
                texts like the
                > > Price Edict. It has also been accepted as a synonym of
                �garon� in Greek as
                > > we see from the Geoponika. There are some detailled descriptions of
                the
                > > production of �garum� but only in the Geoponika we find
                the same for
                > > �likouamen� which in that context is to be considered a
                synonym of �garon�.
                > > The word �liquamen� is used in a similar way � i.e.
                as a translation of
                > > �garum� or �garon� � in the Price Edict and
                in Apic. 7.13.1. Well, we may
                > > get much more examplesfor �liquamen� and �garum�
                out of the epigraphic data
                > > base (http://oracle-vm.ku-eichstaett.de:8888/epigr/epigraphik_de)
                but we
                > > wouldn�t find many differences between �liquamen� and
                �garum� there. We
                > > have �liquamen optimum scombri� and �garum flos
                scombri� and so on. From my
                > > point of view it is not possible to clearly distinguish the both,
                �garum�
                > > and �liquamen�, as both appear to be exchangeable in
                various contexts. They
                > > vary in frequency of occurrence: �Garum� was used more
                frequently before
                > > the 2nd century, �liquamen� was used more frequently from
                the end of the
                > > 1st century.
                > >
                > > Best wishes,
                > >
                > > Robert
                > >
                > > From: sallygrain@...
                > > Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2012 2:11 PM
                > > To: Apicius@yahoogroups.com
                > > Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)
                > >
                > > Your ref to Pliny is as follows in English for the rest ' then allec
                > > became a luxury and its various kinds have come to be inumerable'
                These
                > > refer to enumerable kinds of allec or fish paste made from sea food
                and not
                > > neccesarily the liquid fish sauce derived from one kind of allec.
                The
                > > liquid fish sauce was not enumerable in kind but basically 2 types
                or 3 if
                > > you include muria 1, liquefied whole fish sauce. 2 fish blood and
                viscera
                > > 3. brine from salted fish which corresponds to coluratura die alici
                from
                > > the Naples area as this is made with eviscerated salted anchovy.
                > >
                > > Ultimately then, you are basing your argument that liquamen is not a
                > > synonym for garum but is for garon on Apicius 7.13.1 which is one
                recipes
                > > out of 450+ That garum and liquamen appear in this recipes and only
                this
                > > one suggest to me that the pepper is ground with liquamen and them
                served
                > > with garum at table. Otherwise it makes no sence to use both terms.
                If they
                > > are there because whome ever wanted to translate the one with the
                other we
                > > would at least find this construction - using both terms more often
                in the
                > > rest of the text. The use of garum in the compound terms oenogarum,
                > > hydrogarum etc is not relavant as they are transliterated Greek.
                > >
                > > You almost get it - The generic term only exists in Greek In latin
                > > technically there is no generic term but as they are so similar many
                > > ancient as well as modern scholars assume that the generic function
                was
                > > transferred to the Latin when it was translated. I will even allow
                that
                > > some ancients used garum when they actually meant liquamen but the
                > > manufacturer, trader, merchant and cook never would have got them
                mixed up
                > > - one was black and bloody, dark and strong used in drops while the
                other
                > > was pale brown and used in quantity. There simply had to be a way to
                > > distinguish them in trade. The acetabulum little vinegar cup in some
                > > recipes (p 83 ff our edition) hold 60ml and was blended with a
                similar
                > > amount of wine and fish sauce. The resulting oenogarum was delicious
                as i
                > > am sure you know. I have made blood garum and it is disgusting in
                those
                > > quantities. Check out http://www.ishiri.jp/en/ for the Japanese
                squid
                > > blood and viscera fish sauce which is pitch black and smells
                distinctly of
                > > blood - iron in fact, a frind who was a nurse told me it smells of
                digested
                > > blood after smelling the human gut in surgery.
                > >
                > > You do know Ausonius' letter I am sure. He specifically says there
                is no
                > > latin word that he can use instead of garum which he rejects as its
                Greek
                > > in origin and he rejects Greek words. If liquamen was the equivelent
                of
                > > garum in Latin he would have no problem. Instead of cause he fuels
                our
                > > confussion with the use of muria which we cannot get tied up in now.
                > >
                > > sally
                > >
                > > -----Original Message-----
                > > From: RM <mailto:apicius%40maierphil.de>;
                > > To: Apicius <mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com>;
                > > Sent: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 0:15
                > > Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)
                > >
                > > Hi Sally,
                > >
                > > the fact that a lot of differt types of �garum� existed is
                obviously true
                > > but it is not my idea. This has already been reported by Pliny in
                the half
                > > sentence I cited before: �... , creveruntque genera ad
                infinitum, ...�
                > > (Plin. NH 31, 95). So why shouldn�t Pliny be right? I am sure
                that there
                > > were not only the two forms of �garum� that you mentioned
                but a lot of
                > > other varieties, too. So why shouldn�t they have been sold
                eventually under
                > > the same name �garum�? In the Price Edict and even in the
                Geoponika
                > > �liquamen� (or in Greek letters �likouamen�) is
                clearly a synonym /
                > > translation of the Greek word garon. The Price Edict has a first and
                a
                > > second quality of garon / liquamen. The name of both qualities was
                the same
                > > but to produce different qualities probabely the ingredients were
                somewhat
                > > different. And then there is also the Apicius recipe 7, 13, 1 garum
                and
                > > liquamen do mean exactly the same: �fungi farnei: elixi,
                calidi, exsiccati
                > > in garo piper<ato> accipiuntur, ita ut piper cum liquamine
                teres.� � I
                > > cited this from my own Apicius edition where it is numbered 7, 15, 1
                (ed.
                > > Robert Maier, Reclam, Stuttgart 1991), the text of your edition has
                �piper�
                > > instead of �piper<ato>�. Unfortunately Manilius
                doesn�t tell us the names
                > > of what his fishermen were creating in the Astronomica 5, 667 sqq.
                > > To conclude: I think it�s an alluring hypothesis to believe in
                a real
                > > difference between �garum� and �liquamen� but
                it�s a hypothesis that lacks
                > > evidence. As we can deduce from the Price Edict and the Geoponika
                > > �liquamen� was a synonym at least of the Greek
                �garon� and probabely also
                > > of the Roman �garum�, as we see in Apic. 7, 13, 1. What we
                eventually could
                > > assume is that �liquamen� in some contexts might have been
                understood as a
                > > specific quality of �garum� (some filtered high quality
                �garum�) but there
                > > is certainly no general distinction. On the amphorae one should
                expect some
                > > trade names, as we use today the word �balsamico� for a
                specific type of
                > > vinegar, while the product class remains �vinegar�. So in
                our case the
                > > product class would be �garum� including more specific
                appellations like
                > > �garum sociorum�, �garum scombri�,
                �liquamen� etc. At the end �liquamen�
                > > was used as a general term (because everyone tends to use only the
                very
                > > best quality), just as it happened in the case of �iecur�
                which, at the
                > > end, was called always �ficatum� and became
                �fegato�, �foie� etc. in the
                > > different modern languages.
                > >
                > > Best wishes,
                > >
                > > Robert
                > >
                > > From: mailto:sallygrain%40aol.com
                > > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 7:57 PM
                > > To: mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com
                > > Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)
                > >
                > > Hi
                > >
                > > Your approach to fish sauce is too simplistic I am afraid. Do you
                not even
                > > recognise the fact of a separate blood and viscera sauce different
                from the
                > > whole-fish sauce. They cannot both be garum!, the former black and
                bloody,
                > > the latter pale golden according to Pliny. They have different uses,
                the
                > > garon melan was used at table and so became a fashionable ingredient
                to
                > > discuss in satire, the cooking liquamen was only used in the kitchen
                by
                > > slaves and therefore was not recognised as a separate sauce by the
                elite.
                > > The tituli picti associated with amphorae from Pompeii and Rome
                reflect the
                > > frequent usage of liquamen in the 1st century along side garum. We
                find
                > > garum scombri flos and liquamen flos in contempory sites: they have
                to mean
                > > two separate sauces, there is no way out of that one!
                > >
                > > sally
                > >
                > > -----Original Message-----
                > > From: RM <mailto:apicius%40maierphil.de>;;
                > > To: Apicius <mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com>;;
                > > Sent: Sun, 15 Jul 2012 22:24
                > > Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)
                > >
                > > Just a little correction and an addition: The Geoponika have been
                written
                > > down about 600 years after the Price Edict (not 800!). The word
                �garum� is
                > > found twice within the Apicius recipes, in 7, 13, 1 (with
                �liquamen� in the
                > > same recipe!) and Exc. 29 (according to Vollmer & Milham).
                > >
                > > Best regards
                > >
                > > RM
                > >
                > > From: RM
                > > Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2012 8:36 PM
                > > To: mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com
                > > Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)
                > >
                > > Well, we don�t know exactly when the Apicius collection has
                been compiled
                > > but it is quite sure that has been compiled from a base of earlier
                recipes
                > > from which about a third is to be considered to be from an original
                > > cookbook probabely written by the same Apicius who has been
                mentioned in
                > > Plinius� Naturalis Historia (see Brandt: �Untersuchungen
                zum r�mischen
                > > Kochbuch� in Philologus Suppl. XIX, 3). From the Historia
                Augusta we learn
                > > that Aelius Verus who died in 138 took three books into his bed:
                Amores by
                > > Ovid, Apicius and Martial. We may believe this or not. If we believe
                it
                > > there should have been an edition of Apicius at those times. I
                didn�t say
                > > that Apicius was the only one who ever mentioned
                �liquamen� � I said he was
                > > the only one who used it in this sense in antiquity, Vegetius and
                > > Pelagonius lived in very late antiquity, but you wouldn�t find
                the term
                > > before Columella where it signified just a liquid. The question is
                > > therefore if your �liquamen�, that may differ from
                �garum�, was invented
                > > after the 1st or 2nd century. There is no doubt that there were many
                > > different types and qualities of garum (�... , creveruntque
                genera ad
                > > infinitum, ...� Plin. NH 31, 95). Plinius tells us that Apicius
                used the so
                > > called �garum sociorum� which is just a type of garum. In
                his Naturalis
                > > Historia Plinius mentioned �garum� sometimes �
                liquamen never. I personally
                > > believe that Plinius did know very well what he was writing about in
                book
                > > 31 where he describes the production of �garum� �
                there he calls it a
                > > �liquor� (not �liquamen� of course). What you
                can find in the Diocletian�s
                > > Price Edict are two terms (3.6): �garou ge�matos
                prwte�ou� in Greek,
                > > �liquaminis primi� in Latin � there the word
                �liquamen� appears as a simple
                > > translation of �garon� (why do you think it should be
                �garos�?). The
                > > Geoponika, of course, has been compiled 800 years later, using
                authors of
                > > the late antiquity but it is very interesting that in the Geoponika
                the
                > > Latin word �liquamen� appears twice as �t�
                kalo�menon likouamen� (=�the so
                > > called liquamen�) in the chapter "Garwn piohsis" (20, 46, 1+2).
                > >
                > > Well, I better stop here because it would end up with some kind of
                endless
                > > discussion. There is � in my opinion � no real evidence
                for any difference
                > > of liquamen and garum, especially if we consider the Price Edict and
                the
                > > Geoponika. I think �liquamen� is just a word that may have
                been introduced
                > > by people like Apicius as a terminus technicus to substitute
                �garum� in
                > > technical language and then spread more and more until Anthimus did
                only
                > > use the term �liquamen� ("Nam liquamen ex omni parte
                prohibimus."). Even
                > > the �so called liquamen� in the Geoponika leads to this
                direction.
                > >
                > > Best regards
                > >
                > > RM
                > > From: mailto:sallygrain%40aol.com
                > > Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2012 5:06 PM
                > > To: mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com
                > > Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)
                > >
                > > OK
                > >
                > > garum liquamen and the differences: i recently presented a paper at
                the
                > > British School at Rome to archaeologist of the fish trade in the
                Med. and
                > > therefore what follows is a pressi of what i said to them
                > >
                > > To start with you talk about Apicius as if he was the sole author
                and
                > > originator of the text when it is clear from our textual analysis
                that the
                > > recipe collection has multiple authors and they are slave cooks
                rather than
                > > a single gourmet. In terms of food at this level there were
                consumers and
                > > producers and it is the producers - the cooks - who we must trust to
                use
                > > the terminology correctly. You cannot argue that Apicius wrote this
                or that
                > > way, logically all the slave cooks wrote liquamen rather than garum
                for a
                > > reason. Equally you cannot place Apicius as a text in the late
                Empire
                > > reflecting a late usage for fish sauce. The terms used in it must
                reflect
                > > the way in which cooks expressed themselves throughout the classical
                > > period. The whole argument and justification for Vulgar Latin/Late
                Latin is
                > > based on elite usage. You say garum was the more commonplace term
                but in
                > > fact it is the other way round: Caelius Aurelianus says that the
                vulgar
                > > latin term in every day usage is liquamen. You also state that
                liquamen
                > > only occurs in Apicius but this is not the case. It is found in the
                Greek
                > > agricultural manual The Geoponica - you do all know that Andrew
                Dalby has
                > > recently published a new translation of this dont you ? - where it
                is a
                > > direct translation of the Greek garon but wait ...garon does not
                > > necessarily mean garum. It is also found frequently along with garum
                in the
                > > same veterinary recipe collections, particularly Vegetius and
                Pelagonius.
                > > (Pelagonius: liquamen: 9; 11.2; 13;98; 455; 457, garum: 428;13.
                Vegetius
                > > liquamen: 1.10.1; 1.17.10, 16; 2.91.2; 2.108.2; 2.132.4; 4.6.1,
                garum:
                > > 2.28.8; 3.28.10). In Galen it is also clear that two sauces were
                used: he
                > > refers simply to garon many times but only once or twice to garon
                melan. We
                > > have two names and two sauces so there shouldn't have been a
                problem!
                > >
                > > (Pelagonius: liquamen: 9; 11.2; 13;98; 455; 457, garum: 428;13.
                Vegetius
                > > liquamen: 1.10.1; 1.17.10, 16; 2.91.2; 2.108.2; 2.132.4; 4.6.1,
                garum:
                > > 2.28.8; 3.28.10). In Galen it is also clear that two sauces were
                used: he
                > > refers simply to garon many times but only once or twice to garon
                melan. We
                > > have two names and two sauces so there shouldn't have been a
                problem!
                > >
                > > Apicius - this is the title not the author - is an organic
                collection of
                > > recipes originally compiled, in it's earliest form, in Greek and we
                > > consider this to be in the late 1st century AD and possibly even
                earlier.
                > > We see no evidence of a formal publication date, only a finish date
                which
                > > is clearly 5/6th century. The chapter heading are in Greek and there
                are
                > > numerous terms that are not translated but transliterated i.e the
                Greek
                > > endings are converted into Latin endings so oenogaron: the Greek
                sauce made
                > > from the original Greek fish sauce and wine becomes oenogarum. Bare
                in mind
                > > the whole idea of fish sauce was originally Greek
                > >
                > > So if the cooks dont use garum qua garum one has to ask why? At this
                point
                > > I am pasting from the delivered paper
                > >
                > > What we first must do is acknowledge the presence of a blood and
                viscera
                > > sauce in the Ancient Mediterranean cuisine that we think of as Roman
                food.
                > > This sauce was a strong black and bloody condiment called in Greek
                garon
                > > melan or haimation that I believe was almost certainly handled by
                the
                > > consumer at table. This sauce was completely separate to the primary
                > > product in terms of archaeology (the amphora and fish bones) which
                was a
                > > cooking sauce made from whole-fish with extra viscera which provided
                > > enzymes which aided the liquefaction of the muscle tissue.
                > > The development and use of the primary product: a fish sauce made
                with
                > > whole fish, initially began in Greece and was a simple sauce made of
                very
                > > small fish (otherwise of no value) and salt used in everyday
                cooking. It is
                > > clear from references in 3rd century new comedy in Athens that this
                sauce
                > > was used with oil and vinegar or wine as a dressing for vegetables
                and
                > > pulses and was not considered particularly elite. My colleague
                Andrew Dalby
                > > has stated it to be a commonplace ingredient and it is noteworthy
                that
                > > Archestratus, the 2nd century Greek gourmet poet writing from Sicily
                about
                > > the best fish does not mention fish sauce at all. Later Galen in the
                2nd
                > > Century AD is also suggesting the use of garos in dressing of oil
                and
                > > vinegar to accompany simple vegetables. The Apicius recipes
                collection
                > > includes a whole section on vegetables which are also largely
                accompanied
                > > by oil, wine and fish sauce. These simple blended sauces are
                basically like
                > > vinaigrette and are throughout the Apicius recipe text in various
                forms.
                > > The most common was an oenogarum a transliterated term from the
                Greek. In
                > > fact when oenogarum is translated into Latin - it is found in Ps.
                Gargilius
                > > Martialis recipe - it appears as Confectio liquaminis. So there
                rearly is
                > > no garum in Apicius. This means of cause that there is no blood and
                viscera
                > > garum, because as a table sauce it was used on food rather than in
                the
                > > cooking and was also used to make elite oenogarum that may have been
                > > blended at table by the gourmet or slaves attendants.
                > >
                > > This simple Greek whole fish sauce almost certainly came to Rome as
                garon
                > > transliterated into garum but was still this simple liquefied fish
                sauce.
                > > As fish sauce became popular in Rome the elite were concerned with
                > > differentiating their foods from everybody else�s and I believe
                they may
                > > have instigated new developments in fish sauce types, one of which
                was the
                > > blood and viscera sauce and one was the use of much larger fish that
                did
                > > have a market value such as mackerel and larger clupeidae and
                sparidae
                > > which could have been used as salted fish.
                > > I believe the confusion over the terminology occurred when the elite
                > > retained the term garum - the transliterated and now fashionable
                Greek term
                > > to designate their new table sauce made from blood and viscera and
                the
                > > manufacturer, trader , merchant and cook had to coin a new term in
                Latin to
                > > designate the original and commonplace fish sauce, called garon made
                from
                > > whole fish. This was liquamen, the derivation of which is �to
                liquefy so it
                > > is aptly titled.
                > > We have mentioned the absence of garum from Apicius but we must also
                > > mention the absence of the separate Latin blood garum from
                Diocletians
                > > price edict in 301 AD . Here liquamen is equivalent to garos not
                garum just
                > > as we find in the Geoponica. These two absences are of cause the
                primary
                > > reason for the 'single sauce hypothesis' advovated by Curtis. If
                however
                > > you see these absences as evidence that the blood garum was no
                longer
                > > sufficiently popular in the early 4th century AD to warrant its own
                price
                > > on the edict or a mention in the recipes, then the later dominance
                of
                > > liquamen is explained. In fact (a guess) I believe the elite blood
                viscera
                > > garum had a relatively small market in comparison to liquamen and
                was made
                > > to appear more important because of the unusually close view we get
                of the
                > > elite at table in the early empire through satire. It was still made
                in the
                > > late empire as we know Ausonius acquired a jar in the mid 4th
                century but
                > > it seems it was a special delivery and therefore probably not
                readily
                > > available in southern France, and he is also very confused as to
                what to
                > > call it!
                > > The original Greek sauce � garos equivalent to liquamen -
                remained the
                > > primary product. We can I think come to see how it was that later
                sources
                > > began to say that garum was liquamen. Caelius Aurelianus says that
                the
                > > vulgar latin term in every day usage is liquamen � I don�t
                think he means
                > > just the poor here - and the elite prefer garum but in principle
                it�s the
                > > same product. if Pliny can fail to see the two sauces when it was
                popular,
                > > when the blood sauce has become rare it would seem quite logical to
                revert
                > > to the earlier usage and make the assumption that everyone has -
                ancient
                > > and modern - that the Greek and Latin meant the same thing'.
                > > note: I have not pasted the bit from Pliny but he is the cause of
                most of
                > > the confusion as he conflates both sauces into one. His elite
                expensive
                > > garum is made from viscera and most interpretations of his
                definition of
                > > fish sauce presupposed that he also meant to say small fish as he
                goes on
                > > to suggest that allec was the residue of garum but the blood viscera
                sauce
                > > has no bones or fish paste to make an allec. Only the primary fish
                sauce
                > > generates a fish paste.
                > > Hope this helps. It is a theory i will own but a thoroughly rational
                and
                > > logical one according to the archaeologists (and Robert Curtis who
                has been
                > > an adviser), I spoke to and they will be moving forward in analysing
                > > amphorae shapes and fish bone residues with the idea that there were
                two
                > > basic types of sauce in the 1st century AD when all the archaeology
                is most
                > > prolific.
                > >
                > > Sally Grainger
                > >
                > > -----Original Message-----
                > > From: RM <mailto:apicius%40maierphil.de>;;;
                > > To: Apicius <mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com>;;;
                > > Sent: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 14:05
                > > Subject: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)
                > >
                > > I am sorry, but are you really sure that there is any evidence for a
                > > difference between garum and the Apician �liquamen�?
                �liquamen� is a word
                > > used only by Apicius instead of the more common word
                �garum�. A good
                > > example is the following recipe:
                > > �Hydrogarata isicia sic facies: teres piper, ligusticum,
                pyrethrum
                > > minimum, suffundes liquamen. temperas aquam cisterninam, dum
                inducet,
                > > exinanies in caccabo, et tum isicia ad vaporem ignis pones, ut
                caleat, et
                > > sic sorbendum inferes.�
                > > This means that to make �hydrogarum� Apicius used
                �liquamen� et �aqua
                > > cisternina�. �liquamen� for Apicius is just a
                terminus technicus. The word
                > > �liquamen� has been used in antiquity just by Columella
                (who used it in a
                > > different context) and once by Flavius Vopiscus Syracusius on
                Aurelius
                > > where it meant �garum�. The hypothesis of a difference
                between garum and
                > > liquamen sounds interesting but I think Apicius just introduced the
                word
                > > �liquamen� as a t.t. in order to substitute the common
                word �garum�.
                > >
                > > Best regards
                > >
                > > RM
                > >
                > > From: mailto:sallygrain%40aol.com
                > > Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2012 1:49 PM
                > > To: mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com
                > > Subject: Re: [Apicius] Recent Cook Out
                > >
                > > good to know the dishes worked
                > > Can i just point out - as i am a bit of a stickler for such things -
                that
                > > the recipes in Apicius use the word liquamen rather than garum
                because they
                > > represent two different sauces - one whole-fish sauce, one a blood
                viscera
                > > fish sauce and I don't want to see an inaccurate ref that puports to
                be
                > > from my book where you have changed liquamen into garum in the
                belief that
                > > they are synonymous - they were not.
                > >
                > > thanks so much
                > > sally
                > >
                > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                > >
                > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                > >
                > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                > >
                > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                > >
                > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                > >
                > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                > >
                > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                > >
                > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                > >
                > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                > >
                > >
                > >
                >
                >
                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                >
              • Justin Mansfield
                A quick reply while my conditum melancholicis cools down. Sally, not to impugn my own impartiality in this discussion, but generally if you say something about
                Message 7 of 25 , Jul 21 11:58 AM
                • 0 Attachment
                  A quick reply while my conditum melancholicis cools down.

                  Sally, not to impugn my own impartiality in this discussion, but generally
                  if you say something about fish-fermented products in the Roman Empire, I
                  am inclined to defer to you. You are, as far as I'm concerned, the expert
                  on the topic, and as I've already made abundantly clear, I tend to find
                  Pliny a difficult read, for reasons not entirely related to his Latin, and
                  this is doubly so when I am reading a paragraph out of context, and on the
                  fly.

                  However, this does leave me looking again at his paragraph on the topic, a
                  bit confused. It seems like the first sentence is definitely about allex
                  (since, you know, he names it specifically), and it seems generally agreed
                  that "ad colorem ... dilutum" refers to garum (as opposed to allex). And it
                  seems to be generally assumed that the reference to kosher products would
                  be about garum, or fish-sauce in general. But then in the last sentence he
                  explicitly mentions allex again (where he mentions oysters, sea urchins,
                  jelly fish, mullet livers, and so on). So I don't know what to tell you.

                  Futhermore, I'm not sure how you're taking that *sicuti*. You suggested
                  that "for instance" would be a better translation here than "just as," but
                  then we seem to be implying that diluted garum is a type of allex, which I
                  know you don't think.

                  Let's have a go at the whole paragraph, for those who don't have Latin.
                  I'll avoid out *sicuti* problem by using "like," which is just about as
                  ambiguous in English ;)

                  "Its blemish and unfinished, unstrained dregs is *allex*. But it was
                  originally made specifically from useless, tiny fish. The Greeks call our *
                  apua* (≈"whitebait") *aphye*, because this little fish is born from rain.
                  The inhabitants of Forum Julii (Fréjus) call the fish from which they make
                  it *lupus* ("wolf" -- according to Dalby, the European seabass). Then it became
                  a luxury, and its varieties grew to be innumerable, like *garum*, which has
                  been diluted to the color of old *mulsum*, and such sweetness that you
                  could drink it. And another one is dedicated to the supertstition of
                  purity, and holy rites of the Jews, which is made from scaleless fish (um,
                  Pliny I think you have that backwards...). In this way *allex* has arrived
                  at oysters, urchins, jellyfish, mullet livers, and in countless ways salt
                  has begun to decay for the tastes of the gullet."

                  ... that last sentence is particularly hard. I think it's just a fancy way
                  of saying what he's already said: there's a lot of variety.


                  On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 12:27 PM, <sallygrain@...> wrote:

                  > **
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Hi justine and all
                  >
                  > this is getting wonderfully complicated but as i have always wanted to get
                  > to grips with what Pliny says here i do think we might continue if no one
                  > minds ? Take care of your feast first by all means! Hope it goes well.
                  >
                  > Your theory is probably not on the case as it is pretty certain that allec
                  > was made specifically, that was somewhat the point of the
                  > sentance. It was a residue - ie a fish paste derived from the manufacture
                  > of fish sauce and now it is being made especially from very small fish -
                  > tiny 'born of rain ' he says which means no bones at all. It resembles
                  > pissalat - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pissalat and anchovy pate
                  > generally as it is not fermented and made to be a fish paste. There are a
                  > few ref to this product becoming a desirable item at table though it is
                  > always difficult to comprehend. Martial epi gram III. 77 where capers and
                  > onions are served with allec. There is another but i cannot find it where a
                  > women devoures a platter of allec. He then goes on to say that allec was
                  > then a luxury item when made from bone free sea food such as oysters and
                  > mullet livers etc.
                  >
                  > So i would maintain that the allec was still enumerable i.e. made with
                  > every kind of fish and sea food and that seems to be the point here.
                  >
                  > i have some what lost the point of the original argument - no - it was
                  > that garum or liquamen could be enumerable in kind but i would maintain
                  > that the differences are all about what kind of fish are used - the process
                  > remains either to liquefy = liquamen or to take the juice from = blood
                  > viscera garum
                  >
                  > sally
                  >
                  > -----Original Message-----
                  > From: Justin Mansfield <iustinus@...>
                  > To: Apicius <Apicius@yahoogroups.com>
                  > Sent: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 18:55
                  > Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)
                  >
                  > >
                  > Justine jump in when ever you want!
                  >
                  > have been summoned. I just hope you're pronouncing "Justine" as three
                  > yllables! ;)
                  > Sorry, I haven't had time to follow this debate in any detail: I'm rushing
                  > round in my final days before the Conventiculum Latinum Lexintoniense,
                  > hich is of course when I have my annual Cena Romana (Incidentally I tried
                  > aking Columella's recipe for pickled purslane... but I suspect I did it
                  > rong. We'll see how it tastes when I open the jar) Not much focus to spare
                  > n so detailed an argument.
                  > This just gets worse when I look at the text:
                  > (�In process of time, alex has become quite an object of luxury, and the
                  > various kinds that are now made are infinite in number. The same, too, with
                  > garum, which is now prepared in imitation of the colour of old honied wine,
                  > and so pleasantly flavoured as to admit of being taken as a drink'
                  > This is very poor translation i think - Justine jump in when ever you
                  > want! 'The same too' does not sound right at all for secuti garum The loeb
                  > has 'for instance' implying a single example ' garum for instance ...
                  > rather than suggesting that garum had multiple varieties as well.
                  >
                  > y vey. My first instinct is indeed "for instance," but yeah, given that
                  > ts most basic meaning is "just as," I can see how "the same, too" is a
                  > ossibility. But as is so often the case with Pliny it's not so much a
                  > uestion of what the word could or could not mean, the real problem is
                  > rying to follow his stream of thought. For starters:
                  > *Vitium huius est allex atque inperfecta nec colata faex. coepit tamen et
                  > rivatim ex inutili pisciculo minimoque confici. *
                  > ts blemish and unfinished, unstrained dregs is *allex*. But it was
                  >
                  > riginally made specifically from useless, tiny finish.
                  > What was originally made this way? On first reading it sounds like he means
                  > allex*. But I'm pretty sure the topic of this entire paragraph is fish
                  > auce in general (the *huius* of the first sentence), not the *vitium
                  > *thereof.
                  > n other words, the "it" in the second sentence refers back not to *allex*
                  > but
                  >
                  > ather the "Its" of the first sentence! I mean, why would he be talking
                  > bout what kind of fish they use to make lees with in *Forum Iulii*, right?
                  > ou don't set out to make *faex*, *faex* is a byproduct of something else.
                  > If you still think those sentences are only about *allex*, then yeah, he
                  > ust be saying something like "[*allex*] became a luxury, and its varieties
                  > rew to be innumerable, *just as* [happened with] *garum*, which
                  > as [nowadays] been diluted to the color of old *mulsum*, and such
                  >
                  > weetness that you could drink it."
                  > But if you accept that he's talking about fish sauce in general, he seems
                  > o be saying "[fish sauce] became a luxury, and its varieties grew to be
                  > nnumerable, *for instance* [the variety of] *garum* which is diluted to
                  > he color of old *mulsum*, and such sweetness that you could drink it."
                  >
                  > It seems to me pretty clear that the latter translation is preferable, and
                  > his jibes well with my point that the rest of the paragraph makes better
                  > ense if we assume the sentence about *allex* was essentially a
                  >
                  > arenthetical gloss.
                  > I tell you, every time I read Pliny the Elder something like this happens:
                  > very sentence in the paragraph could be interpreted in multiple ways, and
                  > he key is finding the thread so that it all makes sense.
                  > As I said, I'm very distracted right now, so please forgive any sloppiness,
                  > r inattention to what has already been said.
                  > Valete
                  > On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 12:06 PM, <sallygrain@...> wrote:
                  > > **
                  >


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Justin Mansfield
                  Iustinus Demetriae salutem plurimam dicit, Wow, thank you! I see that Pliny mentions atriplex a few times, and apparently it shows up in Hippocrates as well.
                  Message 8 of 25 , Jul 21 12:57 PM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Iustinus Demetriae salutem plurimam dicit,

                    Wow, thank you! I see that Pliny mentions atriplex a few times, and
                    apparently it shows up in Hippocrates as well. Pliny doesn't say what to do
                    with it so far as I can see, and having lost the university proxy I cannot
                    easily look up what Hippocrates says. Do you have some sort of recipe
                    yourself?

                    Thanks,
                    JDM

                    On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Phoenix <hail_isis@...> wrote:

                    > **
                    >
                    >
                    > Salve Iustino,
                    >
                    > I have a nice small crop of white goosefoot (lambs' quarters) in my
                    > garden.
                    > You are welcome to it if it can help you with a second preparation for
                    > the C.L.L.
                    >
                    > It is very nice raw or cooked.
                    >
                    > Good luck with your purslane pickles.
                    >
                    > Vale,
                    > Demetria
                    >
                    > --- In Apicius@yahoogroups.com, Justin Mansfield <iustinus@...> wrote:
                    > >
                    > > >
                    > > > Justine jump in when ever you want!
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > I have been summoned. I just hope you're pronouncing "Justine" as
                    > three
                    > > syllables! ;)
                    > >
                    > > Sorry, I haven't had time to follow this debate in any detail: I'm
                    > rushing
                    > > around in my final days before the Conventiculum Latinum
                    > Lexintoniense,
                    > > which is of course when I have my annual Cena Romana (Incidentally I
                    > tried
                    > > making Columella's recipe for pickled purslane... but I suspect I did
                    > it
                    > > wrong. We'll see how it tastes when I open the jar) Not much focus to
                    > spare
                    > > on so detailed an argument.
                    > >
                    > > This just gets worse when I look at the text:
                    > >
                    > > (���In process of time, alex has become quite an object of luxury,
                    > and the
                    > > > various kinds that are now made are infinite in number. The same,
                    > too, with
                    > > > garum, which is now prepared in imitation of the colour of old
                    > honied wine,
                    > > > and so pleasantly flavoured as to admit of being taken as a drink'
                    > > > This is very poor translation i think - Justine jump in when ever
                    > you
                    > > > want! 'The same too' does not sound right at all for secuti garum
                    > The loeb
                    > > > has 'for instance' implying a single example ' garum for instance
                    > ...
                    > > > rather than suggesting that garum had multiple varieties as well.
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > Oy vey. My first instinct is indeed "for instance," but yeah, given
                    > that
                    > > its most basic meaning is "just as," I can see how "the same, too" is
                    > a
                    > > possibility. But as is so often the case with Pliny it's not so much
                    > a
                    > > question of what the word could or could not mean, the real problem is
                    > > trying to follow his stream of thought. For starters:
                    > >
                    > > *Vitium huius est allex atque inperfecta nec colata faex. coepit tamen
                    > et
                    > > privatim ex inutili pisciculo minimoque confici. *
                    > > Its blemish and unfinished, unstrained dregs is *allex*. But it was
                    > > originally made specifically from useless, tiny finish.
                    > >
                    > > What was originally made this way? On first reading it sounds like he
                    > means
                    > > *allex*. But I'm pretty sure the topic of this entire paragraph is
                    > fish
                    > > sauce in general (the *huius* of the first sentence), not the *vitium
                    > *thereof.
                    > > In other words, the "it" in the second sentence refers back not to
                    > *allex* but
                    > > rather the "Its" of the first sentence! I mean, why would he be
                    > talking
                    > > about what kind of fish they use to make lees with in *Forum Iulii*,
                    > right?
                    > > You don't set out to make *faex*, *faex* is a byproduct of something
                    > else.
                    > >
                    > > If you still think those sentences are only about *allex*, then yeah,
                    > he
                    > > must be saying something like "[*allex*] became a luxury, and its
                    > varieties
                    > > grew to be innumerable, *just as* [happened with] *garum*, which
                    > > has [nowadays] been diluted to the color of old *mulsum*, and such
                    > > sweetness that you could drink it."
                    > >
                    > > But if you accept that he's talking about fish sauce in general, he
                    > seems
                    > > to be saying "[fish sauce] became a luxury, and its varieties grew to
                    > be
                    > > innumerable, *for instance* [the variety of] *garum* which is diluted
                    > to
                    > > the color of old *mulsum*, and such sweetness that you could drink
                    > it."
                    > >
                    > > It seems to me pretty clear that the latter translation is preferable,
                    > and
                    > > this jibes well with my point that the rest of the paragraph makes
                    > better
                    > > sense if we assume the sentence about *allex* was essentially a
                    > > parenthetical gloss.
                    > >
                    > > I tell you, every time I read Pliny the Elder something like this
                    > happens:
                    > > every sentence in the paragraph could be interpreted in multiple ways,
                    > and
                    > > the key is finding the thread so that it all makes sense.
                    > >
                    > > As I said, I'm very distracted right now, so please forgive any
                    > sloppiness,
                    > > or inattention to what has already been said.
                    > >
                    > > Valete
                    > >
                    > > On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 12:06 PM, sallygrain@... wrote:
                    > >
                    > > > **
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > > Hi
                    > > >
                    > > > 'So why shouldn���t Pliny be right? I am sure that there were not
                    > only the
                    > > > two forms of ���garum��� that you mentioned but a lot of other
                    > varieties'
                    > > >
                    > > > The varieties are determined by the species of fish, their quality
                    > and
                    > > > origin. The fish bone evidence from ship wrecks which I have studies
                    > > > extensively reveal tiny anchovy or sardine or a mixed variety of
                    > small
                    > > > clupiedae and sparidae and they would make one kind - the most basic
                    > i
                    > > > think - of fish sauce, while mackerel is common in fish sauce
                    > amphorae and
                    > > > the tituli picti make it clear this was the best. Apicius - the
                    > gourmet
                    > > > rather than the recipe text - suggest mullet or nd we can assume any
                    > other
                    > > > specified and selected fish would make a superior kind. The
                    > subsequent
                    > > > sauce would not be named by its fish type but by the process it
                    > underwent.
                    > > > To liquefy i.e. liquamen or the juice from them i.e. the blood and
                    > viscera
                    > > > sauce.
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > > You still havnt explained to me how the manufacturer, merchant
                    > trader and
                    > > > cook was able to distinguish between the blood and viscera sauce and
                    > the
                    > > > whole fish variety. You cannot deny the existance of a blood viscera
                    > sauce
                    > > > - its in the Geoponica as a distinctly separate entity and it is
                    > also
                    > > > defined as 'luxury' Martial 'made from the blood of a still
                    > breathing
                    > > > mackerel' afirms its existance. As i said it matters not one jot
                    > what the
                    > > > stupid ill informed gourmet thinks he is eating - the manufacturer
                    > needs to
                    > > > be able to distinguish between them. You note that liquamen is rare
                    > and
                    > > > late but it is also only found in didactic texts written by the
                    > > > practitioner and producer - slave cook, vet, writers of agricultural
                    > > > material. The same kind of people as the manufacturer and merchant
                    > who need
                    > > > specific and precise terminology to identify their products. The
                    > absence of
                    > > > liquamen in elite literature as I have already said is due to the
                    > obvious
                    > > > fact that poets such as Martial etc consume garum at table and do
                    > not cook
                    > > > so they dont recognise the existence of a separate cooking sauce
                    > which is
                    > > > weaker.
                    > > >
                    > > > (���In process of time, alex has become quite an object of
                    > luxury, and the
                    > > > various kinds that are now made are infinite in number. The same,
                    > too, with
                    > > > garum, which is now prepared in imitation of the colour of old
                    > honied wine,
                    > > > and so pleasantly flavoured as to admit of being taken as a drink'
                    > > >
                    > > > This is very poor translation i think - Justine jump in when ever
                    > you
                    > > > want! 'The same too' does not sound right at all for secuti garum
                    > The loeb
                    > > > has 'for instance' implying a single example ' garum for instance
                    > ...
                    > > > rather than suggesting that garum had multiple varieties as well.
                    > > >
                    > > > 'this implies that there were other, less praised types of garum
                    > ��� and
                    > > > that intestina and other parts of the fish were used'
                    > > >
                    > > > You cannot separate the blood and viscera here and suggest that
                    > blood is
                    > > > valuable and viscera not - thats utterly confused. The
                    > > > most prized type of garum was made from mackerel viscera and blood
                    > with
                    > > > salt and nothing else.
                    > > >
                    > > > 'but the normal Latin word at the time of Ausonius was
                    > ���liquamen��� (which
                    > > > wasn���t an old Latin word and Ausonius obviously didn���t
                    > like it'
                    > > > You simply cannot say this, Its the worst kind of special pleading
                    > when
                    > > > your argument fails you. Ausonius didnt use the term liquamen
                    > because he
                    > > > didn't receive liquamen, he received garum He calls it liquor iste
                    > > > sociorum. 'that liquor of our allies' which directly links in with
                    > > > Martials' 'made from the blood of a still breathing mackerel' which
                    > he also
                    > > > calls garum sociorum, the most expensive kind of garum according to
                    > Pliny
                    > > > too, when garum is a blood/viscera sauce. Garum can also be cheap
                    > and
                    > > > cheerful and made from any old bit of fish blood and viscera.
                    > > >
                    > > > The crucial thing about the epigraphic evidence which you have
                    > failed to
                    > > > recognise is that in Pompeii there are amphorae with garum and there
                    > are
                    > > > amphorae with liquamen labels in the same context. This is
                    > indisputable
                    > > > evidence, that makes it absolutely clear, without a doubt, that for
                    > the
                    > > > people who made and bought fish sauce in Pompeii in 69 AD garum and
                    > > > liquamen represented different products. By the 4th century as i
                    > have
                    > > > already said the blood viscera sauce was insufficiently popular to
                    > warrant
                    > > > attention - in Apicius or the price edict and as a result the
                    > differences
                    > > > had ceased to mean anything which is why they appear to be the same
                    > in the
                    > > > late Empire
                    > > >
                    > > > all the best sally
                    > > >
                    > > > -----Original Message-----
                    > > > From: RM apicius@...
                    > > > To: Apicius Apicius@yahoogroups.com
                    > > > Sent: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 0:18
                    > > > Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)
                    > > >
                    > > > Sorry for the late answer. I wasn���t at home yesterday and
                    > therefore not
                    > > > able to sit down and reply immediately.
                    > > > Meanwhile I had a look at some editions of the Naturalis Historia
                    > ��� one by
                    > > > Roderich K���nig with German translation, the other the one by
                    > John Bostock
                    > > > et al. included in Perseus (
                    > > >
                    > http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.01\
                    > 37%3Abook%3D31%3Achapter%3D44<http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0137%3Abook%3D31%3Achapter%3D44>
                    > ).
                    > > > Essentially those two interpreted the passage as to be referred not
                    > only to
                    > > > allex but also to garum (���In process of time, alex has become
                    > quite an
                    > > > object of luxury, and the various kinds that are now made are
                    > infinite in
                    > > > number. The same, too, with garum, which is now prepared in
                    > imitation of
                    > > > the colour of old honied wine, and so pleasantly flavoured as to
                    > admit of
                    > > > being taken as a drink.��� from: The Natural History. Pliny the
                    > Elder. John
                    > > > Bostock, M.D., F.R.S. H.T. Riley, Esq., B.A. London. Taylor and
                    > Francis,
                    > > > Red Lion Court, Fleet Street. 1855.). So, at least, I am not
                    > hopelessly
                    > > > alone with my interpretation.
                    > > > Certainly there were a lot of different types of garum during and
                    > before
                    > > > the 1st century and even after. Martial cites the garum made from
                    > the blood
                    > > > of scomber, Plinius said that the most praised garum was indeed made
                    > from
                    > > > scomber ��� this implies that there were other, less praised
                    > types of garum ���
                    > > > and that intestina and other parts of the fish were used. The
                    > fishermen of
                    > > > Manilius seem to use tunny. Horace mentioned garum ���de sucis
                    > piscis��� (Hor.
                    > > > Serm. 2, 8, 46). But those citations are all about garum, not about
                    > > > liquamen because the word ���liquamen��� was a very new
                    > creation in the 1st
                    > > > century that hadn���t made yet its way into the language of
                    > Pliny, Horace,
                    > > > Seneca and Martial. Ausonius said that he wasn���t used to and
                    > couldn���t say
                    > > > the Latin word (���nec solere nec posse dicere���) for
                    > ���garum��� and that those
                    > > > who knew well old Latin and were disgusted with Greek vocabulary
                    > > > (���scientissimi veterum et Graeca vocabula fastidientes���)
                    > hadn���t a Latin
                    > > > word for it. So he called it ���liquor iste sociorum���
                    > instead ��� but the
                    > > > normal Latin word at the time of Ausonius was ���liquamen���
                    > (which wasn���t an
                    > > > old Latin word and Ausonius obviously didn���t like it;
                    > ���muria��� has been
                    > > > mentioned in a similar context by Plinius in 31, 94 ��� probabely
                    > this muria
                    > > > wasn���t just salty water). And this is what we can deduce also
                    > from the
                    > > > Price Edict: ���garum��� is doubtlessly a Greek word, equal to
                    > ���garon���, and the
                    > > > correct Latin translation is ���liquamen��� at those times, i.
                    > e. at the
                    > > > beginning of the 4th century. As it is a legal text, what we find in
                    > the
                    > > > Price Edict is certainly not an arbitrary appellation. So if therein
                    > > > ���liquamen��� is the translation of ���garon��� (which
                    > is identical to the Latin
                    > > > ���garum��� which, according to Ausonius, is still a Greek
                    > word) why should we
                    > > > believe that there was a fundamental difference between those two?
                    > There
                    > > > were certainly varieties that may have had different trade names
                    > sometimes
                    > > > but the Geoponika show us that in late antiquity the word
                    > ���likouamen��� could
                    > > > substitute the original ���garon��� even in Greek. The same,
                    > of course in Apic.
                    > > > 7, 13, 1: ���ita ut piper cum liquamine teres��� is an
                    > specification for ���in
                    > > > garo piper<ato>��� (I prefer this version because the other one
                    > is
                    > > > grammatically disputable and we have Petronius using a ���garum
                    > piperatum��� in
                    > > > Sat. 36, 3). Probabely this is an old recipe of the 1st century
                    > where
                    > > > someone added the explanation because he was in doubt if the people
                    > could
                    > > > understand what ���garum piperatum��� meant.
                    > > > From the references we have we can derive that the word
                    > ���liquamen��� has
                    > > > been created in the 1st century and was used more and more ���
                    > perhaps driven
                    > > > by culinary experts like Apicius ��� until being an equivalent of
                    > the word
                    > > > ���garum��� at the beginning of the 4th century even in legal
                    > texts like the
                    > > > Price Edict. It has also been accepted as a synonym of
                    > ���garon��� in Greek as
                    > > > we see from the Geoponika. There are some detailled descriptions of
                    > the
                    > > > production of ���garum��� but only in the Geoponika we find
                    > the same for
                    > > > ���likouamen��� which in that context is to be considered a
                    > synonym of ���garon���.
                    > > > The word ���liquamen��� is used in a similar way ��� i.e.
                    > as a translation of
                    > > > ���garum��� or ���garon��� ��� in the Price Edict and
                    > in Apic. 7.13.1. Well, we may
                    > > > get much more examplesfor ���liquamen��� and ���garum���
                    > out of the epigraphic data
                    > > > base (http://oracle-vm.ku-eichstaett.de:8888/epigr/epigraphik_de)
                    > but we
                    > > > wouldn���t find many differences between ���liquamen��� and
                    > ���garum��� there. We
                    > > > have ���liquamen optimum scombri��� and ���garum flos
                    > scombri��� and so on. From my
                    > > > point of view it is not possible to clearly distinguish the both,
                    > ���garum���
                    > > > and ���liquamen���, as both appear to be exchangeable in
                    > various contexts. They
                    > > > vary in frequency of occurrence: ���Garum��� was used more
                    > frequently before
                    > > > the 2nd century, ���liquamen��� was used more frequently from
                    > the end of the
                    > > > 1st century.
                    > > >
                    > > > Best wishes,
                    > > >
                    > > > Robert
                    > > >
                    > > > From: sallygrain@...
                    > > > Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2012 2:11 PM
                    > > > To: Apicius@yahoogroups.com
                    > > > Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)
                    > > >
                    > > > Your ref to Pliny is as follows in English for the rest ' then allec
                    > > > became a luxury and its various kinds have come to be inumerable'
                    > These
                    > > > refer to enumerable kinds of allec or fish paste made from sea food
                    > and not
                    > > > neccesarily the liquid fish sauce derived from one kind of allec.
                    > The
                    > > > liquid fish sauce was not enumerable in kind but basically 2 types
                    > or 3 if
                    > > > you include muria 1, liquefied whole fish sauce. 2 fish blood and
                    > viscera
                    > > > 3. brine from salted fish which corresponds to coluratura die alici
                    > from
                    > > > the Naples area as this is made with eviscerated salted anchovy.
                    > > >
                    > > > Ultimately then, you are basing your argument that liquamen is not a
                    > > > synonym for garum but is for garon on Apicius 7.13.1 which is one
                    > recipes
                    > > > out of 450+ That garum and liquamen appear in this recipes and only
                    > this
                    > > > one suggest to me that the pepper is ground with liquamen and them
                    > served
                    > > > with garum at table. Otherwise it makes no sence to use both terms.
                    > If they
                    > > > are there because whome ever wanted to translate the one with the
                    > other we
                    > > > would at least find this construction - using both terms more often
                    > in the
                    > > > rest of the text. The use of garum in the compound terms oenogarum,
                    > > > hydrogarum etc is not relavant as they are transliterated Greek.
                    > > >
                    > > > You almost get it - The generic term only exists in Greek In latin
                    > > > technically there is no generic term but as they are so similar many
                    > > > ancient as well as modern scholars assume that the generic function
                    > was
                    > > > transferred to the Latin when it was translated. I will even allow
                    > that
                    > > > some ancients used garum when they actually meant liquamen but the
                    > > > manufacturer, trader, merchant and cook never would have got them
                    > mixed up
                    > > > - one was black and bloody, dark and strong used in drops while the
                    > other
                    > > > was pale brown and used in quantity. There simply had to be a way to
                    > > > distinguish them in trade. The acetabulum little vinegar cup in some
                    > > > recipes (p 83 ff our edition) hold 60ml and was blended with a
                    > similar
                    > > > amount of wine and fish sauce. The resulting oenogarum was delicious
                    > as i
                    > > > am sure you know. I have made blood garum and it is disgusting in
                    > those
                    > > > quantities. Check out http://www.ishiri.jp/en/ for the Japanese
                    > squid
                    > > > blood and viscera fish sauce which is pitch black and smells
                    > distinctly of
                    > > > blood - iron in fact, a frind who was a nurse told me it smells of
                    > digested
                    > > > blood after smelling the human gut in surgery.
                    > > >
                    > > > You do know Ausonius' letter I am sure. He specifically says there
                    > is no
                    > > > latin word that he can use instead of garum which he rejects as its
                    > Greek
                    > > > in origin and he rejects Greek words. If liquamen was the equivelent
                    > of
                    > > > garum in Latin he would have no problem. Instead of cause he fuels
                    > our
                    > > > confussion with the use of muria which we cannot get tied up in now.
                    > > >
                    > > > sally
                    > > >
                    > > > -----Original Message-----
                    > > > From: RM <mailto:apicius%40maierphil.de>;
                    > > > To: Apicius <mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com>;
                    > > > Sent: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 0:15
                    > > > Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)
                    > > >
                    > > > Hi Sally,
                    > > >
                    > > > the fact that a lot of differt types of ���garum��� existed is
                    > obviously true
                    > > > but it is not my idea. This has already been reported by Pliny in
                    > the half
                    > > > sentence I cited before: ���... , creveruntque genera ad
                    > infinitum, ...���
                    > > > (Plin. NH 31, 95). So why shouldn���t Pliny be right? I am sure
                    > that there
                    > > > were not only the two forms of ���garum��� that you mentioned
                    > but a lot of
                    > > > other varieties, too. So why shouldn���t they have been sold
                    > eventually under
                    > > > the same name ���garum���? In the Price Edict and even in the
                    > Geoponika
                    > > > ���liquamen��� (or in Greek letters ���likouamen���) is
                    > clearly a synonym /
                    > > > translation of the Greek word garon. The Price Edict has a first and
                    > a
                    > > > second quality of garon / liquamen. The name of both qualities was
                    > the same
                    > > > but to produce different qualities probabely the ingredients were
                    > somewhat
                    > > > different. And then there is also the Apicius recipe 7, 13, 1 garum
                    > and
                    > > > liquamen do mean exactly the same: ���fungi farnei: elixi,
                    > calidi, exsiccati
                    > > > in garo piper<ato> accipiuntur, ita ut piper cum liquamine
                    > teres.��� ��� I
                    > > > cited this from my own Apicius edition where it is numbered 7, 15, 1
                    > (ed.
                    > > > Robert Maier, Reclam, Stuttgart 1991), the text of your edition has
                    > ���piper���
                    > > > instead of ���piper<ato>���. Unfortunately Manilius
                    > doesn���t tell us the names
                    > > > of what his fishermen were creating in the Astronomica 5, 667 sqq.
                    > > > To conclude: I think it���s an alluring hypothesis to believe in
                    > a real
                    > > > difference between ���garum��� and ���liquamen��� but
                    > it���s a hypothesis that lacks
                    > > > evidence. As we can deduce from the Price Edict and the Geoponika
                    > > > ���liquamen��� was a synonym at least of the Greek
                    > ���garon��� and probabely also
                    > > > of the Roman ���garum���, as we see in Apic. 7, 13, 1. What we
                    > eventually could
                    > > > assume is that ���liquamen��� in some contexts might have been
                    > understood as a
                    > > > specific quality of ���garum��� (some filtered high quality
                    > ���garum���) but there
                    > > > is certainly no general distinction. On the amphorae one should
                    > expect some
                    > > > trade names, as we use today the word ���balsamico��� for a
                    > specific type of
                    > > > vinegar, while the product class remains ���vinegar���. So in
                    > our case the
                    > > > product class would be ���garum��� including more specific
                    > appellations like
                    > > > ���garum sociorum���, ���garum scombri���,
                    > ���liquamen��� etc. At the end ���liquamen���
                    > > > was used as a general term (because everyone tends to use only the
                    > very
                    > > > best quality), just as it happened in the case of ���iecur���
                    > which, at the
                    > > > end, was called always ���ficatum��� and became
                    > ���fegato���, ���foie��� etc. in the
                    > > > different modern languages.
                    > > >
                    > > > Best wishes,
                    > > >
                    > > > Robert
                    > > >
                    > > > From: mailto:sallygrain%40aol.com
                    > > > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 7:57 PM
                    > > > To: mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com
                    > > > Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)
                    > > >
                    > > > Hi
                    > > >
                    > > > Your approach to fish sauce is too simplistic I am afraid. Do you
                    > not even
                    > > > recognise the fact of a separate blood and viscera sauce different
                    > from the
                    > > > whole-fish sauce. They cannot both be garum!, the former black and
                    > bloody,
                    > > > the latter pale golden according to Pliny. They have different uses,
                    > the
                    > > > garon melan was used at table and so became a fashionable ingredient
                    > to
                    > > > discuss in satire, the cooking liquamen was only used in the kitchen
                    > by
                    > > > slaves and therefore was not recognised as a separate sauce by the
                    > elite.
                    > > > The tituli picti associated with amphorae from Pompeii and Rome
                    > reflect the
                    > > > frequent usage of liquamen in the 1st century along side garum. We
                    > find
                    > > > garum scombri flos and liquamen flos in contempory sites: they have
                    > to mean
                    > > > two separate sauces, there is no way out of that one!
                    > > >
                    > > > sally
                    > > >
                    > > > -----Original Message-----
                    > > > From: RM <mailto:apicius%40maierphil.de>;;
                    > > > To: Apicius <mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com>;;
                    > > > Sent: Sun, 15 Jul 2012 22:24
                    > > > Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)
                    > > >
                    > > > Just a little correction and an addition: The Geoponika have been
                    > written
                    > > > down about 600 years after the Price Edict (not 800!). The word
                    > ���garum��� is
                    > > > found twice within the Apicius recipes, in 7, 13, 1 (with
                    > ���liquamen��� in the
                    > > > same recipe!) and Exc. 29 (according to Vollmer & Milham).
                    > > >
                    > > > Best regards
                    > > >
                    > > > RM
                    > > >
                    > > > From: RM
                    > > > Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2012 8:36 PM
                    > > > To: mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com
                    > > > Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)
                    > > >
                    > > > Well, we don���t know exactly when the Apicius collection has
                    > been compiled
                    > > > but it is quite sure that has been compiled from a base of earlier
                    > recipes
                    > > > from which about a third is to be considered to be from an original
                    > > > cookbook probabely written by the same Apicius who has been
                    > mentioned in
                    > > > Plinius��� Naturalis Historia (see Brandt: ���Untersuchungen
                    > zum r���mischen
                    > > > Kochbuch��� in Philologus Suppl. XIX, 3). From the Historia
                    > Augusta we learn
                    > > > that Aelius Verus who died in 138 took three books into his bed:
                    > Amores by
                    > > > Ovid, Apicius and Martial. We may believe this or not. If we believe
                    > it
                    > > > there should have been an edition of Apicius at those times. I
                    > didn���t say
                    > > > that Apicius was the only one who ever mentioned
                    > ���liquamen��� ��� I said he was
                    > > > the only one who used it in this sense in antiquity, Vegetius and
                    > > > Pelagonius lived in very late antiquity, but you wouldn���t find
                    > the term
                    > > > before Columella where it signified just a liquid. The question is
                    > > > therefore if your ���liquamen���, that may differ from
                    > ���garum���, was invented
                    > > > after the 1st or 2nd century. There is no doubt that there were many
                    > > > different types and qualities of garum (���... , creveruntque
                    > genera ad
                    > > > infinitum, ...��� Plin. NH 31, 95). Plinius tells us that Apicius
                    > used the so
                    > > > called ���garum sociorum��� which is just a type of garum. In
                    > his Naturalis
                    > > > Historia Plinius mentioned ���garum��� sometimes ���
                    > liquamen never. I personally
                    > > > believe that Plinius did know very well what he was writing about in
                    > book
                    > > > 31 where he describes the production of ���garum��� ���
                    > there he calls it a
                    > > > ���liquor��� (not ���liquamen��� of course). What you
                    > can find in the Diocletian���s
                    > > > Price Edict are two terms (3.6): ���garou ge���matos
                    > prwte���ou��� in Greek,
                    > > > ���liquaminis primi��� in Latin ��� there the word
                    > ���liquamen��� appears as a simple
                    > > > translation of ���garon��� (why do you think it should be
                    > ���garos���?). The
                    > > > Geoponika, of course, has been compiled 800 years later, using
                    > authors of
                    > > > the late antiquity but it is very interesting that in the Geoponika
                    > the
                    > > > Latin word ���liquamen��� appears twice as ���t���
                    > kalo���menon likouamen��� (=���the so
                    > > > called liquamen���) in the chapter "Garwn piohsis" (20, 46, 1+2).
                    > > >
                    > > > Well, I better stop here because it would end up with some kind of
                    > endless
                    > > > discussion. There is ��� in my opinion ��� no real evidence
                    > for any difference
                    > > > of liquamen and garum, especially if we consider the Price Edict and
                    > the
                    > > > Geoponika. I think ���liquamen��� is just a word that may have
                    > been introduced
                    > > > by people like Apicius as a terminus technicus to substitute
                    > ���garum��� in
                    > > > technical language and then spread more and more until Anthimus did
                    > only
                    > > > use the term ���liquamen��� ("Nam liquamen ex omni parte
                    > prohibimus."). Even
                    > > > the ���so called liquamen��� in the Geoponika leads to this
                    > direction.
                    > > >
                    > > > Best regards
                    > > >
                    > > > RM
                    > > > From: mailto:sallygrain%40aol.com
                    > > > Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2012 5:06 PM
                    > > > To: mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com
                    > > > Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)
                    > > >
                    > > > OK
                    > > >
                    > > > garum liquamen and the differences: i recently presented a paper at
                    > the
                    > > > British School at Rome to archaeologist of the fish trade in the
                    > Med. and
                    > > > therefore what follows is a pressi of what i said to them
                    > > >
                    > > > To start with you talk about Apicius as if he was the sole author
                    > and
                    > > > originator of the text when it is clear from our textual analysis
                    > that the
                    > > > recipe collection has multiple authors and they are slave cooks
                    > rather than
                    > > > a single gourmet. In terms of food at this level there were
                    > consumers and
                    > > > producers and it is the producers - the cooks - who we must trust to
                    > use
                    > > > the terminology correctly. You cannot argue that Apicius wrote this
                    > or that
                    > > > way, logically all the slave cooks wrote liquamen rather than garum
                    > for a
                    > > > reason. Equally you cannot place Apicius as a text in the late
                    > Empire
                    > > > reflecting a late usage for fish sauce. The terms used in it must
                    > reflect
                    > > > the way in which cooks expressed themselves throughout the classical
                    > > > period. The whole argument and justification for Vulgar Latin/Late
                    > Latin is
                    > > > based on elite usage. You say garum was the more commonplace term
                    > but in
                    > > > fact it is the other way round: Caelius Aurelianus says that the
                    > vulgar
                    > > > latin term in every day usage is liquamen. You also state that
                    > liquamen
                    > > > only occurs in Apicius but this is not the case. It is found in the
                    > Greek
                    > > > agricultural manual The Geoponica - you do all know that Andrew
                    > Dalby has
                    > > > recently published a new translation of this dont you ? - where it
                    > is a
                    > > > direct translation of the Greek garon but wait ...garon does not
                    > > > necessarily mean garum. It is also found frequently along with garum
                    > in the
                    > > > same veterinary recipe collections, particularly Vegetius and
                    > Pelagonius.
                    > > > (Pelagonius: liquamen: 9; 11.2; 13;98; 455; 457, garum: 428;13.
                    > Vegetius
                    > > > liquamen: 1.10.1; 1.17.10, 16; 2.91.2; 2.108.2; 2.132.4; 4.6.1,
                    > garum:
                    > > > 2.28.8; 3.28.10). In Galen it is also clear that two sauces were
                    > used: he
                    > > > refers simply to garon many times but only once or twice to garon
                    > melan. We
                    > > > have two names and two sauces so there shouldn't have been a
                    > problem!
                    > > >
                    > > > (Pelagonius: liquamen: 9; 11.2; 13;98; 455; 457, garum: 428;13.
                    > Vegetius
                    > > > liquamen: 1.10.1; 1.17.10, 16; 2.91.2; 2.108.2; 2.132.4; 4.6.1,
                    > garum:
                    > > > 2.28.8; 3.28.10). In Galen it is also clear that two sauces were
                    > used: he
                    > > > refers simply to garon many times but only once or twice to garon
                    > melan. We
                    > > > have two names and two sauces so there shouldn't have been a
                    > problem!
                    > > >
                    > > > Apicius - this is the title not the author - is an organic
                    > collection of
                    > > > recipes originally compiled, in it's earliest form, in Greek and we
                    > > > consider this to be in the late 1st century AD and possibly even
                    > earlier.
                    > > > We see no evidence of a formal publication date, only a finish date
                    > which
                    > > > is clearly 5/6th century. The chapter heading are in Greek and there
                    > are
                    > > > numerous terms that are not translated but transliterated i.e the
                    > Greek
                    > > > endings are converted into Latin endings so oenogaron: the Greek
                    > sauce made
                    > > > from the original Greek fish sauce and wine becomes oenogarum. Bare
                    > in mind
                    > > > the whole idea of fish sauce was originally Greek
                    > > >
                    > > > So if the cooks dont use garum qua garum one has to ask why? At this
                    > point
                    > > > I am pasting from the delivered paper
                    > > >
                    > > > What we first must do is acknowledge the presence of a blood and
                    > viscera
                    > > > sauce in the Ancient Mediterranean cuisine that we think of as Roman
                    > food.
                    > > > This sauce was a strong black and bloody condiment called in Greek
                    > garon
                    > > > melan or haimation that I believe was almost certainly handled by
                    > the
                    > > > consumer at table. This sauce was completely separate to the primary
                    > > > product in terms of archaeology (the amphora and fish bones) which
                    > was a
                    > > > cooking sauce made from whole-fish with extra viscera which provided
                    > > > enzymes which aided the liquefaction of the muscle tissue.
                    > > > The development and use of the primary product: a fish sauce made
                    > with
                    > > > whole fish, initially began in Greece and was a simple sauce made of
                    > very
                    > > > small fish (otherwise of no value) and salt used in everyday
                    > cooking. It is
                    > > > clear from references in 3rd century new comedy in Athens that this
                    > sauce
                    > > > was used with oil and vinegar or wine as a dressing for vegetables
                    > and
                    > > > pulses and was not considered particularly elite. My colleague
                    > Andrew Dalby
                    > > > has stated it to be a commonplace ingredient and it is noteworthy
                    > that
                    > > > Archestratus, the 2nd century Greek gourmet poet writing from Sicily
                    > about
                    > > > the best fish does not mention fish sauce at all. Later Galen in the
                    > 2nd
                    > > > Century AD is also suggesting the use of garos in dressing of oil
                    > and
                    > > > vinegar to accompany simple vegetables. The Apicius recipes
                    > collection
                    > > > includes a whole section on vegetables which are also largely
                    > accompanied
                    > > > by oil, wine and fish sauce. These simple blended sauces are
                    > basically like
                    > > > vinaigrette and are throughout the Apicius recipe text in various
                    > forms.
                    > > > The most common was an oenogarum a transliterated term from the
                    > Greek. In
                    > > > fact when oenogarum is translated into Latin - it is found in Ps.
                    > Gargilius
                    > > > Martialis recipe - it appears as Confectio liquaminis. So there
                    > rearly is
                    > > > no garum in Apicius. This means of cause that there is no blood and
                    > viscera
                    > > > garum, because as a table sauce it was used on food rather than in
                    > the
                    > > > cooking and was also used to make elite oenogarum that may have been
                    > > > blended at table by the gourmet or slaves attendants.
                    > > >
                    > > > This simple Greek whole fish sauce almost certainly came to Rome as
                    > garon
                    > > > transliterated into garum but was still this simple liquefied fish
                    > sauce.
                    > > > As fish sauce became popular in Rome the elite were concerned with
                    > > > differentiating their foods from everybody else���s and I believe
                    > they may
                    > > > have instigated new developments in fish sauce types, one of which
                    > was the
                    > > > blood and viscera sauce and one was the use of much larger fish that
                    > did
                    > > > have a market value such as mackerel and larger clupeidae and
                    > sparidae
                    > > > which could have been used as salted fish.
                    > > > I believe the confusion over the terminology occurred when the elite
                    > > > retained the term garum - the transliterated and now fashionable
                    > Greek term
                    > > > to designate their new table sauce made from blood and viscera and
                    > the
                    > > > manufacturer, trader , merchant and cook had to coin a new term in
                    > Latin to
                    > > > designate the original and commonplace fish sauce, called garon made
                    > from
                    > > > whole fish. This was liquamen, the derivation of which is ���to
                    > liquefy so it
                    > > > is aptly titled.
                    > > > We have mentioned the absence of garum from Apicius but we must also
                    > > > mention the absence of the separate Latin blood garum from
                    > Diocletians
                    > > > price edict in 301 AD . Here liquamen is equivalent to garos not
                    > garum just
                    > > > as we find in the Geoponica. These two absences are of cause the
                    > primary
                    > > > reason for the 'single sauce hypothesis' advovated by Curtis. If
                    > however
                    > > > you see these absences as evidence that the blood garum was no
                    > longer
                    > > > sufficiently popular in the early 4th century AD to warrant its own
                    > price
                    > > > on the edict or a mention in the recipes, then the later dominance
                    > of
                    > > > liquamen is explained. In fact (a guess) I believe the elite blood
                    > viscera
                    > > > garum had a relatively small market in comparison to liquamen and
                    > was made
                    > > > to appear more important because of the unusually close view we get
                    > of the
                    > > > elite at table in the early empire through satire. It was still made
                    > in the
                    > > > late empire as we know Ausonius acquired a jar in the mid 4th
                    > century but
                    > > > it seems it was a special delivery and therefore probably not
                    > readily
                    > > > available in southern France, and he is also very confused as to
                    > what to
                    > > > call it!
                    > > > The original Greek sauce ��� garos equivalent to liquamen -
                    > remained the
                    > > > primary product. We can I think come to see how it was that later
                    > sources
                    > > > began to say that garum was liquamen. Caelius Aurelianus says that
                    > the
                    > > > vulgar latin term in every day usage is liquamen ��� I don���t
                    > think he means
                    > > > just the poor here - and the elite prefer garum but in principle
                    > it���s the
                    > > > same product. if Pliny can fail to see the two sauces when it was
                    > popular,
                    > > > when the blood sauce has become rare it would seem quite logical to
                    > revert
                    > > > to the earlier usage and make the assumption that everyone has -
                    > ancient
                    > > > and modern - that the Greek and Latin meant the same thing'.
                    > > > note: I have not pasted the bit from Pliny but he is the cause of
                    > most of
                    > > > the confusion as he conflates both sauces into one. His elite
                    > expensive
                    > > > garum is made from viscera and most interpretations of his
                    > definition of
                    > > > fish sauce presupposed that he also meant to say small fish as he
                    > goes on
                    > > > to suggest that allec was the residue of garum but the blood viscera
                    > sauce
                    > > > has no bones or fish paste to make an allec. Only the primary fish
                    > sauce
                    > > > generates a fish paste.
                    > > > Hope this helps. It is a theory i will own but a thoroughly rational
                    > and
                    > > > logical one according to the archaeologists (and Robert Curtis who
                    > has been
                    > > > an adviser), I spoke to and they will be moving forward in analysing
                    > > > amphorae shapes and fish bone residues with the idea that there were
                    > two
                    > > > basic types of sauce in the 1st century AD when all the archaeology
                    > is most
                    > > > prolific.
                    > > >
                    > > > Sally Grainger
                    > > >
                    > > > -----Original Message-----
                    > > > From: RM <mailto:apicius%40maierphil.de>;;;
                    > > > To: Apicius <mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com>;;;
                    > > > Sent: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 14:05
                    > > > Subject: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)
                    > > >
                    > > > I am sorry, but are you really sure that there is any evidence for a
                    > > > difference between garum and the Apician ���liquamen���?
                    > ���liquamen��� is a word
                    > > > used only by Apicius instead of the more common word
                    > ���garum���. A good
                    > > > example is the following recipe:
                    > > > ���Hydrogarata isicia sic facies: teres piper, ligusticum,
                    > pyrethrum
                    > > > minimum, suffundes liquamen. temperas aquam cisterninam, dum
                    > inducet,
                    > > > exinanies in caccabo, et tum isicia ad vaporem ignis pones, ut
                    > caleat, et
                    > > > sic sorbendum inferes.���
                    > > > This means that to make ���hydrogarum��� Apicius used
                    > ���liquamen��� et ���aqua
                    > > > cisternina���. ���liquamen��� for Apicius is just a
                    > terminus technicus. The word
                    > > > ���liquamen��� has been used in antiquity just by Columella
                    > (who used it in a
                    > > > different context) and once by Flavius Vopiscus Syracusius on
                    > Aurelius
                    > > > where it meant ���garum���. The hypothesis of a difference
                    > between garum and
                    > > > liquamen sounds interesting but I think Apicius just introduced the
                    > word
                    > > > ���liquamen��� as a t.t. in order to substitute the common
                    > word ���garum���.
                    > > >
                    > > > Best regards
                    > > >
                    > > > RM
                    > > >
                    > > > From: mailto:sallygrain%40aol.com
                    > > > Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2012 1:49 PM
                    > > > To: mailto:Apicius%40yahoogroups.com
                    > > > Subject: Re: [Apicius] Recent Cook Out
                    > > >
                    > > > good to know the dishes worked
                    > > > Can i just point out - as i am a bit of a stickler for such things -
                    > that
                    > > > the recipes in Apicius use the word liquamen rather than garum
                    > because they
                    > > > represent two different sauces - one whole-fish sauce, one a blood
                    > viscera
                    > > > fish sauce and I don't want to see an inaccurate ref that puports to
                    > be
                    > > > from my book where you have changed liquamen into garum in the
                    > belief that
                    > > > they are synonymous - they were not.
                    > > >
                    > > > thanks so much
                    > > > sally
                    > > >
                    > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    > > >
                    > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    > > >
                    > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    > > >
                    > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    > > >
                    > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    > > >
                    > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    > > >
                    > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    > > >
                    > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    > > >
                    > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    > >
                    >
                    >
                    >


                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Mercy Neumark
                    This is a great discussion which I am enjoying greatly, but can the posts please be clipped? I read via digest, so if you just hit reply and leave all previous
                    Message 9 of 25 , Jul 22 6:26 AM
                    • 0 Attachment
                      This is a great discussion which I am enjoying greatly, but can the posts please be clipped? I read via digest, so if you just hit reply and leave all previous posts, it gets a little bulky to read thru after a bit.

                      Thank you so much! Sorry to bother you. :(

                      --Mercy

                      Sent from my iPhone
                      Please excuse any typos or odd autocorrection errors
                    • Saerlaith
                      I don t mind so long as everyone starts trimming their posts to just their own reply and the pertinent lines of the previous post. The discussion is
                      Message 10 of 25 , Jul 22 7:50 AM
                      • 0 Attachment
                        I don't mind so long as everyone starts trimming their posts to just their own reply and the pertinent lines of the previous post.

                        The discussion is fascinating, but it's more than a little unecessary not to clip the post, especially when the replies are so long.

                        --- In Apicius@yahoogroups.com, sallygrain@... wrote:
                        >
                        >
                        > Hi justine and all
                        >
                        > this is getting wonderfully complicated but as i have always wanted to get to grips with what Pliny says here i do think we might continue if no one minds ? Take care of your feast first by all means! Hope it goes well
                      • Justin Mansfield
                        Yeah, sorry about that. The thought did occur to me, but not until my last reply. ... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        Message 11 of 25 , Jul 22 8:18 AM
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Yeah, sorry about that. The thought did occur to me, but not until my last
                          reply.

                          On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 9:50 AM, Saerlaith <saerlaith.sca@...> wrote:

                          > **
                          >
                          >
                          > I don't mind so long as everyone starts trimming their posts to just their
                          > own reply and the pertinent lines of the previous post.
                          >
                          > The discussion is fascinating, but it's more than a little unecessary not
                          > to clip the post, especially when the replies are so long.
                          >


                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • sallygrain@aol.com
                          However, this does leave me looking again at his paragraph on the topic, a bit confused. It seems like the first sentence is definitely about allex (since, you
                          Message 12 of 25 , Jul 24 8:29 AM
                          • 0 Attachment
                            However, this does leave me looking again at his paragraph on the topic, a
                            bit confused. It seems like the first sentence is definitely about allex
                            (since, you know, he names it specifically), and it seems generally agreed
                            that "ad colorem ... dilutum" refers to garum (as opposed to allex). And it
                            seems to be generally assumed that the reference to kosher products would
                            be about garum, or fish-sauce in general. But then in the last sentence he
                            explicitly mentions allex again (where he mentions oysters, sea urchins,
                            jelly fish, mullet livers, and so on). So I don't know what to tell you.




                            I think you have hit the nail on the head re this bit of confused rambling by Pliny. I really dont think he knows what he is talking about to be honest It is one of the major problems we have with his work as he was inclined to just write out everything he could find about a given topic without any judgement or critical thinking and this often leads to confusion. I think this is the reason why it makes no sense, he didn't fully comprehend what the individual products were he was discussing, and in fact if that is the case then we cannot trust any of it! He was, according to his nephew, inclined to read everyone else's works on a given topic and then makes notes so that he could precis their knowledge for his own books (letter 3.5). We have to assume that the books he read were written by people with some empirical knowledge of the topic even if he clearly demonstrates limited empirical knowledge. The reversal of the kosher issue implies considerable lack of attention and I guess he was rather indifferent to the topic. His diet is also referred to in the letter above as being very simple and traditional. Pliny the elder would not be included among those who indulge in Roman delicacies I feel. Having determined that Pliny is somewhat confused we have to find other references to the issues that seem to make no sence and see how much of it is supported elsewhere Pliny should not be used as a primary source for garum that for sure.

                            Pliny but also the Romans generally do seem to be confused by the complex nomenclature of fish sauce and I think their confusion feeds ours.
                            Pliny refers to garum as a elite and expensive sauce made from fish viscera and waste matter generally and I have made the judgment that this must have originally referred to the blood viscera sauce which we know was considered elite and expensive according to the Geoponica. It does not follow that the waste matter he referr to would necessarily be other small fish - thus turning the blood viscera sauce into a general fish sauce. ( I originally did think this but have changed my mind) I assume the more expensive garum was made from selected fish ie all Spanish mackerel for instance from New carthage mentioned by Pliny as costing thousands of HS or all tuna viscera as mentioned by the Geoponica. Thus the ordinary garum would i think be made from a mixture of any old fish viscera and blood. It is not easy to harvest fish blood from mackerel, easier for tuna if large enough, but when done well - note - 'made from the blood of a still breathing mackerel' is indicative of the technique required - the resulting sauce could be both black and bloody which is how this sauce is described by Galen and also a bloody sauce is referred to in a papyrus fragment. If however the fish are not adequately bled then the sauce - here i can demonstrate through empirical experience as i tried to make a garum with already dead mackerel and could not get much blood out of them - would resemble an ordinary fish sauce made from whole small fish the liquefied liquamen . Ie it is pale - dark brown and they are indistinguishable from each other though the protein levels are actually quite high in the viscera one. Interesting! When at table how would a diner know what he was consuming? A black bloody viscera sauce blended with sweet wine would look brown - aged honey wine, a liquamen blended with wine would look like aged honey wine and an inadequately made garum would look like aged honey wine. Like most luxury foods if you dont know that you are eating expensive food you often could not guess.

                            Pliny then in the next paragraph talks about allec being the residue of this garum but believe me the residue from blood viscera garum is not fit for consumption even for Cato's slaves!. We know from the Geoponica that allec / alix was the residue from the sauce made from whole fish and here we see that Pliny thinks in terms of one sauce - the single sauce hypotheses - that Robert Curtis et al also edvocate. The Geoponica is quite clear that the two sauces were separate. Once we see Pliny's confusion and even why he might be confused i think it puts the paragraph about allec into perspective. We cannot look for any rational or logical thought processors within the Latin. Given this I will look again at the allec passage - maybe i am expecting too much of the latin as it stands.

                            sally

                            -----Original Message-----
                            From: Justin Mansfield <iustinus@...>
                            To: Apicius <Apicius@yahoogroups.com>
                            Sent: Sat, 21 Jul 2012 19:59
                            Subject: Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)





                            Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
                            Messages in this topic (20)
                            RECENT ACTIVITY:
                            Visit Your Group

                            Post message: Apicius@yahoogroups.com
                            Unsubscribe: Apicius-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                            List owner: Apicius-owner@yahoogroups.com


                            Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use



                            .








                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.