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

57971Re: [Authentic_SCA] Re: wriggle room

Expand Messages
  • JL Badgley
    Jul 8, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 8:45 PM, Heather Rose
      Jones<heather.jones@...> wrote:
      >
      > On Jul 8, 2009, at 4:11 AM, bronwynmgn@... wrote:
      >
      >> In a message dated 7/7/2009 10:51:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
      >> tatsushu@... writes:
      >>
      >> <<For food I often look at post-cutoff sources, but I analyze them
      >> critically based on earlier evidence. If you find a 1640 recipe for a
      >> food that is mentioned (but not otherwise described) in 1590, then
      >> would it not be reasonable to assume that they are the same, barring
      >> contrary evidence?>>
      >>
      >> Similar yes, but quite possibly not the same. After all, we have
      >> lots of
      >> contemporary manuscripts which list a recipe of the same name in
      >> each, but
      >> the recipes themselves can be anything from slight variations of
      >> each other to
      >> completely different. We also have evidence that a dish can be
      >> listed by
      >> the same name in an earlier and a later source and have evolved
      >> significantly
      >> in between. So assuming that a dish named Bukenade in one source
      >> and a
      >> dish named Bukenade in another source are the same dish is a faulty
      >> premise.
      >>
      >
      > My favorite example of this problem is how to interpret the Welsh
      > clothing term "pais". The word shows up as a description of a specific
      > garment continuously from the earliest written sources (the Book of
      > Aneurin) to the present day. But the specific nature of the garment
      > being referred to changes enormously over that time. Even if you had a
      > picture of a garment in century X with an arrow pointing to it saying
      > "this is a 'pais'", that wouldn't tell you what the word referred to
      > in century X-1 or X+1.

      All true, but then again, this is where we get into the "reasonable
      attempt"--we get as close as we can justify to the truth of the
      matter, and don't ever try to adjudicate things in a vacuum.

      -E. G. Logan
    • Show all 19 messages in this topic