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

Re: [Apicius] Garum and Liquamen (again)

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 25 , Jul 19, 2012
    View Source
    • 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 2 of 25 , Jul 20, 2012
      View Source
      • 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 3 of 25 , Jul 20, 2012
        View Source
        • 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 4 of 25 , Jul 21, 2012
          View Source
          • 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 5 of 25 , Jul 21, 2012
            View Source
            • 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 6 of 25 , Jul 21, 2012
              View Source
              • 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 7 of 25 , Jul 21, 2012
                View Source
                • 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 8 of 25 , Jul 22, 2012
                  View Source
                  • 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 9 of 25 , Jul 22, 2012
                    View Source
                    • 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 10 of 25 , Jul 22, 2012
                      View Source
                      • 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 11 of 25 , Jul 24, 2012
                        View Source
                        • 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.