Who Cooked?
Hannah Epstein
The frontispiece of Gervaise Markham’s sixteenth century book, The English Housewife, claims that the text contains “[t]he inward and outward vertues which ought to be in a compleat woman. As, her skill in Physicke, Cookery, Banqueting-stuffe, Distillation, Perfumes, VVool, Hemp, Flax, Dayries, Brewing, Baking, and all other things belonging to an Houshould.” Markham goes on to proclaim that cooking, “…is a duty really belonging to a woman…” (60). Clearly, the ideal housewife of Shakespeare’s day needed to be well versed in all of these areas. Women were associated with all types of nurturing, not only pertaining to children, but to the feeding and nursing of their households as well. Markham’s book is one of the most well-known of a large number of books written to help women do their duty by their husbands and families.
Women in the time of Shakespeare spent many hours of the day devoted to culinary pursuits. Food preparation was an arduous task, which consumed much time and energy. Although butchers existed, women still needed to dress and hang game that had been caught by the men, harvest their own gardens, collect eggs from their chickens, milk their cows, and prepare food for their families from those raw ingredients. This in addition to running a household and rearing their children! Daily food for the household tended to be simpler than the foods eaten by nobility (Thirsk 15)
Women were expected to be skilled not just in culinary pursuits but as herbalists as well to provide medicines for the household. Many of the herbs from a woman’s household garden could be used not just to flavor food, but as poultices, tisanes and plasters meant to ameliorate or cure a variety of ills. “So-called 'physic' gardens were established at leading universities to grow plants of medicinal value. Garlic was one of the major plants grown for this purpose" (Rivlin 953S) It remained the food of the working classes, though the nobility used it for its supposed therapeutic benefits (953S).
As evidenced in the frontispiece of Markham’s text, women were tasked not only with cooking, but also with the brewing of beverages. Water was not often consumed plain; ale or beer were the preferred drinks, being much safer than water (Thirsk 22). In her article, “What and How They Ate in the Days of Elizabeth,” Katherine Morse writes, “Every thrifty country wife brewed her own beer” (97). Indeed, given the cost of buying beer, home brewing was necessary. Markham notes that, “…though we have many excellent men maltsters, yet it is properly the work and care of the woman, for it is a house work…” (180). There was a clear difference in the type of work considered acceptable for men and women. Women were to work primarily in the home, and men were not to take on tasks that were considered women’s work. In an article on the subject of women’s work in Early Modern England, Jane Whittle points out that, “The household was the primary place of work…” (284). Women did not have many opportunities to work outside of the household, save their own fields and gardens which were considered their partial purview.
Though it was women who cooked in the home setting, men retained a massive presence in the culinary workforce. In an article on the gendering of cooking roles in Early Modern England, Huey-Ling Lee points out that, “Although it cost more to employ male kitchen staff than women, grand households still preferred to hire men as a ‘status symbol’” (262). Men were larger, stronger, and more able to accomplish the heavy tasks associated with cooking in a large establishment. Men were more trusted cooks; women were often suspected of tampering with the food (262). Most of the sickness due to food consumption, however, was a result of food poisoning rather than intentional poisoning (Sim 78), though the distinction would have not been obvious to people of the time. And, though there were men employed as cooks, in the final analysis, most of the cooking for common folk was done by women.
Women in the time of Shakespeare spent many hours of the day devoted to culinary pursuits. Food preparation was an arduous task, which consumed much time and energy. Although butchers existed, women still needed to dress and hang game that had been caught by the men, harvest their own gardens, collect eggs from their chickens, milk their cows, and prepare food for their families from those raw ingredients. This in addition to running a household and rearing their children! Daily food for the household tended to be simpler than the foods eaten by nobility (Thirsk 15)
Women were expected to be skilled not just in culinary pursuits but as herbalists as well to provide medicines for the household. Many of the herbs from a woman’s household garden could be used not just to flavor food, but as poultices, tisanes and plasters meant to ameliorate or cure a variety of ills. “So-called 'physic' gardens were established at leading universities to grow plants of medicinal value. Garlic was one of the major plants grown for this purpose" (Rivlin 953S) It remained the food of the working classes, though the nobility used it for its supposed therapeutic benefits (953S).
As evidenced in the frontispiece of Markham’s text, women were tasked not only with cooking, but also with the brewing of beverages. Water was not often consumed plain; ale or beer were the preferred drinks, being much safer than water (Thirsk 22). In her article, “What and How They Ate in the Days of Elizabeth,” Katherine Morse writes, “Every thrifty country wife brewed her own beer” (97). Indeed, given the cost of buying beer, home brewing was necessary. Markham notes that, “…though we have many excellent men maltsters, yet it is properly the work and care of the woman, for it is a house work…” (180). There was a clear difference in the type of work considered acceptable for men and women. Women were to work primarily in the home, and men were not to take on tasks that were considered women’s work. In an article on the subject of women’s work in Early Modern England, Jane Whittle points out that, “The household was the primary place of work…” (284). Women did not have many opportunities to work outside of the household, save their own fields and gardens which were considered their partial purview.
Though it was women who cooked in the home setting, men retained a massive presence in the culinary workforce. In an article on the gendering of cooking roles in Early Modern England, Huey-Ling Lee points out that, “Although it cost more to employ male kitchen staff than women, grand households still preferred to hire men as a ‘status symbol’” (262). Men were larger, stronger, and more able to accomplish the heavy tasks associated with cooking in a large establishment. Men were more trusted cooks; women were often suspected of tampering with the food (262). Most of the sickness due to food consumption, however, was a result of food poisoning rather than intentional poisoning (Sim 78), though the distinction would have not been obvious to people of the time. And, though there were men employed as cooks, in the final analysis, most of the cooking for common folk was done by women.