Monsieur Ude, who is, unquestionably, the prince of
gastronomers, has just published the tenth edition of his French
Cook, of which, line upon line, we may say, Decies repelita
placebit; and Jarrin, the celebrated artiste en sucre,
has also revised his Italian Confectioner, in a fourth
edition. We should think both these works must be the literary
furniture of every good kitchen, or they ought to be; for there is
just enough of the science in them to make them extremely useful,
whilst all must allow them to be entertaining.
A few years ago, Mrs. Glasse ruled the roast of cookery, and not
a stew was made without consulting her invaluable book. Whilst we
were embroiled in war, her instructions were standing orders, but
with the peace came a host of foreign luxuries and fashions, among
these, Cookery from France. Hence the French system became
introduced into the establishments of the wealthy of this country,
to which may be attributed the sale of nine editions of M. Ude's
work; for it is strictly what it professes to be, "A System of
Fashionable and Economical Cookery, adapted to the use of English
Families." The tenth edition, before us, is a bulky tome of
about 500 pages, with an appendix of observations on the meals of
the day; mode of giving suppers at Routs and soirées, as
practised when the author was in the employ of Lord Sefton; and
above all, a brief history of the rise and progress of Cookery,
from an admirable French treatise. This is literally the sauce
piquante of the volume, and we serve a little to our
readers:—
It appears that the science of Cookery was in a very inferior
state under the first and second race of the French kings. Gregory
of Tours has preserved the account of a repast of French warriors,
at which, in this refined age, we should be absolutely astounded.
According to Eginhard, Charlemagne lived poorly, and ate but
little—however, this trait of resemblance in Charlemagne and
Napoleon, the modern Eginhards have forgotten in their comparison
of these two great men. Philippe le Bel was hardly half an hour at
table, and Francis I. thought more of women than of eating and
drinking; nevertheless, it was under this gallant monarch that the
science of gastronomy took rise in France.
Few have heard the name of Gonthier d'Andernach. What Bacon was
to philosophy, Dante and Petrarch to poetry, Michael Angelo and
Raphael to painting, Columbus and Gama to geography, Copernicus and
Galileo to astronomy, Gonthier was in France to the art of cookery.
Before him, their code of eating was formed only of loose scraps
picked up here and there; the names of dishes were strange and
barbarous, like the dishes themselves.
Gonthier is the father of cookery, as Descartes, of French
philosophy. It is said that Gonthier, in less than ten years,
invented seven cullises, nine ragoûts, thirty-one sauces, and
twenty-one soups.
A woman opened the gates of an enlightened age; it was
Catherine, the daughter of the celebrated Lorenzo de Medici, niece
of Leo the Tenth, then in all the bloom of beauty. Accompanied
by a troop of perfumers, painters, astrologers, poets,
and cooks, she crossed the Alps, and whilst Bullan planned the
Tuileries, Berini recovered from oblivion those sauces which, for
many ages, had been lost. Endowed with all the gifts of fortune,
the mother and the wife of kings, nature had also gifted her with a
palate, whose intuitive sensibility seldom falls to the lot of
sovereigns. In consequence of which, after having driven before her
this troop of male and female soothsayers, who pretended to foretel
the future, she consulted her maître d'hôtel,
about some roast meat brought from luxurious Florence; and dipped
in a rich sauce the same hand that held the reins of the empire,
and which Roussard compared to the rosy fingers of Aurora! Let the
foolish vulgar laugh at the importance which the queen-mother seems
to place in the art of cooking; but they have not considered that
it is at table, in the midst of the fumes of Burgundy, and the
savoury odour of rich dishes, that she meditated the means of
quelling a dangerous faction, or the destruction of a man, who
disturbed her repose. It was during dinner she had an interview
with the Duke of Alba, with whom she resolved on the massacre of
St. Bartholomew.
Not long after the massacre of St. Bartholomew the throne was
occupied by Henry de Valois, brother to Charles the Ninth, and son
of Catherine. He was a prince of good appetite, a lover of wine and
good cheer, qualities which his mother had carefully fostered and
cultivated, that she alone might hold the reigns of government.
Henry de Valois spent whole days at table, and the constellations
of the kitchen shone with the greatest splendour under this
gourmand king. We date from the beginning of his reign the
invention of the fricandeau, generally attributed to a Swiss. Now
the fricandeau having its Columbus, its discovery appears not more
wonderful than that of America, and yet it required une grande
force de tête.
Though we acknowledge the immense influence this monarch had
over cookery, we must not conceal that he brought in fashion
aromatic sauces, tough macaroni, cullises, and brown sauces
calcined by a process like that of roasted coffee. These sauces
gave the dishes a corrosive acidity, and as Jourdan le Cointe
remarks, far from nourishing the body, communicated to it a
feverish sensation, which baffled all the skill of physicians, in
their attempts to cure it. They were positive poisons which the
Italians had introduced into France, a taste for which spread
through every class of society.
Under the reign of Henry III. a taste for warm drinks was joined
to that of spicy dishes. Hippocrates recommends hot water in
fevers, Avicenna in consumption, Trallien in phrensy, Plato in
loathings, AEtius in strangury,—whence we conclude that warm
water, having so many different qualities, must have been a very
useful article at table, had it only been to assist digestion,
considering that people ate copiously in the reign of the Valois.
They made not one single repast without a jug full of hot water,
and even wine was drunk lukewarm.
If the poor have preserved the memory of Henry IV., we cannot
say as much of his cooks. That monarch did nothing for
them;—either Nature had not endowed him with a good appetite,
(for what prince ever was perfect,) or he looked upon them, as, in
the last century, we looked upon soups, as things of hardly any
use; but in return they also did nothing for him.
It is very remarkable, that in France, where there is but one
religion, the sauces are infinitely varied, whilst in England,
where the different sects are innumerable, there is, we may say,
but one single sauce. Melted butter, in English cookery, plays
nearly the same part as the Lord Mayor's coach at civic ceremonies,
calomel in modern medicine, or silver forks in the fashionable
novels. Melted butter and anchovies, melted butter and capers,
melted butter and parsley, melted butter and eggs, and melted
butter for ever: this is a sample of the national cookery of this
country. We may date the art of making sauces from the age of Louis
XIV. Under Louis XIII. meat was either roasted or broiled: every
baker had a stove where the citizen, as well as the great lord,
sent his meat to be dressed; but, by degrees, they began to feel
the necessity of sauces.
It appears that the great wits of the age of Louis XIV. had not
that contempt for cookery which some idealists of our days affect
to have. Boileau has described a bad repast like a man who has
often seen better; he liked the pleasures of the table, which have
never been incompatible with the gifts of genius, or the
investigations of the understanding. "I cannot conceive," says
Doctor Johnson, "the folly of those, who, when at table, think of
every thing but eating; for my part, when I am there I think of
nothing else; and whosoever does not trouble himself with this
important affair at dinner, or supper, will do no good at any other
time." Boswell affirms that he never knew a man who dispatched a
dinner better than the great moralist. But what avails
it to defend cooks and gourmands? It is an axiom in political
economy, according to Malthus, that he who makes two blades of
grass grow, where before there was but one, ought to be considered
as the benefactor of his country, and of mankind. Is not this a
service which the epicure and the cook every day do their country?
Addison thought differently from Johnson on this subject: "Every
time," says he, "that I see a splendid dinner, I fancy fever, gout,
and dropsy, are lying in ambush for me, with the whole race of
maladies which attack mankind: in my opinion an epicure is a fool."
What does this blustering of Addison prove? Boswell also asserts,
that Addison often complained of indigestion. And in the present
times, the first chemist of the day, Sir Humphry Davy, passes for a
finished gourmand.
Roasting, boiling, frying, broiling, do not alone constitute the
arc of cooking, otherwise the savage of the Oronoco might be
maître d'hôtel with Prince Esterhazy.
The science of gastronomy made great progress under Louis XV., a
brilliant epoch for the literature of gastronomy: together with the
fashions, customs, freedom of opinion, and taste for equipages and
horses brought from Great Britain—some new dishes taken from
the culinary code of this country, such as puddings and
beef-steaks, were also introduced into France. Thanks to the
increasing progress and discoveries in chemistry, and to the genius
of our artists, the art of cookery rose to the greatest height
towards the end of the last century. What a famous age was that of
Mezelier, l'Asne, Jouvent, Richaud, Chaud, and Robert.
History will never forget that great man, who aspired to all
kinds of glory, and would have been, if he had wished, as great a
cook as he was a statesman—I mean the Prince de Talleyrand,
who rekindled the sacred flame in France. The first clouds of
smoke, which announced the resurrection of the science of cookery
in the capital, appeared from the kitchen of an ancient bishop.
A revolution like the French, which presented to their eyes such
terrible spectacles, must have left some traces in their physical
or intellectual constitution. At the end of this bloody drama, the
mind, bewildered by the late dreadful scenes, was unable to feel
those sweet and peaceable emotions, in which it had formerly
delighted; as the palate, having long been at rest, and now become
blunted, must require high-seasoned dishes, to excite an appetite.
The reign of the Directory, therefore is that of Romances à
la Radcliffe, as well as of Sauces à la Provençale.
Fortunately, the eighth of Brumaire pulled down the five Directors,
together with their saucepans.
Under the Consulship, and during the empire, the art of cooking,
thanks to the labours of Beauvilliers, Balaine, and other artists,
made new and remarkable improvements. Among the promoters of the
gastric science, the name of a simple amateur makes a distinguished
figure—it is Grisnod de la Reynière, whose almanac the
late Duke of York called the most delightful book that ever issued
from the press. We may affirm, that the Almanach des
Gourmands made a complete revolution in the language and usages
of the country.
We are yet too near the restoration to determine the degree of
influence it had on cookery in France. The restoration has
introduced into monarchy the representative forms friendly to
epicurism, and in this respect it is a true blessing—a new
era opened to those who are hungry.
M. Jarrin's fourth edition contains upwards of 500 receipts in
Italian confectionery, with plates of improvements, &c. like a
cyclopaedian treatise on mechanics; and when our readers know there
are "seven essential degrees of boiling sugar," they will pardon
the details of the business of this volume. The "degrees"
are—1. Le lissé, or thread, large or small; 2.
Le perlé, or pearl, le soufflet, or blow; 4.
La plume, the feather; 5. Le boulet, the ball, large
or small; 6. Le cassé, the crack; and, 7. the
caramel. So complete is M. Jarrin's system of confectionery,
that he is "independent of every other artist;" for he even
explains engraving on steel and on wood. What a host of
disappointments this must prevent!
If we look further into, or "drink deep" of the art of
confectionery, we shall find it to be a perfect Microcosm—a
little creation; for our artist talks familiarly of "producing
picturesque scenery, with trees, lakes, rocks, &c.; gum paste,
and modelling flowers, animals, figures, &c." with astonishing
mimic strife. We must abridge one of these receipts for a "Rock
Piece Montée in a lake."
"Roll out confectionery paste, the size of the dish intended to
receive it; put into a mould representing your pond a lining
of almond paste, coloured pale pink, and place in the centre a sort
of pedestal of almond paste, supported by lumps of the same paste
baked; when dry put it into the stove. Prepare syrup to fill
the hollow of the lake, to represent the
water; having previously modelled in gum paste little
swans, place them in various parts of the syrup; put
it into the stove for three hours, then make a small hole through
the paste, under your lake, to drain off the syrup; a crust
will remain with the swans fixed in it, representing the
water. Next build the rock on the pedestal with rock
sugar, biscuits, and other appropriate articles in sugar, fixed to
one another, supported by the confectionery paste you have put in
the middle, the whole being cemented together with caramel, and
ornamented. The moulding and heads should then be pushed in almond
paste, coloured red; the cascades and other ornaments must
be spun in sugar."
These are, indeed, romantic secrets. Spinning nets and cages
with sugar is another fine display of confectionery skill—we
say nothing of the nets and cages which our fair friends are
sometimes spinning—for the sugar compared with their
bonds—are weak as the cords of the Philistines.