De VOOGHT, Danielle, Royal Taste. Food, Power and Status at The European Courts After 1789

Royal Taste
Food, Power and Status at the

European Courts after 1789
Edited by
Danille De Vooght
Royal Taste
This page has been left blank intentionally
Royal Taste
Food, Power and Status at the European Courts after 1789
Edited by
Danille De Vooght
Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium
Danille De Vooght and the contributors 2011

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system
or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording
or otherwise without the prior permission of the publisher.
Danille De Vooght has asserted her right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act,
1988, to be identified as the editor of this work.
Published by

Ashgate Publishing
Limited Ashgate Publishing Company

Wey Court East Suite 420
Union Road
101 Cherry Street
Farnham
Burlington
Surrey, GU9 7PT
VT 05401-4405
England
USA
www.ashgate.com
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Royal taste : food, power and status at the European Courts after 1789.
1. Europe Court and courtiers Food History 18th century. 2. Europe Court and courtiers
Food History 19th century. 3. Europe--Kings and rulers--Social life and customs--18th century.
4. Europe--Kings and rulers Social life and customs 19th century. 5. Food habits
Social aspects--Europe History--18th century. 6. Food habits Social aspects Europe
History 19th century. 7. Social status Europe History 18th century. 8. Social status

Europe History 19th century.
I. Vooght, Danille de.
394.1208621094-dc22
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Royal taste : food, power and status at the European courts after 1789 / [edited by]
Danille
de Vooght. p. cm.

Includes
bibliographical references and index.

ISBN 978-0-7546-6837-4 (hardcover : alk. paper) ISBN 978-0-7546-9478-6

(ebook) 1. Food habitsEuropeHistory19th century. 2. Dinners and diningPolitical aspects
EuropeHistory19th century. 3. Courts and courtiersEurope--History19th century.
4. Political cultureEuropeHistory19th century. 5. EuropeHistory1789-1900.
I. Vooght, Danille de.
GT2853.E8R69 2010
394.1209409034dc22

ISBN 9780754668374 (hbk)

ISBN 9780754694786 (ebk)
II
2010038454
Contents
List of Figures and Tables
Notes on Contributors
Acknowledgments
Introduction. Food and Power: Studying Food at (Modern) Courts
Danille De Vooght and Peter Scholliers
1

The Historical Models of Food and Power in European Courts of

the Nineteenth Century: An Expository Essay and Prologue
Ken Albala
vii
ix
xiii
1
13
2 A Culinary Captatio Benevolentiae: The Use of the Truffle as a

Promotional Gift by the Savoy Dynasty in the Eighteenth Century31

Rengenier C. Rittersma
3

4

5

6

7

Drinking for Approval: Wine and the British Court

from George III to Victoria and Albert
Charles C. Ludington
57
Food at the Russian Court and the Homes of the Imperial

Russian Elite, Sixteenth to mid-Nineteenth Centuries
David I. Burrow
87
Pilaf and Bouches: The Modernization of Official Banquets at the

Ottoman Palace in the Nineteenth Century
111
zge Samanc
The Ceremony of Dining at Napoleon IIIs Court Between 1852
and 1870
Anne Lair
143
Culinary Networks of Power in a Nineteenth-Century Court

Society: Dining with the Kings of the Belgians (18311909) 171
Danille De Vooght
vi
Royal Taste
Conclusion
Stephen Mennell
191
Bibliography
Index
201
227
List of Figures and Tables

Figures
2.1 The change in the geopolitical position of Savoy during the

eighteenth century (source: Gianni Oliva, I Savoia, 1998;

by kind permission of Arnoldo Mondadori Editore S.p.A.).
3.1 Sherrys rise to parity with port, 18171846 (source: Parliament of

the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, Parliamentary

Report C.8706, Custom tariffs of the United Kingdom from

18001897, with some notes upon the history of more important

branches of the receipt from 1600 (London, 1897), pp. 15051).
5.1 A banquet given for a European envoy at Topkap Palace in the

eighteenth century (source: M. dOhsson, Tableau Gnral

de lEmpire Ottoman; authors collection).
5.2 Banquet given in honor of Prince Napolon at Beylerbeyi Palace

on May 8, 1854 (source: LIllustration: Journal Universel, Paris,

1854; authors collection).
5.3 The layout of the banquet arranged for the commander of the
English navy at Yldz Palace on June 28, 1914

(source: Ottoman Archives, BEO. GGd., 20 a).
5.4 The menu and concert program of the banquet arranged for

the commander of the English navy at Yldz Palace on June 28,

1914 (source: Ottoman Archives, BEO. GGd., 19b).
5.5 The layout of the banquet prepared in honor of the commandant

of the German navy at Dolmabahe Palace on May 17, 1914

(source: Ottoman Archives, BEO. GGd., 18a).
5.6 The menu of the banquet prepared in honor of the commandant


(Ottoman Archives, BEO. GGd., 17b).
6.1 The large dining room at the Louvre Palace (source: Muse du
Louvre).
6.2 Christofle basket (source: Muse du Louvre).
7.1 Visual representation of all dinner occasions at the Belgian royal

court in 1835 and how these are linked by guests (Pajek software).
36
75
114
123
128
129
131
132
151
180
viii
7.2

Royal Taste
Visualization of the component of the one-mode network

consisting of guests (tied by occasions), 1869 (Pajek).
183
Tables
2.1 Quantities of food gifts sent from Turin to Vienna

(17381774).
456
5.1 Dishes served during late Ottoman official banquets.
137142
6.1 Three menus served at the imperial court of Napoleon and
Eugenie, spanning a period of five years.
159
7.1 Line values of the one-mode network consisting of dinner

occasions, 1835 (Pajek Report Window).
181
7.2 Line values of the one-mode network consisting of dinner guests,

1835 (Pajek Report Window).
182
7.3 Interpretation of the line values of the one-mode network

consisting of all dinner occasions (tied by guests).
185
7.4 Interpretation of the degree of all vertices in the one-mode

network consisting of all dinner guests (tied by occasions).
186
Ken Albala is Professor of History at the University of the Pacific in Stockton,
California. He is the author of nine books ranging from academic monographs
such as Eating Right in the Renaissance (2002) and The Banquet: Dining in the
Great Courts of Late Renaissance Europe (2007) to popular titles such as Beans:
A History, the 2008 IACP Jane Grigson Award winner. He also edits three food
series for Greenwood Press, including Food Culture Around the World. He has
recently completed a textbook for the Culinary Institute of America entitled World
Cuisines, and has begun a book on food controversies in the Reformation era.
David I. Burrow is Assistant Professor of History at the University of South
Dakota, where he teaches European and Russian History. He received his PhD
from the University of Wisconsin-Madison in 2005. His research focuses on the
concept of the public in late eighteenth and early nineteenth-century Russia.
Danille De Vooght graduated from the History Department at the Vrije
Universiteit Brussel in 2001. As of January 2002, she is a researcher at that same
department. She conducted research for the research project (Un)sustainability
Developments of Product Systems, 18002000, an interdisciplinary project
in cooperation with Vito (Flemish Institute for Technological Research) and
commissioned by the Belgian Federal Science Policy Office. In April 2010,
she obtained her PhD with a thesis on the relationship between food culture
and (political, economic, social, and cultural) power within an elite, and more
particularly on food culture at the nineteenth-century Belgian royal court. She
has recently published an article about her research in Food & History and in an
edited volume entitled The Dining Nobility: From the Burgundian Dukes to the
Belgian Royalty (2008).
Anne Lair received her PhD in French culture from the Ohio State University
in 2003, she is an Assistant Professor of French in the Department of Modern
Languages at the University of Northern Iowa. She studies the ways in which a
literary text can also be read as a source for information about culture in a certain
period of time. As a French culture specialist and expert on the symbolism of
Royal Taste
food, she taught a course on famine and abundance, focusing mostly on the
Middle Ages and medieval literature.
Charles C. Ludington received his PhD from Columbia University in 2003. He
is currently a Visiting Professor at Duke University and the University of North
Carolina at Chapel Hill, where he teaches British and Irish history since 1400,
early modern European intellectual history, and two different courses on the
history of food and drink. He has published a variety of articles on the Huguenot
diaspora, British intellectual history, and the history of wine consumption in
Britain. He is currently writing a book on the meaning of the taste for wine in
Britain, 16491860.
Stephen Mennell read Economics at Cambridge, and was then Knox Fellow
in the Department of Social Relations at Harvard (19661967). From 1967
to 1990 he taught sociology at the University of Exeter, becoming Reader in
Sociology and Western European Studies. In 1986, his book All Manners of Food
was the first English-language book to be awarded the Grand Prix Internationale
de Literature Gastronomique, and the French translation (Franais et anglais
table) won the Prix Marco Polo in 1988. In 19871988 he was a Fellow of the
Netherlands Institute for Advanced Study, Wassenaar, and he has spent three
periods as a Senior Associate Member of St Antonys College, Oxford. From
1990 to 1993 he was Professor of Sociology and Head of the Department of
Anthropology and Sociology at Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. He
moved to the chair of sociology at University College Dublin in August 1993.
He has been an associate editor of Theory, Culture and Society since 1989, and
is now international editor of the Irish Journal of Sociology and an editor of the
journal Food & History, based in Tours, France.
Rengenier C. Rittersma graduated as a Master in History from the Universiteit
van Amsterdam in 1999. He also obtained his Masters degree in Germanic Studies
at the same institution in 2000. In 2006, he succesfully defended his PhD on the
myth of the count of Egmont in European culture (15681830) at the European
University Institute in Florence (published by Waxmann Verlag, Mnster and
New York, 2009). He is currently writing a book on the cultural history of the
truffle in Europe since the late Middle Ages. He recently published Luxury in
the Low Countries. Miscellaneous Reflections on Netherlandish Material Culture,
1500 to the Present (2010). Between 2008 and 2010, he was an Alexander von
Humboldt Fellow at the Universitt des Saarlandes, where he now teaches at the
History Department. Since 2007, he is the secretary of the editorial board of the
journal Food & History.
xi
zge Samanc completed her graduate studies in History at Boazici

University in Istanbul in 1998 and continued her PhD studies in Ottoman and
Turkish Studies at the Ecoles des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales in Paris.
Recently, she finalized her PhD thesis on the culinary culture of the Ottoman
palace and Istanbul in the nineteenth century. Samanc is Assistant Professor
at the department of Gastronomy and Culinary Arts at Yeditepe University in
Istanbul. She is also working as the culinary culture section curator in Antalyas
City Museum Project in Turkey.
Peter Scholliers studied History at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel, where he
obtained his PhD in 1984 with a dissertation on wages, purchasing power,
and the standard of living in Belgium in the interwar period. In his research he
focuses on the history of the standard of living, labor history, wages and prices,
material culture, and industrial archeology, and on the history of food. He was
a researcher at the Center for Contemporary Social History between 1976
and 1985. In 1986, he became a staff member of the Department of History
at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel. Since 2000, he has also been a lecturer in that
department. He is a member of the editorial staff of Food & History, Food and
Foodways, and Food, Culture & Society. On top of that he is vice-president of the
International Committee for the Research of European Food History and he is
a member of the Comit dOrientation of the Institut Europen dHistoire et
des Cultures de lAlimentation. Recently, he received the Vlaamse Cultuurprijs
Smaakcultuur (Flemish Award for the Culture of Taste) for his research on
food.
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank the International Institute of Social History for giving me
the opportunity to organize a session on courtly food at the ESSHC 2008.
Thank you to all authors for their contributions, and to Stephen Mennell
for his editorial remarks. Thank you, Jay Paul Bullard, for proofreading the
manuscript. Thank you to the peer reviewers, for their useful comments and
suggestions. Thank you to my supervisor, Peter Scholliers, for his never-ending
enthusiasm and support. And of course, a special thanks to Emily Yates and
Nick Wain, editors at Ashgate Publishing, for their enthusiasm, patience, and
suggestions.
Danille De Vooght
Introduction
Food and Power: Studying Food at
(Modern) Courts
Danille De Vooght and Peter Scholliers
The Importance of Food and Everything That Comes With It

The social and cultural importance of food has been examined and confirmed
at length by anthropological, sociological, and historical research, which
has ascribed to it status, identity, and power. Clearly, (public) dining, social
position, and hierarchies are tightly interconnected. This explicit association
between food and status was, academically speaking, first acknowledged on
the food production level. Landowners, millers, and bakers were the rich, the
famous, and the powerful, since they owned the essential foodstuffsgrain,
flour, and bread, respectively. Anthropologist Sidney Mintz analyzed this
relationship meticulously. Taking sugar as an example, he demonstrated the
relationship between the possession of sugar plantations and slavery and, thus,
how ownership of food was directly proportionate to the occupation of the most
important positions in society. Moreover, this was a dual conceptualization of
power; next to the obvious demonstration of power on the production level, the
social significance of sugar consumption could hardly be neglected: As a rare
and costly substance, its very consumption expressed a kind of power. Food
consumption not only reflects power and status, but it also demonstrates the
quest for power and status, regardless of the lack of either ownership or affluent
income. In early nineteenth-century Spain, for example, some impoverished
aristocrats ignored their formal bankruptcy or judicially constrained patrimony,
P. Fieldhouse, Food and Nutrition: Customs and Culture (New York, 1995), p. 78.
See, for example, R. Gibson and M. Blinkhorn (eds), Landownership and Power in

Modern Europe (London, 1991).

S.W. Mintz, Sweetness and Power: the Place of Sugar in Modern Society (New York,
1985).

S.W. Mintz, Tasting Food, Tasting Freedom: Excursions into Eating, Culture, and the
Past (Boston, MA, 1996), p. 12.
Royal Taste
and continued buying (via seemingly endless credit) costly foods in order
to uphold their status. The consumption of rich foodin terms of quantity
and qualitywas and undoubtedly is a manner of showing ones social status,
creating or maintaining power, or aspiring to powerful circles. Taste and dining
preferences, as Ken Albala put it, point to broader values, desires, and sometimes
explicit food ideologies. Like any ideology, this term denotes a conscious way of
behaving, in this case eating, intended both to set the individual or group apart
from others [] .
This book addresses the relationship between food consumption, status, and
(political, cultural, social, and economic) power by focusing on the traditional
top layer of society; it considers the way royalty, nobility, and aristocrats wined
and dined in the rapidly changing world of the late eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries, a period during which the bourgeoisie and even the menu peuple
(i.e. common people) obtained political rights, economic influence, social
importance, and cultural authority. Although the book deals with all the
elements that arise when kings, sultans, or czars are mentioned, it moves beyond
the effulgence of extravagant feasts. It questions the role of food consumption at
courts and the significance of particular foodstuffs or methods of preparation; it
deals with the number of guests at parties and with table decorations; it studies
the way courts influenced one another; and it considers whether and how dining
preferences at court diffused throughout the society as a whole and, indeed, how
societys food practices interact with court food. This relationship, interestingly,
was also illustrated in a present-day democracy prior to the inauguration of the
44th president of the United States, Barack Obama. The choice of who was to
become the new White House chef stirred up debate among foodies, since his
[Obamas] eating habits could set an example for the rest of the country.
Food, of course, makes up the central issue of this book, but because food
is much more than the simple act of eating and drinking, the book addresses
issues of social networks, prestige, politics, and diplomacy, banquets and their
design, income and spending, economic aims, taste and preference, cultural
C. Sarasa, Upholding Status: the Diet of a Noble Family in Early NineteenthCentury La Mancha, in P. Scholliers (ed.), Food, Drink and Identity: Cooking, Eating and
Drinking since the Middle Ages (Oxford and New York, 2001), pp. 3761.

K. Albala, The Banquet: Dining in the Great Courts of Late Renaissance Europe
(Urbana and Chicago, 2007), p. 2.

H. Bailey, No White House Food Fight, Newsweek, January 17, 2009. As read
on: http://www.newsweek.com/id/180097 (accessed on January 20, 2009). J. Huget,
Eat, Drink, and Be Healthy, Washington Post, January 19, 2009. As read on: http://www.
washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/16/AR2009011604152.html?refe
rrer=emailarticlepg (accessed on January 20, 2009).
Introduction
innovations, social hierarchies, material culture, and many more social and
cultural issues. Food is crucial to all humans, yet it may be even more essential to
the rich and famous because of these multiple connotations with prestige, codes
(of behavior), and display of sheer power. The specific issues addressed in this
book will be presented more thoroughly in the final section of this chapter.
Food Historiography, Social Differences, and Power Exertion
The link between food consumption and (economic) status has been studied
and empirically verified more or less continuously since the late eighteenth
century. Recurring investigations into household expenditures established, not
surprisingly, that richer households spent more money on food, mostly due to
the variety in their diets. In 1855 for example, the Belgian statistician Edouard
Ducptiaux recorded the yearly per capita consumption by various families
of four foodstuffs that were considered a genuine marker of wealth, including
meat. His findings revealed striking differences between the rentier, grande
aisance (106 kg of meat), the boutiquier, avec petit commerce de mercerie
(65 kg), and the ouvrier maon (13.5 kg), all living in Brussels in 1853. By
1900, numerous statistical studies of mainly working-class households in a great
variety of countries led to more detailed insight into this relationship, confirming
that higher income groups ate more, and more varied food. Moreover, this led
to one of the first sociological laws formulated by the German statistician
Ernst Engel: as income increases, the share of total spending on food declines.
Subsequent research showed this to be universally valid both through space
and time, as well as within a particular society. Since the 1920s, these inquiries
gradually began to include other social categories such as blue-collar employees
or independent workers. From the 1950s on, partly because of the development
of more sophisticated statistics, data were refined, groups were reorganized,
and other classifications were introduced (e.g. dwelling place or age group).
Although these changes raised doubts among some scholars about the close link
between income and food consumption, the data substantiated the importance
of family income, regardless of family composition, age, or place of residence.
Moreover, since most people spent at least 50 percent of their household budget
E. Ducptiaux, Budgets conomiques des classes ouvrires en Belgique, Bulletin de
la Commission Centrale de Statistique, VI (1855): p. 415.

See the survey by G.J. Stigler, The Early History of Empirical Studies of Consumer
Behavior, The Journal of Political Economy, April (1954): pp. 95113. On the relevance of
household budgets, see T. Pierenkemper, Das Rechnungsbuch der Hausfrau, Geschichte
und Gesellschaft, 14/1 (1988): pp. 3863.
Royal Taste
on food (in Western Europe this was true up to the 1950s), the possibility to
obtain other goods or services was inevitably restricted. The ability to make at
all times consumption choices, thus, was the privilege of a small elite. This elite
used quantity as well as quality of food to enjoy and express material comfort
and prestige.
If the particular aim of studying budget inquiries was to know about the
standard of living of working-class households and inequality between these
families, another type of research, which also used expenditures, emerged in
the 1960s. These studies considered the lifestyle of the rich and famous. Here,
a totally different world appeared, one of luxury, social occasions, conspicuous
consumption, snobbery, and networking. This type of research started as part of
a vast program in various European countries, but most benefited from Frances
influential journal Annales. Economies, Socits, Civilisations. Its 1975 special
section Histoire de la consommation dealt with food and, more importantly,
it paid specific attention to the nobility.10 The ongoing (and still modest)
research outlined three significant issues: the enormous amounts spent on food
(although clothing, travel and other types of conspicuous consumption were
important, too), the great variety of food (particularly wine and meat), and
the huge quantities of food (with, for example, an average daily consumption
of 2 litres of wine per person at minor courts in southern France during the
fifteenth century). Thus, historical research again confirmed Engels law: as the
household income increases, the diet becomes more diverse, and the percentage
of the budget spent on food declines. Unfortunately, historians of the 1970s
(not exclusively the French) were entirely focused on a quantitative and highly
economic approach to food; because of this, they neglected what had been
happening in anthropology and sociology since the 1930s.11
In the first half of the twentieth century, the functional sociologists, displaying
an interest in food, addressed its physiological and nutritional aspects, and linked
food production, preparation, and consumption to interpersonal relationships.12
Food and cuisine were used to maintain social structures of a group, community,
or society. Scholars who opposed this approach raised objections based on the
ideas of teleology, circularity, a-temporality, and biological reductionism. By the
B. Bennassar and J. Goy, Contribution lhistoire de la consommation alimentaire
du XIVe au XIXe sicle, Annales. Economies, Socits, Civilisations, 30/23 (1975):
pp. 40230.
11
See the survey in P. Scholliers, Twenty-five Years of Studying un phnomn social
total: Food History Writing of Europe in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries, Food,
Culture and Society, 10/3 (2007): pp. 44971.
12
S. Mennell, A. Murcott, and A. Van Otterloo, The Sociology of Food: Eating, Diet
and Culture (London, 1992), pp. 718.
10
Introduction
late 1950s, structuralist sociologists, strongly influenced by social scientists like

Claude Lvi-Strauss, Norbert Elias, and Mary Douglas, focused on cuisine, taste,
and manners as opposed to the functionalists attention to food and calories.
They considered the meaning, symbolism, and aesthetics of food in order to
learn about the underlying, and thus hidden, cohesion of a group, community,
or society. Cuisine is a language, they claimed, and as with language there are
both unconscious and conscious messages. Therefore, studying cuisine reveals
the very core (or structure) of a society. The most important critique expressed
against structuralism was regarding its static approach. This led to an increased
interest on the part of sociologists in historical developments; Stephen Mennells
and Anneke van Otterloos work are fine examples of this development.
Finally, in the 1980s, socioeconomic historians gradually discovered the
sociologists and anthropologists approaches and debates, which contributed
highly to the cultural turn in history writing. Jean-Louis Flandrin may be
cited as a pioneer.13 Food historians continued their research about particular
communities such as schools, poor houses, towns, wealthy families, and courts
but took a much more cultural outlook than previously. Werner Sombarts
Luxury and Capitalism of 1913 and Norbert Eliass Die hfische Gesellschaft of
1969 (with the English translation in 1983) were read or reread. Both showed
an interest in the conspicuous consumption of courts, and particularly of the
Italian Renaissance courts of Ferrara, Urbino, Milan, or Rome and that of Louis
XIVs Versailles, where cuisine clearly played a central role in forging status and
identity. Most of these places were studied thoroughly in the 1990s.14 Calories
and expenditures were still research subjects, but they were situated within the
study of taste, preferences, prestige, and significance. Household budgets were
still used too, of course, but they were set within a qualitative approach.15
The subject of food studies currently revolves very much around how food was
and is used to create, confirm, and change social relations, identities, behavior,
and power hierarchies.16 Through food, people are socially, culturally, and even
See, for example, J.-L. Flandrin, La diversit des gots et des pratiques alimentaires
en Europe du XVIe au XVIIIe sicle, Revue dHistoire Moderne et Contemporaine, 1983:
pp. 6683.
14
Albala, The Banquet.
15
A good example of this shifting approach is B. Laurioux and P. Moirez, Pour une
approche qualitative des comptes alimentaires: cour de France et cour de Rome la fin du
Moyen ge, Food & History, 4/1 (2006): pp. 4566.
16
A. Beardsworth and T. Keil, Sociology on the Menu: An Invitation to the Study of
Food and Society (London and New York, 1997); T.L. Bray, The Commensal Politics of
Early States and Empires, in T.L. Bray (ed.), Archaeology and Politics of Food and Feasting in
Early States and Empires (New York, 2003), p. 2.
13
Royal Taste
politically positioned within society.17 To use Warren Belascos words: Food

indicates who we are, where we came from, and what we want to be.18 Today,
historiography connects issues of food, diet, and nutrition to cuisine, taste,
preferences, communication, demarcation, identity, and power.19 This relatively
new approach frequently appears in the bulk of literature about culinary culture,
no matter what language it is written in. Very recently, nineteenth-century court
food began to benefit from this approach. Most of this literature is presented and
used throughout this introduction and the chapters in this book. Admittedly,
this new attention has also led to the production of some entertaining and
superbly illustrated coffee-table books, some of which may contain relevant
information.20
Food at the Court and Within the Modern Society
Sebastian Olden-Jorgensen stresses the multiple functions of courts, In early
modern Europe the court of a prince was many things: the household of a prince,
a point of contact between the ruler and the elites, a cultural trendsetter, a focal
point of patronage and an important institution of regional and international
politics. In short, the court had many functions.21 Moreover, according to
Stephen Mennell, this role of the court, with its elites as a culturally powerful
establishment that shapes good taste and appropriate manners, must be seen as a
blueprint of power relations in society as a whole.22 Thus, court life differs from
one country or even region to another, according to dissimilar political, social,
and cultural elements in each country or region (hence, the difference between
See, for example: M. Jones, Feast: Why Humans Share Food (Oxford, 2007); M.
Dietler, Feasts and Commensal Politics in the Political Economy. Food, Power and Status
in Prehistoric Europe, in P. Wiessner and W. Schiefenhvel (eds), Food and the Status Quest:
An Interdisciplinary Perspective (Providence and Oxford, 1996); C. Counihan and P. Van
Esterik, Introduction, in C. Counihan and P. Van Esterik (eds), Food and Culture: A Reader
(New York and London, 1997).
18
W. Belasco, Food Matters. Perspectives on an Emerging Field, in W. Belasco and
P. Scranton (eds), Food Nations: Selling Taste in Consumer Societies (New York and London,
2002), p. 2.
19
Scholliers, Twenty-five years, pp. 4616.
20
For example, K. Jones, For the Royal Table: Dining at the Palace (London, 2008).
21
S. Olden-Jorgensen, State Ceremonial, Court Culture and Political Power in Early
Modern Denmark, 15361746, Scandinavian Journal of History, 27 (2002): p. 65.
22
S. Mennell, All Manners of Food: Eating and Taste in England and France from the
Middle Ages to the Present (Oxford and New York, 1985), p. 108.
17
Introduction
a conspicuous Louis XIV and a somewhat more frugal Charles II).23 With this
statement, Mennell follows in the footsteps of sociologist Norbert Elias. In
Die hfische Gesellschaft, Elias emphasized the importance of not thinking of
the concepts individual and society as two different and therefore isolated
entities.24 He is convinced that the individual position of the king, the structure
of the court, and the figuration of society as a whole are correlated. Studying the
court is apposite, and even compulsory, if one is interested in power relations on
a micro-level (the court) as well as on a macro-level (society as a whole).25 Links
between the court and its context, or society, may be illustrated by referring to
the court as a display window for impressing local nobility and foreign visitors,
but also the little people (e.g. artisans, workers, and even the poor). If the court
is indeed a display window, then it is conceived and set up to be seen and
commented upon. So, the court does not exist outside or above society, but it
is part of it in practice (e.g., providers, servants, diners) and in discourse (e.g.,
narratives, imagery, renown, later journalism).
Also according to Elias, foodways, cuisine, guests, etiquette, drinks,
presentation of dishes, dcor, et cetera reflect societal configurations.26 Thus,
since food is central within the court and the court is fully embedded within
society, the importance of studying food at the court can be accepted with little
argument. To be absolutely clear, the impending study is not only about the
demonstrative consumption of the wealthy (which would be a great research
topic on its own); it is primarily about the position of the rich and famous within
society, and how their position is mirrored in their dining habits. The importance
of studying food at the court is fully acknowledged by Bruno Laurioux, who
claims that the courtly images of abundance and refinement that appear within a
very specific political and social situation are necessary to understand a broader
societal context.27
Most of the aforementioned theory and empirical study relates to absolutist
courts with powerful sovereigns, a wealthy court life, and complex relationships
between court and society. From the late eighteenth century onward, the
Mennell, All Manners of Food, p. 118.
N. Elias, The Court Society (Dublin, 2006), pp. 2021.
25
D. De Vooght, Culinary Networks of Power: Dining with King Leopold II of
23
24
Belgium (18651909), Food & History, 4/1 (2006): p. 85.

26
J. Goudsblom, J. Heilbron and N. Wilterdink (eds), Norbert Elias. Het
civilisatieproces. Sociogenetische en psychogenetische onderzoekingen (Amsterdam, 2001),
p. 111; J. Allard, Repas et manires de table la cour dEspagne au Sicle dOr, in J.-L.
Flandrin and J. Cobbi (eds), Tables dhier, tables dailleurs (Paris, 1999), p. 172.
27
B. Laurioux, Alimentation de cour, alimentation la cour au Moyen ge: nouvelles
orientations de recherche, Food & History, 4/1(2006): p. 9.
Royal Taste
role and status of courts changed radically and irrevocably, and with that, the
historians interest seems to have diminished. Absolutist kings and emperors
in Europe have gone or have continued their reign as constitutional monarchs,
meaning they have little or no real influence. Yet, new courts appeared as loci
of power. Think about the presidential houses of large nations like France28 and
the United States, or consider international organizations like the European
Union. Moreover, it is questionable whether the old monarchs role really
became irrelevant. It is clear that the role of the aristocracy and royalty altered
when confronted with the enormous transformations during the nineteenth
and twentieth centuries resulting from the numerous revolutions in agriculture,
transportation, dwelling, manufacturing, politics, time usage, social structure,
employment, infrastructures, et cetera. New powerful groups, gathered under
the term the bourgeoisie, forged a new cultural hegemony, with their own
codes and practices. The fancy restaurants that began to emerge in Paris in the
1780s and conquered the world are only one example: they became the new
meeting places of the rich and famous.29
So, what did happen to court society after 1789, the chronological ending
point of Norbert Eliass Die hfische Gesellschaft? Did the aristocracy and,
consequently, the monarchy, indeed lose its influence and power completely?
Or did it succeed in entering the new financial, industrial, and commercial elite
of the nineteenth century? Some new countries emerged, and chose a new king
and court, such as Belgium or Greece. Some old monarchies re-emerged, as with
Napoleon IIIs coup in France in 1852. What were the implications for the
nineteenth-century monarchies, and how did they affect societys functioning?
Assuming that nineteenth-century courts did retain a certain amount of
power and influence, what then was the role of food at the court? For example,
could the food that was served at the court compete with the food of the new
fancy restaurant? Did food (still) create and maintain hierarchies at nineteenthcentury courts, and this within the society wherein it existed? Who got invited
to dinner by kings and queens, and did the table arrangement of the guests (still)
reflect contemporary social hierarchy? And how about the presumed bond
between food and power? Did the new bourgeoisie appreciate being invited at
royal courts, or did it not care?
M. Lavandier, E. Flament-Guelfucci et al., La table lElyse. Rceptions officielles
des prsidents depuis la IIIe Rpublique (Milan, 2005), p. 11: Offrir un bon repas privilgie
lentente et lamiti tout en les rendant publiques, et daucuns en ont fait depuis des sicles un
vritable outil diplomatique.
29
R. Spang, The Invention of the Restaurant: Paris and Modern Gastronomic Culture
(Cambridge, MA, 2000).
28
Introduction
Surprisingly, these questions have rarely been asked by academic researchers

before. Indeed, the (exhaustive) bibliographical database on court history that
can be consulted on the website of the Society for Court Studies contains
virtually no titles concerned with the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.30 Yet,
to interpret (luxury) food and grasp the hierarchies, conflicts of power, and
indeed the general development of European society, it is of utmost importance
to understand court society after 1800.
European Courts and This Book
The European Social Science History Conference (ESSHC) convenes
researchers who tackle historical questions by using the methods of the social
sciences. At the 2008 ESSHC in Lisbon, the research unit Social & Cultural
Food Studies (FOST) of the Vrije Universiteit Brussel (Free University of
Brussels) organized a session on Food, Court Cultures, and the World since
1850. For this book, the four papers that were presented at the ESSHC were
transformed (very thoroughly) into chapters. The book is completed by three
additional chapters, an introduction, and a concluding chapter. It tackles the
question of the relationship between food and power by looking at (nineteenthcentury) courts in different parts of the world.
Ken Albala sets the stage in an expository chapter. He states that dining is
always, and certainly at courtly events, an expression of power. He convincingly
argues that, to demonstrate their authority, leaders from all times and places
looked for inspiration from the past or from the colonial other. His
contribution should be read as a guide to different historical models that may
have affected nineteenth-century European courtly food culture. It takes us to
ancient Greece, which apparently served as an example for the healthy eating
habits that are currently very much in fashion, and to ancient Rome, of which
the decadent banquets are probably the best-known example of sheer perversity
as far as eating habits are concerned. However, there was more to dining in
Rome than hedonism alone, as the author shows. From Rome, Albala leads us
past the food dictates of early Christianity and illustrates the importance of the
medieval institution of kingship for nineteenth-century nobility. Of course,
Albala does not neglect the significance of the Italian (Renaissance) courts and
of the French Sun Kings Versailles, both of which are also treated in the chapters
by Rittersma and by Lair. Finally, the author demonstrates how European courts
were influenced aesthetically by the colonies.
http://www.courtstudies.org (accessed December 31, 2008).
30
10
Royal Taste
In his chapter, Rengenier Rittersma examines the use of truffles as a

promotional gift by the Savoy dynasty in the eighteenth century. By looking at
the rich diplomatic correspondence of the court of Savoy, Rittersma reveals how
the gift-giving practice was always used as a political tool and how food each
time played a part in this tradition. What is striking is the fact that the use of
the truffle as a promotional gift coincides with the emergence of the state of
Savoy on the European political scene. Rittersma argues, persuasively, that this
custom indeed had a key role in the development and preservation of diplomatic
relations, and even in the development of a dynastic culture. Finally, the author
points out that the organization of this gift-giving culture can be useful to
evaluate the (power) alliances between the different parts of the Piedmontese
state administration.
Charles Ludingtons chapter also commences in the eighteenth century. He
takes us to the court of George III and his successors, describing a century of wine
consumption at the British court. The author argues that the taste for wine at the
British court was evidence of a changing society as well as a changing British
monarchy. Ludington wishes to oppose the widespread idea that, as of the midseventeenth century, the British court was culturally dead. By examining the
courts consumption of wine, he studied a commodity that had been associated
with the court and aristocracy since long before the early modern era. Ludington
shows that there was a shift in courtly wine consumption in the late eighteenth
and nineteenth centuries. The royal family became more middle class in its
tastes, and its choice of wine should be regarded as a political move to keep the
monarchical institution alive.
David Burrows chapter puts, what Richard Wortman terms, the scenarios
of power on trial. Burrow applies the idea of these scenarios to food and its
presentation at the Russian court. By examining different types of sources, for
example diaries and household books, Burrow demonstrates how service and
meals among the court-affiliated Russian nobility shifted from an emphasis
on sociability and the open table to events designed to inculcate courtapproved manners, a shift corresponding with a parallel deepening of Russian
nationalism.
As described by zge Samanci, at the Ottoman court too, food was one
of the key components of the ceremonial code. Until the early decades of the
nineteenth century, foreign ambassadors who visited the sultan were welcomed
in a traditional Ottoman style, which included dining at low tables and eating
without knives and forks. As Samanci convincingly demonstrates by examining
menus and diaries, changes inspired by European culture were introduced
during the nineteenth century, and foreign guests were served with a new kind
of cuisine known as alafranga (in the European style). In this chapter, Samanci
Introduction
11
looks for the underlying reasons of this modernization of the food language and
she examines the importance of food in the positioning of the Ottoman court
within (global) power alliances.
Anne Lair discusses the ceremony of dining at the French court of Napoleon
III. Before elaborating on the courtly dining habits of the Second Empire,
Lair takes us back to Louis XIVs dining table in Versailles, since he imposed
ceremony, etiquette, codes, and table manners. With this elaboration, she puts
the choices that were made by Napoleon III in perspective. According to Lair,
Napoleon III and his wife Eugnie were not gourmets; nonetheless food was still
in abundance at the Tuileries Palace. By examining courtly menus and comparing
these to the food that was served in some of Pariss fancy restaurants, by looking
at the dcor of the imperial couples apartments, and by discussing some of the
details that were designed to inspire awe, like the Christofle silverware, Lair
concludes that dinner occasions at Napoleon IIIs court were merely a display of
wealth and power. The food itself however, lacked refinement, and French haute
cuisine was no longer to be found at the court, but rather in the public sphere of
fancy restaurants.
Danille De Vooght examines the usefulness of sociologist Norbert Eliass
concept figurations of power. In his Die hfische Gesellschaft, Elias uses ample
historical empirical material to formulate and test sociological theories. The
framework of his study is the courts of the ancien rgime, especially focusing on
the French Louis XIVs reign (16611715). When studying a court, Elias cannot
be ignored. But can Eliass findings actually be used as a guide when researching
all courts? De Vooght tests Eliass views by examining the composition of the
dinner guest lists of the kings of the Belgians of the nineteenth century. Who
was invited to join the king and queen at the dining table? How did the guest
lists evolve over time; can subgroups be detected; and do the culinary networks
at the kings dining table reflect a (shifting) balance of power within Belgian
society at that moment in time? By performing a social network analysis, the
author reveals that the Belgian royal court can be regarded as a place to be, but
perhaps not the place to be.
Finally, Stephen Mennell provides the afterword, in which he relates the
chapters to the central issues of this book. He also looks to the future, pointing
out possible other angles of research.
* * *
This book explores the extent to which the connection between food and power,
which has clearly been defined for medieval and early modern courts, can also
be identified for nineteenth- and twentieth-century court elites confronted
Royal Taste
12
with gigantic societal turmoil. It adds to our understanding of the importance

of food, as well as of the power of royal courts in modern Europe. Apart from
exploring this fascinating period of time in history, the subject of these chapters
covers a substantial geographic area of the world.
Nonetheless, as is almost inevitable, there are geographical hiatuses. This
book does not talk about, for example, the Habsburg court, the Brazilian imperial
court, Meiji Japan, or Qing China, even though, according to William Chan
Tat Chuen, in China the organization of the court, including court meals, was
already meticulously described more than 2,000 years ago.31 We acknowledge
the reality of this lacuna, but instead of allowing it to keep us from publishing
this book, we would like to take this opportunity to encourage scholars to fill in
the gaps and to take up the modern court, and, even more specifically, food at
these loci of power, as a subject of research.
W. Chan Tat Chuen, A la table de lempereur de Chine (Arles, 2007), pp. 78.
31
Chapter 1
The Historical Models of Food

and Power in European Courts of the
Nineteenth Century: An Expository
Essay and Prologue
Ken Albala
In the Western Tradition, the plastic arts have often taken their formal
inspiration from historical precedents, notably the idealized reconfigurations of
either classical Greek and Roman or medieval and indigenous art. For example,
columns and pilasters on a town hall or bank evoke ancient Imperial Rome
and convey a feeling of strength and stability. A neo-Gothic spire celebrates
the intense heaven-soaring piety of the Middle Ages in an attempt to elicit a
comparable emotion in the modern spectator. Artistic taste alternates between
these historical styles, sometimes motivated by explicitly nationalistic goalsas
in the rejection of classical objective dictates of beauty for the local and homegrown. The nineteenth century witnessed erratic and sometimes violent shifts
in taste between the classical models and the romantic, naturalistic, or neoGothic.
Paintings, sculptures and buildings, especially when publicly funded,
regardless of style, were conscious expressions of power, meant to provoke
reaction in the spectator by means of associated symbols and ideas. More often
than not, these symbols were drawn from historical models. Hence, Napoleons
court exploited universalist Roman and then Ancient Egyptian symbols at the
same time he was attempting to build an empire to surpass these. In the age of
nationalism, new states like Germany drew inspiration from their folk tales and
pagan legends in order to exhibit their own inherent greatness. It was in this same
era that the Brothers Grimm and Wagner sought to create art as a manifestation
of the soil, its people, and their values, which included the ancient German idea
of kingship. Historical models were sometimes drawn from a specific artist of the
pastperhaps Michelangelo during the Florentine Republicor were meant to
recall a certain time and place: the court of Louis XIV, Tudor England, and so
Royal Taste
14
on. In every case, the art relays an implicit message of identification with the
historical court depicted or echoes its form of political power.
How the plastic arts serve as tools of propaganda has been studied in great
detail. Yet one art, among the most ephemeral in nature, remains to be analyzed as
an expression of a certain type of power, be it authoritarian or populist, imperial
or national, idealized or folk; or, as Friederich Nietzsche would have schematized
it, Apollonian or Dionysian. This remaining art form is food. One reason for this
neglect stems from the difficulty in analyzing the historical record, the objects
themselves having completely vanished, except for the intrepid archeologist or
coprolithographer. The food served, and its stylistic inspiration in great state
banquets, has for all practical purposes disappeared. As with the other ephemeral
art forms, music and its forms of notation, there survive historic cookbooks and
banquet guides which describe how dishes can be recreated, and accounts which
give a reasonable report of the proceedings, table settings, modes of protocol
and service, and even sometimes individuals reactions. From these the historian
is able to recreate, sometimes literally if necessary, the historic meals of the past.
It should not come as a surprise that the great state functions of the nineteenth
century, like other arts, drew inspiration from the past. It might have been
straightforwardin the elaborate architectural follies of a genius like Carme
which depicted classical ruins in pastry and sugar workor more subtly in
Victorian gelatin molds recalling Gothic tracery and crocketting. Or it might
have been a message of exoticism, recounting the history of a recently conquered
colonyhence we find an interest in Northern African cuisine, couscous in
particular, at the same time paintings by Jean-Lon Grme become popular in
France in the late nineteenth century. The historical reference may equally have
been a form of seating arrangement, a recreated ceremony or even sometimes
a recipe recovered from a historic cookbook to evoke the rulers ancestors, or
named for a great gourmand of the past such as Apicius or Lucullus. No less than
in the other arts, these meals were not merely flights of fancy incidentally using
forms drawn from the past. They were expressions of power intended to evoke
explicit associations among diners. The artistic statementsnot only in the food,
but also in the table settings, uniforms of the servants, the seating, and perhaps
the entertainmentwere all ultimately expressions of political power, and often
in the nineteenth century of a specific type of political power. A meal may thus
evoke an egalitarian past, an aristocratic past, a past replete with exotic novelties
drawn from the far corners of a tropical empire, or simply remind diners of a
regal bygone sovereignty bedecked with the baubles of majesty. One can easily
I. Kelly, Cooking For Kings: The Life of Antonin Careme, the First Celebrity Chef
(New York, 2004).

G. Ackerman, Jean-Lon Grme: His Life, His Works (Courbevoie, 1997).
The Historical Models of Food and Power
15
understand, for example, why King Victor Emmanuel was fond of elaborate
neo-Roman tiered wedding cake forms in architecture (witness his tomb) and
on the table, just as a bourgeois king like Louis-Philippe chose to serve more
simple unaffected foods. Quite plainly, taste reflects political leanings, and the
desired associations are often, particularly in the historicist nineteenth century,
drawn from the past, or at least an imagined past.
This being the case, a discussion of the great banquets which served as
models of inspiration for the nineteenth century is in order. What historical
precedents did nineteenth-century courts draw from and why? How did the
political vicissitudes of the era stimulate them to change their models, and what
prompted the constant interplay between grand elaborate meals and the simple
unaffected? What messages of power were nineteenth-century courts attempting
to broadcast? This chapter will serve as a prologue to the general themes of
food and power in modern European courts, specifically how these courts used
historical models to elicit particular associations and how expressions of power
are always grounded in past political forms which are manifested in terms of
style, in the arts, and in cuisine.
It should be noted from the outset, however, that courtly meals in the
nineteenth and early twentieth centuries were not merely historical recreations
or set pieces. Other dramatic forces were equally transforming dining in
general and especially at court. Perhaps the most important of these was the
organization of the kitchen itself, a result of both the professionalization of
cooking and the development of restaurants. Kitchens were indeed organized
like armies, into batteries with a strict chain of command. The scale of operation
was now naturally far beyond anything even thinkable merely a century before.
This was also due to industrialization, new forms of energy, and new cooking
technologies. The entire infrastructure of the food supply of Western Europe
would change in the Industrial Era, and this would make the organization of
the kitchen as well as the types of food available totally new. Refrigeration, the
ability to import meat from the other side of the world, fruits out of season,
or cannedthese were totally different culinary substrata than those known to
courts of previous eras.
Precisely as in the arts, cooking became commodified, something sold to the
masses and advertised. This had a direct effect on the popularization of taste and
styles of serving. That a celebrity chef like Escoffier would work in a hotel and
publish his culinary guide is a measure of how dramatically elite and courtly

A. Trubek, Haute Cuisine: How the French Invented the Culinary Profession
(Philadelphia, 2000); R. Spang, The Invention of the Restaurant: Paris and Modern
Gastronomic Culture (Cambridge, MA, 2000).
Royal Taste
16
dining had changed. This was no longer merely publicized, like the dining
manuals of the early modern period, but intended to be used in any restaurant,
patronized by literally anyone with money. That is, popular taste and preferences
now influenced courtly cuisine, and of course to serve plebian food is itself a
specific political statement. Americans, for example chortle when hearing that
Franklin Delano Roosevelt served hot dogs at a picnic to King George VI and
Queen Elizabeth during a state visit, assuming this was pure incompetence. In
fact, it was a clear political statement of informal amity and concordas well
as pride in an indigenous and industrial American commodity. But it was a
different world, and culinary milieu, that made such an act even thinkable in the
twentieth century.
Nonetheless, we might assess on a similar level the great egalitarian
potato banquets of the Jacobin era, the exotic food halls of the Crystal Palace
Exhibition, the celebrations of traditional folk foodways at state functions of the
late nineteenth centurywhether Hungarian goulash, a Swedish smorgasbord,
or Spanish paella; and of course when monarchs and emperors set out to
impress with food, they have ample historical precedents, as well as the financial
wherewithal and staff to execute any whim. What follows is essentially a catalogue
of possible historical models on which nineteenth- and early twentieth-century
courts drew their inspiration, and with which they hoped to project some kind
of affinity, or in the case of the exotic, those states over which they hoped to
exercise dominion.
Greece
Ancient Greece has long been identified as the birthplace of democracy,
whose culinary habits embraced a generally egalitarian style of commensality.
That symposia and other meals were exclusive to only the highest ranks of
enfranchised male citizens was not exactly important, since nineteenth-century
egalitarians were often of a similar mind: equality for those of wealth and
standing and the leisure to afford the cultivation of taste. The Greeks also left
copious documentation of their culinary customs, stretching from the earliest
Homeric barbecue-sacrifices all the way up to the luxurious courts of Alexander
the Greats successorsthe Ptolemys, Seleucids, and Aechmenids of Hellenistic
Greececorrupted by Eastern exotics. That is, there were numerous examples
drawn from ancient Greece, both positive and negative. Most of these were
A. Escoffier, The Escoffier Cookbook (New York, 1969); K. James, Escoffier: The King
of Chefs (London, 2006).
17
also recorded in Athenaeuss massive food history, the Deipnosophistae. Within

this text was one author in particular who revealed that there were among
the Greeks certain cultivated connoisseurs whose knowledge of fine dining in
many ways anticipated their own, and even in some respects rivaled the great
pillars of gastronomic writing in nineteenth-century FranceBrillat-Savarin
and Grimod de la Reynire. This author was one Archestratus, whose culinary
testament survives in fragmentary form, in sections mostly about fish, within the
work of Athenaeus.
Archestratus was unique in that he singled out quality over quantity in
foodstuffs, refinement over lavish presentation, and went so far as to specify
exactly where the best of ingredients could be obtained. The best barley flour for
bread comes from Lesbos, followed by Thebes and Thasos, which seems merely
passable. His attention to what we would now call terroir is unparalleled in
ancient literature. There are also recipes, the most interesting of which specify
not to over-season or garnish the main ingredient (good evidence that many
cooks did just that). For example, about the amia, probably a kind of bonito,
he counsels to wrap it in fig leaves with a little oregano, no cheese and no fancy
stuff. It is then simply placed onto hot embers. This fish, the best of which comes
from Byzantium, needs no adornment, the quality of the ingredient will speak
for itself.
In any case, the impression bequeathed to modern Europeans by writers such
as Archestratus was that the Greeks had managed to achieve that most worthy
of gastronomic ideals: good taste without excess, attention to health, balance
and moderationin short, a culinary culture as well conceived as their political
forms. This may have been an entirely self-delusionary image of what the Greeks
were actually like, but in the nineteenth century they were still accepted as the
ideal unspoiled roots of Western civilization in the arts, sciences, and dietary
practices. Ironically, though, not many Europeans knew much about ancient
Greek food. Those who went to aid the Greek war of independenceand
romantics like Byron who wanted to experience it first hand, and certainly
consumed enough of itencountered the same ruddy wine, pita bread, feta
cheese, fish, and olives that proponents of the modern Mediterranean diet find
there today. Readers of Platos Symposium, meaning virtually every educated
person in the nineteenth century, would learn little about foodways. Even in the
more raucous symposium by Xenophon, we get naked flute girls, ample amounts
of wine and snacks, but not a proper meal. Thus the model of dining which
Athenaeus of Naucratis, The Learned Banqueters (Deipnosophistae), ed. S.D. Olson
(Cambridge, 2007).

Archestratus, The Life of Luxury, ed. J. Wilkins and S. Hill (Totnes, 1994).

Ibid, pp. 734.
Royal Taste
18
Greece provided was entirely in the abstract. It dealt with moderation, even
sometimes Stoic self-denial, but not specific recipes or ways of eating.
Even in the Greek revival period of the early nineteenth century, which was
itself inspired by democratic ideals, one finds day beds reminiscent of Greek
dining couches, modern politicians posing in togas, haircuts drawn directly from
Athens, and of course pediments on facades and imitations of the Elgin Marbles
in statuary. But there is little evidence of Europeans looking directly at models
like Archestratus for culinary inspiration. If not in content, they did imitate the
Greeks in form and function. This was a period of great dietary reform, when
health and a well-built physique were considered indispensable components of
the good life. Gymnastics suddenly gained prominence in educational theory,
as witnessed by Matthew Arnolds interest in muscular Christianity. Likewise
the Romantics emphasized wholesome, clean, and natural food, inspired first by
Rousseau but then adopted with enthusiasm by Shelley, vegetarians, and similar
groups. The historical model is ultimately the well-fed egalitarian Greeks, who
listened to their physicians, exercised rigorously, and ate pure, simple foods.
This general fashion for Greek taste did not originate in European courts, but it
certainly left its mark.
Rome
Ancient Rome afforded two diametrically opposed models of culinary taste.
On the one hand there was the republican period, consciously imitated by every
revolutionary state in successive waves1789, 1830, 1848for its egalitarian
culinary virtues. This model stood in sharp contrast to the decadent Imperial
Era, when Romans became addicted to luxury if not outright perversity in their
dining habits.
The republican period is best exemplified by the stern Roman statesman
Cato the Elder. Best known as the instigator of the last Punic War, Cato also
composed a farming manual, an investment guide for young aristocrats eager
to buy land and make it productive. While his advice is mostly for an absentee
landlord, growing grapes, olives, and other southern Italian crops, the model of
self-sufficiency and landed wealth was one that resonated with many nineteenthcentury Europeans in powernotably landed aristocrats. On their estates, such
men prided themselves on the produce of their own domains. They invited
similar-minded peers, and regaled them in country houses modeled directly on
J.-J. Rousseau, Emile, trans. A. Bloom (New York, 1979).
Cato, On Farming, trans. A. Dalby (Totnes, 1998).

19
those of early Rome, which in many cases survived in ruined form in proximity.
This particular classical aesthetic originated in the eighteenth century, especially
in England and its American colonies, but remained a powerful model well into
the nineteenth century. While the meals actually served may have had little
to do with ancient Roman dining practices, nonetheless a prejudice toward
homegrown, and simple, unaffected fare dominated, often in direct contrast to
the more lavish regal courts. Even if subconsciously, the food culture of men like
Cato, alongside the rhetoric of Cicero and ornamental forms of the same epoch,
had a profound impact on elite dining in the nineteenth century.
In fact, the dining habits of the Romans were also becoming better known,
partly through archeological findings. There had been early food histories,
academic Latin discourses, going back to the sixteenth century,10 but the
nineteenth century witnessed a real interest in learning about the daily habits
of the Romans, in particular stemming from the apprehension that they were in
many ways similar to European states in the imperial nineteenth century. Alexis
Soyers Pantropheon of 1853,11 while not considered reliable history today,
nonetheless reflects a wide and popular interest in ancient Rome, and in many
cases meals were modeled directly on ancient precedents.
The image of Rome as a culinary model also benefited from the survival of
a full cookbook from the Imperial Era, attributed to Marcus Gavius Apicius.12
Although the historical figure Apicius was almost certainly not its author, it was
widely accepted until recently that he had written it. This was, however, a very
different image than frugal republican Rome. This was a luxurious state, whose
resources and far-flung trade routes could bring in exotic spices such as pepper
from India, rare animals from Northern Africa, and even some products from the
Far East. It is no wonder imperialist Europeans could identify with these people;
they were undergoing the same enterprise in many of the same locales. This
assumed affinity is historically fascinating in itself. The very name Apicius, once
his text became known during the Renaissance, was consistently associated with
gluttony and lavish excess. Stories were circulated about his wild profligacy and
eventual suicide once he realized he could no longer entertain on a massive scale.
But over time the names meaning changed. In the late seventeenth century and
into the eighteenth century the name came to be associated with discerning taste
and refinement; there were books titled the Modern Apicius in Italy and then
See for example Stuckius, Boulenger, Chacon et al. in M. Jeanneret, A Feast of

Words (Chicago, 1998).
11
A. Soyer, The Pantropheon (London, 1977).
12
Apicius, trans. C. Grocock and S. Grainger (Totnes, 2007).
10
Royal Taste
20
elsewhere.13 By the nineteenth century to be called an Apicius was fairly positive.

This shift is similar to that enjoyed by the term epicurean; though having little
to do with the original ideas of Epicurus, it gradually shifted from gluttonous
associations (as with Sir Epicure Mammon in Ben Jonsons The Alchemist) to
a term denoting those who appreciate the finer things in life, especially good
food. Thus what began as general censure of Imperial Roman dining habits as
corrupt during the Renaissance gradually became admiration, and sometimes
not so veiled imitation, in European imperial courts, whether of Napoleon III,
Leopold II of Belgium, or any empire of the late nineteenth century.
This is not to say that Europeans suddenly adopted the salty garum fish sauce
of the Romans, ate flamingo tongues or sows womb, in fact, they continued
to gawk in disbelief at what they navely construed to be culinary perversities.
But the style of imperial dining, the table settings, the service, and sometimes
fanciful recreations of supposedly Roman dishes certainly interested these
courts. There is another very interesting similarity between what might be
considered the vulgarity and flashiness of Imperial Rome and that of the
nineteenth century, especially in the so-called gilded era. First, it seems
unlikely that many ancient Romans ate exactly as Apiciuss cookbook describes.
These were foods intentionally intended to impress, with expensive ingredients
or strange dishes like dormice dipped in honey and sprinkled with poppy seeds.
This dish in particular was singled out for ridicule in Petroniuss Satyricon, as
something in very poor taste served by the nouveau-riche upstart Trimalchio (a
former slave who struck it rich speculating in grain).14 In this case the dormouse
appears in dishes borne by a statue of a donkey. The foods found in Apiciuss
cookbook are precisely those that would be served by a newly wealthy merchant
or businessman, exactly the sort the old patrician Petronius scorned. It may
be mere coincidence, but the nineteenth century witnessed a comparable and
shocking growth of the bourgeoisie, whose new-found wealth was flaunted in
meals intended to imitate if not surpass their social superiors, often to their own
embarrassment when it could not quite be pulled off. This class would of course
never have consciously imitated the rising mercantile classes of ancient Rome,
but the snobbery and effetism of the court attempting to exclude those not to
the manner born might be considered directly parallel to figures like Petronius,
who was in his day arbiter of taste at the court of Nero. In other words, the
nineteenth-century taste for Imperial Rome may stem from a very real similarity
of social circumstances: trying to protect their privileges and vaunted taste from
encroaching middle classes with their filthy, commercially derived lucre. This in
G. Vasselli, LApicio overo Il Maestro deConviti (Bologna, 1647); F. Leonardi, LApicio
Moderno (Florence, 1790); Apicius Redivivus, or the Cooks Oracle (London, 1817).
14
Petronius, The Satyricon (Harmondsworth, 1965).
13
21
turn led to culinary innovations, rarer ingredients, and elaboration for its own
sake. This may, strangely enough, explain the aesthetic similarities between these
two disparate erasgrandeur, an obsession with ornamentation and stylistic
innovation, and just plain kitsch as these styles were imitation down the social
ladder.
The Christian Tradition
One powerful historical current influencing all European civilization stems
from the food dictates of early Christianity. Although Jesus himself and his
followers explicitly rejected the food prohibitions of the Jews from whom they
originated, the early church eventually instituted ritual fasts as well as feasts
which punctuated the medieval calendar. A fast meant specifically abstinence
from meat and meat products during Lent, on Friday, sometimes on Wednesday
and Saturday, sometimes during Advent. Roughly a third of the year was
designated fast days, though in practice this could merely mean an elaborate
fish-based meal. In contrast to these were the feasts: in the case of Carnival or
Mardi Gras, raucous opportunities to indulge in excess, in particular to consume
all remaining meat before Lent.
Adherence to these strictures underwent various tumultuous reversals in
the millennia since their institution, especially during the Reformation. By
the nineteenth century they were almost completely abandoned in Protestant
countries. Yet in Catholic Europe they still remained in force, sometimes strictly
so by various ultramontane movements. That is, in France in particular, in the
wake of secularization of the state in the Revolution, there was a conservative
reaction which sought to uphold papal authority and its decrees regarding food.
The Papal States themselves hung on tenuously, even being occupied by French
troops before finally succumbing to the new nation of Italy. In any case, fasting
and feasting became a political message in nineteenth-century Catholic courts. It
could have been merely a ruse to garner popular approval, or to signal real assent
to papal authority, but the publicly acknowledged Catholic dietary practices
of nineteenth-century courts must be construed at some level as political
statements. France itself wavered between conservative and democratic regimes,
and thus there is no consistent pattern of courtly fasting, but in countries like
Spain and Portugal, the new nation of Italy, as well as the Central European
Catholic states, fasting was practiced as it always had been, albeit, again, often as
lavish meals of seafood and vegetables.
Royal Taste
22
The Middle Ages

The Middle Ages became an artistic model in the nineteenth century for many
varied reasons. First there was the reaction against the tyranny of the formal
classically bound academic arts rooted since the Renaissance in imitation of
ancient standards of beauty, and which upheld painting and sculpture as the
highest artistic forms. This reaction is more apparent in the plastic arts than
in the culinary, but a parallel rejection of the formalities of haute cuisine and
modes of protocol demanded in formal dining did indeed go hand in hand with
a new fascination for the medieval.
The clearest example of this can be found among the Pre-Raphaelites,
whose new-found reverence for medieval textures and colors extended into not
only an intense interest in what we now call crafts, but into cooking as well.
The Arts and Crafts Movement even better exemplifies the new fascination
for organic medieval domestic arts, pottery and textiles, as well as tableware
drawing inspiration directly from medieval models. We get glimpses of how the
nineteenth century conceived of food culture as inspired by the Middle Ages in
William Morriss News From Nowhere.15 In it, healthy Englishmen of the future
are fishing for salmon in the Thames. Gone are all the factories, and instead little
cottages surrounded by gardens, clean and orderly, provide the ideal habitat
for humans in this modern Utopia. As for food, there is no buying or selling;
everything is shared freely, each person producing what they need with plenty to
spare for others, since they are motivated by joy deriving from working itself. This
is only possible of course due to the absence of luxuries; needs are met with good
healthy food, unpolluted and unadorned with superfluous frippery. For Morris,
this was an explicitly political vision of a socialist society which resembled in his
mind something like the Middle Ages. It is both a rejection of the modern state
and nineteenth-century imperialism and, most importantly, a rejection of the socalled benefits that were supposed to derive from industrial capitalism. While
certainly not a courtly food aesthetic, it did have a major impact on society and
perhaps indirectly on a rather different approach to food, which has perennially
resurfaced down unto our own day.
For courts, however, the Middle Ages meant something more concretely
rooted in their own ancestrythe medieval institution of kingship. As
reactionary governments quelled the uprisings of republicans, and later
socialists, they sought to justify their own authoritarian and conservative forms
of government. The Middle Ages, in its imagined form, provided the aesthetic
grounding. Nineteenth-century rulers built fantasy castlesNeuschwanstein
W. Morris, News From Nowhere (Harmondsworth, 1980).
15
23
in Bavaria is merely the best known of these. Replete with grand medieval
banqueting halls, there was indeed an effort to eat like medieval kings. Although
the details may have been wildly off, whole roast venison, stately pies and
medieval confections came into fashion, just as had medieval dcor, and brica-brac. In many cases, particularly among Germanic states and fledging nations,
focus shifted anew to their own origins, in rejection of what were considered
foreign classical influences.
One example would be the eleventh-century dining hall of the Imperial
Palace (Kaiserpfalz) in Goslar, Germany. A nineteenth-century mock medieval
cycle of paintings of past emperors now lines the walls, beneath which one can
easily imagine diners on long benches, consuming quasi-medieval fare. The idea
at least is to associate the present Reich with the earlier, as the proper form of
government native to Germany. Perusal of menus of this period reveals not
only a return to the German language instead of French, Gothic script, but also
to local, traditional dishes. The Knigliche Tafel in Munich on June 21, 1886
reveals Ochsenschweifsuppe (oxtail soup), Knigseeforellen (trout from Konigsee);
Kalbsrcken (saddle of veal), Fleischpastetchen (meat piesalthough these are
nach Richelieu), Hhnerbrstchen (chicken breast), and so on.16 Perhaps we
might not be surprised to see Germans eating German food; but at court, not to
serve French food was indeed a statement of nationalism.
It is of course in this same period that many new nations looked to their
own native folk traditions in all the arts: Sibelius in Finland, Tchaikovsky in
Russia, Bartk in Hungary, for example in music. A comparable reawakening
of local food traditions also begins here, with the gradual rejection of French
taste as the model for all European courts. It is also, not coincidentally, the first
time historians became actively interested in recovering and editing their own
medieval cookbooks.
The Early Modern Era
In this period there were several disparate aesthetic models for European
courtsthe aforementioned French model in haute cuisine reigned the longest
and still exerts an influence. At first this was based on seventeenth-century
monuments of gastronomic literature such as La Varenne, Massialot, L.S.R., and
ultimately, the eighteenth-century Menon.17 These figures and the dishes they
invented came to be codified as the ultimate forms of dining appropriate for
K. Wanninger (ed.), A la Carte (3rd edn, Rosenheim, 1988), p. 171.
La Varennes Cookery, ed. T. Scully (Totnes, 2006); LArt de la cuisine franaise au
16
17
XVIIe sicle (Paris, 1994).
Royal Taste
24
European courts, especially those of the ancien rgime, whose political style still
in some measure reflected the precedent set by Louis XIV and the Palace of
Versailles. Why French taste came to dominate practically all European courts is
difficult to determine, but must stem in part from the meticulous attention given
to gastronomic matters in France. It should be noted that this was not merely
imitating the latest contemporary French fashions, but evoking the French court
of the Sun King, and to a lesser extent his successors, as a historical model of
the ideal court. That is, in the nineteenth century for rulers with aspirations
or delusions of absolutism, the formal Baroque and Rococo forms of dining
replete with waiters in starched wigs, mirrored walls and gilt ceilings, as well as
grand pices montes, virtual towers of foodsent a clear political message. We
intend to dine as we would rule, in grand formal style befitting majesty.
It is impossible to overestimate the influence French taste in general had
on European courts of the nineteenth century. Menus were for the most part
written in French, rulers hired French chefs, served dishes devised by the French
or made to look like them. In a word, French cuisine and fine dining became
synonymous, and not to serve French food at state functions could only be
construed as a statement of national pride.
Naturally overt reference to the ancien rgime could stimulate rancor in more
democratically minded eras, and it is actually surprising how resilient the Baroque
trappings of kingship were in the nineteenth century, even in constitutional
monarchies. A gala dinner menu for Edward VII, executed by Escoffier and
held at the Carlton restaurant in June 1902, is not only all in French but is also
festooned with ermine, a crown, and regalia that more properly should belong
to Charles II, though the French menu cannot help but remind one of Louis
XIV.18
France was not the only stylistic model. Italy of the Renaissance, just as it
remained the inspiration for painting, sculpture, and architecture, also exerted
a certain influence on the culinary arts. This is partly because Italy was the
gastronomic trendsetter in the sixteenth century, due to a wave of publications
extending from the first printed cookbook in the 1470s, Platinas De honesta
voluptate (On Right Pleasure and Good Health), through monumental works
such as Scappis Opera a century later, which influenced practically all of
Europe.19 Moreover, banqueting guides and carving manuals produced in the
seventeenth century became the authorities in the field, and the inspiration for
rituals used in royal courts throughout the continent. Not only Italian service,
but also ingredients such as olives and lemons, eventually tomatoes and other
T. Shaw, The World of Escoffier (New York, 1994).
Platina, On Right Pleasure and Good Health (Tempe, 1998); B. Scappi, Opera
18
19
(Venice, 1570).
25
vegetables associated with the Mediterranean, and even pasta, left a permanent
impression on what was considered good taste at court.
In the nineteenth century there was also an Italianate revival, inspired by
the same motives that had drawn European nobles on their grand tours long
before, but now imbued with a strange taste for decay and poverty. This was not
fascination with ruins and classical detritus, as in the archeologically minded
sixteenth through seventeenth centuries, but an attraction for the squalor and
violence of Italian cities, and the desuetude of the countryside. Of course, one
would never see such a style imitated in courtly meals, but elites found themselves
strangely compelled to witness it, to follow their guidebooks into louche corners,
and perchance to eat a plate of spaghetti on the street in Naples. Italy had gone
from being an artistic model to being an exotic other, though perhaps this was
the result of discovering the south for the first time.
Incidentally for those truly interested in Italian cuisine, at least at the
bourgeois level, the publication of Pellegrino Artusis La scienza in cucina e
larte di mangiare bene offered ample recipes, and itself played a crucial role in
the nationalization of disparate regional cuisines into something recognizably
Italian.20 The emigration of Italians would also stimulate restaurants where one
could sample these foods outside Italy.
Almost the same impulse toward the exotic south can also be found with
regards to Spain. It was as if an unknown and for some reason backward part
of Europe had been left behind by time. This was a place where spicy Flamenco
dancing, seedy women like Bizets Carmen, and not coincidentally Spanish
food suddenly gained attention outside Spain. Spain had actually already been
a trendsetter in the seventeenth century, when olla podrida, or olios as they
were called in England, came into fashion. Spanish and Portuguese wines had
long been popular among the English, especially when at war with France,
and Bordeaux embargoed. Hence the popularity of sherry and port. But the
ninteenth-century attention toward Spain was now quite different, its interest
not in the great Hapsburg court, but in dirty back alleys and cigar factories, street
urchins breaking a loaf of bread or sharing a jug of coarse wine. One can only
speculate that this was a kind of condescending fascination for a kind of life that
was unimaginable yet close, the gaze of the tourist rather than the humanitarian.
In any case, it does influence cuisine, with an interest in Spanish dishes such as
gazpacho and paella.
There remains one other European state that deserves mention for its
influence on nineteenth-century fine dining: Romonov Russia. Fascination
with Russia sprang from its distance and that few had any contact with its
P. Artusi, Science in the Kitchen and the Art of Eating Well (Toronto, 2004).
20
Royal Taste
26
culture or cuisine. That would change after Russian soldiers appeared in

Paris after the Franco-Prussian War of 1870; they arrived with the Prussians.
It is even said that the word bistro derives from their command for quick
service, in Russian buystro. Of course service la Russe had taken hold long
before, meaning that courses were individually plated rather than presented
on the table en massebut the foods themselves were still always French.
But eventually culinary interest shifted toward Russian ingredients, whose
reputation for quality and elegance remains to this day. Caviar of course tops
this list, but so too does fine vodka, blini, soups such as borsch, and other
Russian specialties such as coulibiac, which enjoyed a vogue in the nineteeth
century and beyond. In England the fascination may have sprung from the
royal marriages between the two houses. For example, for Christmas dinner at
Osborne House in 1896 Queen Victoria was served kromeskys as an entre
they are a kind of cork-shaped croquette.21 From the cookbook written by her
chef, Charles Elm Francatelli, we find a recipe for this Russian dish, which
instructs us to bind chopped roast fowl with mushrooms and truffles and
bchamel sauce, chill, cut into cork-shaped pieces, wrap these with slices of
braised calves udder, batter, and fry.22 Whether the procedure is authentically
Russian or not is beside the point; Victorias court wanted to formally express
its affiliation with the Russian imperial family through food.
We might add that most great courts of this period held a measure of appeal,
thus Hungarian palatschinken (a kind of stack of crpes laden with fruit and
cream) appeared on menus, as did fine Tokay wines. Austrian pastries, indeed
anything hailing from a royal or imperial court, gained attention, especially
when families intermarried.
Colonial Style
Although not necessarily historic in their gaze and appropriation, European
courts were consistently thrilled aesthetically by their own recent colonial
acquisitions. This was partly fascination with anything exotic and novel, but it
was also an interest in the raw, overtly sexual and primitive nature of the arts
they encountered in their newly acquired territories. Colonial powers reacted
with equal measure of disgust and delight over new ingredients, new ways of
dining, and new cooking methods. At least to borrow aesthetic elements from
these exotic cultures offered a frisson of release from the demands of modern
Menu image online at http://www.btinternet.com/~sbishop100/osmenu.jpg.
C.E. Francatelli, The Modern Cook (London, 1880), p. 313.
21
22
27
industrial society, an opportunity to express deep, fundamental, instinctual

urges. To dress in a turban and eat with the hands while seated on the floor was
at once an expression of the rejection of stiff, formal values; but it was also an
expression of power over people who eat this way, a means by which the inherent
fear of pollution through contact with them is sublimated into an aesthetic and
gastronomic act. Consuming the strange and exotic can be an expression of
machismo, but also a way to consume the other and use him or her as a means to
our own ends, which is colonialism in a nutshell. Even the seemingly innocent
dessert garnished with a flourish of coconut or banana is a vivid expression of
imperial power, for it exhibits not only the ability to import such items, but also
the ability to force others to provide them.
Colonial regimes and adopted foods were nothing new in the nineteenth
century. The Spanish gladly adopted chocolate from the Aztecs whom they
conquered. The English for a while were fascinated by Native Americans, and
some foods (including tobacco) gradually made their way to the English court,
even if some were mistakenly associated with Virginia, like potatoes. Actually,
the French court did enjoy a North American native plant, the topinambour
( Jerusalem artichoke)erroneously named for a Brazilian tribe. Both Portuguese
and later Dutch colonies in Asia were founded expressly to control the spice trade,
and thus it is not surprising that they both influenced the culinary cultures with
which they interacted and adopted many local foodways in turn. Coffee and tea
were both exotic imports explicitly associated with the Ottoman and Chinese
empires respectively. Exoticism itself was nothing new. Neither of course were
plantation economies, in which millions of humans were subjected to slavery
merely to provide nutritionally superfluous flavorings, such as sugar.
The novel element in the nineteenth century was the appeal of the primitive
itself, not necessarily with an interest to convert, reform, and civilize as in previous
centuries, but to enjoy and consume and even, ironically, to preserve native
culture among the more ethnographically and anthropologically minded of
observers. This attitude stems from the very different nature of colonies in the
nineteenth century. Not only were these in new and relatively unknown regions
such as Africa, Southeast Asia, and Australia where relatively primitive peoples
were found, but nineteenth-century colonies were also quite different in scale
and purpose. Most were founded with tacit and sometimes quite open political
encouragement of large corporate interests. Such companies motives were first
and foremost profit and more often than not through growing, trading, and
processing foodstuffs.
It was also partly petty nationalistic rivalries that motivated nations which
had never had a colonial legacy to suddenly engage in empire building. Thus
we see Germany and Belgium in Africa, as well as Italy in northern Africa. All
28
Royal Taste
the colonial powers without exception were also industrial nationsFrance and
especially England should be added to this list. The United States and Japan
after the Meiji Restoration were also important to the late-nineteenth-century
wave of imperialism. In colonies these nations sought raw materials, sometimes
embarking on invasion without even knowing what natural resources they might
find. Equally important was the opening up of markets where they might sell
manufactured goods, precisely those newly mass-produced goods which were
advertised as the necessary accompaniments to civilized life. As industrialized
capitalist nations, expansion of markets and constant growth was essential to
survival. For the colonizers there was also an avowed mission of bringing culture
to the lesser races, as it was sometimes put in explicitly racist tones. But there
was also a fascination with the culture and food of these indigenous peoples, a
desire to appropriate the other at precisely the same time that these regions were
being modernized or civilized.
In practical terms this meant a strange and eclectic borrowing of artistic
motifs, as well as ingredients. Tropical fruits, now able to be shipped by steamer
straight to Europe, now became de rigueur on courtly menus. They were tangible
evidence of the value of subjugating less powerful peoples. Bananas, pineapples,
coconuts, not to mention new plantations of now requisite colonial goods such
as sugar, coffee, and teaall became indispensable elements in any fine meal,
increasingly at every level of society. Courts would also adapt certain colonial
recipes to their own tastes before these were popularized by immigrants and
popular ethnic restaurants. For example, vague approximations of Indian
chutneys and curry powder appeared in England among elites long before they
went mainstream. In a similar way the Dutch obtained rijsttafel, the French
creole recipes of the Caribbean, and rum, or reworked versions of West African
and Algerian dishes. These exotic impulses began among rulers and especially
colonial administrators first, in particular those who had gone native.
There is perhaps no better example of this impulse to absorb and ingest
indigenous culture than the big game hunt, especially when edible species could
be cooked in the open field and consumed on the spot. Hunting was always a
privilege of European nobility, but the ability to bag enormous elephants, tigers,
and such, reflected the most immediate way one could consume a colony at its
most direct and authentic level.
The long-term global legacy of these colonies, beyond the initial courtly
fascination, can also not be underestimated. What began as an influx of
ingredients, and perhaps an odd utensil, eventually grew to a torrent of
new cooking methods and familiar dishes. This was partly because colonial
administrators returned home with a new taste for spicy food; but gradually
in the course of the nineteenth century immigration from these places also
29
intensified. Indians were sent to England for education, Vietnamese learned

French in Paris, as did West Africans. While the opening of so-called ethnic
restaurants only became apparent in the twentieth century, a growing awareness
of food cultures around the world, an internationalism of taste, ran concurrent
with the expanding global economy. Enjoying strange and exotic dishes showed
off the courts cosmopolitan outlook and toleration for diverse cultures, although
this may have served as a guise to assuage the conscience of what was in reality
naked exploitation. In a certain sense, exhibiting formal acceptance of the other
is a convenient way to ignore the real plight of such people.
We have seen that nineteenth-century courts had numerous historical and
exotic models to draw from in terms both of ingredients and recipes and overall
fashion in dining and dcor, however much superficial or bastardized. How
these impulses were carried out in actual menus, recipes, and courtly events I
leave to culinary historians of the nineteenth century, who will hopefully fill in
the picture of stylistic models for cuisine as they have already been discussed for
art. My intention here has been merely to suggest that all periods seek inspiration
from the past or from the colonial other as an expression of their own power;
and in this respect dining is always a political statement, an iteration of power,
at the level of sheer display and opulence, but often with an implicit message
codified by a particular historical stylistic choice as well.
Chapter 2
A Culinary Captatio Benevolentiae:

The Use of the Truffle as a Promotional
Gift by the Savoy Dynasty in the
Eighteenth Century
Rengenier C. Rittersma
per Umberto, fine conoscitore del bosco
Since the late Middle Ages, the local elites of Piedmont were well aware of the
value of the truffles indigenous to their region. The first recorded instance in
which truffles were given as a promotional gift by Piedmontese magnates was
when the ally of the Savoy dynasty, Prince Amadeus VII of Acaia, presented
truffles to Bona di Borbone, the wife of Count Amadeus of Savoy in 1380. No

I would like to thank the following people and institutions for having been of great
help during the preparation of this chapter. First, the staff of the Archivio di Stato di Torino
and, in particular, Dottoressa Paglieri, Marsaglia, and Niccoli. I am also grateful to Irma
Naso, Albina Malerba, Monica Cuffia, and Philippe Marchenay for their help. This chapter
benefited greatly from the stimulating observations of Allen J. Grieco, Professor Geoffrey
Symcox, Gustavo Mola di Nomaglio, Danille de Vooght, and Peter Scholliers, to whom I
extend my sincerest thanks. Last but not least, I would also like to thank Milton Kooistra
and, again, Allen Grieco for their rigorous linguistic corrections. I owe you all an immense
amount of truffes, bertavelle, and vacherins savoyards. The remaining errors and inadequacies
are, of course, all my own.
This researchwhich forms part of the project Manifestations of Truffle Mania in Italy
(14001800): Towards a Cultural History of the Truffle in Europe, conducted at the Center
for Social & Cultural Food Studies (FOST) at the Vrije Universiteit Brusselhas been made
possible by a Rubicon grant from the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research
(NWO). For more information: http://www.nwo.nl/projecten.nsf/pages/2300136061
(accessed August 20, 2008).

For the first mention of the use of the truffle as a gift, see: Archivio di Stato Torino
(henceforth AST) C. Tes. gen. dAcaia, rot. 2 and Casa Bona di Borbone, rot. 33. For an
account of the exchange of food and other regional products by the princes of Savoia in
the Middle Ages, see: L. Vaccarone, I Principi di Savoia attraverso le Alpi nel medioevo
(12701520), Club Alpino Italiano, Bollett. nr. 68 (1902): pp. 191.
32
Royal Taste
systematic research in Piedmontese archives has been done for the period between
the fourteenth and eighteenth centuries, but since truffles were frequently used
as prestigious gifts in other Italian regions, it is likely that Piedmont was no
exception to this rule.
The princes of Savoy were, however, very truffle-minded, from roughly
1730 to 1830, as archival material in Turin suggests. In this period the dukes of
Savoia showed in different ways that they were highly aware of the instrumental
value of their subterranean mushrooms. The most remarkable manifestation
was the use of the tartufi as a promotional gift in diplomatic relations. Due to
the perishability of these mushrooms, the utility of the truffle as a present was
naturally limited by transport terms, since truffles, even when preserved under
the most favorable circumstances, tend to decay after 10 to 14 days. Among
the different capitals which were situated within reach of a 10-day trip, Vienna
appears to have received the most truffles as gifts.
However, this exchange between Turin and Vienna is intriguing not only
because of its frequency, but also because of the supplementary information in the
correspondence and, in particular, the specific background of the Piedmontese
Austrian relationship, which, when combined analytically, sheds light on various
aspects of the foreign politics and state administration of Savoy. For that reason, this
chapter will primarily focus on a detailed analysis of the diplomatic correspondence
between the Savoyard and the imperial court from approximately 1730 to 1780. In
order to place this PiedmonteseAustrian truffle connection in the right context,
other cases of diplomatic instrumentalization of the truffle by the Savoia will also
be briefly presented, but they will serve an illustrative purpose.
This chapter attempts, thus, to examine the following issues: first, it will
demonstrate that the Savoy were perfectly aware of the unequivocal instrumental
value of their tartufi; second, it will shed light on the giving of gifts as a political
tool, used to facilitate the development and maintenance of diplomatic relations
during a period in which the dukes of Savoy entered the scene of European
Gromchte. Finally, this contribution will also show that the management of
this gift-giving culture can be considered a barometer of the relationships
between the various sections of the Piedmontese state administration, especially
between the chancellery in Turin and the diplomatic corps abroad.
Do ut des, About Giving and Owing: Some General Observations on Gift
Exchange
There is no such thing as a free gift. If we expect nothing in return for a given
object, then we simply discard it. A gift, on the other hand, appeals to deeper
A Culinary Captatio Benevolentiae
33
motivations and should at least evoke gratitude, a strong sentiment, described as

nothing less than the moral memory of mankind. A gift will inevitably tip the
balance of the social relation between the persons involved. A present affects a
social relation and engenders a differentiation between the partners, even before
the gift has been offered and received. This intrinsically divisive dimension of
giving gifts finds expression especially in the Spanish and Italian verbs regalar
and regalare respectively, which originally meant to present a gift to the king,
and is even more apparent in archaic forms such as offerte, offrande, offerieren, or
offrir, which literally refer to the humble activity of bringing something toward
someone (ob-ferre) and whose aspect of vertical differentiation stems, of course,
from sacrificial practices. Something of this idea of eternal debt (coram dei)
remained in the notion of gift-giving, since social scientist theoriesin spite
of the many nuances each one of them might introducebasically share the
idea that gift-giving results in an irreversible incommensurability. Simply said,
while the first gift can (but must not) be voluntary, the return gift is inherently
compulsory. Explicit or not, there is a claim of reciprocity in every present.
Since the time of primitive societies, victuals have played a dominant role in
gift-giving culture, either in a direct way by exchange or in an indirect way as an
expression of hospitality. Hospitality without food is unthinkable, because food
is the most elementary form of sociability. The fundamental social dimension of
food also becomes clear in the tacit claim to share ones food, as long as hygienic
concerns allow, even with strangers. Everybody has experienced the situation of
invidious eyes when entering a train compartment with an ice cream or fresh
cherries, and everybody can confirm the favorable role exercised by the act of
sharing food when socializing with unknown people. Perhaps it is this very
basic quality of food that turns the presenting and sharing of it, in terms of gift
practices, into a unique one-way communication where no reward is expected,
yet everybody is stimulated to reciprocate because they are certain to experience
a similar situation in the future.
G. Simmel, Faithfulness and Gratitude, in A. Komter (ed.), The Gift: an
Interdisciplinary Perspective (Amsterdam, 1996), pp. 3949, p. 45.

B. Schwartz, The Social Psychology of the Gift, in A. Komter (ed.), The Gift: an
Interdisciplinary Perspective, pp. 6981, p. 78.

See the various contributions in Komter, The Gift. For a study of gift giving in
medieval societies, see G. Algazi, V. Groebner and B. Jussen (eds), Negotiating the Gift: PreModern Figurations of Exchange (Gttingen, 2003).

See, for example, M. Sahlins, On the Sociology of Primitive Exchange, in A.
Komter (ed.), The Gift: an Interdisciplinary Perspective, pp. 2639; and M. Fantoni, Feticci
di prestigio. Il dono alla corte medicea, in S. Bertelli and G. Calvi (eds), Rituale, cerimoniale,
etichetta (Milan, 1985), pp. 14163, pp. 15360.
34
Royal Taste
In much the same way, the use of food as a gift is a universal phenomenon
in all social classes. In Umbria, even an exclusive product like the truffle was,
particularly until the rise of the packaging industry in the area of Spoleto-Norcia
but also thereafter, popularly exploited as a rewarding gift during the feastdays
of December. This usage was practiced by the truffle hunters themselves, who
were commonly crofters, in order to thank the landowners for letting them
exploit their truffle grounds or to do a favor for a prominent person (such as the
local physician or priest) or for a friend or relative. After the commercialization
of the Umbrian truffles from approximately 1865 onward, they increasingly
tended to use the commercially unsuitable part of the harvest, which consisted
of fragmented, gnawed, or otherwise damaged tubers (the capatura), for their
informal gift circuit.
Apparently, even second-rate truffles were an appreciated gift. This reveals
something of the value and, more in particular, of the fascinosum that was generally
attributed to the subterranean mushroom. Initially, they may have been used
primarily for their inherent prestige and exclusivity, but gradually the preference
shifted to the gastronomical qualities of the truffle, clearly seen in the increasing
use of truffle-based products in France, such as dinde truffe (truffled turkey).10
Faire gouter ces sortes de fruits de notre pays:11 The Use of Food as a Gift
by the Savoia
In spite of the abundant truffle grounds on their own territory and the historical
awareness of the truffles potential, it took a while before the dukes of Savoy

Compare P. Meyzie, Les cadeaux alimentaires dans le Sud-Ouest aquitain au XVIIIe
sicle: sociabilit, pouvoirs et gastronomie, Histoire, conomie & Socit, 25 (2006): pp. 33
51; N. Zemon Davis, The Gift in Sixteenth-Century France (Oxford, 2000), pp. 5672.

On the Umbrian truffle trade and consumption: C. Papa, Il tartufo. Dono di natura,
La ricerca folklorica, 41 (2000): pp. 2536; R.C. Rittersma, Industrialised Delicacies: The
Rise of the Umbrian Truffle Business and the Pioneering Work of Mazzoneschi and Urbani
(18601918), in G. Dorel-Ferr (ed.), Nourrir les hommes, de la Champagne-Ardenne
au monde: Actes des premires rencontres de la section agroalimentaire de TICCIH (Reims,
2011).

See J.-L. Flandrin, Lhuitre et la truffe, in J.-L. Flandrin (ed.), Chronique de Platine
(Paris, 1992), pp. 14352, pp. 14950.
10
For example, see Meyzie, Les cadeaux alimentaires. Until the eighteenth century,
neither truffled products nor pt truff were mentioned: G. de Merlhiac, Essai historique
sur la truffe, Chroniqueur du Prigord, 3 (1855): pp. 91120, p. 95.
11
To let (someone) taste these kinds of fruits of our country: AST Lettere Ministri
(henceforth L.M.) Austria, Mazzo 65, Ormea > Canale, January 13, 1738.
35
started to exploit them systematically in diplomatic relations. Until then, other

valuable food products were used as gifts. In fact, the diplomatic correspondence
of the period 16701730 presents a wide variety of local products that were
occasionally sent to the most important partners and/or neighboring states,
such as France, Milan, Switzerland, Rome, and the United Kingdom.
The most frequent bagatelles sent along were Piedmontese wines
(unfortunately not specifically named), rosolio (a sweet liqueur whose aroma
derives from different products like orange, coffee, vanilla, and so on), jam from
Mondov, the fromage de Nol (recently known as Vacherin dAbondance), and
Piedmontese tobacco.12 All these products were eagerly consumed at foreign
courts, especially the Piedmontese wine and liqueur, which seem to have been
highly pleasing to Louis XIV and Charles II.13 Strikingly, in the diplomatic
correspondence from the period 16701725, the subterranean mushroom
did not appear, not even when in season (November to January).14 However,
before discussing the question of how the Piedmontese truffle conquered the
diplomatic scene, a few words should be said about the political circumstances
that induced the rulers of Savoy to create their well-organized system of
distributing regional food products to foreign courts.
The political vicissitudes that characterized the history of the dynasty of
Savoia since its medieval origins were determined by its geographical position.
Its pedemontanus setting was both a blessing and a curse: on the one hand, the
actual sphere of influence was relatively small and rather insignificant from an
economic point of view. On the other hand, its cisalpine and transalpine territories,
proximity to and influence on the Mediterranean, and position at the crossroads
of the northsouth and eastwest axes of the European communication network
made Savoy a region that was too strategic to be neglected. Geopolitically, the state
of Savoy constituted a kind of buffer zone between the continental superpowers of
12
For rosolio, see http://www.saporidelPiedmonte.it/prodotti/bevande/16.htm
(accessed May 2008); for vacherins savoyards, which might have been the so-called Vacherin
dAbondance, see L. Brard, J. Froc, P. Hyman, M. Hyman and P. Marchenay, Inventaire des
produits rgionaux de la France. Rhne-Alpes (Paris, 1995), pp. 4258; C. Abry, R. Devos, H.
Raulin and J. Cuisenier (eds), Les sources rgionales de la Savoie. Une approche ethnologique:
alimentation, habitat, levage (Paris, 1979), p. 221. This Vacherin dAbondance was already
famous in the fifteenth century: Pantaleone da Confienza, Summa lacticiniorum (Turin,
1477), Tractatus II, cap. 8.
13
D. Perrero, I regali di prodotti nazionali invalsi nella diplomazia piemontese dei
secoli XVIIXVIII, Atti della Reale Accademia delle Scienze di Torino, 31 (1896): pp. 411
32, pp. 41217; and, more recently: G. Caligaris, Viaggiatori illustri e ambasciatori stranieri
alla corte sabauda nella prima met del Seicento: ospitalit e regali, Studi Piemontesi, 4/1
(1975): pp. 15171.
14
See Perrero, I regali di prodotti nazionali.
36
Royal Taste
Spain, France, and Austria (Figure 2.1). This already precarious situation was only
aggravated by the proximity of Milan and Monferrato, both contested territories
repeatedly claimed or invaded by the Savoia but equally desired by the Spanish
king and the Austrian emperor. Due to this geopolitical constellation, the state of
Savoy became embroiled in virtually every war that took place during the sixteenth,
seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries, and eventually succeeded in politically
exploiting the rivalries of the different contenders.
The key to Savoys gradual, but persistent accumulation of power was the
combination of successful marital policy, the creation of both a consistent and
considerable army as well as an able diplomatic corps, and the pronounced
political instinct of some of its rulers, who repeatedly managed to gain in
influence by an ingenious and well-aimed diplomacy that regularly played the
Gromchte off one another. Since the time of Emmanuel Philibert, one of the
most important long-term goals ardently pursued by all the dukes of Savoy
despite differing political agendaswas the acquisition of a royal crown.
Figure 2.1 The change in the geopolitical position of Savoy during the
eighteenth century
(Source: Gianni Oliva, I Savoia, 1998; by kind permission of Arnoldo Mondadori Editore
S.p.A.).
37
The quest for a crown and scepter was triggered by an intra-Italian competition
between the Medici and the Savoia, who both more than once claimed the title
of King of Cyprus and tried to underpin their prerogatives with the publication
of their genealogy and with a diplomatic campaign. Simultaneously, the Savoy
dynasty also showed its ambitions by creating a court society that was clearly
inspired by the French model of Noblemen-in-Residence. The court in Turin
tried to integrate the local aristocracy by subsuming its radius of action under the
immediate sphere of influence of the duke. By the time of Charles Emmanuel II,
the court of Savoy had obtained a self-evident prestige which was progressively
acknowledged at an international level. From approximately 1660 onward,
the dukes of Savoy were considered de facto kings, since an increasing number
of states honored them with royal treatment. In 1713, they finally saw their
ambitions fulfilled with the bestowal of the Kingdom of Sicily (by the Treaty of
Utrecht), which after the conquest of Sicily by Spain in 1720 was exchanged for
the crown of Sardinia.
During the various wars that took place between 1688 and 1738 (the Nine
Years War, War of the Quadruple Alliance, and the wars of Spanish and Polish
succession), the princes of Savoy gained in importance as political allies. Because
of the strategic position of their territories and the considerable size of their army,
the Savoia were often approached by both of the contending sides. This was a
situation that led them to frequently change alliances from one war to another, or
even during an armed conflict, depending on what was politically advantageous.
During the four aforementioned wars, Victor Amadeus II and Charles Emmanuel
III chose twice to side against the Austrian Hapsburgs overtly and ambiguously,
and once betrayed them in the course of the armed conflict, a decision which
resulted in a significant expansion of the Duchy of Savoy. Even if they fought
as allies of the Hapsburgs, as they did during the Spanish Succession War, peace
negotiations turned out to be another source of friction, as Savoyard territorial
ambitions could only be gratified at the expense of Hapsburg Lombardy. For
example, the Treaty of Utrecht of 1713, which ascribed substantial territorial
expansion to Savoy, prefigured a long period of tension. Another important
territorial gain took place after the battle of Guastala (1734) during the War of
the Polish Succession, when Austria had to cede important areas in Lombardy
and Piedmont and was almost forced to renounce the Duchy of Milan. This
underlined, once again, the expansionist aspirations of the Savoia but contributed
to undermining an already fragile relationship.15
15
See, amongst others, W. Barberis, I Savoia. Quattro storie per una dinastia, in W.
Barberis (ed.), I Savoia. I secoli doro di una dinastia europea (Turin, 2007), pp. XVLIV; C.
Storrs, La politica internazionale e gli equilibri continentali, in W. Barberis (ed.), I Savoia,
pp. 349; G. Symcox, Let di Vittorio Amedeo II, in P. Merlin, C. Rosso, G. Symcox and
38
Royal Taste
The years between the armistice and the final peace brought about by the
Treaty of Vienna (1738) were particularly full of tension and mutual suspicion.
In order to stabilize the relationship with the imperial court, Charles Emmanuel
III sent one of his most capable diplomats, Count Luigi Girolamo Malabaila di
Canale. Besides the defeat at Guastala and the subsequent territorial losses, there
were also other factors that complicated the AustrianSavoyard relationship.
Over the course of the eighteenth century, Austria tried to reinforce its position
in Italy, but it was repeatedly obstructed by the rising Duchy of Savoy. The main
offensive and defensive powers on the Italian peninsula lived in a slumbering
but ongoing state of conflict. The fact that Savoy had formally been part of the
Holy Roman Empire since the Middle Ages also prejudiced the relationship
because both states used ancient privileges and stipulations to lend weight to
their territorial claims. However, since both parties no longer believed in the
juridical legitimacy of these feudal arrangements and used them only as political
instruments, diplomatic relations were very much complicated by infinite
juridical disputes. Significantly, the staff of the Piedmontese delegation in
Vienna consisted of excellent diplomats who were well versed in both imperial
legislation and feudal issues, and were frequently assisted by special juridical
experts.16
In January 1737, a young but relatively experienced and very promising
Piedmontese nobleman arrived in Vienna, where he had been appointed
ambassador by Charles Emmanuel III. Due to the SavoyardFrench alliance
during the War of the Polish Succession, the diplomatic relations between Turin
and Vienna had been broken since September 1733, and Count Luigi Girolamo
Malabaila di Canale, who previously served as the kings representative in The
Hague, was expected to reestablish diplomatic contacts. A first step in this
direction was the arrangement of the third marriage of the Duke of Savoy to the
G. Ricuperati (eds), Il Piemonte sabaudo. Stato e territori in et moderna (Turin, 1994),
pp. 271441; G. Ricuperati, Il Settecento, in P. Merlin, C. Rosso, G. Symcox and G.
Ricuperati (eds), Il Piemonte sabaudo, pp. 441515; R. Oresko, The House of Savoy in
Search for a Royal Crown in the Seventeenth Century, in R. Oresko, G.C. Gibbs and H.M.
Scott (eds), Royal and Republican Sovereignty in Early Modern Europe (Cambridge, 1997),
pp. 272350; E. Castelnuovo, W. Barberis et al. (eds), La Reggia di Venaria e i Savoia. Arte,
magnificenza e storia di una corte europea (Turin, 2007).
16
On the relation between Savoy and the Holy Roman Empire: G. Tabacco, Lo stato
sabaudo nel Sacro Romano Impero (Turin, 1939). For the juridical details of the tensions: K.
Otmar von Aretin, Das Alte Reich 16481806, Band 2: Kaisertradition und sterreichische
Gromachtpolitik (16481745) (Stuttgart, 1997), pp. 2025. More specifically on the
Savoyard legazione in Vienna: E. Piscitelli, La legazione sarda in Vienna (17071859) (Rome,
1950), especially pp. 1332. On Canales capability: Ricuperati, Il Settecento, p. 483.
39
sister of the future Emperor Francis I, Elisabeth Theresa of Lorraine in 1737,

which had already been concluded before Canales arrival.17
In accordance with the procedures of the Savoy state administration, once in
Vienna, Canale received the instructions of his predecessor, Marquis Giuseppe
Roberto Solaro di Breglio, and there are indications that Breglio initiated
Canale into the practice of gift-giving. Marquis Breglio had experienced that
offering bagatelles was a subtle way of gaining favor at the imperial court, and
he did not omit to inform his successor about this effective strategy.18 Whereas
Breglio suggested the use of rock partridges (bartavelle or bertavelle),19 Canale
seems to have discovered that Piedmontese truffles turned out to be an excellent
way of gaining favor in the Viennese diplomatic milieux. From the start of
Canales tenure, mention of truffles begins to appear regularly in diplomatic
correspondence.20
Curiously, the rise of the Piedmontese truffle coincided with the entering of
the Duchy of Savoy into the arena of European states. It would be, of course, too
casuistic to conclude that the Piedmontese truffle brought about this emergence
of the Savoia. Nevertheless, some factors made this period a propitious moment
For a biographical account, see A. Ruata, Luigi Malabaila di Canale. Riflessi della
cultura illuministica in un diplomatico piemontese (Turin, 1968), especially pp. 1119. For
an account of the political function of gifts in early modern statecraft literature, see J. Falcke,
Studien zum diplomatischen Geschenkwesen am brandenburgisch-preuischen Hof im 17. und
18. Jahrhundert (Berlin, 2006), pp. 5366.
18
See the following fragment from a letter of Canale: Feu le marquis de Breil [i.e.
Breglio; R.C.R.] qui le [le bartavelle; R.C.R.] savois bien men donna 12 pour le chancelier
de Sinzendorf tres entendu en bonne chere, lorsque je vins a Vienne pour la premiere fois;
le chancellier en fit grand bruit comme dun regal ainsi ce fut la un [ unreadable; R.C.R.]
derudition que jappris dans les premiers instants de mon sejour Vienne et quoique jaie
vu beaucoup de changements ici, il ny en a point eu cet egard. (It was Marquis Breglio,
being familiar with the bartavelle, who gave me 12 of them for the connoisseur chancellor
Sinzendorf, when I came for the first time in Vienna; during the initial period of my sojourn
in Vienna I heard that the chancellor made it widely known that such a gift was a [
unreadable] of erudition, and nothing changed in this respect, even though I have seen a lot
of changes here.) Cited from: AST L.M. Austria, Mazzo 90, Canale > Raiberti, December
14, 1769. See also Perrero, I regali di prodotti nazionali, p. 425.
19
On the rock partridge or bartavelle daosta (Alectoris graeca), see: http://www.
chasses-du-monde.com/europe/especes-chassees/perdrix-bartavelle.htm; http://oncfs.esigetel.
fr/Oncfs/Obj/Pdf/Bartavelle.pdf (both websites accessed May 2008); Gruppo Amis du patois,
Dizionario del dialetto francoprovenzale di Hne, Valle dAosta (Comune di Hne, 2007),
p. 407 (1).
20
See, for example, AST L.M. Austria, Mazzo 65, Ormea > Canale, January 13, 1738;
AST L.M. Austria, Mazzo 65, Ormea > Canale, December, 18, 1738. See also Table 2.1 in
this chapter.
17
Royal Taste
40
for the introduction of the Piedmontese truffle into court society, and may
have set the stage for its subsequent exploitation in view of their own political
agenda.
Tartufomania: Truffes Blanches de Pimont (AOC)
Since nobody, not even the gods, can resist the pull of presents, as Ovid
knew perfectly well (Munera, crede mihi, capiunt hominesque deosque, Ars
amatoria 3, 653), who could abstain from a basketful of these peculiar telluric
commodities? Notwithstanding their gastronomical qualities, which only in the
course of the eighteenth century became recognized and properly exploited, it
was their very mysterious and exclusive nature which made truffles so immensely
appealing.21
Today, it would be an offense or a very bad joke to offer someone potatoes in
Western societies, but when introduced the potato was considered a prestigious
gift and frequently circulated among the elites. This use of the cheaper tuber
as a rewarding gift shows that there is much more in the exchange itself than in
the things exchanged.22 It was precisely the symbolical value and the semantic
meaning of the truffle that made this unsightly tuber an unequalled gift object.
Since offering gifts can be considered an act of self-definition and a means of
defining the other, the truffle (and to a lesser extent other Piedmontese delicacies)
conveyed different, but overlapping meanings. Like all gifts, this also served as an
indicator of social prestige in two ways: it referred to the prestige of the giver and
simultaneously also revealed the ascribed prestige of the recipient.23 The message
conveyed by the gift of truffles could, of course, provoke a range of different
reactions: the recipient could counter immediately with their own gift, delay
the counter-gift, or not engage at all in a response gift. Accordingly, this process
of accumulated gift-giving frequently becomes a source of competition or even
The gastronomical use of the truffle presumably started only at the court of Louis
XV and Louis XVI. Until then, truffles appeared rarely at the French court, but rather served
as an accessoire, like boiled eggs: Merlhiac, Essai historique, pp. 11516.
22
C. Lvi-Strauss, The Principle of Reciprocity, in A. Komter (ed.), The Gift: an
Interdisciplinary Perspective, pp. 1826, p. 21. For the use of the potato as a precious gift, see,
for example, Die Korrespondenz Hans Fuggers von 1566 bis 1594. Regesten der Kopierbcher
aus dem Fuggerarchiv, ed. Ch. Karnehm (2 vols, Munich, 2003), vol. 1, p. 523; vol. 2.1,
p. 772. I would like to thank Professor Wolfgang Behringer and Katharina Reinholdt for this
information.
23
Schwartz, The Social Psychology, pp. 70, 74.
21
41
conflict, as the anthropological phenomenon of the potlach illustrates.24 It would

require other archival research to verify whether or not emulative intentions
played a role here, however, as for quite a long time the initiative of gift-giving
was coming solely from the Piedmontese side, which suggests a distorted gift
relationship.25
However, the truffle did not only symbolize prestige, but also served in other
respects as a distinctive and noteworthy object. What pushed the court society
in general, and this newly arrived royalty of Savoy in particular, was the urge
On contemporary relevance of competitive gift-giving still inspiring: M. Mauss,
Essai sur le don. Forme et raison de lchange dans les socits archaques, LAnne
Sociologique, seconde srie, I (19231924): pp. 5106, especially pp. 811. For an online
version, see: http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1522/cla.mam.ess3 (accessed May 2008). On the
importance of timing in the gift exchange: [] lintervalle [temporelle; R.C.R.] [] tait l
pour permettre celui qui donne de vivre son don comme un don sans retour, et celui qui
rend de vivre son contre-don comme gratuit et non dtermin par le don initial (the interval
enables he who gives to experience his gift as a gift without a return gift and it enables he who
renders to experience his counter-gift as disinterested and not determined by the initial gift).
Cited from P. Bourdieu, Raisons pratiques. Sur la thorie de laction (Paris, 1994), p. 177. Also:
P. Bourdieu, The Work of Time, in A. Komter (ed.), The Gift: an Interdisciplinary Perspective,
pp. 13548.
25
In November 1769 Raiberti communicated to Canale V.E. verra par la dpche
que je lui [i.e. Canale; R.C.R.] envoie en reponse sa relation, combien le Roi a t sensible
au present de Vin de Tokai, que lEmpereur a voulu lui [i.e. Charles Emmanuel III; R.C.R.]
faire. (His Excellence will see through the letter which I am sending him [i.e. Canale;
R.C.R.] as reaction to his report, how pleased the king has been by the gift of the Tokaj wine
which the Emperor has wanted to give him [i.e. Charles Emmanuel III; R.C.R.].) Cited
from AST L.M. Austria, Mazzo 90, November 18, 1769. Five years later, the correspondence
for the first time made mention of the standardization of this gift: Puisque Monsieur le
comte de St. Julien vous a dj parl du vin de Tokai, je pense quon voudra aussi se conformer
lusage dans la distribution de cet envoi. (Since Count St Julien has already spoken with
you about Tokaj wine, I think that they want to make a custom of the distribution of this
product.) Cited from AST L.M. Austria, Mazzo 94, Aigueblanche > Scarnafiggi, October
15, 1774. But this standardization was preceded by some subtle pressure from the Secretary
of Foreign Affairs in Turin, Aigueblanche, who gave the following instructions to the interim
ambassador in Vienna, Montagnini: Vous pourres dire comme de vous meme Mr. de St.
Julien que le vin de Tokai dont il vous a parl sera toujours bien reu ici par le cas que lon fait
de tout ce qui vient de la part de LL. M.M. Imples. Il sera meme trs propos que lorsquon
vous le remettra, vous prenes des mesures telles eviter toute sorte dinconvenient la dessus.
(You can tell Mr St Julien yourself that the Tokaj wine, of which he spoke with you, will
always be well accepted here in any case, as will be all things that come from the Empress
and Emperor. It would also be appropriate that you take the kind of precautions, while they
submit the wine to you, that will help you avoid any kind of inconvenience in this respect.)
Cited from AST L.M. Austria, Mazzo 94, Aigueblanche > Montagnini, January 29, 1774.
24
Royal Taste
42
to distinguish itself. The frequent dispatch of considerable and initially everincreasing quantities of truffles and other regional produce was also a way of
displaying prodigality and financial carelessness. It was this costly game of titfor-tat which forced the state administration in Turin to act promptly whenever
Vienna requested truffles, even if the budgetary repercussions of these transports
affected the functionaries or even the king (as will be dealt with below).26
In terms of distinction, truffles also turned out to be a rewarding gift,
since they could be perfectly integrated into an aristocratic lifestyle which
was characterized, if not dictated, by the search for prestige. So, as often is
the case with presents, the charm of the tartufi essentially derived from their
redundancy27 and from the fact that they, as delicacies, largely contributed
to the state of bien-tre and douceur, which higher nobility, and especially
court nobility, actively pursued.28 In much the same way, and perhaps even
preeminently, truffles could immensely delight the recipient because of their
concomitant unexpectedness and eccentricity. Startling and peculiar presents
are likely to be highly effective, especially in a court society overburdened with
gift-giving which was very often merely ritual.29 The truffle was at that time an
undeniable novelty and curiosity.
It is difficult to explain the origins of this sudden, almost feverish, interest in
truffles. Was it the gradual progress in the scientific unveiling of the subterranean
mushroom which triggered this vivid interest, or were these explorations rather
manifestations of a deeper, primary curiosity which preceded and induced the
With regard to the conspicuous lifestyle of the court society: T. Veblen, The Theory
of the Leisure Class: an Economic Study of Institutions (New York, 1934); N. Elias, Die hfische
Gesellschaft (4th edn, Frankfurt am Main, 1989).
27
On the typical redundancy of the gift: D. Cheal, Moral economy, in A. Komter
(ed.), The Gift: an Interdisciplinary Perspective, pp. 8195.
28
M. Figeac, La douceur des Lumires: Noblesse et art de vivre en Guyenne au XVIIIe
sicle (Bordeaux, 2001). This hedonistic lifestyle was not a goal in itself, but rather served as
a display of wealth and social valence (Elias, Die hfische Gesellschaft for example, pp. 87
8). Conversely, this search for prestige did become a Selbstzweck and a plane of projection
of aristocratic honor, since the social status of the nobility deteriorated due to the rise of
the noblesse de robe and the professionalization of the armed forces. On the changing selfperception of the nobility between the late Middle Ages and the eighteenth century: K.
Margreiter, Konzept und Bedeutung des Adels im Absolutismus (Florence, 2005), pp. 8205.
29
Cheal, Moral economy. For an analysis of such a merely ritual gift relation, see C.
Windler, Tribut und Gabe. Mediterrane Diplomatie als interkulturelle Kommunikation,
Saeculum. Jahrbuch fr Universalgeschichte, 51 (2000): 2456; P. Burschel, Der Sultan und
das Hndchen. Zur politischen konomie des Schenkens in interkultureller Perspektive,
Historische Anthropologie, 15/3 (2007): 40821.
26
43
scholarly findings?30 Whatever the case, these mycological studies very strongly
suggest that the scientific interest in truffles was anything but an isolated
academic issue.
The best proof of this tartufomania was the requests for truffle hunters
that the French, English, and Prussian court sent to the King of Savoy. At least
three truffle dog expeditionseach time accompanied by a couple of truffle
pickersleft Piedmont in the course of the eighteenth century in order to verify
whether these countries produced (white) truffles.31 Very soon the reputation
of Piedmont in this particular field of specialization was internationally
acknowledged, as the potato entry in the Zedler Universallexikon (1749)
demonstrated: These truffle dogs come from the Turin area to Augsburg and
other German regions.32
30
The major developments were Geoffroys theory that truffles had seed-vessels
(around 1710); the actual observation of the spores by Micheli (approx. 1710); the first
successful reproduction of the black truffle by Bradley (around 1726); and the first illustration
of a truffles cross-section by Bruckmann (1720). See R.C. Rittersma, The Quest for the
Holy Spores: Exploring the Truffle in Early Modern European Science, unpublished paper
(2008); R.C. Rittersma, Subterranean Fieldwork: Marsilis Survey on the Biogeography and
Ecobiology of Truffles in 18th Century North and Central Italy, in C. Ries, M. Harbsmeier
and K. H. Nielsen (eds), Ways of Knowing the Field: Studies in the History and Sociology
of Scientific Fieldwork and Expeditions (Aarhus, 2011); G. Lazzari, Storia della Micologia
Italiana. Contributo dei botanici italiani allo sviluppo delle scienze micologiche (Trento, 1973),
pp. 96132; and G.C. Ainsworth, Introduction to the History of Mycology (Cambridge, 1976),
especially pp. 181. Perhaps the supposed aphrodisiac qualities contributed to the popularity
and the appeal of the truffles, as for example discussed in the works of courtiers like Brantme
and Giacomo Casanova. However, this aspect is never mentioned even in guarded terms.
31
With regard to the truffle dog expeditions to Paris (1723), London (1751), and
Berlin (approx. 1720): Tempo addietro partirono di qua cercatori di tartufi fra i pi esperti
con cani addestratissimi, mandati dai grandi Vittorio Amedeo II e Carlo Emanuele III in
Germania, in Francia, in Inghilterra, nelle parti pi fiorenti dEuropa a sommi principi e re
amici. (Formerly, some of the most experienced truffle hunters with well-trained dogs were
sent by King Victor Amadeus II and Charles Emmanuel III to prominent rulers and friend
kings in Germany, France, England, and in the most prosperous regions of Europe.) Cited
from G.B. Vigo, Tubera terrae. Carmen. I tartufi (1st edn, Turin 1776; Borgosesia, 1994),
p. 27; and Perrero, I regali di prodotti nazionali, pp. 42532; respectively F.E. Bruckmann,
Specimen botanicum exhibens fungos subterraneos vulgo tubera terrae dictos (Helmstedt, 1720).
32
Dergleichen Hunde kommen aus den Turinisischen Gebiethe nach Augspurg und
andre Orte Teutschlandes. (These dogs come from the region of Turin to Augsburg and
other parts of Germany.) Cited from: Erd-Aepffel, in J.H. Zedler, Grosses vollstndiges
Universal-Lexikon (vol. 8, 1st edn, 1749; Graz, 1994), p. 1518.
Undoubtedly, this supra-academic interest was also very much related to the early
modern scientific practice, which was not only socially closely connected with the milieux of
the court and aristocracy, but thematically also strongly inspired by a primary, almost childish
44
Royal Taste
There are some indications suggesting that the rulers of Savoy managed to
exploit their local specialty in multiple ways, and that they increasingly became
aware of its unique promotional possibilities. Besides the export of truffle dogs
and the casual product promotion through the organization of truffle-hunting
sessions in Piedmont for foreign aristocratic visitors33, there was, of course, the
exploitation of the culinary qualities of the truffle. The administration of the
Duchy of Savoy seems to have noticed its unique utility only at a later stage.
Initially, the truffles sent to Vienna were just announced in the accompanying
letters as quelques livres de truffes, but from the winter of 1768 onward they
are repeatedly called Truffes blanches de Pimont or Truffes de Pimont.34 I
cannot yet conclude that the Savoy rulers aspired to a kind of appellation dorigine
controlle (AOC) with regard to their local specialties, but the abrupt change in
the designation of the truffle in the diplomatic correspondence is, to say the least,
striking. Perhaps, the distribution of Hungarian truffles in Viennese high society
made the Savoia aware of the uniqueness of the products of their own terroir.35 In
kind of curiosity: B.T. Moran, Courts and Academies, in K. Park and L. Daston (eds), The
Cambridge History of Science, vol. III: Early Modern Science (Cambridge, 2006), pp. 25172;
and specifically with regard to the Piedmontese court: V. Ferrone, La Nuova Atlantide e i
Lumi. Scienza e politica nel Piemonte di Vittorio Amedeo III (Turin, 1988). On the role of
curiosity: L. Daston, Die Lust an der Neugier in der frhneuzeitlichen Wissenschaft, in K.
Krger (ed.), Curiositas: Welterfahrung und sthetische Neugierde in Mittelalter und frher
Neuzeit (Gttingen, 2002), pp. 14775.
33
Perrero, I regali di prodotti nazionali, p. 428.
34
See, for example, AST L.M. Austria, Mazzo 90, December 14, 1768; 2 XII 1769;
Mazzo 94, December 3, 1774.
35
R.C. Rittersma, Ces pitoyables truffes dItalie. Die franzsisch-italienische
Rivalitt auf dem europischen Trffelmarkt seit 1700. Zu einer Geschichte des
Gastrochauvinismus und des Terroir, sterreichische Zeitschrift fr Geschichtswissenschaften,
21/2 (2010): pp. 81105. A workable definition of terroir would be: Un systme au sein
duquel stablissent des interactions complexes entre un ensemble de facteurs humains
(techniques, usages collectifs ), une production agricole et un milieu physique (territoire).
Le terroir est valoris par un produit auquel il confre une originalit (typicit). (A system in
which complex interactions are established between a set of human factors (as, for example,
techniques, collective practices, etc.), an agricultural production, and a physical environment
(territoire). The terroir is valorized by a (agricultural) product, whose very specificity and
originality derive from this constellation of human and natural factors.) Cited from L.
Brard and P. Marchenay, Les produits de terroir. Entre cultures et rglements (Paris, 2004),
p. 72. With regard to the Hungarian truffles: Diese nun auf obige Art gesammelte
Schwmme, werden von denen Bauern in die Stdte gebracht, nach Pfunden verkauffet und
hernach auf zweyerley Weise verbraucht. Erstlich frisch, welche man vor etwas delicates
hlt, und weit und breit davon nach Wien und andern Orten an grosse Herren Geschencke
machet. (The peasants bring the accordingly collected mushrooms to the cities and sell
45
any case, the white truffle of Piedmont became more and more in vogue, as the
recurrent rumors about truffles in Viennese court society (see the next section)
and the ever-increasing quantities of truffle transports demonstrated.
From the diplomatic correspondence at issue it is difficult to date with
certainty the first dispatch of truffles to Vienna. The first consignment might
have taken place from approximately 1738 onward, since the previous years of
correspondence did not contain any mention of truffles.36 However, from this
supposedly first occurrence onward, diplomatic communication gives evidence
of a steep rise in demand. Significantly, the initiative of the first gift came from the
newly instated queen, Elisabeth Theresa of Lorraine, who charged her minister,
the Marquis of Ormea, to send une demie douzaine de vacherins et quelque
livres de truffes to Canale, who should forward them to the queens brother,
the Duke of Lorraine, in order de [lui; R.C.R.] faire gouter ces sortes de fruits
de notre pays.37 The Piedmontese delicacies apparently appealed to the Duke of
Lorraine: in November 1739 he asked Canale whether he knew if the queen had
already expedited the truffles. In the subsequent autumn, the queen sent him
first 15 livres and then nine more. Remarkably, 30 years later the quantities were
almost doubled, as Table 2.1 illustrates.
Table 2.1
Quantities of food gifts sent from Turin to Vienna (17381774)
Information source
Year* Quantity of offered
victuals**
(AST L.M. Austria, Mazzo [= M.])
Truffes
Vacherins Bertavelle
1738 -quelques tr.
-6
M. 65, Jan. 13, 1738
-quelques livres
- quelques
M. 65, Dec. 18, 1738
de tr.
1739 4 botes de tr.
M. 66, Nov. 18, 1739
1740 24 livr. = 9.1 kg
M. 67, Dec. 3, 1740 (15 livres de tr.)

M. 67, Dec. 10, 1740 (9 livres de tr.)
them by the pound, whereupon they are used in two ways. First, as a fresh product, which is
considered to be a delicacy, and in the whole region exploited as a gift to grandseigneurs in
Vienna and other places.) See the entry Hirsch-Schwmme, in Zedler, Grosses vollstndiges
Universal-Lexikon, p. 251.
36
I checked the correspondence from 1721 (Mazzo 48), 1733, 173673 (Mazzo 64),
and 173738 (Mazzo 65).
37
To let him [i.e. the Duke of Lorraine; R.C.R.] taste these kinds of fruits of our
country. AST L.M. Austria, Mazzo 65, Ormea > Canale, January 13, 1738.
Royal Taste
46
1766 42 livr. = 16 kg
M. 88, Dec. 20, 1766
1767 84.5 livres = 32.1

-6
kg
-6
1768 176 livres = 66.9 kg - 6
-8
18
1769 56 livr. = 21.3 kg
18
1773 28 livr. = 10.6 kg

1774 44 livr. = 16.7 kg
8
-8
-6
12
- 16
- 25
M. 89, Jan. 3, 1767: 38,5 poids dici

M. 89, Dec. 19, 1767: 46 livres de tr.
M. 90, Jan. 2, 1768: 56 livres de tr.
M. 90, Dec. 14, 1768: 70 livres de tr.
M. 90, Dec. 24, 1768: 50 livres de tr.
M. 90, Dec. 2, 1769
M. 94, Dec. 22, 1773
M. 94, Jan. 3, 1774: 44 livres de tr.
M. 94, Dec. 3, 1774: no truffle
quantity indicated
* Understood as calendar year (and not as the truffle harvest season, which goes from October
until January). Decisive are the date and the weight of the transport on the day they were sent.
** 1 livre equals approximately 380 g.38
The table also shows that there was a sudden decrease in 1769, which
was predominantly caused by the bad harvest of that year. After having sent
a first dispatch of 56 livres (approx. 21.3 kg) on December 2, 1769, Canales
correspondence partner in Turin, Raiberti, wrote on December 30, 1769 that he
counted on sending a second consignment. Unfortunately, he was informed by
the Intendant general de la maison du Roi thatin spite of les recherches plus
exactesthere were, due to warm winds, no good truffles available or expected
for the rest of the season.39 The relatively low quantity in the year 1773 was
primarily due to the fact that a new ambassador had to be initiated into the art
of gift-giving, as Count Canale died in July 1773.
In several respects, 1768 differed considerably from the previous years.
In this year the gift repertoire of the dukes of Savoy was expanded with the
reintroduction of the rock partridge, or bertavella dAosta. Simultaneously, the
Savoia became increasingly aware of the uniqueness of their white truffle, and
identified the terroir of the tuber magnatum explicitly with their own power
base. Most striking, however, was the enormous increase in food gifts that were
According to Giuseppe Bracco, who can be trusted to know the actual measures
adopted by the Savoyard court, since he was involved in the source edition of the accounts of
the Savoia between approx. 1500 and 1789, a Piedmontese livre (libbra) was equivalent to
approx. 380 grams: G. Bracco, La tavola dei Savoia nei secoli XVII e XVIII, in Accademia
Italiana della Cucina (ed.), Il terzo convegno dellAccademia Italiana della Cucina, Piemonte,
1517 Ottobre 1971 (Milan, 1973), pp. 7185, p. 82. I would like to thank signora Ginepro
(Biblioteca Comunale di Novara) for sending me a copy of this book.
39
Cited from: AST L.M. Austria, Mazzo 90, December 30, 1769.
38
47
sent around, especially of truffles. Was this the result of a plentiful harvest of that
season so abundant, or was there more at stake?
1768 was also the year in which Raiberti for the first time added truffles
for private use. The size of these portions for personal aims was unspecified.40
Significantly, the truffles, whether additional or meant for the imperial highness,
were in most cases announced in a postscriptum or on a separate leaflet,
together with other informal remarks. Only exceptionally did they appear in
the main diplomatic letters that discussed important political issues and were,
because of their confidentiality, mostly enciphered. These short notes were,
of course, never sent separately but always attached to the official diplomatic
correspondence. However, this does not automatically mean that they were
completely insignificant politically and negligible. On the contrary, these casual
remarks very often revealed an economy of emotions, which were, in the highly
ceremonial and emotionally repressive regime of the court society, otherwise
retrievable only with great difficulty.
Parler ministerielement au sujet des truffes, or How to Use Truffles in
Diplomacy
It was Canale who presumably had the primeur of exploiting Piedmontese
truffles at the Viennese court, but it was his predecessor, Breglio, who suggested
to him the possibility of facilitating things with imperial court society by using
Savoyard delicacies. From the instructions given to Canales temporary successor,
Interim Ambassador Montagnini, we can deduce that Canale systematically
pursued this strategy41 and the same applies to his successor, Count Scarnafiggi.
In a postscriptum, Raiberti wrote: Je joins cet envoi une petite caisse de Truffes
qui vous regarde. (I add a little box of truffles to this expedition that is for you.) Cited
from: L.M. Austria, Mazzo 90, Raiberti > Canale, January 2, 1768.
41
Je sai que Monsieur de Canal envoyoit directement une partie des Truffes aux
principaux Ministres Imperiaux. On ne veut pas scarter de ce systme []. (I know that Mr
Canale sent a part of the truffles directly to the principal Imperial Ministers. You should not
drift away from this system [].) Cited from: AST L.M. Austria, Mazzo 94, Aigueblanche
> Montagnini, January 29, 1774. See also the letter from Scarnafiggi to Aigueblanche: Si
dans la susdite expedition V.E. trouve propos den faire ajouter une petite quantit pour
distribuer deux ou trois des principales personnes de cette Cour, elle me mettra meme
de continuer une attention pratique par le feu Comte de Canale, et pour la quelle on lui
en etoit trs reconnoissant. (If His Excellency considers it appropriate, a small quantity
of truffles could be added to the mentioned expedition for distribution among the two or
three most important persons at this court. This would enable me to maintain an attention,
practiced by the late Count Canale, of which the recipients were [always] very grateful.)
40
48
Royal Taste
But unlike Canale, Scarnafiggi frequently requested truffles for his own use: Il
y a quelques tems que je vous ai parle ministerielement au sujet des Truffes, et je
vous en reparlerai encore, pour vous dire que si vous pouvez men envoyer une ou
deux fois une petite quantit pour distribuer, cela me facilitera les moyens detre
plus familierement dans quelques maisons quil me convient de frequenter. One
year later, Scarnafiggi was able to inform his chief in Turin that the truffles had
achieved their purpose, because the [] principaux Ministres de cette Cour
[] men savent un gr infini. 42
Other remarks in correspondence suggest, furthermore, that truffles were in
high demand at the Viennese court and that the main recipients, the imperial
couple, adored them: Aussi S.M. Imperatrice ma-t-elle encore fait dire par un
de ses Valets de Chambre de confiance, que ces truffes toient si bonnes, que
tout ce quelle avoit mang depuis lui avoit paru fade et insipide.43 According
to courtly rumors, the State Chancellor Kaunitz, who was imperial attach at
the court of Savoy between 1742 and 1744, always received his truffles two
weeks prior to Canale, which leads one to believe that Kaunitz had his own
supply network, and that Canale may not have told the whole truth in his
letters to his home base in Turin. There are, in any case, indications that Canale
obscured information about the conditions in which the truffles arrived.
Even worse he also suppressed what he did with these failed expeditions, as
Scarnafiggi critically suggested when he wrote that during his predecessors
tenure [] malgr quon en envoyt une grande quantit la fois, comme elles
Cited from: AST L.M. Austria, Mazzo 94, October 3, 1774. It is not clear whether Canale
used the imperial or the private truffle portion for this goal.
42
It is some time ago that I spoke with you in my capacity of minister about the
issue of the truffles, and I will come to speak about it again, in order to tell you to send
me once or twice a small quantity of truffles for distribution purposes. That would make it
easier to get more familiar with some houses that it would be useful to have contact with;
respectively the most important ministers were most grateful for this gift. Cited from AST
L.M. Austria, Mazzo 94, Scarnafiggi > Aigueblanche, October 24, 1774; respectively AST
L.M. Austria, Mazzo 94, Scarnafiggi > Aigueblanche, December 23, 1775.
43
The Empress told me also through one of her confidential pages that the truffles
were so tasty that everything that she had eaten afterwards seemed bland and insipid.
Cited from AST L.M. Austria, Mazzo 94, Scarnafiggi > Aigueblanche, December 19,
1774. Canale also testified repeatedly to the fact that the empress and emperor enjoyed the
truffles; see, for example: Leurs majests ont t fort sensibles au souvenir du Roi, cited
from AST L.M. Austria, Mazzo 89, Canale > Raiberti, December 29, 1768; also AST L.M.
Austria, Mazzo 89, Canale > Raiberti, January 19, 1767; AST L.M. Austria, Mazzo 89,
Canale > Raiberti, December 31, 1767; AST L.M. Austria, Mazzo 90, Canale > Raiberti,
December 14, 1769.
49
murissent en chemin, LL.MM. Imperiales ne pouvoient quen manger une ou

deux fois.44
Scarnafiggis reflection is rather curious, since Canale confirmed the arrival
of every consignment. As we have just seen, he also wrote some words on how
the royal gift was actually perceived and tasted by the empress and emperor.
The following remark of Raiberti even suggests that Canale had to give an
account of the way he presented the truffles: Jespere que vous les recevrez en
bon etat, me raportant pour la maniere dont vous avez pratiqu lgard du
premier envoi [].45 But perhaps these reports were from time to time untrue
because there is also a letter from Raiberti informing Canale about a rumor
which circulated in Turin that [quelquun a suppos ici que] les Truffes quon
est en coutume denvoyer Vienne salteroient en route de manire navoir
plus aprs leur arrive le gout et la saveur qui les fait rechercher.46 Perhaps
Canale sometimes also made illegitimate use of the truffle consignments. As
yet, Canales negligence canfor lack of evidencenot be substantiated, but
it might be, perhaps, more rewarding to focus on the wider context of these
calumniations and accusations.
The recurrent confrontation with delicate, anonymously supplied information
perfectly illustrates what, according to Norbert Elias, characterized the court
society, namely its penetrating culture of mistrust and berwachung.47 Since the
creation of a separate Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 1717, which resulted from
a drastically administrative reform by the recently crowned Victor Amadeus
II, diplomatic policy became more than ever centered on the sovereign. Since
the rulers of Savoy, and their first monarch in particular, considered themselves
chief foreign ministers, they were ever more intensively involved in diplomatic
affairs. In order to remain well informed about all political developments, they
disposed of different instruments.
44
[] even though a large quantity was sent, the imperial couple could only eat them
once or twice, as the truffles decayed on their way. See for this citation and with regard to
Kaunitzs own truffle connection: AST L.M. Austria, Mazzo 94, Scarnafiggi > Aigueblanche,
October 3, 1774: Je me suis rappell lenvoi des truffes, [] au sujet du quel jai appris que
le Prince de Kaunitz en avoit toujours reu quelques semaines auparavant que le Comte de
Canale. ([] I have been informed that the Prince of Kaunitz always used to receive them
some weeks earlier than Canale.)
45
I hope you will receive them in a good condition and that you will notify me in the
same way as you have done after the first dispatch. Cited from: AST L.M. Austria, Mazzo
90, Raiberti > Canale, January 2, 1768.
46
someone has suggested here [in Turin; R.C.R.] that the truffles that are usually sent
to Vienna decay on their way and lose their flavor and aroma which make them so requested.
Cited from: AST L.M. Austria, Mazzo 90, Raiberti > Canale, December 2 1769.
47
Elias, Die hfische Gesellschaft, pp. 197200, 296.
50
Royal Taste
First and foremost, in their own correspondence with the ambassadors

in the different legazioni, the dukes of Savoy consistently instructed their
representatives in a sometimes almost embarrassingly meticulous manner.
Second, they were also informed about the ins and outs of the correspondence
of the ambassadors with the Chief Secretary of Foreign Affairs. Third, in
view of their own political agenda, the dukes of Savoy also exploited their
private communication channels, for example with relatives at foreign courts.
Additionally, several aspects of foreign administration, for example archival
and budget policy, became increasingly institutionalized in the course of the
eighteenth century. Eventually, from an organizational point of view, virtually
every step of the ambassadors of Savoy had to be formally approved by the
Secretary of Foreign Affairs and/or by the king. Nevertheless, even in this
regime of permanent supervision, there were still grey areas in which individual
initiatives were still possible.48
Someone who obviously felt at ease with this free space was Count Luigi
Malabaila di Canale. As the kings minister he was able to maintain a more
independent existence because in Vienna he very quickly married a woman from
the upper stratum of the Austrian-Hungarian nobility, namely Maria Anna
Palffy-Ordd from the influential and wealthy Esterhzy dynasty. This alliance
not only relieved his financial dependence on his sovereign, but also eased his
access to court society in general and to the imperial couple in particular, since
Canales wife (and later also one of his daughters) belonged to the bedchambers
and intimates of the empress.
Several fragments in the correspondence indicate that Canale regularly had
private meetings with Archduchess Maria Theresa, which was rather exceptional
for representatives of foreign states.49 He was also very close to influential
members of the Viennese state apparatus, for example Baron Hagen, the vicepresident of the Imperial Council. With Kaunitz, the most powerful statesman
at the Viennese court, he maintained a rather antipathetic relationship. Canale
spent more than 35 years at the Viennese court and eventually began to identify
with the imperial side from time to time, which was particularly clear in the
War of the Polish Succession. During this political conflict, he was engaged as
go-between by King Stanislaw II of Poland to secure simultaneously political
support from Charles Emmanuel III and Maria Theresa. This diplomatic
Alleingang of Canale damaged his reputation, which was otherwise excellent,
since he managed to repair the fragile relationship with Vienna and regain the
48
Storrs, La politica internazionale, pp. 4047; D. Frigo, Principe, ambasciatore e
jus gentium. Lamministrazione della politica estera nel Piemonte del Settecento (Rome, 1991),
pp. 2199, 18089.
49
Ruata, Luigi Malabaila di Canale, pp. 1523.
51
confidence of the empress.50 In this process of reconciliation, the mutual gifts

of food products were simultaneously an instrument and a symbol of the actual
social relation.51 From this point of view, it was only expected that the rulers
of Savoy would continue this yearly practice. They actually had no choice,
since the obligeantes attentions progressively became obligatory, especially since
the introduction and subsequent standardization of Tokaj (Tokay) wine as a
counter-gift by the imperial court. But not everything remained as usual.
The painstaking initiation of Canales successors (Montagnini as interim
and Scarnafiggi as the new imperial ambassador) into the yearly ritual of the
food gift in a way corresponds with the more general process of centralization
and reorganization of the Savoy state apparatus, started by Victor Amadeus
III immediately after the death of his father in 1773. The new king replaced
the established cadre of ministers and appointed a new staff, headed by the
novice Marquis of Aigueblanche. After an initial phase of disorientation and a
struggle for power, this new minister of state and foreign minister succeeded in
dominating state administration.52
Whether it was this reorganization of the state administration or the
changing of the Viennese ambassador that provoked increasing interference
from Turin in truffle affairs, it became increasingly evident that the yearly
truffle consignments were not a bagatelle for the rulers of Savoy, but rather
a ritual to whose fulfillment they progressively attached a certain valueas
we will see, not only because the gift exchange weighed considerably on the
state budget. There was more at stake than budgetary accuracy, there were
other reasons for care. This personal concern became visible in four ways.
First, Canales successors were meticulously instructed in the entire practice
of this yearly ritual. Strikingly, they had to check customs formalities with
the revenue officers before they could receive the consignmentsas though
there had never been a precedent network!53 They also constantly received the
same directives: even after a couple of years, they were informed that the small
box of truffles was for private use and that the destination of the dispatch,
needless to say, was, as usual, the imperial couple. To put it shortly, there was a
Ibid., pp. 198, 167.

M. Godelier, Lnigme du don (Paris, 1996), p. 145.
52
See, for example, Ricuperati, Il Settecento, pp. 58198, 60717.
53
See for the customs formalities AST L.M. Austria, Mazzo 94, Aigueblanche >
50
51
Montagnini, December 11, 1773; and for the instructions to the staff: Ibid. and Mazzo 94,
Aigueblanche > Montagnini, December 22, 1773; Mazzo 94, Aigueblanche > Montagnini,
January 29, 1774.
Royal Taste
52
constantly repressed suspicion between the center (Turin) and the periphery
(Vienna).54
This suspicion was to a certain extent understandable, since a considerable
number of expeditions in the transitional period after Canales death failed due
to customs formalities, transport delays, theft, and so on. In order to avoid such
complications, the diplomats all tried to find a solution; this was the second
illustration of the increasing concern of the Savoy governors. Scarnafiggi suggests,
with regard to the recurrent problem of the conservation and theft of truffles,
that the truffles be properly packaged in Turin and that the maitres des postes
should instruct the coachmen to take care that the truffles not be subjected to
strong fluctuations in temperature.55
Third, another clear manifestation of the weight and high utility value that
the Viennese diplomats of the house of Savoy ascribed to the Piedmontese food
products, is that the ambassadors in Vienna also regularly sent their own precious
counter-gift to their superiors in Turin. This gift exchange among officials of
Savoy obviously served to remove tension and to express esteem. At least since
Canales tenure such a gift was usually offered to the first and second ranking
officials of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Turin:
Nayant reu le vin de Tokay que depuis environ un mois, il ne sera en etat detre
mis en bouteille que vers la Fin de Fevrier, en quel tems je lexpedierai en faisant
mettre du Vin de St. George sur la [unreadable; R.C.R.] du Tokay selon que le
Jai fait partir [] sous votre adresse une caisse de Truffes et une de Bartavelle [].
Vous savs leur destination, il me seroit superflu de vous en reparler. (I have sent a box of
truffles and a box of bartavelle to your address []. You are informed about their destination;
it would be superfluous to say tell you again.) Cited from AST L.M. Austria, Mazzo 95,
Aigueblanche > Scarnafiggi, December 2, 1775.
55
Comme cependant il peut arriver dans ces sortes denvoi quelque contretems
en chemin, et quun des inconvenients, aux quels ils sont le plus sujets, est celui de geler et
de degeler, je pense quon pourroit les eviter en partie si V.E. vouloit avoir la bont de les
accompagner dune lettre mon adresse, et de faire recommander aux Maitres des Postes de
ne pas permettre que les postillons en changeant de chevaux mettent les caisses, dont il sont
chargs, dans des chambres echauffes, ou dans les ecuries. (With this kind of expedition
there is always a risk of some misfortune during the transport, and one of the most frequently
occurring complications is the alternately freezing and thawing of the truffles. I think we
can avoid this partly, if His Excellency would be so good as to dispatch them accompanied
by a letter to my address, and to recommend the Maitres des Postes that they prevent the
coachmen, who are responsible for the (truffle) boxes, from putting the boxes into the stables
or into heated rooms when they are changing the horses.) Cited from AST L.M. Austria,
Mazzo 94, Scarnafiggi > Aigueblanche, December 19, 1774. See also AST L.M. Austria,
Mazzo 94, Scarnafiggi > Aigueblanche, December 11, 1775.
54
53
pratiquoit mon Predecesseur. Jaurai soin que le Ministre et son Pr Offr puissent
juger de lenvoy et de la reconnoissance de leur correspondent pour les Truffes qui
lui ont envoyes.56
This creation of secondary circuits of gift exchange clearly demonstrates the

intrinsically inflationary character of gifts.
The fourth and final manifestation of the value which the king of Savoy and
his state administration attached to the truffle delivery is in their emotional
involvement. Most striking is the following remark of Aigueblanche: Je vous
ecris part, que le Roi [i.e. Victor Amadeus III; R.C.R.] a t fach dapprendre
que le second envoi des Truffes ait aussi essuy des contretems.57 In order to
understand this emotional reaction, the reader should know that the first truffle
consignment of the year had arrived in a very bad state: nearly all of the truffles
were rotten, and only a selection of approximately two dozen had been sent
immediately to the grand maitre dhotel of the Viennese court, [] le quel
javois prevenu sur la cause de la petite quantit de Truffes, que je lui faisois
remettre.58
Despite these precautions, something went wrong with the second
consignment, causing the person giving the truffles to become angry. What
happened is made clear in another letter from Scarnafiggi, reporting the arrival
of the second dispatch:
[] jai reu le second envoi [], dont les caisses stant ouvertes en chemin, il
sen est perdu une partie, ce qui a fait, quen les envoyant Monsieur le Comte St.
Julien Grand Maitre dHotel de LL. dites Majests je lui ai fait communiquer le
certificat ci-joint des officiers de la Poste de Vienne, par lequel il conte du susdit
accident.59
56
Having received the Tokaj wine (only) approximately one month ago, it will not be
ready to be bottled until the end of February and in that period I will send the wine, putting
the wine of St George on the [] [unreadable; R.C.R.] of the Tokaj, according to the practice
of my predecessor. I will take care that the Minister and his Prime Officer will experience the
gratitude of their correspondent (by way of the wine dispatch) for the truffles which they
sent him. Cited from AST L.M. Austria, Mazzo 94, Scarnafiggi > Aigueblanche, December
19, 1774.
57
I am writing you solely (to inform you), that the king has been angry to learn that
the second consignment of truffles has also experienced a mishap. Cited from AST L.M.
Austria, Mazzo 95, Aigueblanche > Scarnafiggi, December 23, 1775.
58
[] whom I had notified about the cause of the small quantity that I had sent him.
Cited from AST L.M. Austria, Mazzo 94, Scarnafiggi > Aigueblanche, December 23, 1775.
59
I have received the second consignment, and a part of it was lost, as the boxes were
opened up during the transport. For that reason I submitted these boxes together with the
54
Royal Taste
At this point, the correspondence also beautifully exemplifies Marcel Mausss

observation of the gift as a fait social total, because this certificate of damage,
which Scarnafiggi sent to the grand maitre dhotel of the imperial court andas
a certified copyto the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Turin was anything but a
formality. Here was loss of distinction, oreven worse for an eighteenth-century
noblemanloss of honor at stake, as Aigueblanches response illustrates: La
prcaution que vous avez e denvoyer Mr. de St. Julien le certificat que vous
avez retir du Bureau de la Poste, toit propos pour faire voir que lintention du
Roi ntoit pas que la portion en fut si petite.60 Scarnafiggi might have requested
instantly a certificate of damage at the Viennese post office for at least two reasons.
First, he had to make it known that it was not the kings intention to send such
a small portion, a fortiori as the first consignment had already arrived in bad
order. Second, Scarnafiggi had to avoid even the semblance of having suppressed
the truffles, both to Count St Julien and to his own sovereign. In other words,
Scarnafiggi was forced to provide full disclosure to all parties involved about
the full facts of the matter, in order to maintain his masters honor and his own
reputation.
While the bad tidings of the unsuccessful consignments were arriving in
Turin, Aigueblanche had already sent a third consignment with a lot of truffles
as compensation for the first incomplete one: Il y a dans cet envoi de quoi
suppler abondamment au premier.61 A week later in a letter to Scarnafiggi he
wrote that he was impatient dapprendre62 whether this third dispatch had
arrived in good order. This once again makes it evident that the truffles were, for
the Savoia, not to be taken lightly, but rather something to which they ascribed
weight and importance.
attached certificate [of damage] of the post office of Vienna to the Grand Matre dHotel,
in which he is informed about this accident. Cited from AST L.M. Austria, Mazzo 94,
Scarnafiggi > Aigueblanche, December 11, 1775. Unfortunately, the certified copy of this
certificate of damage, which Scarnafiggi sent to the ministry in Turin (le certificat cijoint des officiers de la Poste de Vienne) has not been conserved in the correspondence
at issue.
60
The precaution, which you took by sending Mr St Julien a certificate of damage
from the post office, was appropriate to demonstrate that it was not the kings intention that
the portion of truffles was so small. Cited from AST L.M. Austria, Mazzo 95, Aigueblanche
> Scarnafiggi, December 23, 1775.
61
This dispatch abundantly compensates the first one. Cited from AST L.M.
Austria, Mazzo 95, Aigueblanche > Scarnafiggi, December 16, 1775.
62
impatient to hear. Cited from AST L.M. Austria, Mazzo 95, Aigueblanche >
Scarnafiggi, December 23, 1775.
55
Conclusion
Gifts, as we all know, are conveyors of emotions and meanings, even if they
appear to be merely ritual or perfunctory. Food gifts are no exception to
this rule. On the contrary, due to its very palpability (and, one can even say,
palatability), food has been used as an effective gift since time immemorial. Its
use in gift relations is as universal as the resource itself. Nevertheless, some foods
are particularly appealing for their exclusive characteristics to be exploited in gift
exchange, and the use of the truffle as a promotional gift by the dukes of Savoy
clearly shows evidence of this. The truffle enabled the emerging Savoy dynasty to
create a distinct and unequaled profile for themselves, as the Truffes blanches de
Pimont were, due to their rareness, simultaneously precious and as a gift object
exclusively connected with the territory of Savoy. Management of the process
of giving the truffles as gifts itself shows that officials from different levels of
the state administration were very concerned with the practical organization of
this gift exchange, and thereby also offers insight into the texture of personal
relations within the state apparatus.
From correspondence and other diplomatic contact with the courts of Vienna,
London, Paris, and Berlin, it becomes very clear that this culinary resource for the
kings of Savoy was not just an object of occasional value, but rather a deliberately
exploited instrument and image that sustained their quest for preeminence and
prestige. In so doing, the Savoia simultaneously were indicators and factors of the
tartufomania that progressively captivated the European elites on the threshold
of the French Revolution. Significantly, the revolutionary movement whichas
is generally knownprofoundly changed European (and some non-European)
societies did not even leave these subterranean commodities untouched. But
it would be better to discuss the post-revolutionary history of the truffle on
another occasion.
Chapter 3
Drinking for Approval:

Wine and the British Court from George
III to Victoria and Albert
Charles C. Ludington
There is a remarkable degree of consensus among cultural historians of early

modern Britain that the royal court ceased to be the locus of artistic and aesthetic
fashion after the reign of Charles II (16601685). As the story goes, Charless
court launched or supported the careers of such playwrights and poets as George
Etherege, William Wycherley, John Dryden, the Earl of Rochester, and Andrew
Marvell, the architect Christopher Wren, painters Antonio Verrio, Peter Lely, and
Godfrey Kneller, the woodcarver Grinling Gibbons, and the composer Henry
Purcell. Moreover, Charless court introduced the three-piece mens suit, tea, ice
cream, sparkling champagne, and luxury claret (red wine from Bordeaux) to the
English aristocracy, who then helped to make these items popular among Londons
merchant princes and literati, as well as provincial aristocrats and wealthy gentry.
I would like to express my gratitude to Danille De Vooght for her encouragement
and patience with this chapter. I would also like to express my appreciation to Stephen Mennell
for his books and articles on the history of food and drink in England and France, and for
introducing me to the figurational sociology of Norbert Elias. It is hoped that a historians
version of Eliass methodology has been thoughtfully applied in this chapter. In London,
Karin Thyselius and Dick Schumacher provided their usual warm hospitality during the final
research phase of this chapter. In Old Lyme, Connecticut, where the bulk of this chapter was
written, my parents, Jane and Townsend Ludington, happily kept the children occupied, and
at Duke University, Philip Stern provided helpful last-minute comments. Lastly, I would like
to thank David Cannadine. For his assistance with this chapter, and for his friendship, this
chapter is dedicated to him.

For statements in this regard, see: R. Bucholz, The Augustan Court: Queen Anne and
the Decline of Court Culture (Stanford, 1993), p. 23; J. Miller, James II: A Study in Kingship
(Hove, 1978), pp. 1212; W.B. Willcox and W.L. Arnstein, The Age of Aristocracy, 1688
1830 (8th edn, Boston, MA, 2001), p. 56.

For a detailed summary of the cultural contributions of Charles IIs court, see
Bucholz, Augustan Court, pp. 1222. See also, M. Foss, The Age of Patronage: The Arts in
58
Royal Taste
But after the death of Charles II in 1685, court culture was of little significance.
James II and VIIs court produced very little that was novel or fashionable.
Even his mistresses were thought to be plain; youth, it seems, was the kings only
requirement. William and Mary halted the decline of the court, if only briefly.
In particular, Mary did her best to keep a lively, if unscandalous court, while she
and William together planned and commissioned new buildings at Kensington
and Hampton Court Palace, along with formal gardens to accompany them.
Mary also commissioned musical works by Purcell, whose performances were
all the rage at court; but Marys life was cut short by smallpox in 1694, and the
courts cultural influence waned once more.
Queen Annes child-bearing days were over by the time she arrived on the
throne in 1702, but she had been pregnant on 18 separate occasions and was
too corpulent, gout-stricken, and tired much of the time to promote a vivacious
court. Her one claim to cultural fame was that she helped to lure the German
composer Georg Friedrich Hndel to Britain. True, Queen Annes reign
witnessed a tremendous flowering in English philosophy, literature, science,
architecture, and painting (although almost all of the painters were foreign
born), but these producers of culture and what was now called taste lived and
made their money outside the court.
Thus, by the time Anne died in 1714 the courts cultural clout was dwarfed by
that of the so-called public sphere, and the arrival of the dim-witted, Germanspeaking Hanoverians did nothing to reverse the trend. In fact, it expanded the
differential. George I wanted mostly to be left alone, a wish that was granted
by his British ministers; and while George II loved music and rehired the now
naturalized Handel as court composer, he was most interested in defending his
England, 16601750 (Ithaca, 1972). For the three-piece suit, see D. Kuchta, The Three-Piece
Suit and Modern Masculinity, England 15501850 (Berkeley, 2002); for tea, see J. Burnett,
Liquid Pleasures: A Social History of Drinks in Modern Britain (London, 1999), pp. 4969;
for ice cream, see K. Colquhoun, Taste: The Story of Britain through its Cooking (London,
2007), p. 177; for champagne, see A.L. Simon, The History of Champagne (London, 1962);
for luxury claret, see C. Ludington, Politics and the Taste for Wine in England and Scotland,
16601860 (Columbia University, PhD, 2003), p. 144.

Bucholz, Augustan Court, pp. 226.

C. Carlton, Royal Mistresses (London, 1990), pp. 8087; A. Hardy, The Kings
Mistresses (London, 1980), pp. 4152.

D. Jacques, The Gardens of William and Mary (London, 1988).

For a detailed analysis of Queen Annes court and the myriad reasons she did not
revive court culture, see Bucholz, Augustan Court.

The seminal work here is J. Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public
Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society, trans. Thomas Burger (Cambridge,
MA, 1989).
Drinking for Approval
59
native Hanover from Prussian aggression. But fashionable the early-Hanoverian

courts were not. Nothing the kings did and, excepting the music of Handel, little
that happened at court became popular elsewhere. Politically, the court was still
important in the mid-eighteenth century, but culturally, the court was kaput.
There is little to quibble with in this historical narrative except that it is not
entirely true. Recent historical scholarship on the early-Georgian monarchy has
shown that the early-Georgian court continued to be used as a space to broker
patronage and politics and that the negative reputation of the first two Georges
has been exaggerated by biased historians.10 Nevertheless, even the staunchest
defenders of the early-Georgian courts continued political influence cannot
rewrite the story of the courts cultural decline. At best the monarch could serve
as a patron of the arts through financial support of artists and institutions outside
the court, which was precisely what happened.11 In sum, our understanding of
the early-Georgian court needs to be nuanced.
However, if we are truly to understand the courts role in cultural production
and dissemination, we should look beyond the early-Georgian court, and into
the reigns of George III, George IV, William IV, and lastly, Queen Victoria
and Prince Albert. In so doing, we see that the British court as a creator and
exponent of the latest fashions had not died in the early-eighteenth century; it
was merely comatose. To be sure, the late-eighteenth and nineteenth-century
British court was never as fashionable as it had been under Charles II, and never
again would it reach such heights of artistic patronage. But it was alive and well,
and fashionably kicking.
The fashionable nature of the court is particularly glaring if we turn our
attention away from court patronization of the arts, and toward royal taste and
behavior. In this regard, one domain in which the English and Scottish courts
had been fashion leaders long before they became the amalgamated British court
in 1603and remained so long afterwas the taste for wine, by which I mean
both the type of wines consumed and the ways in which they were consumed.
Indeed, wine in both England and Scotland had long been associated with the
court and aristocracy (as well as Christianity) and, consequently, with elite social
status and power. Wine symbolized all the major pillars of political legitimacy
in ancien rgime Britain. Consequently, wine provides a unique lens through
J.M. Beattie, The English Court in the Reign of George I (Cambridge, 1967); L. Colley,
Britons: Forging the Nation 17071837 (New Haven, 1992), pp. 196204. For concise
biographies of George I and George II, see J.H. Plumb, The First Four Georges (London,
1956), and for court life during their reigns, see H. Smith, Georgian Monarchy: Politics and
Culture, 17141760 (Cambridge, 2006), pp. 193243.
10
Smith, Georgian Monarchy, p. 244.
11
Ibid., pp. 2368.
Royal Taste
60
which to examine the changing nature of the British court and of the monarchy
it represented as Britain moved from the predominantly aristocratic eighteenth
century to the increasingly bourgeois nineteenth century.
Indeed, the taste for wine reveals that the court still set the fashion for much
of the British aristocracy, but that by the 1760s court fashion was no longer
created from within by its leading members or from without by the court in
France. Instead, the British court increasingly took its fashion cues from the
British middle classes and, in so doing, became more, not less, stable. Thus, this
chapter argues that the taste for wine at court tells us not only how the monarchy
changed; it also illuminates one of the reasons for the monarchys survival.
Before proceeding further, however, it is important to acknowledge that
my argument rests upon three major, inter-related claims, all of which must
be clarified. First, fashion trends are not simply a matter of upward emulation,
with every individual, family, or class trying desperately to keep up with the
individuals, families, or classes above it in a clearly perceived social hierarchy.12
As much recent historical scholarship has shown, patterns of taste and fashion
are more complex and varied than that, especially in a formerly aristocratic
society that came to be dominated politically by people whose primary source
of wealth was not in land, as was the case in Britain.13 In this circumstance, the
monarchy as an institution found itself with the paradoxical need to show that it
understood and agreed with the values of the so-called middle classes, but also
that it remained above the petty concerns and financial limitations with which
most members of the middle classes had to deal. In other words, the monarchy
had to be recognizable to members of the middle classes, but also magnanimous,
magisterial, and slightly magical.
Second, in a historically conscious nation in which the monarchs power had
been severely curtailed by law, by custom, and by force, the political legitimacy
of the monarchy rested largely upon consent. The royal court in the eighteenth
and nineteenth centuries was, therefore, the domain in which much of the
performance of the monarchs legitimacy and request for approval was played
out.14 Of course, much of the consent the monarchy sought needed to come
This idea was first put forward by the American sociologist Thorstein Veblen in his
book The Theory of the Leisure Class (1899), and has remained influential ever since.
13
The literature on this subject is extensive. However, for general discussions of the
complexity of consumer trends in Britain, see: L. Weatherill, Consumer Behavior and Material
Culture in Britain, 16601760 (New York, 1988); B. Lemire, The Business of Everyday Life
(Manchester, 2005).
14
The major theoretical work here is C. Geertz, The Interpretation of Cultures (New
York, 1973) and C. Geertz, Centers, Kings and Charisma: Reflections on the Symbolics of
Power, in J. Ben-David and T.N. Clark (eds), Culture and Its Creators: Essays in Honor of
12
61
from the House of Commons; however, the consent of the middle ranks of men
was also necessary, in part because these men were able to influence the outcome
of Parliamentary elections and of votes in Parliament.15 In a handful of boroughs
the franchise included 80 percent of all adult males, and roughly 2530 percent
of them could be classified as middling, while as many as 50 percent of the
electorate in the shires could be classified in the same way.16 In other words, while
the Reform Act of 1832 gave middle-class men a majority within the British
electorate, and helped give concrete definition to the term middle class, these
men had not been entirely excluded up to that point. And obviously, after 1832,
their consent for the monarchys legitimacy was even more crucial. Furthermore,
it was middle-ranking men who formed the backbone of urban mobs prior to
1832.17 These mobs could and did create civil unrest and destroy vast amounts
of property if angry enough to do so; and while the monarch was rarely the
direct target of mob anger (at least not in Britain proper), he did not want to
risk becoming so. In short, at the foundation of the monarchs legitimacy in the
late-eighteenth century stood the British middle ranks, and by the nineteenth
century the monarchys legitimacy was even more dependent upon the consent
of the middle classes.
As the previous sentence is meant to suggest, the third claim upon which
this chapter depends is that the middle ranks and middle classes can and
must be carefully defined. But, if defining the court as the royal family, the
courtiers, the royal household, and the venues these people inhabited is relatively
straightforward, defining the middle strata of British society is notoriously
difficult and much disputed by historians.18 For purposes of expediency, this
E. Shils (Chicago, 1977), pp. 15071. For studies of the English and British courts, see S.
Anglo, Spectacle, Pageantry and Early Tudor Policy (Oxford, 1969); R. Strong, The Cult of
Elizabeth: Elizabethan Portraiture and Pageantry (London, 1999); J.E. Archer, E. Goldring
and S. Knights (eds), The Progresses, Pageants and Entertainments of Queen Elizabeth I
(Oxford, 2007); D. Cannadine, The Context, Performance and Meaning of Ritual: The
British Monarchy and the Invention of Tradition, c. 18201977, in E.J. Hobsbawm and T.
Ranger (eds), Invention of Tradition (Cambridge, 1983), pp. 10164.
15
N. Rogers, The Middling Sort in Eighteenth-Century Politics, in J. Barry and D.
Brooks (eds), The Middling Sort of People: Culture, Society and Politics in England, 1550
1800 (New York, 1994), pp. 15980.
16
Ibid., p. 167.
17
M. Hunt, The Middling Sort: Commerce, Gender, and the Family in England, 1680
1780 (Berkeley, 1996), p. 6.
18
The literature here is vast, but for some of the most recent assessments of the
middling sorts/ranks/classes, and attempts at definition, see J. Barry, Introduction,
in Barry and Brooks (eds), The Middling Sort of People, pp. 127; Hunt, The Middling
Sort, pp. 1518; P. Earle, The Making of the English Middle Class: Business, Society and
62
Royal Taste
chapter uses the terms middle ranks and middling sorts to discuss those
people in the eighteenth century who reinvested capital for the sake of future
profit, which implicitly suggests people who were trying to improve their social
and economic status. This group included a broad range of (mostly) men, from
merchant princes at the top to successful artisans and shopkeepers, and rural
leaseholders at the bottom. In between, there were manufacturers, merchants,
tradesmen, and bankers, as well as men in the professions of medicine, the law,
university teaching, and civil service, and officers in the armed forces. What
united all of these people was not only the fact that they had capital to invest,
even if only a modest amount, but also their desire to become or remain free
from domination by the aristocracy and/or an all-powerful employer whose
decisions could deny them a political voice or an economic livelihood.19 In
that sense, being middling was by definition masculine, in that few women
could or did yet aspire to economic and political independence.20
The middle ranks of the eighteenth century evolved into the so-called
middle classes of the nineteenth century, although increasingly the latter
group was both more economically diverse and more dominated by capitalists,
professionals, and manufacturers, and less by merchants and successful
tradesmen.21 Perhaps more importantly, the middle classes of the nineteenth
century were culturally united in their assumption that they were the engine of
progress in British society (if not even the world), and that what made them so
special was their hard work, prosperity, sobriety, and, in a word, respectability.
Thus, when speaking about the period after the end of the Napoleonic Wars
(1815), this chapter uses the terms middle classes or bourgeoisie.
Notably, I avoid the term middle class as a noun to describe a distinct group
of people on the grounds that it is overly reductionist and, as Dror Warhman
has pointed out, a conspicuous historical construction that masquerades as an
Family Life in London, 16601730 (Berkeley, 1989), pp. 114; A. Kidd and D. Nicholls,
Introduction: History, Culture and the Middle Classes, in A. Kidd and D. Nicholls (eds),
Gender, Civic Culture and Consumerism: Middle Class Identity in Britain, 18001940
(Manchester, 1990), pp. 111; A. Kidd and D. Nicholls, Introduction: The Making of the
British Middle Class?, in A. Kidd and D. Nicholls (eds), The Making of the British Middle
Class? Studies of Regional and Cultural Diversity since the Eighteenth Century (Stroud,
1998), pp. xvxi.
19
Rogers, Middling Sort, p. 162.
20
This point is made in both L. Davidoff and C. Hall, Family Fortunes: Men and
Women of the English Middle Class, 17801850 (London, 1987), and A. Clarke, Manhood,
Womanhood, and the Politics of Class in Britain, 17901845, in L.L. Frader and S.O. Rose
(eds), Gender and Class in Modern Europe (Ithaca, 1996), pp. 2647.
21
Kidd and Nicholls, Introduction: The Making of the British Middle Class?,
pp. xxiiixxviii.
63
ineluctable historical force.22 Therefore, I use the term middle class as either
an adjective to describe the tastes and habits of the middling sorts, or as a
noun to express the historically constructed idea that the middle classes are
supposed to represent. However, this is not to agree entirely with Wahrman,
for all attempts to deny historical agency to a broadly defined middle class
have been as unsuccessful as all attempts to portray the middle class as united
and acting solely in its class interests. My semantic distinctions are, therefore,
an attempt to acknowledge the social complexity of those who stood between
the aristocracy and gentry on the one hand, and the laboring poor on the
other, but not to deny the broad, collective existence of the middle strata
as an economic, political, and cultural force that pushed Britain in a more
commercial, democratic, and respectable direction.
This chapter begins by attempting to settle any argument over whether the
court remained fashionable and culturally influential in the late-eighteenth
and nineteenth centuries. It then proceeds to examine the wine consumption
habits and preferences of the monarchs, beginning with George III and
continuing up to Victoria at the time of Prince Alberts death in 1861. After
Albert died, Queen Victoria went into a two-decade-long seclusion that
rendered her court not only unfashionable, but essentially non-existent. By the
time she returned to the public spotlight the British monarchy was a symbolic
institution, with almost no political power. Alberts goal of a monarch who
acted like an important government minister had continued only so long as
Albert was alive, but when he died, so did his idea of the monarchs role within
the British Constitution.23 What remained of the monarchy is what exists
today, a figurehead who, in Walter Bagehots famous words, has the right to be
consulted, the right to encourage, the right to warn.24 It is therefore appropriate
that this chapter ends with the demise of Albert, because without political power,
the court was no longer a magnet for power-hungry ministers and unctuous
sycophants, the very people who once helped to keep the court fashionable and
spread court fashion outward.
D. Wahrman, Imagining the Middle Class: The Political Representation of Class in

Britain, c. 17801840 (Cambridge, 1995).
23
D. Cannadine, The Last Hanoverian Sovereign?: The Victorian Monarchy In
Historical Perspective, 16881988, in A.L. Beier, D. Cannadine and J. Rosenheim (eds), The
First Modern Society: Essays in Honour of Lawrence Stone (Cambridge, 1989), pp. 12765.
24
W. Bagehot, The English Constitution (Eastbourne, 1997; originally published
1867), p. 43.
22
Royal Taste
64
A Fashionable Court
Just a quick glance at the period 1760 to 1861 indicates that the standard
narrative of the courts cultural influence ends too abruptly. Indeed, the British
court both created and reflected popular fashions well into the nineteenth
century. For instance, George III popularized seaside holidays and ocean bathing
(in a bathing machine). He also helped bring model farming and experimental
livestock breeding into vogue among the aristocracy and gentry.25 By the 1790s,
George IIIs court was no longer fashionable, but this had everything to do with
the kings precarious mental health. Moreover, a new fashionable, if unofficial
court had been created by the Prince of Wales at Carlton House. As Prince
of Wales, the future King George IV befriended Beau Brummell, who in turn
introduced dandy fashions to the princes circle. For men who could afford it,
and even many who could not, understated, close-cut, and finely tailored mens
clothing soon became all the rage, and not only in Britain, but also throughout
much of the Western world. So too did wearing a cravat, which, in the form of a
tie, remains de rigeur mens fashion to this day.26 As Prince Regent (18111820),
George also gave the architect John Nash a number of commissions and thus
introduced the Regency style, with its neo-classical designs and heavy use of
colonnades, much copied in Britain in entire towns such as Cheltenham, and
abroad in buildings like the United States Capitol in Washington, DC. Georges
younger brother, William IV (18301837), was a very different character, who
reigned for only seven years. Nonetheless, much of the vogue for frugality and
domesticity that are thought to be Victorian virtues actually began to be widely
practiced during the reign of William and his wife Queen Adelaide.27
And then there were Victoria and Albert. Besides promoting and idealizing
such activities and attitudes as domesticity and thrift, child-raising, and
marriages based on love (although their marriage was essentially arranged, and
they arranged their own childrens marriages),28 Victoria gave prestige to the
idea that brides should wear white on their wedding day, an idea and fashion
which has, like the mens tie, subsequently conquered much of the world.29 A
R. Porter, English Society in the Eighteenth Century (Harmondsworth, 1982),
pp. 2467; J.S. Watson, The Reign of George III, 17601815 (Oxford, 1960), pp. 1011.
26
For Brummell and Dandyism, see: E. Moers, The Dandy: Brummell to Beerbohm
(New York, 1960); I. Kelly, Beau Brummell the Ultimate Dandy (London, 2005).
27
A. Somerset, The Life and Times of William IV (London, 1980), pp. 110217;
P. Ziegler, King William IV (London, 1971), pp. 123294.
28
Cannadine, The Last Hanoverian Sovereign?, pp. 14851.
29
S. Tobin, Marriage la Mode: Three Centuries of Wedding Dress (London, 2003),
pp. 323.
25
65
white wedding dress represented virginal purity and, more subtly, the wealth of
the bride; after all, one needs a clean environment and some assistance to keep
a white dress white. Another clothing fashion made popular by Victoria and
Albert was Scottish tartan. Newly invented official clan tartans had already
received a major commercial boost from George IV when he visited Scotland
in 1822. In fact, for much of the visit the king was bedecked in a traditional
Highland outfit costing over 1,354 and featuring the never-before-seen, bright
red Royal Stewart tartan.30 Consequently, tartan salesmen were already doing
a booming business when Victoria and Albert moved tartan beyond the kilt
and plaid and onto the walls and furniture of their vacation homes at Balmoral
and on the Isle of Wight. Very quickly, the fashion for tartan everything spread
throughout Britain and abroad. Indeed, tartan is still the presiding decorative
motif in many nouveaux riche golf-course-side homes in the American South
and Midwest, where tartan furniture, like the course-side home and playing golf
itself, is meant to signal a familys arrival in the world of quasi-bucolic gentility.
However, the most significant and iconic fashion legacy of Victoria and
Alberts reign was introduced by Albert from his native Germany, and that was
the Weinachtsbaum, or Christmas tree.31 As a pagan-inspired reminder that
Christs love abides through even the darkest days, the evergreen fir treea
perfect showcase for Victorian kitschquickly replaced the Yule log (an earlier
German import) as the Christmas tradition of choice in the English-speaking
world. So, while the British court was no longer the locus of fashion it had been
for much of the seventeenth century, it remained fashionable and in some cases
even fashion-setting.
But how was the courts stylishness manifested in terms of wine, long a symbol
of the court, the aristocracy, and political power? Let us begin with King George
III, the first Hanoverian monarch to feel more British than Hanoverian, and the
man who inherited a court that was, in matters of fashion, supposedly dead.
George III
For a king who has a popular historical reputation among some British people
and almost all Americans for being a tyrant, George III was a very moderate
man; he never drank wine before dinner, and rarely if ever got drunk. Ironically,
30
H. Trevor-Roper, The Invention of Tradition: The Highland Tradition of Scotland,
in Hobsbawm and Ranger, The Invention of Tradition; J. Prebble, The Kings Jaunt: George IV
in Scotland, August 1822, one and twenty daft days (London, 1988).
31
A.N. Wilson, Eminent Victorians, Prince Albert (New York, 1990), p. 30.
Royal Taste
66
he ruled during one of the most alcoholically intemperate eras of British history.
As the Edinburgh memoirist Robert Chambers reflected in 1824:
In the early part of the [eighteenth] century, rigour was in the ascendant; but
not to the prevention of a respectable minority of the free and easy, who kept
alive the flame of conviviality with no small degree of success. In the latter half of
the centurya dissolute era all over civilized Europethe minority became the
majority, and the characteristic sobriety of the nations manners was only traceable
in certain portions of society [] In Edinburgh [] intemperance was the rule to
such an [sic] degree that exception could hardly be said to exist.32
The same was true for London and other British cities, where between roughly
1780 and 1820 inebriety reigned supreme.33
Not that many historians have noticed the extreme drunkenness of the lateGeorgian era.34 This oversight has occurred because the high and mighty at the
time were not themselves troubled by drunkenness. Instead, excepting the king but
very much including the Prince of Wales, the ruling elite led the way in fashionable
intoxication. Drunk as a Lord was a socially charged phrase that emerged in lateseventeenth-century England and by the late-eighteenth century the hard-drinking
British aristocracy and ruling elite surpassed even their own formidable standards.35
R. Chambers, Traditions of Edinburgh (Edinburgh, 1980, reprint of 1868 edn; first
published in 1824), p. 146.
33
For other contemporary comments about the drunkenness of the age, see for
example, N. Wraxall, The Historical and Posthumous Memoirs of Sir Nathaniel Wraxall, ed.
H.B. Wheatley (5 vols, London, 1884), vol. 5, p. 364; R. Howell Gronow, The Reminiscences
and Recollections of Captain Gronow, Being Anecdotes of the Camp, Court, Clubs and Society,
18101860 (2 vols, London, 1892; originally published in 186265); J. Boswell, Boswells
Book of Company at Auchinleck, 17821795, eds Viscountess Eccles and G. Turnbull
(Roxburghe Club, 1995); F. Place, The Autobiography of Francis Place, (17711854), ed. M.
Thale (Cambridge, 1972).
34
Exceptions to this oversight are few and mostly recent. They include: Porter, English
Society, pp. 3334; Porter, The Drinking Mans Disease: The Pre-History of Alcoholism in
Georgian Britain, British Journal of Addiction, 80 (1985): pp. 38596; Porter, Introduction,
in T. Trotter, An Essay, Medical, Philosophical and Chemical on Drunkenness and its Effects
on the Human Body, ed. R. Porter (London, 1988); A. Taylor, Bacchus in Romantic England:
Writers and Drink, 17801830 (Basingstoke, 1999); V. Gatrell, City of Laughter: Sex and
Satire in Eighteenth-Century London (New York, 2006); B. Wilson, The Making of Victorian
Values: Decency and Dissent in Britain, 17891837 (New York, 2007); F. Linnane, Drinking
for England: The Great English Drinkers of their Times (London, 2008).
35
R. Hendrickson (ed.), Encyclopedia of Word and Phrase Origins (New York, 1997),
p. 219; Porter, English Society, p. 34.
32
67
Looking back from the relatively sober perspective of the 1860s, Captain Reese
Howell Gronow recalled that:
The Prince [of Wales], Mr Pitt, Dundas, the Lord Chancellor Eldon, and many
others, who gave the tone to society, would, if they now appeared at an evening
party, as was their custom of an afternoon, be pronounced fit for nothing but
bed. A three-bottle man [as in per diem consumption of wine] was not an unusual
guest at a fashionable table; and the night was invariably spent in drinking bad
port-wine to an enormous extent.36
George III, therefore, did not partake in the elite penchant for drunkenness, but
nor was he mimicking the fashion of the middling sorts. Drunkenness was as
much the practice and fashion of the eighteenth-century middle ranks as it was
of the aristocracy and poor.37 The only difference was that while the middling
sorts and aristocrats preferred route to inebriety was wine and rum punch, the
poor preferred beer, ale, and, when possible, gin.38
Statements about the drunkenness of the middle ranks deserve some
elaboration and evidence, as they too go against a commonly held belief that one
of the touchstones of middle-ranking identity was alcoholic moderation and
sobriety. It is certainly true that during the early eighteenth century and then
again during the long reign of George III the British middle ranks produced
a handful of canting moralists who decried the drunkenness of their fellow
subjects, but it is also true that until the aftermath of the Napoleonic Wars with
France, the frequent drunkenness of Britons of all classes, the men in particular,
was the very behavior that annoyed the moralists.39 It was only in the 1820s and
30s, when the middle class was being defined as the group around whom British
society should be structured,40 that sobriety became synonymous with the new
definition of the middle class.
One need only examine the history of British clubs, havens of bourgeois
bonhomie in the late-Georgian era, to see that drunken revelry was
an approved form of behavior. As the leading historian of eighteenth Gronow, Reminiscences and Recollections, vol. 2, p. 75.
Ludington, Politics and the Taste for Wine, pp. 40483.
38
The Gin Act of 1751 ended the Gin Mania of the English urban poor during the
36
37
early-eighteenth century, although it did not eradicate the occasional consumption of gin.
See J. Warner, Craze: Gin and Debauchery in the Age of Reason (New York, 2002).
39
For the early-eighteenth century and the failed Reformation of Manners movement,
see Hunt, The Middling Sort, pp. 10124; For the late-eighteenth and early-nineteenth
century, see Gatrell, City of Laughter, pp. 415595; Wilson, Victorian Values, pp. 11739.
40
Wahrman, Imagining the Middle Class, pp. 118.
Royal Taste
68
century clubs has written, the essence of club fellowship was in most cases
uncomplicated and conventional, marked by convivial rites of heavy drinking
and drunkenness, swearing and obscene songs, activities which men felt
increasingly uncomfortable about in the presence of women.41 The tailor,
shopkeeper, and political activist Francis Place, a habitu of late-Georgian
clubs in London, candidly acknowledged that clubs were full of men without
understanding who substituted brutality and drunkenness for exhilaration
and pleasant enjoyment.42 Indeed, the middle-ranking clergy, professionals,
gentry, shopkeepers and artisans who would lead the march toward temperance
and even teetotalism in the early-Victorian era had first to reject the habits of
their youth and their parents.43
In short, George IIIs sobriety was altogether unfashionable. Where he was
more up to date was in the wines he served. Royal cellar records from the 1760s,
the first decade of Georges long reign, show the king had an atavistic liking for
German hock, the British name for Rhenish wine.44 Four bottles of hock were
disgorged from the royal cellar each day for the kings table, as were one or two
bottles of claret. Along with these wines, the king and his immediate guests
drank sherry, Madeira, port, and a variety of other wines.45 Thus, in his choice
of wines, the king and his court reflected British aristocratic fashion, which
stressed diversity.46
What was novel about George IIIs wine cellar was that beginning in May
1762 it contained a great deal of port, a wine that was not found in the cellars
of the first two Georges. Certainly, George III did not commence the English
taste for port. In fact, by the mid-eighteenth century port was already the most
commonly consumed wine in England, and an established symbol of the English
middle ranks.47 And true to form, during the 1760s most of the port in the royal
cellars was for the lower-ranking members of the household: the various royal
chaplains, the yeoman of the guard, the kings and queens footmen, the hunting
P. Clark, British Clubs and Societies, 15801800: The Origins of an Associational
World (Oxford, 2000), p. 202.
42
British Library (hereafter BL), Add. MS 27828, Place Papers.
43
For a lengthy disquisition on the changes in societal attitude and behavior in the
1820s, see Wilson, Victorian Values.
44
Hock was generally a generic term, but sometimes it was used specifically for wine
from the village of Hochheim-am-Main, from which the term hock derives.
45
The National Archives, Kew (hereafter NA), LS 13/271, Wine Accounts for the
Royal Household, 17611766; NA LS 13/272, Wine Accounts for the Royal Household,
17671770.
46
C. Ludington, Claret is the liquor for boys; port for men: How Port Became the
Englishmans Wine, 17501800, Journal of British Studies, 48/2(April 2009): pp. 36490.
47
41
69
grooms, and the master horse servants. Claret was reserved for the master of the
household, the first and second clerk, and the dean of the chapel royal.48 Just as
they did in English society at large, port and claret helped to demarcate social
rank within the court.
However, during Georges long reign, this oenological demarcation system
broke down as the taste for port gradually moved up the social scale and surpassed
claret as the preferred wine of the elite, while also maintaining its role as the wine
of the middle ranks. For example, in 1798 the entire royal household, which
in the 1760s consumed slightly more claret than port, consumed roughly five
times as much port as claret.49 And by the end of the century port was no longer
predominantly for the lower-ranking members of the royal household. It was for
everyone. For instance, cellar records show that two of Georges sons, the Dukes
of Cambridge and Clarence, preferred port for their personal consumption, and
so too did many courtiers.50 While it might be imagined that this preference was
forced upon the British aristocracy because of the ongoing war against France,
that was not the case. Claret could still be found in the royal cellars, and trade
with France, while burdened by tax and diplomatically complicated, was never
cut off. The dukes, therefore, drank port out of choice.
So once again, the court of George III reflected and perhaps even helped to
create elite taste in that it followed the aristocratic switch from claret to port.
After all, the Dukes of Clarence and Cambridge were hardly alone among the
elite in their preference for port. As Gronow recalled, the Prince of Wales, the
Prime Minister (Pitt), the Secretary of the Navy and Home Secretary (Dundas),
and the Lord Chancellor (Eldon) all drank a great deal of port. In fact, for
the Prime Minister we even have some specific figures. In the year beginning
July 1784, Pitt purchased approximately 5,200 bottles of wine, of which port
constituted nearly half (46 percent) and claret a mere 11 percent.51 Likewise,
a surviving wine bill from the London vintners Christie and Barrow in 1790
for Spencer Perceval reveals that the future Tory Prime Minister also had a
predilection for port: it comprised 61 percent of his purchases.52
A similar taste for port prevailed among the aristocracy. For instance, in
the period 1792 to 1804, Henry Gage (third Viscount Gage)a prominent
Sussex landowner and son of General Thomas Gage, the last royal governor of
Massachusettspurchased the equivalent of nearly 19,000 bottles of wine, of
50
51
52
48
NA, LS 13/271; LS 13/272.

NA, LS 13/273, Wine Cellar, St Jamess Palace, 17971813.
NA, LS 13/275, Pitcher List, 18011807.
NA, PRO 30/8/219, William Pitts wine expenses, July 1784June 1785.
BL, Add. MS 49186, ff. 12. Bill and receipt for wine order from Christie and
Barrow to the Hon. Spencer Perceval, 3 September 1790.
49
Royal Taste
70
which port constituted 48 percent. Sherry and Madeira ranked next in volume,
while claret accounted for only 3 percent of the total.53 Equally telling is that
in the years 1796 to 1806, port was the most prominent wine in the cellars of
perhaps the most aristocratic of Oxford University colleges, Christ Church. At
that time, the only other wine to be found in Christ Church cellars was sherry.54
If any more proof is needed that port had become the wine of the ruling elite
while remaining the wine of the middle ranksa quote from an article in The
Times in February 1798 should dispel any doubt: To which University, said
a lady, some time since, to the late sagacious Dr Warren, shall I send my son?
Madam, replied he, they drink, I believe, near the same quantity of port in
each of them.55
Ports social climb in the late-eighteenth century was a complex phenomenon,
but was based primarily on the improved quality of the wine and the perceived
need of the ruling elite to embrace the middle-ranking manliness that port had
come to represent.56 It is for these reasons that George IIIs cellar records are
so revealing. Wine remained a symbol of traditional authority and political
legitimacy during George IIIs reign; but the group he had to appeal to in order
to remain legitimate was not to be found among rival aristocratswho did not
question his legitimacybut among reform-minded members of the middle
ranks who argued that the aristocracy, beginning with the king at the top,
was effeminate, foppish, and completely undeserving of its privileges.57 While
George III himself never moved far beyond hock and claret, his court moved
decisively in the direction of port. In other words, their taste for wine moved
decisively in the direction of the middle ranks. As with the concomitant shift in
elite mens clothing stylesfrom brighter to darker colors and to increasingly
55
56
57
53
East Sussex Record Office, Lewes, Gage Account Book, A 741, S.A.S, 17921804.
Christ Church College, Oxford, Common Room Accounts, MS C.R.2.
Theatre, The Times (February 19, 1798): p. 1.
Ludington, Claret is the liquor for boys; port for men.
G. Newman, The Rise of English Nationalism (New York, 1987), pp. 6884; P. Carter,
Men and the Emergence of Polite Society, Britain 16601800 (Harlow, 2001), pp. 12438; K.
Wilson, The Sense of the People: Politics, Culture and Imperialism in England, 17151785
(Cambridge, 1995), pp. 185205; K. Wilson, Empire of Virtue: The Imperial Project and
Hanoverian Culture, c. 17201785, in L. Stone (ed.), An Imperial State at War: Britain
from 1689 to 1815 (London, 1994), pp. 14350; K. Wilson, The Good, the Bad, and the
Impotent: Imperialism and the Politics of Identity in Georgian England, in A. Bermingham
and J. Brewer (eds), The Consumption of Culture 16001800: Image, Object, Text (London,
1995), pp. 23762; M. Cohen, Manners Make the Man: Politeness, Chivalry, and the
Construction of Masculinity, Journal of British Studies, 44 (April 2005): pp. 31417; M.
Cohen, Fashioning Masculinity: National Identity and Language in the Eighteenth Century
(London, 1996), pp. 99101.
54
71
simple cuts58the change in taste for wine was meant to quell middle-ranking
criticism and assert the essential Englishness of the aristocracy. Whether these
changes were consciously undertaken by members of George IIIs court is unclear
and demands more study, but appreciation of middle-ranking taste reflected an
awareness that the political legitimacy of the aristocracy rested upon approval by
those lower down the social scale. In other words, the performance of the kings
authority was directed towards a middle-ranking audience who rarely visited
the court, but who certainly read about the court in newspapers, and who stood
ready to criticize it when it did not conform to their own middle-ranking tastes
or to middle-ranking conceptions of what constituted a real man.
George IV
In the tradition of his Hanoverian predecessors, George IV rejected almost
everything he perceived his father to represent.59 Consequently, George IV was
not a moderate man. To say that he drank heavilyas Prince of Wales, Prince
Regent, and kingis to understate his predilection for alcohol. In his youthful
manhood George was known to his admiring contemporaries as the First
Gentleman of Europe, and he was first in perhaps more ways than one. There
were few men anywherein Britain, Ireland, or on the Continentwho could
challenge the future King George IV in the realm of intoxication. Indeed, his
sober parents concern was entirely understandable. Intoxication in the most
extensive sense, reported a bottle companion, commonly followed the banquets
of Carlton House, the effects of which have more than once nearly proved fatal.
His Royal Highness has been, I know, critically rescued from suffocation, when
the delay of half an hour or even a shorter time would have rendered unavailing
all assistance.60 At his wedding to Caroline of Brunswick in 1795, George was
so drunk he had to be held up by two of his brothers; and the rest of his life was
full of similarly intoxicated antics.61
Given wines associations with the aristocracy and martial masculinity, the
princes heavy drinking may have resulted, at least in part, from his desire to be
D. Kuchta, The Making of the Self-Made Man: Class, Clothing, and English
Masculinity, 16881832, in V. de Grazia and E. Furlough (eds), The Sex of Things: Gender
and Consumption in Historical Perspective (Berkeley, 1996), pp. 6770; Kuchta, The ThreePiece Suit, pp. 13372.
59
Plumb, First Four Georges, pp. 13742.
60
Wraxall, Memoirs of Sir Nathaniel William Wraxall, vol. 5, p. 364.
61
S. David, Prince of Pleasure: The Prince of Wales and the Making of the Regency (New
York, 1998), pp. 1678.
58
Royal Taste
72
seen as a manly man during a time of war, especially since he had little political
power as Prince of Wales. Furthermore, the traditional form of aristocratic
masculinity of leading men into battle had been forbidden him by his father.
Instead, the prince was only allowed to be a ceremonial officer. What is certain is
that Georges drunkenness reflected contemporary British cultural practice in a
way his fathers sobriety did not. Drinking was the fashion of the day, recalled
Captain Gronow about London Society during the Regency Era (18111820).62
And again, this was not only true of the elite. The engraver George Cruikshanks
wrote that his own father, Isaac, who was also an engraver, shortened his life
by partaking in what the younger Cruikshanks called the fashion of the day.
To wit, in 1811 Isaac partook in a drinking contest which sent him into an
irreversible coma.63
Thus, in terms of his conviviality the prince was a very fashionable man.
Indeed, Georges frequent drunkenness reflected fashion, but it also may have
helped to create it. Of course, it is impossible to know how much the princes
heavy drinking was emulated by others, especially in an era when frequent
intoxication was already the norm. But as Gronow said, the prince was among
the men who gave the tone to society.64 It is therefore likely that he aided and
abetted the already established vogue for conviviality that could, and often
did, proceed to alcohol-induced catatonia. This seems to have been the case
with one of the princes early drinking companions, Richard Brinsley Sheridan,
the Irish playwright and later Whig politician. Sheridan was already a heavy
drinker when he met the young Prince of Wales in 1784,65 and according to
Sheridans most recent biographer, time spent in the Princes company was
bound to enhance Sheridans own reputation for dissolution and profligacy.66
It did. And although the prince cannot be blamed for Sheridans alcoholic
immoderation, as a politician looking for high placement Sheridan had every
incentive to keep up with the prince drink for drink. So too and so did the
princes and Sheridans friend, Charles James Fox. As leader of the Whig
opposition in the middle of the wars against revolutionary France, Fox drank,
gambled, and womanized incessantly. He died in 1806 at age 56 from liver
failure. An autopsy revealed that his liver was prenaturally hard and almost
entirely schirrous.67
64
65
66
62
63
p. 179.
Gronow, Reminiscences and Recollections, vol. 2, p. 75.

Gatrell, City of Laughter, p. 103.
Gronow, Reminiscences and Recollections, vol. 2, p. 75.
BL, Add. MS 44401, ff. 3032. R.B. Sheridans tavern bills from L. Reilly, 1777.
F. OToole, A Traitors Kiss: The Life of Richard Brinsley Sheridan (London, 1997),
L.G. Mitchell, Charles James Fox (Oxford, 1992), p. 97.
67
73
If, therefore, George IV both reflected and enhanced the vogue for extreme
conviviality at the turn of the nineteenth century, his preference among wines
was also fashionable. To be sure, there were few wines, spirits and liqueurs that
George did not like. On his visit to Ireland in 1821, the king and his entourage
patronized four different Dublin wine merchants and revealed a catholic taste
which included Chteau Lafite, Chteau Margaux, champagne, burgundy, vin
de paille, frontignac, red and white hermitage, sauterne, vin de Graves, brandy,
and a liqueur called Ratafia de Grenoble from France; port and Madeira from
Portugal; sherry and Malaga from Spain; hock and moselle from the Rhineland;
maraschino (cherry liqueur) from Dalmatia; rum from the West Indies; gin
from England; and whiskey, cider, and porter from Ireland.68 On his trip to
Scotland one year later, in which he wore his Highland kit, a similar array of
wines was ordered from two Edinburgh wine merchants.69 On both royal visits,
just as at home in England, the variety and abundance of wine served was meant
to appeal to the broadest possible range of guests and to emphasize the splendor
and generosity of the monarch. However, of all the different wines that were
served by the royal court, whether at home or on its travels, port, claret, and
sherry were overwhelmingly the most popular. And among these three wines,
the king himself preferred sherry. For instance, among the wines sent to the royal
yacht, the Royal George, for the kings personal use while docked at Leith, there
were 120 bottles of claret, 216 bottles of port, and 288 bottles of sherry.70 The
wine was to be shared, of course.
Georges preference for sherryalthough hardly exclusiveover other
wines seems to have begun during his regency and may have helped to set a new
fashion in motion among the British aristocracy, especially the generation that
came of age during his regency and reign.71 For example, an 1824 cellar inventory
of Ashburnham Place, the country residence in Sussex of George Ashburnham,
third Earl of Ashburnham and fifth Baron Asaph (17601830), showed that
the ageing earl, like most of his contemporaries, still preferred port. His cellar
contained 904 bottles of port, 501 bottles of Madeira, 299 bottles of German
wines, and 283 bottles of sherry, along with lesser numbers of other wines. The
cellar was little changed in substance when the third earl died in 1830.72 However,
an inventory of the cellar taken one year later shows that Bertrand Ashburnham
70
71
72
68
NA, LS 8/319, Expenses of His Majestys Visit to Ireland, 1821.

NA, LS 8/320, Expenses of His Majestys Visit to Scotland, 1822.
Ibid.
A.D. Francis, The Wine Trade (London, 1972), p. 303.
East Sussex Record Office, Lewes, MS 2721, List of the Wine Cellar, Ashburnham
Place, 15 February 1824; MS 2723, List of the Wine Cellar, Ashburnham Place, 10 November
1830.
69
Royal Taste
74
(17971878), the fourth earl, had dramatically different taste from his father.
There were now 1,213 bottles of sherry, 805 bottles of Madeira, 510 bottles of
Marsala, and 335 bottles of port among the leading wines in the Ashburnham
Place cellar.73 Other aristocratic cellars show a similar move toward sherry by the
1830s.74
But while Georges gradual move from port to sherry may have been trendsetting among the British elite, it ran parallel with British middle-class fashion.
In the three decades 18171826, 18271836, and 18371846, Spanish wines
consumed in the United Kingdom (which meant mostly sherry) increased
from 22 percent, to 33 percent, to 38 percent of the overall total. Meanwhile
Portuguese wines, excepting Madeira (which meant mostly port), dropped
from 51 percent, to 44 percent, to 40 percent of the overall total in the same
decades.75 In other words, by the 1840s, port and sherry imports into Britain
were essentially the same (Figure 3.1).
Because the majority of British wine consumers came from the middle
classes, only they had the numbers to create such a shift in percentages. Already
in 1824 the London-based Scottish physician Alexander Henderson wrote
in his comprehensive study, The History of Ancient and Modern Wines, that
sherry and port together were the wines of the British middling classes.76 In
other words, in his preference for wine George IV may have come gradually to
reject his fathers generations taste for port; but just like his fathers generation
of aristocrats, George IV and his peers were following, not creating, middleclass taste. Ironically, for all his desire to turn the clock backward and create a
magisterial monarchy along the lines of the former Bourbon kings in France,
even George IV understood that in early-nineteenth-century Britain it was the
middle classes, not the aristocracy, who needed to be convinced of the kings
majesty.77
Place, 18 April 1831.
74
See, for example: BL, Add. MS 77189, Althorp Papers, f. 862; BL, Add. MS 76782,
Althorp Papers, Ledger for Althorp, 18471852; National Archives of Scotland, Edinburgh,
GD 10/925, Catalogue of the Magnificent Household Furniture, etc. the property of the late
Alexander Murray [] 13 January 1846.
75
Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, Parliamentary
Report C. 8706, Customs Tariffs of the United Kingdom from 18001897, with some notes
upon the history of more important branches of the receipt from 1600 (London, 1897),
pp. 15051.
76
A. Henderson, The History of Ancient and Modern Wines (London, 1824), p. 316.
77
Colley, Britons, p. 215.
73
75
Figure 3.1 Sherrys rise to parity with port, 18171846

(Source: Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, Parliamentary
Report C.8706, Custom tariffs of the United Kingdom from 18001897, with some notes
upon the history of more important branches of the receipt from 1600 (London, 1897),
pp. 15051).
It is, of course, impossible to prove that George IV grew to prefer sherry

because he was following a trend among the British middle classes, and not
as an expression of generational anger, or some other reason besides. But it
is clear that the rise of sherry in the early-nineteenth century mirrored the
rise of middle-class moralists who decried the martial behavior of the era and
wanted to see a more civilized and moral Britain. This civilizing message was
articulated throughout the Napoleonic Wars and helped both to end the slave
trade and achieve prison reform. However, it had little effect on drunkenness
until the 1820s, when, according to Byron (and the most recent historical
scholarship), the age of cant set in.78 And it was in the 1820s that sherry, already
creeping up in total British imports, began its dramatic climb to parity with
portwhich it achieved by 1840. Sherry, therefore, was a symbol of British
middle-class identity, at the time that reformers were defining the middle
class as hard-working, thrifty, sober, and civilized. Thus defined, the middle
class was the linchpin of British society, positioned between the supposedly
profligate aristocracy and the ignorant poor. As a symbol, sherry was part of
the winning, middle-class argument. Like a wife to a husband, sherry was a
necessary complement to port. Because, if port was a masculine wine, sherry
Gatrell, City of Laughter, pp. 53092; Wilson, Victorian Values, pp. 284335.
78
76
Royal Taste
was its feminine counterpart, and therefore, like women themselves, a civilizing
influence upon men.79
As Prince Regent and king, George grasped, and grasped for, the civilizing
symbolism of sherry; it was a way of rejecting his fathers generation of portdrinking boors and defining aristocratic masculinity as more concerned with
aesthetics than fighting. After all, having led Britain to victory over Napoleonic
France, elite British men no longer needed to prove their masculinity. Instead,
they needed to show themselves, as well as their middle-class critics, that they
were both manly and civilized.80 And yet what George IV did not comprehend
was that sobriety was integral to the new definition of civilized masculinity.
Sherry drinkers that they were (although they drank much else besides), George
IV and his drunken friends and mistresses at court did not associate sherry
with sobriety. As a result of their profligate, amoral, and drunken behavior,
they were loathed by the middle classes who had come to believe that sobriety
and moderation, in a word, temperance, was a godly virtue.81 In other words,
having followed the middle classes to sherry, George forgot that it was not
only what wine you drank, but how you drank wine that was important for the
kings reputation as a credible authority figure. Not surprisingly, when George
died in 1830, grossly obese and suffering from the various diseases of a lifelong
dipsomaniac, it was the members of the middle classes who were most content
to see him go. As The Times, the voice of the bourgeois establishment wrote in its
obituary for the king: There never was an individual less regretted by his fellow
creatures than this deceased king. What eye has wept for him? What heart has
throbbed one beat of unmercenary sorrow?82
William IV
William IVthe very same Duke of Clarence who as a young man preferred
port to claret and who helped to prop up his brother at the latters wedding
came to the throne in 1830 at the age of 64. Like his brother George IV, William
had enjoyed his youth, although more with sex than drink; in any case, William
79
C. Ludington, The Politics of Wine: Power and Taste in England and Scotland,
16491860 (forthcoming, Basingstoke, 2011), chap. 11.
80
81
J. Tosh, A Mans Place: Masculinity and the Middle-Class Home in Victorian England
(New Haven, 1999), p. 139.
82
As quoted in C. Hibbert, George IV, Regent and King, 18111830 (London, 1973),
pp. 7823.
77
seems to have had a head for drink, imbibing large amounts with little effect.83
Unlike his brother, William had an actual military career in the navy rather than
an imagined one in the army, rising to the rank of admiral (although he was
never given the wartime command he desired). More importantly still, William
evolved as he got older. In 1791 he settled down to a 20-year relationship with
the famous Irish stage actress Dorothea Bland (aka Mrs Jordan). Never actually
married, they were never divorced, but the relationship ended in 1811, leaving
ten FitzClarence children in its wake. Seven years later, after a succession of
lovers, William married the German Princess Adelaide of Saxe-Meiningen.
As with Mrs Jordan, Williams life with Adelaide was quiet and domestic. The
couple preferred their home and garden at Bushy Park to the more grandiose
ducal accommodations they were offered in St Jamess Palace. They had two
daughters, both of whom died in infancy, but they seemed actually to enjoy each
others company, and William desisted from his earlier philandering. This, then,
was the couple who presided over the royal court from 1830 to 1837.
Given this brief biography of William, it is perhaps no surprise that as he
grew older he became a very moderate drinkerespecially when measured
against the Herculean standards established by his own and the previous
generation. Dr William Beattie, a physician who attended William and Adelaide
both in England and on their trips to the Continent in 1822, 1825, and 1826,
commented of the duke: Sherry is his favourite, and I may say only wine. I never
saw him taste port, and seldom French or Rhenish wines. Beattie added that
the only drink William consumed in quantity was barley water with lemon.
The historian Philip Ziegler summarized Williams regime as frugal, simple, and
rigidly adhering to bourgeois standards.84
Williams drinking habits were certainly bourgeois in that they adhered
to the new middle-class standard of sobriety. But to be moderate is not to be
miserly, and William did not stint in his hospitality. William understood that to
maintain the prestige and legitimacy of the monarchy in the eyes of the public
he must be a frequent and generous host, and wine must be a central part of his
entertainment. According to the Duke of Buckingham, William entertained
on an average two thousand persons per week.85 In 1834, 36,000 bottles of wine
were consumed at St Jamess Palace alone.86 No one could deny that William was
shunning his royal obligation to be a generous host, even if the wine consumption
Ziegler, William IV, pp. 734.
Ibid, p. 130.
85
Duke of Buckingham and Chandos, Memoirs of the Courts and Cabinets of William
83
84
IV and Victoria, from Original Documents (London, 1861), p. 75.

86
Royal Archives, Melbourne MS, 4 June 1835, as quoted in Ziegler, William IV,
p. 153.
Royal Taste
78
figures fell short of what his brothers court often achieved. But just as important
as his generosity, William remained within his parliamentary income. In other
words, in serving wine to his guests William exhibited the munificence of a
monarch and the budgeting of the bourgeoisie.
However, Williams careful balancing act came at a price with the aristocracy.
He saved 14,000 per annum by dismissing his brothers German orchestra and
replacing it with a less expensive and less talented group of British musicians;
he cut the number of royal yachts from five to two; and he fired the platoon
of French chefs who had followed George IV from palace to palace, replacing
them with native Britons. These moves played well with the middle classes, for
whom patriotism and living within ones means were next to Godliness, but not
all aristocrats were impressed. Lord Ravensworth was horrified at the news of
the diminished cuisine, while Lord Dudley muttered audibly on one occasion:
What a change to be sure, cold pates and hot champagne.87
So while aristocrats were slow to appreciate the changed tenor of the royal
court, William was a popular king among the middle classes, despite the fact that
he prevaricated on the Reform Act of 1832 and opposed the abolition of slavery
within the British Empire, both of which were middle-class causes. Wisely,
William accepted the changes, and continued to consider himself a man of the
people, sometimes walking the streets of London by himself. Just as critically
for his popularity, William continued to be a generous host; while staying in
his late brothers pleasure palace at Brighton he would call upon local hotels
for their guest list so that he could invite anyone he knew for dinner.88 And as
always, serving wine was integral to Williams public dinners, as it emphasized
his legitimacy and social rank, while also allowing him to show that he was not
an aristocratic drunkard.
If Williams consumption style as king was fundamentally bourgeois, so too
were the wines he drank and served. As we have seen, Williams preferred wine
was sherry, although to his many guests he offered the required royal panoply
of wines. Of these wines, the most commonly served, in descending order of
volume, were old port, old sherry, and Madeira. More expensive French wines
such as claret, burgundy, and champagne were available at court, but served less
often. What was popular with most guests was also popular among the royal
household staff. As under previous Hanoverian monarchs, the staff remained
oenologically divided according to the importance and difficulty of their tasks,
As quoted in Somerset, William IV, p. 119.

Ibid.
87
88
79
but the overwhelming majority of royal household staff was given aptly named
household port or household sherry.89
In the last year of his reign, when his faculties began to fail him, William
purchased 432 bottles of Sillery (non-sparkling champagne) for his personal
consumption, perhaps on the advice of his physician.90 However, according
to his son Adolphus FitzClarence, sherry remained the kings preferred wine.
Describing Williams daily regimen toward the end of his life, Adolphus found
his father to have maintained his daily moderation and regimentation: After
breakfast he devotes himself with Sir H. Taylor to business till two, when he
lunches (two cutlets and two glasses of sherry); then he goes out and drives
till dinner; at dinner he drinks a bottle of sherryno other wineand eats
moderately, and goes to bed soon after eleven.91 In the twenty-first century one
might regard Williams bottle-and-a-quarter of sherry per day as immoderate,
but even in the increasingly sober decade of the 1830s this was not an
extravagant amount. In fact, it was a fairly average amount for a British middleclass gentleman, which in practice William was.
Victoria and Albert
When William died in 1837, the crown passed to his 18-year-old niece Victoria.
Four years later, Victoria married her cousin, Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg and
Gotha, and it is this royal couple who are often cited as the progenitors of the
middle-class monarchy in Britain. However, it should be clear that aspects of
what became known as middle-class behavior and taste began to infiltrate the
monarchy and court culture almost 80 years prior to the beginning of Victorias
reign.92 That said, Victoria and Albert (especially the latter) did bring a greater
degree of budget management, cost cutting, and advanced planning skills to
combat the bourgeois nightmares of indebtedness and spontaneity with which
NA, LS 13/297, Board of the Green Cloth, Account of Creditors not paid by
salary, 1837.
90
Ibid, ff. 56.
91
As quoted in Ziegler, William IV, p. 271.
92
There is a longstanding historiographical debate about which British monarch(s)
was the first truly bourgeois monarch, the candidates usually being Victoria and Albert or
George III. For the former, see R. Fulford, The Prince Consort (New York, 1966), pp. 2768,
and Wilson, Eminent Victorians, pp. 1448. For the latter see Colley, Britons, pp. 195236.
For an explanation of why George III has not been seen as the first bourgeois monarch,
see Cannadine, The Last Hanoverian Sovereign?, pp. 1612. Cannadine argues for both
continuity and change, suggesting that while George III was the first bourgeois monarch, we
might also see Victoria as the last Hanoverian monarch.
89
Royal Taste
80
the Hanoverian monarchs had to struggle. More obviously, Victoria and Alberts
marriage also brought a bevy of children, and along with them the idealization
of domesticityif more for Albert than Victoria, who was not enamored of the
terrible froglike action of infants.93
As for their wine consumption habits, ever an important aspect of royal
authority and munificence, Victoria began her reign drinking one bottle of wine
at dinner, just as her uncle William IV had done. However, Baron Stockmar,
Victoria and Alberts Continental consiglieri who had been dispatched by King
Leopold of Belgium to advise the young couple, disapproved of Victorias daily
intake, writing a private note to Albert which insisted, A queen does not drink
a bottle of wine at a meal.94 More diplomatically, Stockmar suggested that
Victorias former governess, Louisa, Baroness Lehzen, was responsible for this
behavior, since Lehzen herself loved wine.95 The result of Stockmars discreet
admonition is not known, but certainly Victoria did not have a public reputation
for being a heavy drinker, something which would have been remarked upon
had insobriety been her frequent practice. Indeed, as a monarch and a woman,
Victoria was in a difficult position. As a woman who was doing what was
thought to be a mans job, Victoria needed to drink wine to symbolize her status
as the monarch and to show that she was not too frail for the task of leadership.
Similarly, Victoria wore a military uniform on certain state occasions and she
insisted that she be given a full military funeral.96 However, as a woman, Victoria
was not expected to lead men into battle. Nor was she expected to drink as much
wine as a man would, which is why Stockmar was appalled by her consumption
level (as unremarkable as it would have been for a king).
What was more openly remarked upon by observersand the queen had
thousands of guests each monthwas Victorias ravenous appetite. She ate what
was thought to be a copious amount for a very small woman, and got right to
business when the food arrived. As one biographer tactfully explained, Victoria
never toyed with her food.97 Most dinners were filled with courtiers and guests,
and Albert arrived at the scheduled hour to make sure the table was set and
Queen Victoria to the Princess Royal, 27 October 1872, in R. Fulford (ed.), Darling
Child: Private Correspondence of Queen Victoria and the German Crown Princess, 18711878
(London, 1976), p. 59, as quoted in Cannadine, The Last Hanoverian Sovereign?, p. 147.
94
D. Bennett, King Without a Crown: Albert, Prince Consort of England, 18191861
(London, 1977), pp. 889.
95
Ibid.
96
C. Campbell Orr, The Feminization of the Monarchy 17801910: Royal
Masculinity and Female Empowerment, in A. Olechnowicz, The Monarchy and the British
Nation, 1780 to the Present (Cambridge, 2007), pp. 934.
97
S. Weintraub, Albert: Uncrowned King (London, 1997), p. 143.
93
81
guests seated comme il faut. Victoria entered grandly up to 15 minutes later, took
her seat, and was served first. Because all were expected to stop eating when she
did, dinner at the court of Victoria and Albert was a hasty affair, with little time
to indulge in wine.
If Victoria was moderate in her wine consumption Albert was even more so,
especially given the continued customs of many British aristocratic men. Indeed,
while the wine-drinking middle classes began to shun heavy consumption in the
1820s, the fashion for sobriety was slower to catch on among the aristocracy.
For many aristocratic men, it was possible to be excessively moderate; and it
was thought that too much time drinking cordial glasses of sherry with women
was unmanly, just as their grandfathers had feared that too much time being
polite and drinking claret could lead to effeminacy.98 Thus, at the outset of
Victorias reign, aristocratic and even upper-middle-class men were still expected
to dismiss the women after dessert and remain at the table for port and indelicate
conversation. Albert, who was openly disdainful of the English aristocracy,
found this habit to be particularly obnoxious and further evidence that English
aristocrats were uncivilized. Moreover, he reasoned that men had no right to
dismiss their sovereign from her own table. Albert therefore abbreviated the
post-prandial ceremony to roughly five minutes, and then went to join his wife
and the ladies for singing.99 Reluctantly, and with a few more glasses of port in
their bellies, the other men would arrive soon thereafter.
However, by 1860 Alberts custom had become the norm among aristocratic
families, so we can say unequivocally that in this regard the Prince Consort was a
fashion leader among the elite. And while Albert may not have imagined himself
to be following British middle-class fashion, he was doing precisely what British
middle-class families did, and for the very same reasons. Heavy drinking among
men was too manly. It was, therefore, uncivilized. But just as William IV gained
the ire of many aristocrats for his cut-rate cuisine and English entertainers, so too
was Albert resented for imposing his annoying bourgeois habits at court. British
aristocratic men missed the gaming tables and surfeit of wine when they were
invited to the Palace,100 and they missed the chance to be manly by drinking
port and telling each other stories about sex, hunting, and politics, even if they
had no intention of getting completely intoxicated as their forbears had done.
As one royal biographer remarked, Alberts custom and Victorias insistence
that it be followed had the effect of estranging the monarchy from the aloof
aristocracy, and creating an image of the Queen more real to the middle classes
D. Duff, Albert and Victoria (London, 1972), p. 238; J. Richardson, Victoria and
98
99
Albert: A Study of a Marriage (London, 1977), p. 100; Weintraub, Albert, pp. 1434.
100
H. Bolitho, Albert: Prince Consort (rev. edn, London, 1970), p. 56.
Royal Taste
82
than to the proud, ancient families to whom England had belonged; to whom
the rise of the masses, and the rule of a respectable monarchy, were slightly
repulsive.101 However, for Albert, eradicating what from his point of view was
aristocratic barbarism was more important than soothing inflated egos. Thus,
the court conformed more than ever to British middle-class habits, even if
Albert believed he was propagating Teutonic Kultur rather than following the
behavior of the British bourgeoisie.
Ultimately then, it was Albert who disconnected wine from its age-old
affiliation with martial masculinity, although he was careful not to touch wines
symbolic link to political legitimacy. Significantly, the court still offered many
types of wine, and served a great deal of it. But by de-emphasizing the martial
and masculine aspects of monarchy which were reinforced by heavy wine
consumption, Albert helped to feminize, or at least neuter the institution, and
ultimately make it easier for a queen to rule.102
Not surprisingly, Victorias and Alberts preference for wine also mirrored
middle-class taste. Sherry was their wine of choice, although gentlemanly
claret and aristocratic champagne followed close behind. Indeed, in the early
years of her reign, Victoria seemed to enjoy claret just as much as sherry; in the
first quarter of 1838 her cellar master ordered eight hogsheads and four butts
of sherry, and 16 hogsheads of 1834 Chteau Lafite claret.103 Put another way,
she ordered approximately 4,032 bottles of each wine. Luxury claret (specifically
Lafite, Latour, La Rose, and Margaux) remained prominent in the royal cellars
throughout Victorias reign, but as with her predecessors, her cellars contained a
startling range of wines. Nevertheless, of the myriad different types of wine to be
found in the royal cellars, sherry was the most common and the most commonly
consumed throughout the 20-year period in which Victoria and Albert presided
together over the British court.104
For instance, a cellar inventory taken at Windsor Castle, St Jamess Palace,
and Buckingham Palace at the end of 1841 found a total of 111,960 bottles,
Ibid., p. 62.
For a lengthy discussion of the feminization and/or domestication of the monarchy,
101
102
see D. Cannadine, From biography to history: writing the modern British monarchy,
Historical Research, 22 (2004): pp. 289312; Cannadine, The Context, Performance and
Meaning of Ritual, pp. 10164; Cannadine, The Last Hanoverian Sovereign?, pp. 12765;
Orr, The feminization of the monarchy, 17801910, pp. 76107.
103
NA, LS 13/298, Board of the Green Cloth, Account of creditors not paid by
salary, 1838, ff. 13.
104
BL, Add. MS 38372, f. 42, Stock of Wine (Royal Household), 31 Dec. 1841; BL,
Add. MS 76683, Summary of Monthly Returns made by the Gentleman of Her Majestys
Wine Cellar, 1 April31 Dec. 1856.
83
of which sherry and port were dominant. A quarter of the total was so-called
household sherry and household port, but first-class sherry, first-class
port, and top-growth claret were the three most numerous wines available for
the queen and her guests. In other words, Victoria, Albert, and their guests drank
more expensive and presumably better-quality wines than did members of the
royal household; but the prevalence of both first-class and household sherry
and port provided a common denominator between the elite and middle-class
members of the court.105 Another inventory tabulated on December 31, 1841
confirms that what was in the cellar corresponded to what was actually consumed
at court. During the year 1841, out of a total of 25,910 bottles consumed, the
royal household drank 7,450 bottles of household sherry and 6,814 bottles of
household port. Meanwhile, the royal family and their guests consumed 2,565
bottles of sherry, 2,211 bottles of claret, 1,265 bottles of sweet champagne, 812
bottles of port, 546 bottles of dry champagne, and lesser amounts of numerous
other wines, spirits, and liqueurs.106
In sum, the most popular wine at the court of the newly wedded queen
and prince was, as it had been since the late-eighteenth century, also the most
popular wine of the British middle classes. To be sure, middle-class taste in 1841
was almost evenly split between sherry and port, and Spanish and Portuguese
wine imports to Britain were essentially even throughout the early years of
Victorias reign.107 So much were sherry and port considered a pair that specially
labeled decanters were often sold together, suggesting that masculine port and
feminine sherrylike man and woman, husband and wife, and Victoria and
Albertwere made for each other by a beneficent God.108 That said, it should be
stressed that court taste under Victoria and Albert was not completely middle
class. Top-growth claret and sparkling champagne were both expensive wines
in Britain, and not to be found in most middle-class homes. But Victoria and
Albert seemed to have understood that for the sake of their legitimacy, even in an
increasingly bourgeois age the court must be socially amphibious, comfortable
walking on land with the middle classes, but able to swim where only aristocrats
could.
Of course, a single snapshot of the royal cellars in 1841 does not show
continuity or change over time; however, a comprehensive cellar and
consumption inventory for Victoria and Alberts various residences in 1856
reveals that the queen and prince remained remarkably consistent in their
BL, Add. MS 38372, f. 42, Stock of Wine (Royal Household), 31 Dec. 1841.
BL, Add. MS 38372, ff. 456, Amount, in bottles, of wine consumed in 1841.
107
Parliament of the United Kingdom, Parliamentary Report C. 8706, Customs
105
106
Tariffs of the United Kingdom from 18001897, pp. 13157.

108
Francis, Wine Trade, p. 310.
Royal Taste
84
preferences. During the eight-month period from April 1 to December 31,

1856, the royal cellars disgorged over 18,000 bottles of wine, spirits, and liqueur,
approximately 12,000 of which were consumed by the royal household, and
6,000 by the queen and her nearly 11,000 guests. These latter figures indicate
that, on average, most people at the queens table consumed slightly more than
one half-bottle per sitting, or roughly one bottle a day when counting both lunch
and dinner. Among the wines for the queen and her guests, first-class sherry
ranked first in terms of the wines consumed; claret was a close second and sweet
champagne came third, the same rankings as in 1841. After these, first-class
port, Madeira, Malaga, and brandy came next in the overall amount consumed.
Among the household wines, sherry remained the overwhelming favorite,
followed by port and, if royal and household consumption are combined, we
arrive at the following figures in descending order of volume: household sherry
(5,083 bottles), first-class sherry (2,026 bottles), claret (1,968 bottles), sweet
champagne (1,627 bottles), and household port (1,289 bottles). All other
wines and spirits were consumed in lesser amounts.109 Clearly, therefore, port
was still popular among the royal household staff; but equally clearly, neither
Victoria nor Albert nor their guests drank a great deal of it. First-class port
ranked seventh in terms of overall popularity in the royal cellars.
Albert died in 1861, having exhausted himself in his attempts to civilize
the British. His idea for the Crystal Palace Exhibition in 1851 was his greatest
success, and his plan for a museum district in Kensington lives on as a testament
to his determination to educate a people whom he did not love and who did not
love him. In response to Alberts death, Victoria exempted herself from court
duties for nearly 20 years, and spent as much time as possible outside London at
Windsor, the Isle of Wight, and Balmoral. Without Albert, Victorias court was
moribund, and it remained relatively quiet even upon her return to public life
in the early 1880s. Nevertheless, by an oversight of accounting, wine continued
to be ordered as if Albert were alive, and the court still entertained guests on a
regular basis. One result was that when Victoria and Alberts oldest son, Bertie,
came to power in 1901 as Edward VII, one of his first acts of house-cleaning
was to sell off the excess bottles of wine in the royal cellars. This excess included
some 60,000 bottles of sherry.110 Ironically, by the time of the sale, British taste
had moved on to (re)embrace claret and other French wines, as well as whiskey,
gin, brandy, and newly fashionable American cocktails. The London Daily Mail
scoffed at the sale of so much sherry, saying that Sherry is a neglected drink
quite fallen from the fashionable estate from which our forebears held it, and
BL, Add. MS 76683, Summary of Monthly Returns made by the Gentleman of
Her Majestys Wine Cellar, 1 April31 Dec. 1856.
110
H.W. Allen, Sherry and Port (London, 1952), p. 29.
109
85
predicted that the auction would generate only 8,0009,000. In fact, the wine
fetched 18,500.111 Sherry may have been out of fashion, but wine that once
belonged to Victoria seems to have retained the prestige of a monarch who
was revered by millions for the fact that she symbolically represented and held
together the vast and mighty British Empire. In death, as it had not been in life
without Albert, Victorias court was once again fashionable.
Conclusion
In the period 17601861, wine represented the legitimacy and power of the
British monarchy, just as it had for centuries prior. But also during this period, the
legitimacy of the monarchy was increasingly questioned, especially by members
of the vocal middle ranks. One result was that British monarchs had to adapt
by defining themselves in ways that were recognizable to their middle-ranking
critics. The middle rankswho developed into the middle classeswere not, as
doctrinaire Marxists once insisted, a unified or even coherent group who were
united by their relationship to production. However, they did share broadly
common values and interests, and they were often united by their consumption
habits. It was these middle-class consumption habits that allowed British
monarchs to present themselves as representing the true political nationa
political nation that by 1832 was largely defined by and for the middle class.
And among consumption habits, the taste for wine remained of paramount
importance, precisely because competing parties could agree that consuming
wine was necessary for claiming and projecting political legitimacy.
The evidence available does not permit us to do more than speculate about
the precise motives of late-eighteenth and nineteenth-century British monarchs
and courtiers as they switched taste from claret to port to sherry, but a simple
knowledge of the oenological divisions within the court would have told them
that different wines had different social meanings. I have argued that it was this
knowledge that pushed monarchs (and no doubt their advisors) in the direction
of middle-class taste. As other scholars have shown, George IIIs court, and
the aristocracy more broadly, were already moving in the direction of middleranking tastes prior to the French Revolution.112 The conservative reaction that
occurred in Britain and on the Continent in the wake of Napoleons defeat did
not halt the fundamental shift in political power from the aristocracy to the
middle classes. There was no going back to the Old Order. Even George IV, who
As quoted in Allen, Sherry and Port, p. 29.
See footnote 62.
111
112
Royal Taste
86
admired Louis XIV and dreamed of Bourbon glory in Britain, had to accept
aspects of middle-class taste if he was to preserve his legitimacy.113 Consequently,
he embraced sherry; but his failure to embrace moderation in drink, food, and
other earthly pleasures was in large measure the reason for his unpopularity as a
king. William IV and Victoria learned from George IV, adopting both middleclass taste and behavior.
What this study of royal taste confirms is that the period 17601861
witnessed not only dramatic changes at court, but also a fundamental shift in
the institution of the British monarchy; the monarchy became more bourgeois
and effeminate and less aristocratic and masculine as defined by its tastes.
That certainly upset some British aristocrats who did not relish the idea of a
merely respectable monarchy; but existentially, the embourgeoisement and
effeminizing of the monarchy was brilliant, if not also lucky for those who wore
crowns or tiaras. By using taste to position itself among the broadly defined
middle classes and de-emphasizing its role in war at the very time the monarch
was being stripped of the last vestiges of political power, the British monarchy as
an institution helped to save itself. This is particularly apparent if one compares
the British monarchy to its Continental cousins. These monarchies, most notably
the Austrian, German, French, and Russian, continued to resist the bourgeois
tide and identifying themselves with martial prowess, and did not survive the
wars and social upheaval of the period 1870 to 1918. Historically speaking
then, wine at the British court was not just for slaking royal thirst and asserting
political legitimacy; it was also, consciously or not, for keeping the monarchy
intact.
Orr, The Feminization of the Monarchy 17801910, pp. 7981.
113
Chapter 4
Food at the Russian Court and the Homes

of the Imperial Russian Elite, Sixteenth to
mid-Nineteenth Centuries
David I. Burrow
The production, consumption, and presentation of food have always had

cultural and political meanings. In contemporary urban Russia, food choices
seem designed to reflect Russias entry into European society since the collapse
of the Soviet Union and recovery from the economic collapse of the late 1990s.
St Petersburgs Nevskii Prospekt in spring 2008 is lined with trendy sushi bars,
a sign of Russias renewed openness and the conspicuous consumption of its
oil-fueled capitalism. Moscows restaurants run the gamut from international
chains, Russian imitations of such chains (the rather literally named Moscow
Koffe-Hauscafes), high-end restaurants striving to outdo each other for
Moscows billionaires, as well as hundreds of kiosks selling chips, hot dogs, beer,
ice cream, and fruit. The mojito is the latest ubiquitously advertised cocktail.
And yet, at the conference of movers and shakers at the 12th St Petersburg
International Forum, presided over by recently elected Russian Federation
President Dmitri Medvedev, the dinner hosted by St Petersburgs mayor went
for Russian traditional: The menu included three kinds of shashlik, about 10
kinds of cheese, a variety of salads, fruits and vegetables, and seven kinds of

The Soviet Union had a distinct food culture, shaped by shortages, rationing,
and the efforts of the Soviet regime to provide institutions for communal dining. See: M.
Borrero, Communal Dining and State Cafeterias in Moscow and Petrograd, 19171921, in
M. Glants and J. Toomre (eds), Food in Russian History and Culture (Bloomington, 1997),
pp. 16276; S. Boym, Common Places: Mythologies of Everyday Life in Russia (Cambridge,
MA, 1994), chapter 2; S. Fitzpatrick, Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary
Times: Soviet Russia in the 1930s (Oxford, 1999), chapters 2 and 4; E. Osokina, K.S. Transchel
and G. Bucher, Our Daily Bread: Socialist Distributions and the Art of Survival in Stalins
Russia, 19271941 (Armonk, 2001); H. Rothstein and R.A. Rothstein, The Beginnings of
Soviet Culinary Arts, in M. Glants and J. Toomre (eds), Food in Russian History and Culture,
pp. 17794.
Royal Taste
88
ice cream. No doubt by design, the menu reflected the resurgent nationalism
encouraged by the Putin/Medvedev administration.
Richard Wortman has suggested that Russian rulers of the Romanov dynasty
from Peter the Great (r. 16841725) to Nicholas II (r. 18941917) presented
scenarios of power, scenarios intended to demonstrate a ruler-myth, an image
of the type of ruler the emperor or empress wished to project and cultivate about
him- or herself. Wortman examines architecture, paintings, sculpture, military
uniforms, formal court ceremonies, and public presentations of the monarchs
(appearances in front of audiences) in order to illustrate the individual modes
of performance of the imperial myth, the imperial myth being the ruler and the
court celebrating its own elevation, sacredness, and the legitimacy of its powerholding. Food and its presentation at court could also be part of these imperial
scenarios of power. For example, if the mayoral dinner described above served
to Medvedev is considered a scenario, in adhering to what is seen in 2008 as
Russian culinary tradition, the scenario suggests that in the midst of international
influx and negotiations, the Medvedev regime maintained a core Russianness.
In addition, the dinner suggested that Russia, and Russian cuisine, belongs on
an international level, that it has a cultural worth equal to that of Russias
international economic partners.
Rulers and the artists, architects, military leaders, and court organizers under
their direct command did not exclusively enact scenarios of power. The imperial
court and the Russian nobilitythe primary but not exclusive audience for the
displays of the scenarios of powerwere integral parts of the scenario apparatus.
The Russian nobility maintained a close association with state power. In the
medieval period, the court coalesced around the Riurikid dynasty in Moscow
that built the Russian state (Muscovy) out of the city of Moscow, beginning in
the fourteenth century. Ranks of the nobles consisted of landowning nobility
(some descended from princely families from once-independent Slavic cities
M. Delany and N. Popova, A Forum of Drinks, Magic and a Flying Pig, The Moscow
Times ( June 9, 2008): p. 2. Shashlik is grilled or spit-roasted meat, brought to Russia during
the nineteenth-century conquest of Georgia and the Caucasus, and now considered as
Russian as curry is British. Catriona Kelly notes that Russian cookbooks of the nineteenth
century often took a rather elastic view, in practice, as to what might be considered Russian
food. Refining Russia: Advice Literature, Polite Culture, and Gender from Catherine to Yeltsin
(Oxford, 2001), p. 143.

R. Wortman, Scenarios of Power: Myth and Ceremony in Russian Monarchy, from
Peter the Great to the Death of Nicholas I (2 vols, Princeton, 1995), vol. 1. I hope to enhance
the utility of Wortmans concept in applying it to focus on food at court.

Ibid., p. 6.

The concept of cultural worth here comes from A.K. Smith, Recipes for Russia: Food
and Nationhood under the Tsars (DeKalb, 2008), p. 73.
Food at the Russian Court and the Homes of the Imperial Russian Elite
89
conquered or incorporated by Muscovy) as well as military servitors, many of

whom were given un-hereditable landed estates in exchange for service. Russian
Orthodoxy constituted a binding identity for the Russian court and service
nobility, organized into competitive clan groups. After the collapse of Muscovy
during the Time of Troubles (15981613), the Romanov dynasty was placed on
the throne, and rebuilt the empire. The Romanov autocracy was structured in
such a way that the autocrat ruled both over and with members of the nobility,
who received titles and rank from state service and were landowners, deriving
income from the serfs bound to the land of the estates; the emperor also ruled
through an expanding imperial bureaucracy. Under Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich
(r. 16451676), the state legally enforced serfdom, binding peasants to the land
and placing them under the legal control of the state or their noble landlords.
Serfdom remained the basis of the states economy until 1861.10 Peter the Great
legally harnessed the nobility for service, creating the Table of Ranks for civil
and military service, establishing a new basis for court ranks and noble hierarchy.
Peter also, both through legislation and practice, reshaped the urban nobility
(explored more extensively in the Peter section below). After Emperor Peter IIIs
release of the nobility from mandatory state service in 1762, members of the
nobility were free to vegetate in the glush (the back of beyond, the provinces),
although many often visited relatives in Moscow and St Petersburg during the
social season, with urban-dwelling nobles visiting the countryside in summer.11
N. Shields Kollmann, Kinship and Politics: The Making of the Muscovite Political
System, 13471547 (Stanford, 1987). For kin and clan groups, see V. Kivelson, Autocracy
in the Provinces: The Muscovite Gentry and Political Culture in the Seventeenth Century
(Stanford, 1996).

C.S.L. Dunning, Russias First Civil War: The Time of Troubles and the Founding of
the Romanov Dynasty, (University Park, PA, 2001).

Autocracy is the distinctive form of Russian imperial government, a type of political
absolutism, of absolute monarchy, in which the autocrat (also known by the titles emperor
and tsar) rules with no constraints on his or her authority. All of the texts in the footnotes for
this section discuss and define autocracy and its development.

R. Crummey, Aristocrats and Servitors: The Boyar Elite in Russia, 16131689
(Princeton, 1983); J.P. Le Donne, Absolutism and Ruling Class: The Formation of the Russian
Political Order, 17001825 (Oxford, 1991); B. Meehan-Waters, Autocracy and Aristocracy:
The Russian Service Elite of 1730 (Newark, 1983); E. Kimerling Wirtschafter, Social Identity
in Imperial Russia (DeKalb, 1997).
10
J. Blum, Lord and Peasant in Russia from the Ninth to the Nineteenth Century
(Princeton, 1961); D. Moon, The Russian Peasantry 16001930: The World the Peasants
Made (New York, 1999).
11
R.E. Jones, The Emancipation of the Russian Nobility, 17621785 (Princeton,
1973).
Royal Taste
90
Catherine the Greats reign (17621795), often called the Golden Age of the
Nobility, saw Catherine, despite her Enlightenment aspirations, rewarding
noble service with land and extending serfdom, while codifying the privileges
of the nobility in 1785 (in the Charter to the Nobility).12 Service to the empire
was a metric for those who wished to buy into state power and serve at court;
estates that had once been given for service were now heritable, making noble
landowners intermediaries between the enserfed population and the state.13 A
hallmark of the Golden Age was the divergence of the social conditions of the
high urban nobility from the majority of the rest of the empires population;
nobles spoke French, aspired to follow European fashions, and became visibly
separate from the majority population.14 The nobility itself divided into different
strata, layers that were sometimes brought into being only by the perception
of the nobility itself; formal, legal divisions by service rank were complicated
by metrics of supposed distinction or antiquity, engendered by geographic
origin, documented or believed time of entry into service, and of course
wealth.15 Court life remained the focus of aspiring nobles; patterns of social life
and sociability practices were not dictated by the autocracy, but represented a
compromise between the social practices desired by the nobility and the social
control desired by the autocracy. The Francophile orientation of Russian court
culture changed under Alexander I (r. 18011825) as a consequence of the wars
against Napoleon and the growth of a Russian reading public (largely confined
through the eighteenth century to the upper Russian social groups) that allowed
for the new expressions of Russian nationalism and a new consciousness of
Russian identity.16 The Decembrist rebellion of 1825, led by noble members of
the military, deeply affected the new Emperor Nicholas I (r. 18251855); as a
consequence, he established a surveillance state and crafted a formal culture of
official patriotism.17 Nicholass rigid adherence to duty and effort to subordinate
the elite functioned, contrary to his intent, to separate elite from autocrat. The
overall pattern, however, is one where changes in elite social and court life,
I. de Madariaga, Russia in the Age of Catherine the Great (New Haven, 1981),
pp. 7989 and 292307.
13
Blum, Lord and Peasant, pp. 34566; Le Donne, Absolutism and Ruling Class,
pp. 321.
14
H. Rogger, National Consciousness in Eighteenth-Century Russia (Cambridge, MA,
1960).
15
Kelly, Refining Russia, pp. 912.
16
A. Martin, Reformers, Romantics, Reactionaries: Russian Conservative Thought and
Politics in the Reign of Alexander I (DeKalb, 1997).
17
N. Riasanovsky, Nicholas I and Official Nationality in Russia, 18251855
(Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1969).
12
91
the patterns of food service and consumption of the court and the noble elite,
travel together; the social practices of the elite, the high nobility, supported,
surrounded, and constituted the audience for imperial culinary scenarios of
power.
The term elite describes those who served directly at court and depended
on imperial service, as well as the members of the nobility who were related to
court nobles, attended court functions, and participated in the social practices
of court and noble culture. In addition, elite describes well the access to foods
and means of food service available to this segment of the imperial population.
The diet of the vast majority of Russias population was less varied, less copious,
and much simpler.18 Elite status conferred access to court and to the scenarios.
My use of the term elite follows other scholars in categorizing the notoriously
complex patterns of the imperial nobility.19 In her analysis of the second half of
the nineteenth century, Recipes for Russia, Allison K. Smith employs the term
elite Russians, meaning for her analytical purposes, those literate Russians
who contributed to and read Russias growing print media: not simply the
richest of nobles, but the broader group of middling nobles, bureaucrats, even
some unusually modern merchants.20 Richard Wortman also employs the term
elite: A multinational imperial elite comprised noblemen [from all over the
empire] [] They shared a common bond of service with the emperor and a
common domination of a subject population.21 Members of the court, and
those members of the high nobility at court or with access to the court and the
means to join in court culture, constitute the elite in my analysis.
Surveying patterns of food service at court and among the elite of the
Russian nobility to the middle of the nineteenth century, ending with the reign
of Nicholas I, will serve to acquaint those unfamiliar with the situation in Russia
18
On peasant diet, see R.E.F. Smith and D. Christian, Bread and salt: A social and
economic history of food and drink in Russia (Cambridge, 1984); Smith, Recipes, pp. 1398;
Moon, Russian Peasantry, pp. 282324.
19
A main purpose of Wirtschafter, Social Identity, is to elucidate these complexities.
Catriona Kelly argues the Russian nobility was amorphous, including not only aristocrats
in the strict sense, those distinguished by wealth (both in terms of capital and in terms of
serf ownership), rank, and closeness to the Russian court through service, shared tastes, and
occupation, but also a wide range of humbler figures whose modes of existence were not
always easily distinguishable from those of educated members of the merchant classes. Kelly,
Refining Russia, p. 153.
20
Smith, Recipes, p. 9.
21
R. Wortman, Scenarios of Power: Myth and Ceremony in Russian Monarchy from
Peter the Great to the Abdication of Nicholas II (abridged one-volume edn, Princeton, 2006),
p. 2. Wortmans use of the term draws from Max Weber and Ernst Gellner.
Royal Taste
92
during these centuries.22 In terms of food service at court, these centuries are
periodized into four eras. In the medieval and early modern periods, court food
service followed a host-controlled feast model, in which the ruler served as the
central figure of the meal. Elite culture followed a similar pattern. In the early
eighteenth century, Peter the Great altered court service, creating assemblies
deliberately void of the formality and rules for dining proscribed by Russian
Orthodoxy and Muscovite tradition; elite culture followed suit. By the reign
of Catherine the Great in the second half of the eighteenth century, elites
followed Western European patterns, and had also created the sociable practice
of the open table. By the beginning of the nineteenth century, a Russian style
of service developed, one subsequently exported to Western Europe. Russian
rulers had to find new ways to reassert their primacy, which Nicholas I strove
to do (although not with the outcome he would have desired). Food service at
court and among the elite illustrates for us the nature of Russian autocracy and
its permeation into all areas of elite life, and also the construction of autocracy
in collaboration with the elite.
Medieval and Early Modern Russia
Patterns of food service and consumption among the elite prior to the Petrine
Revolution at the beginning of the eighteenth century are less well known to us
than we would like.23 Extant sources emphasize the exceptional rather than the
everyday. Two conceptions dominate: the distributive role of the ruler and norms
established by Russian Orthodoxy. Orthodox rules and proscriptions deemed
certain animals as unclean, and forbade their consumption; these included
horses, serpents, and animals considered to be vermin, including squirrel and
beaver.24 The Orthodox Church mandated periods of fasting during which
believers were to abjure meat. On these fast days it was forbidden to eat any
After the death of Nicholas I, his son, Alexander II (r. 18551881), had the
imperial bureaucracy launch the Great Reforms that included the emancipation of the serfs
in 1861. The social, administrative, and economic changes brought by the Great Reforms
altered relations between court and noble elite to such an extent that the second half of
the nineteenth century presents a different context. W. Bruce Lincoln, The Great Reforms:
Autocracy, Bureaucracy, and the Politics of Change in Imperial Russia (DeKalb, 1990); F.W.
Wcislo, Reforming Rural Russia: State, Local Society, and National Politics, 18551914
(Princeton, 1990).
23
H.G. Lunt, Food in the Rus Primary Chronicle, in Food in Russian History and
Culture, p. 15.
24
Smith and Christian, Bread and Salt, pp. 1213.
22
93
meat or meat products, including eggs, milk, and cheese.25 Major fast periods
included the seven weeks prior to Easter, 50 days after Easter, a mid-August
fast prior to the Assumption of the Virgin, and the period prior to Christmas.
Festival days provided for special diets. Major holidays included Easter, Butter
Week (better known in the West as Carnival or Mardi Gras), and Christmas.
Holidays on the Orthodox calendar became associated with particular foods:
paskha and kulich for Easter, and blini for Butter Week.26 The Church waged a
constant battle with the population in attempting to get them to give up alcohol
during these periods, as well as during feasts themselves.27
Many of the occasions described in medieval texts center on feasts. The
feast was the knot bringing together all the threads of the emergent sociality of
ancient times.28 A role of the ruler in medieval Rus, as in European states, was to
provide food and drink for his retainers: Volodimer [Svyatoslavich the Great,
r. 9781015; he earned his epithet by accepting Christianity], as a benevolent
Christian prince, makes pite i iadene, drink and food, available for everyone
at his court [in the year] (996).29 Volodomir enhances his authority through
both the granting and withdrawal of food, and, in at least one case reported
by the Primary Chronicle, by permitting silver spoons at service instead of the
wooden spoons initially given out.30 Everyday medieval elite life and tsarist court
ceremonial interacted with each other; the extent to which one could be said to
have generated the other is unclear.31 Regardless of the question of origin, patterns
of food service consistently adhered to a feast/banquet model in which the host
was supposed to serve guests according to their rank and to play an active role
in the service of food; food was brought out and served sequentially. Sequential
service would remain the dominant practice among the elite until the eighteenth
century, when it was supplanted, only to be reintroduced in the nineteenth
century as service la russe, in which diners were served individually.
In the medieval era, the main meal of the day was obed, or dinner, served
mid-afternoon, and the last meal of the day was supper. This model persisted
among the elites until the nineteenth century.32 The major meals in wealthy
25
J. Toomre, Introduction, in Classic Russian Cooking: Elena Molokhovets: A Gift to
Young Housewives, trans., introd., and ann. J. Toomre (Bloomington, 1992), p. 13.
26
Paskha is a flavored cheese, kulich bread with raisins and almonds, and blini are
pancakes similar to crepes.
27
Smith and Christian, Bread and Salt, p. 84.
28
Ibid., p. 81.
29
Lunt, Food in the Rus, p. 23.
30
Ibid., pp. 245.
31
Smith and Christian, Bread and Salt, p. 81.
32
Toomre, Classic Russian Cooking, p. 23.
Royal Taste
94
noble households featured food set out all at once, with tables spread around
an otherwise largely empty main room; servants brought portions of food to
particular tables, from a sideboard or sideboards installed along the wall.
This pattern for food service is set out in the manual for householders
known as the Domostroi (which literally means house order). The Domostroi
was written in the middle of the sixteenth century, during the early part of the
reign of Ivan the Terrible (r. 153384) and is attributed to the monk Sylvester,
although its exact authorship is unclear.33 The Domostroi provides a wealth of
information on the varieties and types of food available to and consumed by
wealthy householders in the 1550s. It also gives specific instructions to the
host over how to preside at a dinner; these instructions make it clear the host
supervises the entire affair. It is didactic and proscriptive, and assumes that its
readers understand the normal codes of behavior. The host directs food to be
sent to other tables and, through his servants, controls the pace of the meal: it
is up to the master of the house or his representatives to offer someone food or
drink or to send something to anothers table according to the recipients worth
or rank or the quality of his counsel.34 Guests were admonished not to take
food from the sideboard for themselves.35 Hierarchy was always to be respected:
Whenever there are guests to feedmerchants or foreigners, invited guests or
those sent by God, rich or poor, priests or monksthe master and mistress of
the house should be thoughtful and should give each person the honor due to
one of that rank and dignity.36 The Domostroi depicts a patriarchal world, where
the head of household/husband/host was absolute ruler in the kingdom of the
household.37
Injunctions to behave well at table, to eat calmly and decorously, are less
specific in the Domostroi than rules for polite eating from thirteenth- through
eighteenth-century France and Germany presented by Norbert Elias in The
Civilizing Process; the Domostrois exhortations do not seem to have served the
distinguishing and civilizing function as the European rules.38 Elias, for example,
For a concise discussion of this subject, see The Domostroi: Rules for Russian
Households in the Time of Ivan the Terrible, ed. and trans. C. Johnston Pouncy (Ithaca, 1994),
pp. 3745. V.V. Kolesov describes the Domostroi as a medieval domestic-conduct book
[that] served as a guide for the ideal life. V.V. Kolesov, The Domostroi as a Work of Medieval
Culture, Russian Studies in History, 40 (2001): pp. 674, quote on p. 19.
34
The Domostroi, pp. 76 and 83. Representative in this context means servant.
35
Ibid., p. 83.
36
Ibid., p. 84.
37
Kelly, Refining Russia, p. 56.
38
N. Elias, The Civilizing Process (Oxford, 2000), pp. 7285. Catriona Kelly notes the
general paucity of detailed advice on etiquette and gesturehow to hold ones fork, how
33
95
quotes a thirteenth-century text: 157 It is not decent to poke your fingers into
your ears or eyes, as some people do, or to pick your nose while eating. These
three habits are bad.39 In The Book of Nurture and School of Good Manners:
69 Do not be noisy at table, as some people are. Remember, my friends, that
nothing is so ill-mannered.40 A parallel injunction from the Domostroi reads, If
those present eat gratefully, in silence or while engaged in devout conversation,
the angels will stand by invisibly and write down the diners good deeds.41 This
brief comparison suggests the dominance of Orthodox religious conceptions in
dining behavior, and the brevity of the advice illustrates that in medieval Russian
culture [] bodily restraint was primarily a marker of social prestige, required
above all in the protagonists of ritual [such as the] Grand Prince of Muscovy
[who] directed the apportionment of food, rather than sating himself at the
feast;42 it suggests as well the comparative underdevelopment of literacy among
the Russian elite in the mid-sixteenth century.
The proscriptive rules of the Domostroi acknowledge two areas requiring
some negotiation. The first of these was the institution of terem (female
seclusion) among the elite, which meant that the women of a noble household
ate separately from the male members.43 The second was balancing provisions for
guests invited in advance while maintaining places for the arrival of unexpected
guests (those sent by God in the quotation above, unexpected guests being
supported by biblical injunction). Hosts were enjoined to be polite in turning
away unwanted guests who overwhelmed the amount of food prepared, but
uninvited guests who did not overtax the hosts resources were presumably to be
accommodated.44 Conversations during meals were supposed to be decorous and
calm (as the quote in the preceding paragraph indicated). The social hierarchy
and ideals of correct Orthodox behavior were all to be reproduced during the
sociable occasion represented by a meal.45 In sum, proscriptive literature illustrates
to greet others, how to make conversation, and so on in conduct books until later in the
eighteenth century. Kelly, Refining Russia, p. 23.
39
Ibid., p. 71.
40
Ibid., p. 69.
41
The Domostroi, p. 77.
42
Kelly, Refining Russia, p. xxvi. Richard Chancellors account of Tsar and Grand
Prince Ivan the Terrible is noted below.
43
Ibid., p. 85, states the mistress of the house should entertain her women friends
of good standing, and any female guests who happen to visit her, in the [same] manner
described. On terem, see N. Shields Kollmann, The Seclusion of Elite Muscovite Women,
Russian History, 10/2 (1983): pp. 17087.
44
The Domostroi, p. 85.
45
For example, The Domostroi quotes Romans 12: 20 on shaming your enemies by
sheltering and feeding them. The Domostroi, p. 137.
Royal Taste
96
how Russian Orthodoxy provided the model for norms of behavior and reflects
status hierarchy in meal service among the elite during the sixteenth century.
Alison Smith, following S.A. Kozlov, defines these practices as constituting the
tradition increasingly challenged and problematized by increased contact
with other European states and their practices in the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries.46
The practices described in the Domostroi accord with accounts of meals
served at court during the 1550s. Richard Chancellor, sent to Muscovy on a
commercial mission, described a dinner given by Ivan the Terrible in 1553.
The tsar sat at a mightie Cupboorde covered with boards in the middes of
the roome. Those who were in favor with the tsar sat on the same bench as
the emperor, although not too near him (proximity to the tsar was and would
remain a sign of favor). The meal commenced when the Emperour himselfe,
according to an ancient custome of the kings of Muscovy, doth first bestow a
peece of bread upon every one of his ghests with a loud pronunciation of his
title, and honour. The individual meat items (beginning with a young Swanne
in a golden platter) were brought to the tsar, then to a carver, and then to the
guests.47
Similar standards and practices were maintained during the tumultuous years
of the Time of Troubles that followed the death of Ivan and lasted through the
installation of the Romanov dynasty in 1613. French captain Jacques Margeret,
in Russian service as a mercenary from 1600 to 1606, described an ambassadors
reception and the tsars meals circa 1600, during the reign of Boris Godunov, as
host-directed meals similar to those of a half-century earlier. Margeret observed
that the number of servants reflected the prestige of the guests. These two or
three hundred gentlemen [serving the meals], who are increased in number
according to the number of invited guests, are ordered to bring the meat dishes
before the emperor and to hold them until he asks for such and such.48 On
the table prior to the meat dishes being served are only bread, salt, vinegar,
and pepper; no plates or napkins. The emperor sends a morsel of bread to
favored guests, and each stands and hails the tsar. Then the meat comes. The
emperor sends to each one of the principal guests a plate full of meat. After that,
all the tables are furnished with meat in great abundance.49 It is unclear from
Smith, Recipes, pp. 89. Kelly discusses this theme as well.
Smith and Christian, Bread and Salt, pp. 11315, quotations are from p. 113. For
46
47
an additional description see R. Hakluyt, The Principal Navigations (12 vols, Glasgow, 1903),
vol. 1, pp. 2867.
48
The Russian Empire and Grand Duchy of Muscovy: A 17th-Century French Account
by Jacques Margeret, ed. and trans. C.S.L. Dunning (Pittsburgh, 1983), p. 55.
49
Ibid., p. 56.
97
Margerets account whether the tsar subsequently sends food thereafter only to
the principal guests, or to everyone present at the banquet. Regardless, Margeret
goes on to describe four rounds of drinks sent from tsar to guests (wine, mead,
claret, honey mead) followed by a second gift of meat: After [the honey mead]
the emperor sends to everyone individually a plate of meat, which each sends to
his home. This presentation is made repeating [a hail to the tsar]. The emperor
tastes a little of these meats before sending them to those whom he favors most.
Margeret mentions that the emperor sends a daily gift of meat, a podacha, to
invited guest [and] each noble and to all those that he favors.50 Ceremonial
dinners could also be sent to ambassadors if the emperor is not disposed to
feast an ambassador after he has had his audience.51 The feast, carried to the
ambassadors residence by a long train of servants, included servitors to keep the
ambassador company as he dined, tableware, the servants themselves, multiple
courses, wines, and silver plategold plate if the ambassador is specially favored
(Volodimir had made a similar gesture centuries earlier).
One of the rulers who took the throne during the Time of Troubles is known
as Tsar Dmitrii (his exact identity is unknown and disputed).52 Dmitrii violated
Orthodox norms: among his peculiarities were that he kept a joyful table and
dispensed with some of the seemingly endless religious rituals associated with
dining at court, a violation of the ethos of bodily restraint mentioned earlier.
He did not fast zealously and occasionally ate food deemed unclean by the
Russian Orthodox Church. He also did not rest after dinner, as was customary.
Instead, he often wandered around the Kremlin or Moscow alone or with a few
guards.53 The Orthodox churchmen who wrote these descriptions exaggerated
Dmitriis practices as a means of denigrating him,54 but it is significant they used
food service and the expected behavior at mealtimes as a way to criticize a figure
of whom they disapproved.
Ibid. For more on the podacha, see below.

Ibid., p. 57.
52
C.S.L. Dunning, Who Was Tsar Dmitrii?, Slavic Review, 60/4 (2001): pp. 70529.
53
Ibid., pp. 7289; Dunning, Russias First Civil War, pp. 204 and 206. Post-dinner
50
51
walks became normal for the nobility in later centuries, an indication of how social practices
change. Dunning does not specify the type of unclean food; presumably it means foods
proscribed during Orthodox fasts.
54
Here the authors followed in the footsteps of the monks who wrote the Primary
Chronicle. For examples from the Primary Chronicle, see Lunt, Food in the Rus, p. 25. On
the campaign of denigration of Dmitrii by Orthodox Church figures, see Dunning, Russias
First Civil War, pp. 2012.
98
Royal Taste
A host-directed dinner noted for its abundance rather than the quality of
the food55 continued during the seventeenth century under the reigns of the
first Romanovs. Adam Olearius, who accompanied the ambassador of the
court of Holstein and was in Russia during the 1630s, and again in 1643, noted
both self-interest and sumptuousness in the suppers served by members of the
noble elite: they sometimes arrange banquets, at which they demonstrate their
grandeur by the variety of food and drink served. Olearius saw self-interest in
such feasts: However, when the magnates have feasts and invite people beneath
them in rank, it is certain that they are seeking something other than their good
company. Their largess serves as a baited hook, with which they gain more than
they expend. For, according to their custom, guests are supposed to bring the
host valuable gifts.56 Contrary to Oleariuss perception, the giving of gifts by
the host, a podacha, reflective of patronclient relationships, was more common.
Gifting as part of a banquet in the mid-seventeenth century was practiced by the
highest in social status as a reflection of their status. These were the same persons
who practiced female seclusion, and Olearius describes as well the existence of
terem in his visits to elite Russian households. When he dined with Count Lev
Shliakhovskii in 1643, Olearius was invited out of the main room, where the
count informed him that, the greatest honor and favor anyone can be given in
Russia is for the mistress of the house to come out and render homage to the
guest as to the master.57 The reluctant Olearius had to kiss Shliakhovskiis wife
as a sign of respect, although Olearius and other observers noted that the more
common practice was for the wife to appear and serve vodka to the guests after
dining.
In sum, the medieval model of a host-directed banquet, governed by norms
established by Russian Orthodoxy and centered on a redistributive patronclient
relationship, remained a major food service practice at court, one replicated by
the seventeenth century in the homes of the elite.
The Reign of Peter the Great
Peter the Great (r. 16841725) brought about a revolution at court and among
the Russian imperial elite in both sociability and food service. Peter reorganized
the life of Russias court out of his desire to Europeanize the Russian nobility,
55
Toomre, Classic Russian Cooking, p. 28. Numerous sources mention that Russian
court banquets emphasized abundance rather than quality.
56
The Travels of Olearius in Seventeenth-Century Russia, ed. and trans. S.H. Baron
(Stanford, 1967), p. 158.
57
Ibid.
99
harness them for service, and increase consumption of luxury goods as a stimulus
to the economy.58 Peters introduction of Assemblies to reshape noble sociability
revolutionized the behavior of elites at court, and their habits at table. Peters
changes also in effect began the oft-discussed split between a Westernized court
elite/nobility and the masses of Russia, a diversion that remained in patterns
of food consumption as well as the types of foods consumed.59 Peters personal
social and dining practices at court varied from Orthodox norms in the decades
prior to the formal creation of Assemblies in November 1718 (although they
were never wholly abandoned, as the Easter podacha example below notes). Peter
disliked intensely what he perceived as the regulated formality of early modern
Russian elite culture, and he was notorious for mocking these conventions60 as
well as following (for the time) informal habits. For example, General Patrick
Gordon, a Scottish soldier in Russian service since 1661, notes in his diary that
on January 2, 1691, without prompting or warning, Peter ordered Gordon to
host the court the next day. Gordon recounted the day after that, The czar came
about [10 am], and immediately sat down to table. He was accompanied by 85
persons of distinction, with about a hundred servants. They were all very merry,
both at dinner and at supper, and spent the night as if in camp.61 Peter, however,
could not entirely force his likes upon his population, and Petrine court culture
remained an amalgam of old and new habits.
One of Peters major efforts to reshape elite social life was his creation by
legislation of Assemblies on November 26, 1718. Peters Assembly legislation
took the term assembly from the French language, and the Assemblies were
intended for entertainment and conversation, both social and serious. The host
was enjoined to provide food and a place to eat for the guests, but not to manage
food service formally. Frederick von Bergholz, kammerjunker (chamberlain)
to Duke Karl Frederick of Holstein-Guttorp during the last years of Peters
reign, wrote that one of the rules for an Assembly was that the host is not
obligated, nor would he dare, to compel the guests to eat and drink, but he is
only able to say, that he was provided refreshments, and after that he is left to
L. Hughes, Russia in the Age of Peter the Great (New Haven, 1998), pp. 2679.
For examples, see Toomre, Classic Russian Cooking, p. 20; Smith, Recipes, pp. 725;
58
59
A. von Haxthausen, Studies on the Interior of Russia, ed. and introd. S.F. Starr, trans. E.L.M.
Schmidt (Chicago, 1972), pp. 123 and 228.
60
Hughes, Russia in the Age of Peter the Great, pp. 24956 and pp. 3758. The most
notorious example of Peters mockery was the All-Mad, All-Jesting, All-Drunken Assembly;
this collection of Peters cronies and court lackeys parodied both court and religious ritual to
satisfy Peters sense of humor.
61
P. Gordon, Passages from the Diary of General Patrick Gordon of Auchleuchries A.D.
1635A.D. 1699 (Aberdeen 1859), p. 173.
Royal Taste
100
complete freedom.62 Bergholz mentions alcohol, coffee, tea, sweets, pastry,

and a separate table set out buffet-style with cold dishes.63 An Assembly could
encompass a formal banquet, but was not supposed to; in fact, the Assemblies
were supposed to begin at five and end at 10, between the then-traditional hours
for dinner and supper.64 The layout of the food, on sideboards, remained similar
to the geography of presentation of the pre-Petrine period, but the ethos was
conspicuously different. Protocols for inviting guests were set out, although
guests could be invited spontaneously as well. Peters hostless Assemblies
were a distinct contrast to the prior norm, and helped establish new customs;
practices had been changing among the elite and at court into less formal and
strict occasions prior to the legal mandate set out by Peter. The Assemblies
also functioned to end the separation of the sexes reflected in terem, given that
mixed-gender sociable mingling was one of Peters intentions.
Peter did not, however, entirely dispense with traditional feasts and customs.
For example, at a traditional Easter dinner, elaborate candies were created. At
the end of these feasts, guests were given additional confectionary to bring
home, the amount determined by each persons rank and the degree of his favor
before the Tsar. This podacha or presentation marked ones status at court and
was a ritualized aspect of Russian hospitality.65 Darra Goldstein quotes the
Austrian diplomat Johann-Georg Korb with an example of how food service was
employed as a sign of favor by the ruler: A Czars entertainment was given to
the representatives of Poland and Denmark. The Pole got twenty-five dishes, the
Dane only twenty-two, and both had six gallons of drinkables of various kinds.
It seems the ministry wanted to cut short the controversy about prerogative
which the Dane had moved against the Pole. Korb noted as well how, as a sign
of favor, a representative of Brandenburg was given a greater quantity than both
the Polish and Danish representatives.66
F.W. von Bergholz, Dnevnik Kamer-iunkera F.V. Berkhgoltsa 17211725, trans. I.F.
Ammona (4 vols, Moscow, 19021903), vol. 2, p. 38 (entry for January 25, 1722).
63
Bergholz, Dnevnik, vol. 3, p. 10 (entry for January 17, 1723). On at least one
occasion the hosts placed the buffet in the same room as the dancers. Bergholz, Dnevnik, vol.
2, p. 95 (entry for March 6, 1722).
64
Bergholz mentions going to one of his first Assemblies after dinner. Bergholz,
Dnevnik, vol. 2, p. 69.
65
Smith and Christian, Bread and Salt, p. 117. D. Goldstein, Gastronomic Reforms
under Peter the Great, Jahrbcher fr Geschichte Osteuropas, 48/4 (2000): p. 484.
66
Goldstein, Gastronomic Reforms under Peter the Great, p. 484. Her source is J.-G.
Korb, Diary of an Austrian Secretary of Legation at the Court of Peter the Great, trans. and ed.
Count MacDonnell (London, 1863; reprint London, 1968), vol. 1, pp. 1712 and p. 240.
62
101
Court and Elite from 1725 to 1825

Practices of the Petrine and post-Petrine Russian nobility diversified. The open
table was an important new dining custom that was adopted. The open table
combined the centrality of a meal from pre-Petrine practice with an even less
formal sociability than that seen in Peters Assemblies. The openness of the
table implied an extension beyond family, and alsoto a degreebeyond
social rank. Alexander Menshikov, Peters favorite, may have initiated the open
table, referring to a meal where any guest who arrived would be fed.67 Belying its
egalitarian and informal nature, the open table could also be in effect a new
feast: a means of highlighting hierarchy and wealth by providing a means of
ostentatious display, and highlighting the ability of the host to dispense with
rank by inviting guests of many ranks, thus reinforcing the hosts own status.
Whatever its precise meaning, by the late eighteenth century and the reign of
Catherine the Great (r. 17621795), the open table was a constituent practice
among the elite; the later eighteenth century also saw a shift to a new model of
food service and display.
By the late eighteenth century, dinner among the elite in Russia had shifted
its service practice to a series of courses in the French service style. Joyce Toomre
describes such service as a static display of dishes arranged on the table in an
artful pattern. This new mode of serving became known as service la franaise.68
The French form of service dated in European history from the seventeenth
century, focused on three courses, and required a highly organized staff and
kitchen. Service was no longer strictly sequential. Whole roasts and other dishes
were placed on the table, and then cleared in their entirety, giving way to a new
course and a new arrangement. The first two courses consisted of a variety of
meat, fish, poultry, and vegetable dishes, and the third dessert and fruits. Diners
ate what was near enough to reach; the dishes were not designed or intended
for passing. The playwright Denis Fonvizin, in Paris in the late 1770s, thought
French service reflected an absence of spontaneity in hospitality: meals were
served without anyones bothering to circulate the plates, so the short-sighted
Fonvizin, who could not see what was on offer at the far side of the table, was
deprived of delicacies.69
Although both service la franaise and the open table became widespread
during her reign, Catherine herself did little to spur either trend; indeed,
Goldstein, Gastronomic Reforms under Peter the Great, p. 500. Her evidence that
Menshikov initiated the practice of the open table is indirect.
68
69
Kelly, Refining Russia, p. 144.
67
Royal Taste
102
Catherine was largely indifferent to the quality of food served her.70 Catherine
rarely ate supper.71 Her inclinations tended toward avoiding excess. Among the
Social rules of the Hermitage that Catherine posted was rule number nine:
Eat slowly and with appetite: drink with moderation, that each may walk
steadily as he goes out.72 Catherine, as Peter the Great had been, was happy
to avoid protocol when possible, but recognized the necessity of keeping up
appearances. Catherine wrote to her lover Grigory Potemkin in 1774, My dear,
if you desire to have some meat, then know that everything is now ready in the
baths. But by no means take food to your quarters from there, or then everyone
will know that food is being prepared in the baths.73 Catherines disinclination
to set standards for elite dining probably encouraged the elite to branch out on
their own. One such branching was the sociable practice of the open table.
N.N. Mordvinova, the daughter of Admiral N.S. Mordvinov, describes the
open table at her familys residence in Nikolaev, in south-western Ukraine, in
1794: At my fathers there was always an open table (otkrytye stol); in addition
to all our family, many officers, and soldiers under their chiefs, often came to
dine without a specific invitation, so that sometimes at table we had nearly 30 or
40 persons. The evenings were full of pleasant and animated socializing [].74
Mordvinovs open table combined moral, practical, and professional motivations.
Some officers were present for career-related socializing, and because of the
necessity of billeting and feeding troops (the soldiers under their chiefs).
Mordvinovs sensibilities inclined him to improve his officers morals. Soldiers,
officers, and women of the town and Mordvinov family mixed in an effort to
further the softening and amelioration of their manners.75 Mordvinova implies
her father maintained the open table because of its sociable and moral value; she
describes her father as solid and generous, neither a spendthrift nor a lover of
foppishness (shchegolyat)a term implying the mindless following of current
G. Munro, Food in Catherinian St. Petersburg, in M. Glants and J. Toomre (eds),

Food in Russian History and Culture, p. 33.
71
De Madariaga, Russia in the Age of Catherine the Great, p. 370.
72
The Marquis de Custine, Empire of the Czar: A Journey Through Eternal Russia
(New York, 1843; reprint New York, 1990), p. 316.
73
Letter, Catherine to Potemkin, February 27, 1774, in: Love and Conquest: Personal
Correspondence of Catherine the Great and Prince Gregory Potemkin, ed. and trans. D. Smith
(DeKalb, 2005), p. 19.
74
N.N. Mordvinova, Zapiski grafini N.N. Mordvinovoi, Russki arkhiv, 1 (1883):
p. 157.
75
D. Smith, Working the Rough Stone: Freemasonry and Society in Eighteenth-Century
Russia (DeKalb, 1999), p. 82.
70
103
trends. Such a defense of her father and his motivations was important, because
by the reign of Catherine the open table was already the subject of criticism.
Prince Mikhail Shcherbatov in his tract On the Corruption of Morals in Russia,
written in 17861787, vociferously criticized the institution and ubiquity of the
open table. Shcherbatov used the open table as a metric for the opulence and
magnificence of the lives of the Russian nobility, which Shcherbatov saw as
sliding further into degeneracy as luxury increased.76 The open table itself was
not inherently corruptingindeed, Shcherbatov connected its inception with
what he saw as positive national character traitsbut the unrestrained rule by a
(female) monarch had overwhelmed the inherently weak checks on restrained
behavior present in human nature. For Shcherbatov, criticism of what might
be called in modern terms conspicuous consumption fit into a framework
from European discourse on luxury and corruption. Shcherbatov placed the
consumption habits of the Russian elite into a dialogue with European habits, a
dialogue that would only increase in the nineteenth century, as the effort to define
Russianness in terms of food (as well as many other categories) increased.77
Some European observers agreed with Shcherbatovs equation of the open
table with opulence and excess rather than a prerogative of rank, or as a way
to get around it. Robert Lyall, visiting the estate of General Nashchokin in the
1820s, commented that: So strong is the passion for entertaining company
among the Russian nobles, that were it possible to find the means of supporting
it, and to obtain a succession of guests, every day would be spent as they spend
Sunday; and indeed some of the richer individuals keep open table throughout
the year.78 Nashchokins Sundays involved invitations sent to nobles within a
reasonable drive from his estate; after church services, the succession of meals
included lunch, dinner at 3:00, tea at 6:00, and supper at midnight.
By the period Lyall describes, the early part of the nineteenth century, elite
dining was undergoing another period of transition. By the reign of Alexander I
(18011825) service la russe became fashionable, supplanting French service.
In Russian service, servants carved meats and prepared individual servings
for each diner, and cleared plates in between courses, providing appropriate
tableware and cutlery for each course.79 Service was once again sequential. Service
la russe was thereafter introduced to Western Europe: In 1810 the Russian
76
M.M. Shcherbatov, On the Corruption of Morals in Russia, ed. and trans. A.
Lentin (London, 1969). This version contains the Russian text and Lentins translation.
Magnificence is Lentins translation of the term velikolepie.
77
See Smith, Recipes, particularly chapter 6.
78
P. Roosevelt, Life on the Russian Country Estate: A Social and Cultural History
(New Haven, 1995), p. 144.
79
Toomre, Classic Russian Cooking, pp. 2731.
Royal Taste
104
ambassador to France turned the cultural tables, as it were, by introducing

Parisians to dinners served in the Russian style.80 By the 1870s and the 1880s
Russian-style service had become the norm in Europe.81 The transition away
from French service occurred in part as a result of practicality (leaving courses
on the table during long Russian winters in ill-heated houses diminished the
quality of the food) coupled with the expansion of Russian nationalism and
patriotism during the wars against Napoleon (fought intermittently and in
varying intensity from 1798 to 1807, and culminating in Napoleons 1812
invasion of Russia).82 Joyce Toomres study of late nineteenth-century menus
indicates that meals in the early nineteenth century became more formal than
they had been during the Catherinian open table period, at least as menus are
reflected in the proscriptive literature.83 Elena Molokhovets, author of A Gift to
Young Housewives, the bestselling and most often reprinted Russian cookbook
after its first edition in 1861,84 provided a series of menus, ranging from large
formal occasions and specific Orthodox religious holidays (when, as we have
seen, certain foods were proscribed) to daily menus:
June 15: Fish pie, Bouillon with crayfish dumplings; Stewed pike; Green peas
garnished with crayfish tails; Roast veal or chicken; and Cold berry soup
December 1: Bouillon with root vegetables, cabbage, and potatoes; A whole
stuffed boiled fish chilled in aspic; Hazel grouse souffl; Roast or fried hare with
marinated beets; various fruits and berries in gelatin85
The journals of Martha and Catherine Wilmot provide a wealth of commentary

on the dining habits of the Russian elite soon after the turn of the nineteenth
century. The two Irish sisters lived with Catherine Dashkova, once an
intimate of Empress Catherine (and a participant in the coup bringing her
to power), head of the Russian Academy of Sciences, but by the turn of the
century a vigorous but somewhat embittered and old-fashioned member of
Moscow society, residing mainly at her estate of Troitskoe on the Oka river
Ibid., p. 29.
Ibid., p. 30.
82
On Russian patriotic thought during the Napoleonic Wars, see Martin, Reformers,
80
81
Romantics, Reactionaries.
83
Toomre, Classic Russian Cooking, p. 30. Toomre does not discuss the open table as
a dining practice or sociable habit.
84
Ibid., p. 9. On cookbooks and the image of the Russian housewife, see Smith,
Recipes, chapter 6.
85
105
70 miles south of Moscow. Dashkova had visited Ireland some years earlier
and made connections to the sisters relatives, earning the Wilmot sisters an
invitation to Russia. Prior to her departure for Russia, Martha dined with
Count Simon Vorontsov in London on May 31, 1803. She describes a typical
dinner of multiple courses with many food items, in which the Countess
told me to help myself to wine if I liked it, as nobody was asked to hobnob.86
This comment indicates that the Vorontsovs in London adhered to service
la russe, and that they maintained as well an informal table, characteristic of
the ethos of the open table, with less formal sociable practices. Once with
Dashkova, the Wilmots found that dinner at Troitskoe was commonly at two;
the usual schedule was coffee at nine oclock, dinner at two or three, tea at six
and supper at half past nine or ten.87 Men and women rose from the table at
the same time,88 a custom Martha came to dislike: I do not like the practice
they have here of dining at three oclock and separating before tea, so that by
half after five or six, unless you are engagd to some party, you return home
gaping for your amusement your Scandal and your teabut the practice is
universal [].89 During her time in Russia, Martha came to find the series
of courses served la russe at dinner and supper exhausting;90 she described
the height of the winter season social whirl as Balls without end; Dinners
that end after four hours uninterrupted Cramming of every delicacy that
Nature and Art can procure.91 The jaundiced, if amusing, observations of the
Wilmot sisters conformed with what many other European visitors to Russia
perceivedthat the food consumed and provided by the elite met Western
European standards, even if the elite themselves did not. As Alison Smith
has demonstrated, the elite, as well as many less elevated Russian citizens,
were in the early nineteenth century investigating their everyday lives with
new interest and with new perspectives [] they sought to create their own
interpretation of everyday life, an interpretation that proved Russias cultural
worth.92
M. Wilmot and C. Wilmot, The Russian Journals of Martha and Catherine Wilmot,
18031808, ed. the Marchioness of Londonderry and H. Montgomery Hyde (London,
1934; reprint New York, 1971), p. 13.
87
Roosevelt, Life on the Russian Country Estate, p. 116; Wilmot and Wilmot, The
Russian Journals, pp. 48 and 60.
88
See Wilmot and Wilmot, The Russian Journals, pp. 1314, 37 and 65 for
examples.
89
Ibid., p. 29 (letter of July 31, 1803); grammar and ellipsis in original.
90
See Ibid., pp. 31, 81 and 210 for examples.
91
Ibid., p. 75.
92
Smith, Recipes, p. 73.
86
Royal Taste
106
The Era of Emperor Nicholas I

The Emperor himself participated in these interpretive moves. Emperor Nicholas
I (r. 18251855) asserted his vision of his own power and authority through
dining and sociable practices. Tsar Nicholas maintained a scenario of power
encompassing both domesticity and the exercise of imperial office as a perennial
performance; the emperor was always and ever on display. Wortman describes
how on Easter Sunday [and] personal and family celebrations, birthdays, name
days, weddings [and] coming of age ceremonies [] the bringing of felicitations
to the emperor and empress [] dramatized the family relationship that was
supposed to govern official relationships throughout the Russian state.93 The
polite and decorous comportment of officials at these functions was to mirror
the values Nicholas wished to instill in the peoples he ruled, and in the behavior
that Nicholas enacted for his population. This behavior stretched into banquets
and family dinners.
The Marquis de Custine, generally a bilious and negative observer of things
Russian, summarized the ubiquity of Nicholass conception rather well:
The present emperor never lays aside the air of supreme majesty except in his family
intercourse. It is there only that he recollects that the natural man has pleasures
independent of the duties of state; at least, I hope that it is this disinterested
sentiment which attaches him to his domestic circle. His private virtues no doubt
aid him in his public capacity, by securing for him the esteem of the world; but I
believe he would practice them independently of this calculation.94
Custine describes a fte in mid-July 1839 following the marriage of Grand

Duchess Marie [ July 2, 1839] with Maximilian Beauharnais, Duke de
Leuchtenberg, that can serve as a model of Nicholass own behavior and the
integration of dining into his scenario. Following the wedding, guests attended
a ball until called for supper. Custine describes the geography of the dinner at
the Winter Palace thus: There was but one table, laid with one thousand covers,
for the corps diplomatique, the foreigners, and all the attendants at court; but at
the entrance of the hall, on the right hand side, was a little round table laid for
eight.95 A Swiss guardsman proceeds to sit at the little table; Custine cannot
say if this faux pas proceeds from natural assurance, republican ease, or pure
simplicity of heart. Custine is then impressed when the emperor simply adds
Wortman, Scenarios of Power, vol. 1, p. 326.
The Marquis de Custine, Empire of the Czar, p. 157.
95
Ibid., p. 166.
93
94
107
this unexpected ninth guest to his table without any apparent sign of distress or
annoyance. Rather than assert hierarchy or the sanctity of those set aside by the
will of the emperor, Nicholas chooses to incorporate the unexpected guest and
thus indicate his own polish and self-possession. Custine continues to describe
how the emperor and his son rise and greet other guests while they sat and ate;96
presumably, Nicholas and his sons eat rapidly or in less quantity than the other
guests. This scene then fits neatly with Nicholass scenario. Nicholas is separate
and set apart from the other guests, and yet intimate at his own table; always
under observation, he fulfills his role as host by greeting the guests. Nicholass
potential pleasure at the meal is subordinate to his sense of duty.
Nicholas provided directives along these lines to his son Alexander
Nicholaevich (the future Alexander II, r. 18551881) in regard to the heirs
1837 tour of Russia: Nicholas prescribed the sequence of events: religious
services; dinners, mentioning which officials were to be invited; receptions of
the nobility, officials, and troops. He was to dance the polonaise with a few of
the distinguished ladies of the province [] and was to leave no later than one
or two in the morning, without waiting for a customary supper.97 Nicholas
told Alexander that his behavior must always be correct, for he was perhaps
for the first time, placed before the court of your future subjects, in a test of
your intellectual capacities. Nicholass description of his sons meetings as
the court of your future subjects indicates to us the extent to which Nicholas
conflated his activities at court with his presentation of himself to his nation, an
appeal to the roar of popular approval in support of the stately silence of the
Petersburg court.98 All of Russia was a court in front of which the tsar must
perform appropriately. In turn, the Russian nation was to be fed at the banquet
of imperial greatness, but to remain passive guests, ever conscious of the tsar set
apart from them, and grateful for his largesse.
The passive, observational role of the public comes through even more
clearly in accounts of the family teas the Romanovs carried out in public view,
notwithstanding the description by A.I. Iakovleva, a noble lady-in-waiting, that
the imperial family made the public the participant in its joys and pleasures.99
Ibid., p. 168.
Wortman, Scenarios of Power, vol. 1, p. 363, and see also p. 328. Custine comments
96
97
on the mechanical appearance of the polonaise danced in St. Petersburg, pp. 1623. This is a
typical example of the way foreign observers criticized Russians: that Russian elites behaved
superficially like their Western European counterparts, but without the proper depth of
feeling, as a form of mimicry rather than genuine cultivation.
98
Wortman, Scenarios of Power, vol. 1, p. 366.
99
A.I. Iakovleva, Vospominaniia byvshei kamer-iungfery imperatritsy Marii
Aleksandrovnya, Istoricheskii Vestnik, 31 (1888): p. 173.
108
Royal Taste
The participation of the public consisted, in this instance, of standing and

watching: Shortly after the July 1 celebration [of the birthday of the Empress],
the imperial family customarily presented an open-air spectacle of family life in
front of the Cottage [at the imperial estate of Peterhof on an island northwest
of St Petersburg], they took tea in full view of the public, including peasants
chosen by their landlords [].100 The tea service carried Nicholass scenario to
its logical extent. His people, the public of Russia, were to be a passive audience,
one that was to observe the rituals and issue acclaim, but not to be active, and no
longer to sit with the tsar at his imperial meal. Nicholas intended his court to be
the epitome of the nation,101 but he expected that epitome to simply reflect his
ideals. (Prince Joseph Lubomirski observed, A kind of automatic submission
to these demands of etiquette was the best way to please the tsar.102) Anna
Tyutcheva, lady-in-waiting and then governess at the courts of Nicholas I and
his successor Alexander II, approved of the rigid etiquette Nicholas maintained
at court: etiquette is not only a barrier dividing the sovereign from his subjects
but also a defense of those subjects from the caprice of the sovereign. Etiquette
creates an atmosphere of general respect, in which each person purchases dignity
at the cost of freedom and comfort.103 Formal separation of sovereign from
people embodied Nicholass scenario, of which Tyutcheva approved.
Hers was a minority opinion. Nicholass promotion of a familial scenario,
combined with his strict devotion to duty and punctilious but mechanistic
observance of court duties and etiquette, did not engage the imperial elite.
Elite culture by the middle of the nineteenth century encouraged diverse trends
within the rubric of loyalty to and promotion of state interests, ranging from
promoting agriculture on their estates, a trend coexisting with the promotion
of the gastronome, the gourmet man, as a model for elite consumption.104 The
family estate became the emotional locus of noble life and culture for many
of the elite.105 Members of the elite felt, as Nicholas Karamzin did in the late
eighteenth century, that When the head and heart are occupied at home in a
pleasant manner; when there is a book in hand, a sweet wife nearby, beautiful
100
Wortman, Scenarios of Power, vol. 1, p. 331; see also the description of a similar
display on p. 342.
101
Wortman, Scenarios of Power (2006 edn), chapter 8.
102
Ibid., p. 153.
103
Diary entry of January 10, 1854, quoted in Kelly, Refining Russia, p. 148.
104
Smith, Recipes, pp. 1223.
105
For estate life and its development, see Roosevelt. For an excellent example of one
noble familys emotional life and its connection to their estate, see J. Randolph, The House in
the Garden: The Bakunin Family and the Romance of Russian Idealism (Ithaca, 2007).
109
children around, would one wish to go to a ball, or to a large dinner?106 While

Nicholas did not sunder the bonds between elite and autocrat, the over-assertion
of his authority contributed to dissatisfaction among the elite, and thereby
helped prepare the elite to support the changes brought by the great reforms of
the 1850s and 1860s, reforms that would ultimately undermine the position of
the elite.107
Conclusion
Patterns of food service at court and among the imperial Russian elite diversified
along with the social practices of the empire and elite culture. Until the reign of
Nicholas I, changing practices in food service reflected collaborative conceptions
of the imperial Russian elite in its relations with the autocrat. In the medieval
and early modern periods, food service at court followed a host-controlled feast
model, in which the ruler/host served as the central figure of the meal, and the
rules and mores for dining were those set out by the Russian Orthodox Church.
In the social hierarchy organized around the principles of medieval Orthodoxy,
the ruler was the conceptual center of the power structure, as well as the focal
point of food service. Elite culture as reflected in the Domostroi followed the
same pattern. Court and elite dining culture were in synch. In the early eighteenth
century, Peter the Great altered court service, creating assemblies deliberately
void of the formality and rules for dining proscribed by Russian Orthodoxy and
Muscovite tradition. Elite culture followed suit, and by the reign of Catherine
the Great in the second half of the eighteenth century, elite dining followed
Western European patterns, and had also crafted the sociable practice of the
open table. Tsar Peters actions were decisive in breaking the old mold; his
social reforms achieved success because the elite supported the changes. Elite
dining practices continued to develop, and, by the beginning of the nineteenth
century, a distinct Russian style of table service had arisen, one subsequently
exported to Western Europe.
Food service at court and among the elite reflects the essence of the relationship
between the autocrat and the imperial elite: mutual dependence structured by
the emperors need to assert his or her dominance, a dominance that nonetheless
could not bypass or disinvite the elite. Each was eager to assert their worthiness
to the other across the banquet hall or dining table. Nonetheless, by the middle
106
p. 429.
N. Karamzin, Letters of a Russian Traveller, trans. A. Kahn (Oxford, 2003),
S. Becker, Nobility and Privilege in Late Imperial Russia (DeKalb, 1985), traces the
impact of the Great Reforms on the nobility.
107
110
Royal Taste
of the nineteenth century, emperor and elite had arrived at a scenario they could
no longer agree upon as comfortably as they once had; imperial meals observed
were a poor substitute for meals shared.
Chapter 5
Pilaf and Bouches: The Modernization of

Official Banquets at the Ottoman Palace in
the Nineteenth Century
zge Samanc
[] the order was to feed, wash and clothe the infidels, and then admit them to
his presence [Sultan Selim III]. In a short time some little stools were arranged in
different parts of the divan, on the top of which were placed large trays of gold and
silver, about four feet diameter, and of a circular form, from which we were to be fed
at the expense of the Turks. A most sumptuous entertainment was served up; first, a
kind of blancmanger, next, different kinds of roasted and baked meats; sweetmeats
followed, and to conclude, a delicious cooling sherbet was handed round in gold and
silver basons.
We experienced one grievous want at this feast, for we were not furnished either with
knife or fork, and were obliged to tear in pieces whatever was set before us; for the
articles of a liquid kind, spoons of tortoise-shell, studded with gold, were handed to
us.
Macgills narration depicting the feast given to the British envoy, Lord Elgin, at
Topkap Palace during the reign of the Ottoman Sultan Selim III (17891807),
represents one example among numerous travelers accounts that relate to the
same subject. Feasting was a key element of Ottoman palace ceremonies for
receiving foreign envoys. Travelers accounts from the fifteenth to the nineteenth
centuries depicting the reception of foreign envoys in the Ottoman palace
demonstrate that offering food to those who visited the sultan at his palace was
a constant and permanent part of the court ceremonies.
T. Macgill, Travels in Turkey, Italy, and Russia, in R. Schiffer (ed.), Turkey
Romanticized: Images of the Turks in Early 19th Century English Travel Literature with an
Anthology of Texts (Bochum, 1982), p. 146.

Travelers accounts are sources of information that should be interpreted with
caution; however, they still constitute a valuable source for gathering historical data. Feasting
during the reception of the envoys and foreign high dignitaries in the Ottoman palace is a
theme frequently mentioned in the detailed descriptions within these accounts. For example
112
Royal Taste
Food continued to be an important part of ceremonies at the Ottoman

palace with regard to receiving foreign guests from the nineteenth century
until the last days of the empire in the 1920s. Interestingly, from the end of the
reign of the Sultan Mahmut II (18081839), a number of changes inspired
by European culture can be seen during official banquets prepared for foreign
guests. According to travelers accounts and information gathered from the
kitchen account registers of the palace of the nineteenth century, banquets for
European high dignitaries were prepared in a European style, with tables, chairs,
knives, and forks being used. Moreover, from the 1850s, a new kind of cuisine,
termed alafranga (European style), was prepared for foreign guests during
official banquets. The banquet menus show the use of French gastronomical
language and preparation. These menus were written in both French and Turkish.
Most of the dishes listed were French cuisine. How were these changes realized?
What were the reasons for this transformation? Why did the Ottoman court
prefer to use a different, modern ceremonial language for food when receiving
foreign guests from the mid-nineteenth century? This chapter attempts to reveal
these changes and answer these questions.
Hosting an Ottoman Style Banquet
Engravings depicting the reception of envoys in the Ottoman court show
the meals given in the Council Hall of Topkap Palace. According to Hakan
Karateke, who studied Ottoman palace ceremonies during the last century of
the empire prior to the nineteenth century, when a foreign ambassador visited
the imperial palace to pay his regards to the sultan, a ceremonial reception and
a special feast were organized in his honor in the second courtyard of Topkap
Palace. Foreign guests were generally invited to the palace on the day that
salaries were paid to the janissaries. During these receptions banquets were
always arranged for the ambassadors; they were served with coffee, a water
pipe for smoking tobacco, and rosewater. According to Glru Necipolu,
see Bertrandon de la Brocquire, (1432), as cited in G. Necipolu, Architecture, Ceremonial,
and Power: The Topkap Palace in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries (New York, 1991)
p. 17. Guillaume Postel (1552), as cited in M. And, Istanbul in the 16th Century: The City, the
Palace, Daily Life (Istanbul, 1994), p. 143.

For example the engraving of a banquet in honor of a European ambassador at the
public Council Hall in the eighteenth century. M.DOhsson, Tableau Gnral de lEmpire
Ottoman (Paris, 1761), vol. 2.

H. Karateke, Padiahm ok Yaa Osmanl Devletinin Son Yzylnda Merasimler
(stanbul, 2000), p. 123.
Pilaf and Bouches
113
who studied in detail the language of ceremonies in the Topkap Palace in

the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, during the reception of ambassadors the
presence of every courtier, wearing his best uniform and lining up in order of
rank at his assigned place, was required. The ambassador, passing from the
second gate with his retinue, would come to the justice court and be faced
with a theatrical scene. He would, for example, pass by lions and leopards
tied on chains and horses saddled with golden ornaments. When the visiting
dignitary reached the first salutation stone, the janissaries under the galleries
would eat their soup. After witnessing this ceremonial scene displaying the
wealth and the power of the Ottoman palace, the ambassador would then
enter the imperial Council Hall:
There he was granted an audience with the grand vizier, after which food was
served from the imperial kitchens as a gesture of the Sultans hospitality. The
degree of lavishness of the banquet that followed was a reflection of the relative
status of the persons being honored. Lesser ambassadors were not deemed worthy
of eating at the same table with viziers and received their food outside. Finally the
ambassador was taken to the Sultan inside the third court.
As mentioned by Necipolu, the act of giving food to the ambassador showed

the hospitality, the generosity, and the power of the sultan. The Ottoman court
treated these ceremonies as a tool to underline the sovereigns superiority. Food,
thus, has a symbolic value in the Ottoman court ceremonies, as was the case in
other courts.
During the receptions for envoys, food was served on common plates on
silver or copper trays at low tables (Figure 5.1). Guests would sit on stools or on
Necipolu, Architecture, Ceremonial, and Power, p. 61
Ibid., pp. 6061.

Ibid., p. 72. The banquets organized for foreign visitors at the Ottoman palace, as well
as other banquets given for palace officials, the clergy, and commoners on the occasions of
weddings and circumcision celebrations of the royal elite, reflect the generosity of the sultan
and the same time embody symbolic meanings. For further references see A. nsal, The
Symbolism of Food: Tokens of Political Power and Status, Legitimization and Obedience
and Challenging Authority, in A. Bilgin and . Samanc (eds), Turkish Cuisine (Ankara,
2008), pp. 17995.

As Dietler mentions, these banquets symbolically reiterate and legitimize
institutionalized relations of unequal social power. M. Dietler, Feasts and Commensal
Politics in the Political Economy: Food, Power and Status in Prehistoric Europe, in
P. Wiessner and W. Schiefenhvel (eds), Food and the Status Quest: An Interdisciplinary
Perspective (Providence and Oxford, 1998), p. 97.
Royal Taste
114
Figure 5.1 A banquet given for a European envoy at the Topkap Palace in the
eighteenth century
(Source: M. dOhsson, Tableau Gnral de lEmpire Ottoman; authors collection).
sofas. Individual knives and forks were absent during these feasts. This service
style was common throughout Ottoman culture, both in the palace and among
common people. Three fingers of the right hand, bread, and spoons were the
Z. Orgun, Osmanl Saraynda Yemek Yeme Adab, in Trk Mutfa Sempozyumu
Bildirileri 31 Ekim-1 Kasm 1981 (Ankara, 1982), pp. 1445.
Pilaf and Bouches
115
only instruments used during the meals. Only soup, pilaf, and fruit compotes
(hoaf) were eaten with a spoon.10 According to some foreign visitors, the meat
was prepared in small pieces and was stewed until it was very tender so there
was no need to use a knife. People broke it and ate it with their fingers.11 Due to
the vagueness of description in travelers accounts, it is difficult to distinguish
the types of dishes served during the reception of the envoys; however, it is
certain that the cuisine prepared for the guests was in the local Ottoman style.
Travelers accounts frequently mention an unfamiliarity with the food served to
them. According to an English official who visited Istanbul in 1610, a banquet
was prepared for them in the imperial council room. The menu was the same as
that during the Ottoman councils meeting days, but the dishes were prepared
with great care and in large quantities. The dishes were served on silver trays
at the ambassadors table.12 According to Guillaume Postel, another foreign
official who visited the Ottoman palace in the sixteenth century, a banquet was
given to the ambassadors on the eve of their departure. Once they had all taken
their places in a circle on a splendid carpet, a long linen towel was placed over
their knees and water was brought to wash their hands. Next, a great silver tray
bearing six porcelain dishes filled with different sorts of foodsuch as rice with
mutton, capons, plovers, and other kinds of fowlwas brought. The whole meal
was served as a single course. They drank sweetened, flavored water containing
fine gold dust with their meal. A different banquet was served to the members
of the ambassadors retinue. This took place in an arcade around one of the
courtyards of the place. A long carpet was unrolled, long enough to seat all those
invited, and on this was placed a great number of porcelain plates containing
rice with morsels of meat or chicken, and meat rissoles. A large crowd of soldiers
and other palace attendants assembled to watch them, standing motionless for
three or four hours.13
A seventeenth-century depiction comes from the banquets served to an
English official before the sultan received him. The meal was served on small
wooden trays covered with leather; the one that was reserved for the grand
vizier and the English ambassador, however, was covered with tissue. Bread and
wooden spoons were placed on the tables. For the starters some olives, parsley,
dill, and pickles in small bowls were served. The menu consisted of roast chicken
with mushrooms, roast meat (lamb) flavored with pepper, vine leaves stuffed
10
. Samanc, Continuity and Change in the Culinary Culture of the Ottoman Palace
in the Nineteenth Century (Istanbul, MA thesis in History, Boazii University, 1998),
pp. 2637.
11
And, Istanbul in the 16th Century, p. 180.
12
R. Withers, Byk Efendinin Saray, trans. C. Kayra (Istanbul, 1996), p. 27.
13
And, Istanbul in the 16th Century, p. 143.
Royal Taste
116
with meat, rice soup, pilaf with chicken, pilaf with pine nuts, grape juice, a savory
pastry dish, and sweetmeat made with milk and honey. For drinks, sherbet and
sweet lemon juice were served.14
The type and the variety of the food served to the foreign guests in the
Ottoman palace can be understood more clearly through the analysis of the
expenditure records of the imperial kitchens (matbah- amire defterleri). These
accounts list in general terms the kind and the amount of ingredients supplied to
the imperial kitchens for a definite period of time or for a special occasion. The
expenses for the preparation of the banquets served to the ambassadors are also
in these records. These records rarely provide information about the types of
dishes prepared with the purchased ingredients, but lists of dishes served during
some official banquets arranged in the Ottoman palace are available from a
detailed examination of the imperial kitchen registers from the mid-seventeenth
century. Two of the banquets mentioned in these records were prepared for
Transylvanian envoys in the Council Hall of the palace in 1649. The list of the
dishes that were served during these banquets demonstrates that the food was
in the local style. The two banquets comprised 19 and 18 courses. According to
these lists pilaf (dane), chicken soup (urba- makiyan), savoury pastry (brek),
baklava, stewed mutton, poultry or fowl (yahni), different kinds of roasted meat
(kebab), a kind of ravioli (mant), rice pudding with safran (zerde), and milk
pudding (muhallebi) were typical dishes.15 The same documents indicate that
these kinds of dishes were also ordinarily served in the Ottoman palace during
the councils meetings.16
The Acquaintance of the Ottoman Palace with European Table Manners
The nineteenth century makes up a reforming and transforming period in
the history of the Ottoman Empire. Reforms that were supported by the
Ottoman sultans from the end of the eighteenth century started with the
military domain, and during the nineteenth century also included economic,
John Covel (1680), as cited in . Nutku, Tarihimizden Kltr Manzaralari
(Istanbul, 1995), p. 24.
15
H. Reindl-Kiel, The Chickens of Paradise: Official Meals in the Mid-Seventeenth
Century Ottoman Palace, in S. Faroqhi and C. Neumann (eds), The Illuminated Table: The
Prosperous House Food and Shelter in Ottoman Material Culture (Wrzburg, 2003), pp. 6088.
16
Ibid. These dishes also exist in Ottoman cookbooks from the eighteenth and
nineteenth centuries. See for example N. Seferciolu, Trk Yemekleri (XVIII. Yzyla Ait bir
Yemek Risalesi) (Ankara, 1985); M. Kamil, Melcet Tabbahin (Istanbul, 1844); T. Efendi,
Mecmua-i Etime-i Osmaniye: A Manual of Turkish Cookery (London, 1864).
14
Pilaf and Bouches
117
political, institutional, as well as educational domains.17 This process included

the recentralization and westernization of government structures. European
economic and political interests also supported the strengthening of the
Ottoman central state. The reform program of centralization and westernization
included the secularization of Ottoman life and touched upon every area of
political, social, cultural, and economic life. The reform program also promoted
the adaptation of other aspects of European culture by the Ottoman sultan and
bureaucrats. The changes ranged from the adoption of Western theatre plays
and music, to full equality of Muslims and non-Muslims.18 These attempts at
modernization by the Ottoman state were the main motivators for the changes
realized in the food culture of the Ottoman elite during the nineteenth century,
and are reflected in the banquets prepared for foreign high dignitaries.
The reformation activities in the Ottoman state realized under the reign of
Sultan Mahmut II concerned mainly military and administrative areas. However,
during his reign, some innovations inspired by Europe were also introduced into
Ottoman elite culture. From 1815, the sultan lived in a new palace (Beikta),
which reflected European tastes, instead of the palace that had accommodated
Ottoman sultans since the fifteenth century (Topkap). Mahmut IIs palace
not only looked European from the outside, it was also furnished with Sevres
china, French tables, chairs, and clocks along with divans and cushions. The
first official Ottoman march was also composed during this time, by a European
composer, Giuseppe Donizetti, in 1828.19 The sultan also introduced novelties
in dress regulations for state officials (except for the clerics) in 1829, according
to which it was obligatory to wear a kind of old-fashioned frock-coat and a fez
instead of the turban. By decree, he made it obligatory to display his portrait in
every government agency. Like European monarchs, he started to celebrate his
birthday. Unlike his predecessors, he enjoyed making long journeys across the
country. He gave permission to the clerics and his ministers to sit in his presence,
and he even participated in the feasts and banquets given by foreign embassies.
Mahmut II also welcomed new culinary habits inspired by European culture into
his private life. He chose to eat his meals in European style, sitting at a dining
The modernization attempts of the Ottoman state realized during the nineteenth
century are some of the most frequently researched topics in Ottoman historiography. Some
of the works we can cite are: N. Berkes, The Development of Secularism in Turkey (Montreal,
1964); R.F. Davison, Reform in the Ottoman Empire, 18561876 (Princeton, 1976); E.Z.
Karal, Osmanl Tarihi. Nizam- Cedit ve Tanzimat Devirleri, 17891856 (Ankara, 1970).
18
D. Quataert, The Age of Reforms, 18121914, in H. Inalck (ed.), An Economic
and Social History of the Ottoman Empire 13001914 (Cambridge, 1994), pp. 759934.
19
P. Mansel, Constantinople City of the Worlds Desire, 14531924 (London, 1997).
pp. 2467.
17
118
Royal Taste
table on a chair. He was the first Ottoman sultan to adopt the habit of using
a knife and fork during the meal. The golden cutlery and tableware that were
used during his reign are on exhibition today at the depository museum of the
Dolmabahe Palace. According to an Irish observer, Robert Walsh, who resided
in Istanbul as an official of the British embassy for 12 years, Mahmut II even
preferred to drink wine and champagne during his meals. Walsh mentioned the
following in his account of the eating habits of the sultan:
He takes two meals a day; one at eleven, in the morning, and the other at sunset.
He has exchanged the Turkish stool and tray for a chair and table, which is laid
out exactly in European fashion. The table is furnished with a cloth, and knives
and forks, which are English; to these are added golden spoons, and a decanter of
wine. The wine is usually champagne, which he is fond of, and is greatly amused
when the cork explodes and the wine flies up to the ceiling. He always sits alone
at his meals. The dishes are brought in one at a time, in succession, to the number
of fifty or sixty, all covered and sealed. He breaks the seal himself, and tastes the
dish; if he does not like it, he sends it away.20
Th European way of eating with knives and forks at the table instead of using a
low tray and common plates, introduced by Mahmut II, was not easily adopted
by his ministers, as observed and noted in a memoir of an English official, Sir
Adolphus Slade, who visited Istanbul in 1835. On January 25, 1835 a grand ball
in the Palace of England was organized in order to celebrate the newly found
peace, and the Ottoman pashas were asked to meet the European officials. Slades
humorous account of the evening dinner included:
Supper was announced. Each noble Osmanley then took a lady under his arm,
and led her down on the main deck, where it was served in perfect style, with
a liberality which did honor to the representative of a great nation. The coup
doeil was good: knives and cutlasses, forks and tomahawks, spoons and sponges,
glasses and rammers, bottles and guns, napkins and aprons, flags and flounces,
sparkling eyes and sparkling liquors, were all together in a narrow space, relieving,
not perplexing. Champagne flowed like fountain, other liquids like rivers. The
Osmanleys laid aside their gravity, and dispensed for that night with the orthodox
use of their fingers, though we feared that sundry manslaughter would have taken
place in consequence of their awkwardness with those accursed contrivances,
knives and forks. There was never a more jovial or a more noisy banquet. They
20
R. Walsh (1836), as cited in . Samanc, Culinary Consumption Patterns of the
Ottoman Elite During the First Half of the Nineteenth Century, in Faroqhi and Neumann
(eds), The Illuminated Table, pp. 16184.
Pilaf and Bouches
119
pledged the sovereigns of Europe, they pledged the ambassadresses, and they
pledged each other in repeated bumpers, and talked much nonsense.21
Some of the elites of the sultans entourage, however, did adopt the new table
manners introduced by the sultan. An English officials daughter, Miss Julia
Pardoe, who resided in Istanbul for nine months in 1835, depicted a very detailed
picture of the Ottoman way of life and customs in her account. She mentions
Ottoman and European table etiquette at the same time as she describes dinners
and banquets she participated in. She recorded that during a dinner given by an
Ottoman pasha, the service style was European in manner and the European
tableware very elegant:
On the present occasion, I rather regretted that the profuse and even sumptuous
dinner that was served up to us was, from an excess of courtesy on the part of our
entertainers, perfectly European in its arrangement, being accompanied by silver
forks, knives and chairs. Wine was handed to us on a beautifully chosen golden
salvor [sic] and the glasses from which we drank it were of finely cut crystal.22
Miss Pardoe depicts another dinner she attended at the harem of an Ottoman
house. This dinner, offered during the month of Ramadan, was traditionally
prepared:
The room was a perfect square, totally unfurnished, save that in the centre of
the floor was spread a carpet, on which stood a wooden frame, about two feet in
height, supporting an immense round plated tray, with the edge slightly raised.
In the centre of the tray placed a capacious white basin filled with a kind of cold
bread soup, and around it were ranged a circle of small porcelain saucers, filled
with sliced cheese, anchovies, caviar, and sweetmeats of every description; among
these were scattered spoons of box-wood, and goblets of pink and white sherbets,
whose rose scented contents perfumed the apartment [] As soon as the serious
business of the repast really commenced [] The meat and poultry were eaten
with fingers. Nineteen dishes, of fish, flesh, fowl, pastry and creams, succeeding
each other in the most heterogeneous mannerthe salt following the sweet, and
the stew preceding the custardwere terminated by a pyramid of pilaf.23
A. Slade, Records of Travels in Turkey, Greece (London, 1854), pp. 2489.

J. Pardoe, The City of the Sultan and Domestic Manners of the Turks (London, 1838),
21
22
vol.1, pp. 2223.

23
Ibid., pp. 2022.
120
Royal Taste
By the end of the reign of Sultan Mahmut II it had become more common for
European service style and table manners to be used during banquets arranged
by the Ottoman court for foreign envoys. For example, during the imperial
festival organized for Princess Salihas wedding in 1834, the banquet organized
for foreign envoys was different from the other banquets offered to court
officials and commoners. Instead of low trays, tables and chairs were supplied
for this banquet. The dishes were offered on a long table that was prepared in
the European style with knives, forks, and glasses. Small notes with the names of
the guests were put on the table. The guests were seated according to European
etiquette and their rank. During the meal, wine was offered and music was
played.24 At another imperial festival, also arranged during Mahmut IIs reign,
the feasts prepared for the foreign guests were also organized in the European
manner. Miss Julia Pardoe depicted the continuous banquets given at Princess
Mihrimahs wedding. She reported that each day was dedicated to a banquet
offered for a special group such as the clergy and palace officials, the pashas. On
the sixth day a banquet was offered to foreign ambassadors: this banquet, unlike
the others, was arranged in the European style.25 The same banquet is depicted in
another travelers account in more detail. The banquet offered to the foreigners
during the wedding celebration of the princess, was excellent and majestic. A
table was prepared with silver cutlery and porcelain tableware for 100 people.
Chandeliers decorated the dining table.26 The idea of presenting banquets in the
European style was to show hospitality and to impress the foreigners through
the medium of Western customs and practices. It was a marked change when
compared to earlier feasts organized in the Ottoman court for foreign envoys,
which were in the Ottoman manner, on low tables without knives and forks.
The Emergence of a Cuisine in the European Style: Alafranga
The modernization process concerning the administrative, military, and
educational sectors in the Ottoman Empire promoted by the Ottoman sultan and
his entourage accelerated from 1839 and became known as the Reorganization
(Tanzimat) Era. During the reign of Sultan Abdlmecit (1839 and 1861),
Western-style banquets continued during receptions organized for foreign
guests in the Ottoman court. During the reign of Abdlmecit, members of
24
H. Aynur, Saliha Sultanin Dn Treni ve enlikler, Tarih ve Toplum. no. 1
(Istanbul, 1989), pp. 3039.
25
Pardoe, The City of the Sultan, pp. 13744.
26
H. von Moltke, Moltkenin Trkiye Mektuplar, trans. H. rs (Istanbul, 1995),
p. 65.
Pilaf and Bouches
121
European royal families visited the Ottoman palace more frequently. According
to Karateke, the Ottoman state, which was not highly experienced in the
preparation of ceremonial procedures for welcoming the royal elite, decided to
adopt the ceremonial customs practiced in Europe for these occasions.27 Giving
banquets in the honor of foreign dignitaries was a part of European protocol, just
as giving feasts during the reception of envoys was a tradition in the Ottoman
state. Since the late 1830s, the Ottoman state had adopted the European style
for banquets. This practice started at the end of the reign of Sultan Mahmut and
continued during the reign of Sultan Abdlmecit. A more important change
concerning the feasts given to foreign dignitaries was also discernable in this
period. During Sultan Abdlmecits reign these banquets also started to reflect
a European taste, in contrast to the typical meals served to the residents of the
Ottoman palace. Dishes served during these official banquets included French
cuisine. For example, during the visit of a Russian prince to Istanbul in 1845, a
banquet was organized at Beylerbeyi Palace. Ambassadors who resided in the
capital were invited to the banquet with invitations written in two languages,
French and Turkish. Ottoman pashas were also present at the reception. The
banquet was prepared in the European style. The table was laid with gold and
silver tableware. The style of food served to the guests was predominantly French,
although some local dishes such as pilaf were also served. Wine was served.28 On
July 22, 1856, a banquet for 130 guests at Dolmabahe Palace was arranged by
the Ottomans with the purpose of celebrating both the victory over Russia and
the completion of the new palace, which had been constructed on the orders
of the sultan. It was a very sumptuous dinner, in the Western style. After being
received by the Grand Vizier, Ali Pasha, and the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Fuad
Pasha, guests were presented to the sultan, who then retired. The banquet room
was arranged with tables decorated with vases of flowers and gold candlesticks.
The menu of the banquet displayed a mixture of Ottoman and French cuisine:
local dishes such as savory pastry called brek, pilaf, shredded pastry soaked in
syrup (kadayf) and baklava were interspersed with some French dishes such as
potage Svign, paupiette la reine, and croustade de foie gras la Lucullus. Some
other dishes were new creations, such as croustade dananas en Sultane, suprme
de faisan la circasienne, and bar la valide.29
Apart from travelers accounts from the nineteenth century, Ottoman palace
kitchen account registers also show that the style of banquets prepared for
foreign high dignitaries changed from the 1850s onwards. The kitchen account
Karateke, Padiahim ok Yaa, pp. 1589.
Ibid., pp. 15862.
29
Mansel, Constantinople, p. 274.
27
28
122
Royal Taste
registers kept for the preparation of such banquets, support the argument that,
starting in the 1850s, banquets arranged for foreign guests in the Ottoman
palace were prepared in the Western style and the dishes served were a mixture
of two cuisines. These account registers exist today in the Ottoman archives
(Babakanlk Arivi) in Istanbul. As mentioned previously, these documents
list the ingredients purchased by and/or delivered to the kitchens for the
preparation of the banquets, but they do not list the dishes (except for those
from the 1910s). The phrases used in these documents clearly imply that both
European and Ottoman dishes were served during these banquets. For example,
the register that listed the ingredients used in a banquet arranged at Beylerbeyi
Palace on May 8, 1854 during Prince Napolons sojourn in Istanbul during the
Crimean War, includes the different types of food items supplied to the imperial
kitchen in order to prepare dishes in both Ottoman and European styles (Figure
5.2). It mentions that the ingredients were used in cooking some alaturka and
alafranga dishes offered during the banquet. The words alaturka and alafranga
were mentioned in order to express the two different styles: alaturka, meaning
in the Turkish manner, and alafranga meaning in the French manner, which
means in the European style.30
We understand that the banquet was organized in the European manner and
the menu was made up of examples from both Ottoman and European cuisine.
The documents display different sorts of food items that were supplied to the
imperial kitchen, and show that the ingredients delivered to the kitchens for use
in the preparation of these dishes included some new and exotic foodstuffs for
Ottoman cuisine at that time: lobster, potatoes, Dutch cheese, partridge, quails,
ducks, and geese are examples of these ingredients.31 Again, according to another
nineteenth-century document of unspecified date, some alaturka and alafranga
dishes were offered during the banquet organized for the Duke of Cambridge,
a relative of the British queen. The banquet was given at the Beylerbeyi Palace,
where Ottoman dignitaries were also invited. The guests were accommodated
30
The words alafranga and alaturka were introduced into the Ottoman language
from European languages, most likely Italian. These expressions were first used by foreigners
to emphasize their cultural differences from the Ottomans. In Ottoman literature, the term
alafranga was used to describe someone who imitated European manners. According to
Cahit Kavcar, the term alafranga appeared for the first time in Ottoman literature in 1872, in
an Ottoman novel. C. Kavcar, Batllama Asndan Servet-i Fnun Roman (Ankara, 1988).
But archival sources as the one cited above indicate that these terms were used in Ottoman
society in the 1850s. The use of these expressions in documents recorded by the Ottoman
palace indicates that the Ottomans were aware of the differences that existed between their
culture and Europe.
31
Ottoman Archives of Prime Minister (Babakanlk Osmanl Arivi), Catalog
Cevdet Saray, no. 3335.
Pilaf and Bouches
Figure 5.2
123
Banquet given in honor of Prince Napolon at Beylerbeyi Palace

on May 8, 1854
(Source: LIllustration: Journal Universel, Paris, 1854; authors collection).
at Feriye Palace for eight days. From the archival documents, we learn that
apart from Ottoman cooks and servants, French cooks were employed for the
preparation of dishes that were served during the banquet and for other meals
during their stay. The document implies that food ingredients were supplied to
the kitchen to be used in the preparation of dishes in the Turkish and European
style. Apart from food items commonly used in palace cuisine of the nineteenth
centurysuch as rice, clarified butter, sugar, onion, salt, pepper, cinnamon,
cloves, cardamom, okra, chickpeas, rosewater, eggs, almonds, dates, dried fruits,
cheese, and vermicellithe expenditure records also list rare and unusual
ingredients such as lobster, potatoes, and Dutch cheese. Fish (including dried
fish), caviar, poultry, and olive oil (only consumed in limited quantities in the
daily cuisine of the Ottoman palace) were supplied in large quantities for the
preparation of the meals offered to the guests.32
During the reign of Sultan Abdlaziz (18611876) the preparation of
Western-style banquets for foreign dignitaries continued in the Ottoman
palace. Examples include the banquets prepared for the French Queen Eugnie,
Cevdet Saray, no. 3374.
32
Royal Taste
124
the Austrian king, and Prussian and Dutch princes who visited the capital of the
Ottoman Empire in 1869. The Ottoman palace organized a sumptuous banquet
in order to receive its honorable guests. According to another kitchen register
that lists the expenditure for this banquet, many preparations were undertaken.33
Three cooks, one pastry chef, and one confectioner were brought from France.
Equipment within the palace was not adequate for such sumptuous banquets, so
the chief butler went to Paris to buy tableware and manage other preparations.
Due to the lack of European tableware and glassware within the palace some
tableware such as flatware, knives, and forks were borrowed from the citys local
markets. From the same documents we understand that modern-style kitchen
uniforms for the kitchen staff were bought, and 40 servants uniforms were
ordered for the occasion. During these banquets, both European and Ottoman
dishes were served because alaturka and alafranga dishes are mentioned. Wine
and beer accompanied the meals. Wine was ordered from Bordeaux, Cyprus,
Berlin, and Bursa. The necessary ingredients and utensils were bought for the icecream maker. Expenses incurred for the food ingredients used in the banquets
included the payment made for different kinds of fowl, fish, mutton, wine and
beer, candies, butter, caviar, cheese, milk and clotted cream, white bread, snow
and ice, fruits, and vegetables. Beef and veal, which were not used in the daily
cuisine in the Ottoman palace, were also listed.34 We do not have the name of the
dishes served for lack of a menu; however, since French cooks were employed
in the kitchens for the banquet preparation, these ingredients were most likely
used in the preparation of both local and French dishes.
Another example of a banquet prepared for foreign guests was organized
at the ale Kiosk in Yldz Palace during the reign of Sultan Abdlhamit II
(18761908) in 1889. There is little information about this banquet apart
from the lists of kitchen expenses. We know that the banquet was prepared for
a foreign guest in the Yldz Palace, but we can only speculate to whom it was
served.35 During the reign of Sultan Abdlhamit, the Ottoman court welcomed
the German Emperor Wilhelm twice. During the first day of his first visit (in
1889), a sumptuous banquet was given at Yldz Palace for 120 guests. Another
banquet was prepared the following day in the ale Kiosk within Yldz Palace.36
Ottoman Archives of Prime Minister (Babakanlk Osmanl Arivi), Maliye rade
Defteri, no. 14310, as cited in Z. Orgun, Osmanl Saraynda Kilercibalk ve Kilerciba
Defterinden Saray Tatllar, in Geleneksel Trk Tatllar Sempozyumu Bildirileri (Ankara,
1984), pp. 5770.
34
Ibid.
35
Ottoman Archives of Prime Minister (Babakanlk Osmanl Arivi), Hazine-i
Hassa, MTA. no. 142/96.
36
F. Demirel, Dolmabahe ve Yldz Saraylarnda Son Ziyafetler (Istanbul, 2007).
33
Pilaf and Bouches
125
The archival document highlighted above may be the expenditure list of this
latter. The lists of the ingredients purchased and supplied for the preparation
of this banquet show that expensive and exotic ingredients were used in the
preparation of the dishes. Fine pasta in a Naples style, Parmesan cheese, bottles
of capers and mustard, Milanese butter, canned duck liver and large truffles,
tapioca, whole filets of beef, whole deer, pheasants, woodcock, partridges,
bottles of English sauce, apricot sauce, cock crests, canned pineapples, vanilla
pods, canned asparagus, mushrooms, beans and peas, rum, cognac, Marsala,
sponge cake (pandispanya), and potatoes were listed. The list also includes the
payment made for the uniforms for kitchen and serving staff.37 Compared to
the types of ingredients listed in the daily or monthly account registers of the
imperial kitchens, these food items were new and exotic for the cuisine of the
Ottoman palace in the nineteenth century.38 These ingredients were used in
the preparation of Western-style dishes mentioned in the document. Several
banquets were organized in honor of the second visit of the German emperor in
October 1898. According to the menus, which were published in the Ottoman
newspaper Ikdam, the dishes served were prepared in both French and Ottoman
styles. Some of the French dishes were bouillon, bouches, sea bass fillet with
sauce, fowl pt, punch, asparagus, almond cream, and ice cream. Pilaf, kebab,
and brek are examples of Turkish dishes listed in these menus.39
As mentioned previously, the kitchen account registers in the Ottoman
archives did not include the menus of the official banquets arranged for
foreign dignitaries until the early decades of the twentieth century. The same
documents rarely mention the names of the dishes served during the daily meals
in the palace. However, from the last decades of the nineteenth century, some
of the menus prepared for official banquets given in the Ottoman palace were
published in local newspapers. According to the examples of these menus, we
understand that most of the dishes served during these banquets were in the
French style. These menus were written in both French and Turkish languages,
for foreign and local guests. For example, the menu of the banquet arranged
for the ambassador Baron de Pedro of Portugal in 1890 in the Yldz Palace,
consisted of 14 courses. The dinner started with a soup potage aux quenelles de
volaille, then savory pastries called bouche, five different entres and relevs
(filets de sole Joinville, quillettes de boeuf la financire, ctelettes de poulet au petits
pois, homard la Polonaise, asperges sauce Hollandaise). Punch la Romaine was
37
Ottoman Archives of Prime Minister (Babakanlk Osmanl Arivi), Hazine-i
Hassa, MTA. no. 142/96.
38
For further information about the types of ingredients used in the nineteenthcentury Ottoman palace cuisine, see Samanc, Culinary Consumption Patterns.
39
Demirel, Dolmabahe ve Yldz Saraylarnda Son Ziyafetler, pp. 65, 70, 76.
Royal Taste
126
served before the roast turkey (dindonneaux rtis) and pilaf. The dinner ended
with three different kinds of dessert and ice cream (pudding au sauce sabayon,
dattes la crme, bavaroise au pomme la vanille et glaces [sic]). According to the
same menu, the only Ottoman dishes served were two kinds of pilaf (pilaf with
pieces of mutton and pilaf with tomatoes). This dish was written in Turkish in
both menus: pilaw in the French one and pilav in the Turkish one.40
We should note that the new table manners that were first embraced and
promoted by the Ottoman sultan from the 1830s became a model for the rest of
society in the capitalalthough to begin with, only within the sultans entourage.
In parallel with the adoption of Western-style banquets while receiving foreign
guests in the Ottoman court from the 1830s, the adoption of new table manners
continued both within the palace and throughout the capital. For example,
according to the memoirs of a woman who lived in the harem of the Ottoman
palace in the second half of the nineteenth century, from the 1860s onwards,
knives and forks began to be used more commonly during ordinary meals.41 The
kitchen account registers of Dolmabahe and Yldz Palace also support this.
From the 1850s, the purchase of European tableware and knives and forks for the
palace were more frequently recorded.42 During the reign of Sultan Abdlhamit
II (18761908), new table manners were adopted not only in the palace but
also among the Ottoman elite circles.43 Another important change that occurred
in the Ottoman elite culinary culture during the second half of the nineteenth
century, was the partial adaptation of European cuisine. This new kind of cuisine,
composed of Ottoman and French components served during official banquets
prepared for foreign dignitaries in the palace from the 1850s, became a model
for some of the elites of the capital. Ottoman cookbooks published from the
1880s onwards in Istanbul reflect this partial adoption of European cuisine by
Ottoman society. The cookbook Housewife (Ev Kadn), which was published in
1882, includes recipes of French cuisine alongside Turkish. Another cookbook,
titled New Cookbook (Yeni Yemek Kitab) and published in 1881, also lists some
new recipes adapted from European cuisine. These cookbooks included French
dishes such as bouillon, charlotte, ragout, sauces, tart, biscuits, and pts.44 The
existence of foreign dishes, especially French, in Ottoman cookbooks published
since the 1880s implies that Ottoman court cuisine welcomed European cuisine,
42
43
44
40
E. Eldem, Bir mnnn anatomisi, Toplumsal Tarih, 114 (2003): pp. 4850.
L. Saz, The Imperial Harem of the Sultans (Istanbul, 1995), pp. 1089.
Samanc, The Culinary Consumption Patterns.
R. Halit Karay, Nesil Hayat (stanbul, 1996), pp. 635.
A. Fahriye, Ev Kadn (Istanbul, 1882); Yeni Yemek Kitab (Istanbul, 18831884);
. Samanc, 19. yzyl Osmanl Mutfanda Yeni Lezzetler, Yemek ve Kltr, 6 (2006):
pp. 8698.
41
Pilaf and Bouches
127
at least during official banquets, which also started to influence also the culinary
habits of larger society.
Pilaf and Bouches
The Ottoman court continued to present foreign guests with banquets prepared
in the European style at the beginning of the twentieth century. A catalog found
in the Ottoman archives in Istanbul includes the menus of the 31 official banquets
prepared between 1911 and 1918 at the Ottoman court. These documents imply
that Western- style banquets continued until the end of the empire.45 These
documents, kept as part of palace protocol, also include the layout of each banquet
table, the names of each guest, and their seats at the table. Most of these banquets,
which were registered in these archival documents, were held at Dolmabahe
and Yldz Palaces. The place of each guest at the banquet table reflected political
hierarchy, which was respected at these gatherings (Figure 5.3). The seat of the
sultan was generally symbolized by a figure of a sun or a star. The seat in front
of the sultan was always devoted to the director of palace protocol. We cannot
be certain that the sultan actually participated in these banquets. The directors of
palace protocols may have represented him as, traditionally, the sultans did not sit
and eat with others. This was a tradition codified in the second half of the fifteenth
century by Sultan Mehmet the Conqueror to reflect the sultans superiority.46 This
code was abandoned during Sultan Abdlhamit IIs reign. According to travelers
accounts, we learn that Sultan Abdlhamit joined banquets arranged for European
dignitaries, such as that organized for the German emperor in 1889,47 and another
organized at Yldz Palace for the English ambassador.48 The participation of the
45
Ottoman Archives of Prime Minister (Babakanlk Osmanl Arivi), Babali Evrak
Odas Gelen-Giden defterleri, no. 904559. These archival documents were first introduced
to readers by Mbahat Ktkolu in 1995. Ktkolu presented examples of some
documents in her article, but she did not give the French menus that were also in the original
documents. Turkish dishes were only displayed, thus the types of dishes served during these
banquets were not explained in great detail. M. Ktkolu, Son Devir Osmanl Ziyafetleri,
in Prof. Hakk Dursun Yldz Armaan (Ankara, 1995), pp. 36993. See also . Samanc,
Fransz slubunda Osmanl Ziyafetleri: 19141918 yllar arasnda dzenlenen on drt
ziyafet mnsnn gastronomik dili zerine inceleme, Yemek ve Kltr, 8 (2007): pp. 48
62; E. Eldem, Bilin Bakalm Kim Yemee Geliyor? 19141918 yllar arasnda dzenlenen
ondrt ziyafet tertibinin siyasi ve prozopografik incelenmesi, Yemek ve Kltr, 8 (2007):
pp. 86102.
46
Necipolu, Architecture, Ceremonial and Power, p.19.
47
Demirel, Son Ziyafetler, p. 80.
48
M. Mller, Letters from Constantinople (London, 1897).
128
Royal Taste
Figure 5.3 The layout of the banquet arranged for the commander of the
English navy at Yldz Palace on June 28, 1914
(Source: Ottoman Archives, BEO. GGd., 20a).
Pilaf and Bouches
Figure 5.4
129
The menu and concert program of the banquet arranged for the
commander of the English navy at Yldz Palace on June 28, 1914
(Source: Ottoman Archives, BEO. GGd., 19b).
Royal Taste
130
sultan in official banquets from the reign of Sultan Abdlhamit may be seen as part
of the modernization of Ottoman palace protocol. The same documents include
the concert programs that accompanied the banquets (Figure 5.4). Only the lists
of ingredients purchased for the dishes served are absent in these documents.
According to these documents, the 31 banquets arranged in honor of foreign
dignitaries at the Dolmabahe and Yldz Palaces, as well as in the residence of
the grand vizier between 1911 and 1918, were all prepared in the French style.
The menus were written in French with Turkish translation. The dinners were
served on long rectangular tables where the place of each guest was marked.
Western-style music accompanied the meals.49 An example of one such banquet
was held on March 15, 1911 at Dolmabahe Palace for the commander of the
English Mediterranean naval force, Sir Edmond Poe. Sixty-one guests were
invited to the banquet. The place of each guest is marked on the schema of the
banquet table. The names and the titles of the high officials from the English
army and from the Ottoman state are on the document. Vice-Admiral Sir
Edmond Poe was seated next to Sultan Mehmet V, in the middle of the table
on the left. The menu of the banquet was written in French and Turkish. The
dinner comprised 14 dishes: potage crme royale, beurek, darnes de saumon sauce
verte, selle de veau Richelieu, suprme de Bcasse Clamart, neige de mandarin,
croutes de Strasbourg, poularde de Mans truffe, salade, asperges en branches, pilaw
Ali Pacha, glace succs, friandises, Chester cake. Apart from savory pastry, written
beurek in French (brek in Turkish) and Ali Pacha style pilaf, all of the dishes
were French. Chester cake was included to honor the English guests.50 Another
example of such a banquet was that prepared in honor of the commandant of
the German navy, Souchon, on May 17, 1914 at Dolmabahe Palace (Figure
5.5). Seventy people were invited to this banquet. Ottoman ministers and highranking military officials as well as German military officials were listed as guests.
The place of each guest is marked in the schema of the banquet table. The seat
of the heir to the throne, Yusuf zzettin Efendi, is in front of the sultan in the
middle of the long rectangular table. The sultans place is symbolized by a star.
German ambassador, Baron Wangenheim, was seated to his right and Contre
Admiral Souchon was placed to his left. The menu served during this banquet
included 12 dishes: consomm de volaille glac, beurek, suprme de bar orientale,
selle dagneau lAmiral, chauffroid de cailles, neige dananas, poussins perigourdine,
salade, artichaut aux fves, pilaw, fraises voiles, dessert.51 The menus were written
in French and Turkish (Figure 5.6).
Ottoman Archives of Prime Minister (Babakanlk Osmanl Arivi), Babli Evrak
Odas Gelen-Giden defterleri, no. 904559.
50
Ibid., pp. 0b1a.
51
Ibid., pp. 18a, 17b.
49
Pilaf and Bouches
131
Figure 5.5 The layout of the banquet prepared in honor of the commandant
(Source: Ottoman Archives, BEO. GGd., 18a).
132
Royal Taste
Figure 5.6 The menu of the banquet prepared in honor of the commandant
of the German navy at Dolmabahe Palace on May 17, 1914.
Source: (Ottoman Archives, BEO. GGd., 17b).
Pilaf and Bouches
133
Analysis of the menus of these 31 banquets mentioned above implies that

90 percent of the dishes served during the banquets were examples of French
grande cuisine. The menus include French dishes such as consomm, potage,
bouche, chaud-froid, and poultry served with supreme sauce, sorbet; fish served
with sauces such as caviar sauce or Mont-blanc sauce; meat dishes such as fillets,
ctelettes, and tournedos; desserts such as tarts, vacherin, and gteau.52 Pilaf, which
has been an essential part of Ottoman cuisine since the early days of the empire,
was the only dish that was present at every banquet. Kebabs and savory pastries
(brek) were other examples of local dishes served to the guests during some of
the banquets. Why were pilaf, kebab, and brek preserved in the menus? The
menus kept some local dishes in order to please the appetite of the local notables.
Pilaf, brek, and kebab were common dishes within ordinary meals served in the
palace. Although brek could be substituted by bouches and kebabs by roasts in
the menus, pilaf was present in nearly every menu. There is no substitute for pilaf
in French cuisine.
Although these menus contained some local dishes, in general they reflected
the taste of French gastronomy. The order in which the dishes were served also
reflected French style. Comparison of these menus with those from the French
or other European courts in the nineteenth century verifies this argument. The
Russian service style, which was in use in France during the nineteenth century,
was also used during these banquets. The order of French dishes in the nineteenth
century was arranged as: Soups or consomm/Hors doeuvres (such as savory
pastries bouche)/Fish/Relevs (meat entres)/Entres/Sorbet/Roasts/Salad/
Vegetable dishes/Entremets/Desserts.53 The menus of the Ottoman official
banquets arranged from the late-nineteenth century onwards, were arranged in
the same manner. For example, the menu of the banquet given by the Grand
Vizier Said Halim Pasha to the ambassadors on March 30, 1914 listed 10
dishes. The menu consisted of crme langoustine served as soup, beureks served
as hot hors duvres, rouget oriental as fish, Agneau Sultane served as relev, foie
de Strasbourg en crote as entre, poularde du Mans truff as roast, salad, fonds
dartichauts la crme served as vegetable, tarte hollandaise and crme de Nice
as entremets, and dessert. 54 Pilaf, which was served in most of the banquets,
was served after the vegetable course. The names of the French dishes served
during these banquets can be found in some of the French cookbooks published
in the nineteenth century, such as those written by Marie-Antoine (Antonin)
See the list of dishes of these banquets in the Annex.
J.-L. Flandrin, LOrdre des Mets (Paris, 2002), pp. 14963; J.-P. Poulain and E.
52
53
Neirinck, Histoire de la cuisine et des cuisiniers (Paris, 2004), p. 75.

54
Odas Gelen-Giden defterleri no. 904559, p. 12b.
134
Royal Taste
Carme in 183334 and by Jules Gouff in 1867.55 Most of the names of the
dishes are present in more recent French cookbooks, such as Escoffiers Culinary
Guide, which was published in 1902.56 We can assume that these French-style
dishes were prepared or supervised by French or European chefs in the Ottoman
palace. The lists of salaries of cooks and employees in the Ottoman palace show
that European chefs were temporarily employed in the imperial kitchens from
the 1850s onwards. These French chefs worked with translators in the Ottoman
palace kitchens.57 French cooks may have started to work permanently from the
reign of Sultan Abdlhamit, as the memoirs of the sultans daughter attest to
this argument. According to her, alongside local chefs, two French chefs were
working in her fathers kitchens: one was responsible for main dishes, the other
for cakes and biscuits.58 The presence of French chefs in the Ottoman sultans
kitchen from the end of the nineteenth century may imply that French cuisine
was in demand in the Ottoman court at this time.
Other examples of menus belonging to the Ottoman palace from the first
two decades of the twentieth century show that some of the French dishes were
also served during banquets arranged for local notables and in the daily meals of
the sultan. This fact implies that the integration of French cuisine into Ottoman
high cuisine had been completed by then, as the menus reflect both Ottoman
and French cuisines. For example, the menu of the banquet given by Sultan
Abdlhamit II in 1909 at Yldz Palace for the members of the parliament
to celebrate the proclamation of the constitution of 1908 contains 11 dishes
that reflect both French and Ottoman tastes. This menu consisted of bouillon
with eggs, cheese brek, sea bass with mayonnaise, filets of beef with vegetables,
veal liver pat, partridge kebab and turkey, chicken pilaf with white sauce, four
brothers pudding, creams, and ice cream.59 The menus of these banquets for
local guests and the menus of the daily meals served to the sultan contain local
dishes but also some new ones adapted from French cuisine. For example, the
menu of the banquet given to the Ottoman deputies on June 9, 1912 for the
occasion of a religious day (kandil) was made up of nine dishes: brek, fish in
papillote (katta barbunya bal), kebab (testi kebab), vegetable stew (trl),
chicken kebab (pili kebab), baked pilaf (gve pilav), strawberry cream (ilekli
55
A. Carme, LArt de la cuisine franaise au XIXe sicle: Les Grands classiques de la
gastronomie Payot (Paris, 1994); J. Gouff, Le Livre de Cuisine (Paris, 1867).
56
A. Escoffier, Le Guide Culinaire (Paris, 1993).
57
Ottoman Archives of Prime Minister (Babakanlk Osmanl Arivi), Yldz
Perakende Hazine-i Hassa, no. 23/9.
58
. Osmanolu, Hayatmn Ac ve Tatl Gnleri (Istanbul, 1966), p. 23.
59
kdam newspaper, 5246 (1909).
Pilaf and Bouches
135
krema), ice cream, and fruits.60 In this menu, fish in papillote and strawberry ice
cream are examples of new dishes.
Concluding Remarks
There are various reasons for the changes in the style of banquet prepared
when receiving foreign dignitaries in the Ottoman palace. First, the ideas of
reformation promoted by the Ottoman sultan stimulated the change seen in
official banqueting style. As mentioned earlier, the westernization process,
which started at the end of the eighteenth century, continued until the end
of the Ottoman Empire. European modes of life as well as culinary culture
became, in time, sources of inspiration for those who supported the ideas of
reform among the Ottoman elites. The adoption of European table manners in
the palace circles, as well as the new reception style arranged for foreign visitors
from the end of the reign of Mahmut II in the 1830s, can be interpreted as a
part of this modernization process of the Ottoman state. It should be noted that
the whole process of reformation inspired from Western civilization realized in
the military, institutional, and educational areas during the nineteenth century
as promoted by the Ottoman sultans, also encouraged other changes that took
place in the Ottoman court ceremonies from the reign of Mahmut II onwards.
The Ottoman court started to use a different language in public spheres. For
example, the Ottoman palaces constructed in the nineteenth century reflected
both Western and Ottoman architectural styles, in both exterior and interior
designs.
Another reason for the change in the style of official banquets in the palace
was the Ottoman courts desire to make foreign dignitaries feel comfortable and
at ease. Since the reign of Sultan Abdlmecit, members of the European court
started to visit the Ottoman capital. At the same time, the Ottoman palace, along
with adopting Western table manners, started to adopt European cuisine, namely
French haute cuisine, a cuisine highly valued at that time within other European
courts. French haute cuisine, which developed in aristocratic households starting
in the seventeenth century, became the professional cuisine first in France and
then in other parts of Europe during the nineteenth century. French cuisine
developed into the international haute cuisine and was in demand in both
aristocratic and bourgeois milieus in Europe at that time.61 The Ottoman court
Orgun, Osmanl Saraynda Kilercibalk, p. 69.
See, for the rise of French haute cuisine in the international arena in the nineteenth
60
61
century, A. Trubek, Haute Cuisine: How the French Invented the Culinary Profession
(Philadelphia, 2000).
Royal Taste
136
was no exception. French haute cuisine was used as an international gastronomic

language by the Ottoman court while communicating with the Western world.
Most of the dishes served during these court banquets to European dignitaries
were examples of French cuisine. The service style of the banquet and the order
of the dishes were arranged also according to the international trend of that time.
The Russian service style, which replaced the French in the nineteenth century
in Europe, was also present at Ottoman official banquets. The menus of these
banquets were written in French and translated into Turkish. As mentioned
by Trubek, during the nineteenth century French culinary vocabulary was
considered as an acceptable way to describe the evenings menu, whether in
France, Australia, Britain, or America.62 The presence of a French menu implied
a fancy meal. In the nineteenth century the culinary language used by the
Ottoman court in the diplomatic world changed: the Ottoman governors now
preferred to use the international gastronomical language when communicating
with the outside world. They changed the style of the reception of ambassadors
in the Ottoman palace, primarily because the Ottoman court, by using the
same language, wanted to represent itself as equal to its adversaries. Banquets
arranged in the Ottoman palace for foreign guests were planned in a French
style because French cuisine was at the top of the gastronomical world at that
time,63 and French gastronomical language was particularly valued in Europe
during this era. Some of the elements of Ottoman cuisine were preserved in
this new gastronomical style, such as the serving of local dishespilaf, brek,
and kebabsduring official banquets for foreign guests. The influence of
French haute cuisine on Ottoman court cuisine was not unique at the time;
this influence was also discernable in other European courts. For example, from
the end of the eighteenth century, Russian elites welcomed French suppers and
wines. French chefs were employed in many European courts in the nineteenth
century. The famous chef Antoine Carme directed the tsars kitchens in Russia,
serving the Galler prince.64
Food continued to be an agent for displaying power in the Ottoman court
during the last epoch of the empire. The use of French gastronomical language
during Ottoman official banquets reinforces this assumption. The Ottoman
court chose to use this highly praised gastronomical language while making
contact with the outside world to confirm its sumptuousness and its equivalence.
The use of French gastronomy during official banquets prepared in the Ottoman
Trubek, Haute Cuisine, p. 22.
62
63
Middle Ages to the Present, (Chicago, 1996), p. 134; Trubek, Haute Cuisine.
64
H. DAlmeida-Topor, Le Got de lEtranger, (Paris, 2006), p. 20, p. 31; Trubek,
Haute Cuisine, p. 47.
Pilaf and Bouches
137
palace also enabled the partial adaptation of French cuisine by Ottoman palace
cuisine. The menus of the banquets arranged for local notables in the Ottoman
palace at the beginning of the twentieth century support this argument. The
new cuisine promoted by the Ottoman court from the 1850s, also influenced in
some respects the culinary culture of the upper classes of Ottoman society, which
becomes clear from looking at Ottoman cookbooks published after 1880.
Annex: Dishes Served During Late Ottoman Official Banquets
As mentioned previously, a catalog found in the Ottoman archives in Istanbul
includes the menus of the 31 official banquets prepared by the Ottoman court
between 1911 and 1918. The list of dishes served during these banquets,
according to their service at the table, illustrates the use of French gastronomical
language in the late Ottoman court (Table 5.1).65 In this table, the first column
demonstrates the type of dish; the second column presents the French names
of the dishes; and the third column the Turkish names as they were written in
the menus. The last column displays the English explanation of the dishes. This
table illuminates three important points: the types of the dishes served during
the banquets; how the names of French dishes were translated into Turkish; and
the order in which dishes were served. We should note that the translation of the
names of French dishes into the Turkish language was generally incomplete as
these dishes did not exist in the gastronomical vocabulary of Ottoman culture.
Table 5.1
Types of
dishes
Soups
Dishes served during late Ottoman official banquets

Names of dishes in
French
Consomm
Consomm la Reine
Consomm de volaille
glac
Names of dishes in
Turkish
Et suyu (meat stock)
Explanation of dishes
Clarified meat or fish

broth
Et suyu (meat stock)
Chicken consomm
thickened with tapioca
and served with pieces of
chicken1
Souk tavuk suyu (cold Cold chicken consomm
chicken broth)

Odas Gelen-Giden defterleri no. 904559.
65
Royal Taste
138
Consomm de volaille
Consomm Imprial
Tavuk orbas
(chicken soup)
orba (soup)
Consomm julienne
orba (soup)
Consomm tapioca
Tavuk orbas
(chicken soup)
Crme royale
orba (soup)
Potage la Reine
orba (soup)
Potage crme dasperge
Kukonmaz orbas
(asparagus soup)
Potage Orientale
Hors
duvres
Beureks
Brek (savory pastry)
Beureks la Financire Brek (savory pastry)
Fish
Bouches la Reine
Tepsi Brei (savory

pastry served in tray)
Bouches chasseur
Avc brei (savory

pastry of hunter)
Bouches de volaille
Bouches des dames
Bar au court bouillon
Levrek Halamas
(boiled sea bass)
Chicken consomm
Chicken consomm
thickened with rice,
served with cockscombs,
kidneys, and shredded
savory pastry2
Consomm served with
julienne vegetables
Consomm thickened
with tapioca
Chicken soup thickened
with cream and cooked
with truffle and diced
chicken
Chicken soup thickened
with tapioca and cooked
with pureed chicken3
Asparagus soup with
cream
Oriental soup
Ottoman savory pastry
made with sheets of pastry
Small, round puff pastry
filled with a mixture of
truffle, diced chicken,
liver, and sweetbread
filled with salpicon la
Reine4
filled with mushrooms,
cream, and demi-glace
sauce
case filled with poultry
case filled with a sauce
Sea bass cooked in a
spiced aromatic liquor or
stock
Pilaf and Bouches

Bar brais au
Champagne
Filets de turbot sauce

blanche
Poisson
ampanyal levrek
Sea bass cooked in court
bal (sea bass au
bouillon with champagne
champagne)
Levrek Bal (sea bass) Cold sea bass served with
Mont Blanc sauce
Havyar salal levrek
Sea bass with caviar sauce
bal (sea bass with
caviar sauce)
Balk (fish)
Turbot served with white
sauce
Balk (fish)
Fish
Rougets
Balk (fish)
Red mullet
Rougets en caisses
Barbunya bal (red

mullet)
Red mullet cooked in

paper
Bar froid sauce Mont

Blanc
Bar poch sauce caviar
Rougets glacs
Relevs/
entres
139
Cold red mullet
Suprme de Bar
Orientale
Levrek bal (sea bass) Sea bass fillet served with

oriental sauce
Suprme de poissons
Balk (fish)
Fillet of fishes
Cailles lImpriale
Gvede Bldrcn
(quails in casserole)
Quails garnished with

truffle and duck liver
Roasted quails
Cannetons de fois gras
Kaz cieri ezmesi

(Pureed duck liver)
Duckling served with

duck liver
Ctelettes dagneau
glaces
Souk kuzu pirzolas

(cold lamb chops)
Cailles rties
Lamb chops cooked with

gelatin and served cold
with white sauce
Chaud-froid de dindon Souk Hindi (cold
Turkey cooked with
turkey)
with white sauce
Chauffroid de cailles
Cierli souk bldrcn Quails cooked with
(cold quails with liver) gelatin and served cold
with white sauce
Lobster cooked with
Homard froid
Souk stakoz (cold
lobster)
with white sauce
Royal Taste
140
Poulardes truffes
Tavuk (chicken)
Poulets nouveaux la
broche
Poussins Alboufra
Pili kebab (kebab of

young chicken)
Kk pili (small
young chickens)
Pili kzartmas
(roasted young
chickens)
Dana kzartmas
Roasted sweetbread
(roasted veal)
Souk pili (cold young Breast or wing of poultry
chicken)
cooked in gelatin and
served with white sauce
Kuzu pirzolas (lamb Lamb chops coated with
chops)
breadcrumbs and fried,
served with Villerois sauce
Kuzu kzartmas
Rump of lamb served with
(roasted lamb)
vegetable garniture
Garnitrl filleto (fillet Veal fillet served with
with garnishes)
garniture
Poussins Prigourdine
Ris de veau fleurs fines
Suprme de volaille
froid
Roasts
Ctelettes dagneau
Villerois
Double dagneau
printanire
Filet la jardinire
Roasted chicken served

with Prigourdine sauce
made of truffles and duck
liver
Roasted young chicken on
skewers
Chicks served with
Albufra sauce
Young chickens served
with Prigourdine sauce
Filet dagneau
bouquetires
Kuzu Filesi (lamb

fillet)
Filet dagneau
Kuzu filesi (lamb fillet) Lamb fillet
Filet dagneau
printanire
Kuzu filesi (lamb fillet) Lamb fillet served with

vegetable garniture
Filet de poulet
Pili filesi (fillet of

young chicken)
Chicken fillet
Poulet de grains garnis
Pili kebab (roasted

young chicken)
Roasted young chicken

served with vegetable
garniture
Lamb rump served with
vegetable garniture
Roasted lamb served with
garniture lAmiral
Roasted lamb rump
served with vegetable
garnish
Rump of Pauillac lamb
roasted on skewers
Gigot de pr- sal

printanire
Selle dagneau
lAmiral
Selle dagneau primeur
Selle de Pauillac la
broche
Kuzu frn (roasted

lamb)
Kuzu filetosu (fillet of
lamb)
Kebab
Lamb fillet served with

vegetable garniture
Pilaf and Bouches

Tournedos la Molle
Salads
Vegetables
Pilafs
Salade
141
Dana Filesi (veal fillet) Grilled sirloin steak served

with boiled bone marrow
Salata (salad)
Salade dartichauts
Enginar salatas
(artichoke salad)
Salade de laitues
etuves
Salata (salad)
Lettuce salad
Salade Lucullus
Salata (salad)
Lucullus salad
Artichauts
Bezelyeli enginar frn
lAllemande
Artichauts lOrientale Enginar frn
(Roasted artichokes)
Artichauts aux fves
Zeytinyal baklal
enginar
Artichauts crme au
Enginar (artichokes)
gratin
Artichauts farcis sauce
blanche
Asperges la crme
Kukonmaz
(asparagus)
Asperges en branches
Kukonmaz
(asparagus)
Asperges sauce
Kukonmaz
mousseline
(asparagus)
Roasted artichokes with

peas
Artichokes in oriental
style
Artichokes with broad
beans in olive oil
Oven-cooked artichokes
with cream
Stuffed artichokes with
white sauce
Asparagus served with
cream
Young asparagus
Asperges sauce tartare
Kukonmaz
(asparagus)

tartar sauce
Cardons la Molle
Enginar fidan (young

artichokes)
Cardoons served with

bone-marrow sauce
Courgettes Imprial
Asma kaba frn

(gourd roasted in
oven)
Gourds in the imperial

style (roasted)
Pilaf truff

mousseline sauce
Pilaf with truffle
Pilaw
Pilav
Pilaf
Pilaw Amberbou
Anberbu pilav (pilaf

amberbu)
Pilaf with spices and dried

fruits
Pilaw aux poulets
Tavuklu pilav (pilaf

with chicken)
Chicken pilaf
Royal Taste
142
Entremets Crme de fruits
and desserts
Fraises voiles
Gteaux aux fruits
Gteaux aux amandes
Gteaux Marquise
Gteaux panach
Dessert
Gaufrettes Sultani
Glace
Glace aveline
Kaymakl meyve tatls

(fruit dessert with
clotted cream)
Kaymakl ilek
(strawberries with
clotted cream)
Meyveli pasta (fruit
cake)
Bademli pasta (almond
cake)
ikolata tatls
(chocolate dessert)
Fruits served with cream

Chantilly
Yemili bademli pasta

(cake with fruits and
almond)
ekerleme (candies)
Ice-cream cake with fruits
Strawberries served with

cream Chantilly
Marquise cake
Dessert
Kaymakl yaprak tatls Sultans waffles

(puff pastry with
clotted cream)
Dondurma (ice cream)
Dondurma (ice cream) Ice cream made with
hazelnuts
Strawberry sorbet
Granit glac aux fraises ilekli dondurma
(strawberry ice cream)
Mont Blanc
Mont Blanc cake
Neige dAnanas
Ananasl dondurma
(pineapple ice cream)
Pineapple sorbet
Tarte la Chambord
ambor tatls
(Chambord dessert)
Tart Chambord
Vacherin Chantilly
Kremal tatl (dessert

with cream)
Vacherin Chantilly
Notes:
1
T. Gringoire and L. Saulnier, Le Rpertoire de la Cuisine (Paris, 1986), p. 34.
2
J. Robuchon, Larousse Gastronomique (London, 2001), p. 331.
3
Ibid., p. 34.
4
Ibid., p. 142.
Chapter 6
The Ceremony of Dining at Napoleon IIIs

Court Between 1852 and 1870
Anne Lair
Immediately following the French Revolution, France went through a period

of political instability and lost much of its status as a world power. However,
thanks to the genius and military victories of Napoleon I (18041814), the
first emperor of France, the country regained its strength and power during
his reign. His ambitious nephew, Louis Napoleon, took power through a
coup dtat and thus ruled France from 1852 until 1870, as the last emperor.
This parvenu, as he frequently referred to himself, had established his court
at the Palace of the Tuileries (the Louvre) prior to becoming emperor. The
sixteenth-century building was the obvious residence for the imperial family:
synonymous with power and style, the palace was remodeled to host grand
receptions, lunches, and dinners comparable in extravagance to those in the
past. The main purpose of these events was to entice national and international
admiration and thereby regain the status France had lost.
Before elaborating on court food during the Second Empire, it is crucial to
examine Louis XIVs dining habits, since he imposed ceremony, etiquette, and
table manners on the court; this will facilitate an understanding of Napoleon
IIIs motivations in shaping the cuisine and food service at the Palace of the
Tuileries and at Compigne, another court residence. Finally, a comparison
will be made between the food served at Napoleon IIIs court and that of fancy
Parisian restaurants during the Second Empire, in order to assess the form and
quality of court food.
Louis XIVs Theatre of Power
The Sun King believed he received his power directly from God, which
explained the manner in which he lived and why the fetish character of every
Royal Taste
144
act in the etiquette was clearly developed at the time of Louis XIV. He used
etiquette as an instrument not only of distance but also of power and for
ruling his subjects. The more the king distanced himself, the more respected
he became by the people. As the lord of the house and the lord of the land,
he ruled everything personally. Due to his extraordinary power, all the places
became royal, the royal bedroom, the royal potager, and verger, all actions being
done for the king. The magnitude of his rule was reflected in his domestic
functions. This sense of etiquette and ceremony led to the development of a
social hierarchy among the court staff, with a supervisor in charge of servants
for whom it was an honor to serve the monarch. From then on, the schedule
of the king was exploited to the maximum; each event or activity, however
seemingly trivial, became a ceremonial and grandiose performance, from the
moment the king woke up until he went to bed. Being present at his leve and
his couche was considered an honor, and people strived to attend, their goal
being to get closer to the king:
The greater his [Louis XIVs] sphere of power was and the more directly everyone
at court depended on him, the greater was the number of people who sought to
approach him. He liked and desired this congestion of people; it too glorified his
existence. [] Each gesture, utterance and step he made was for the supplicants of
utmost importance in terms of prestige.
As Joan DeJean points out in The Essence of Style, the most powerful monarch
in French history very quickly imposed the essence of style, fashion, etiquette,
and ceremony, versions of which can still be observed currently in rich circles.
Conspicuous cuisine and culinary extravagance were a must for the monarch of
France, and his eating habits were characterized by gluttony.
In order to cook the kings meal, 324 people were employed in the kitchens
of Versailles. The service de bouche (service for the kings mouth) was divided
into several stations: paneterie was responsible for the table, the bread, and the
tablecloth; chansonnerie was for wine and water; cuisine bouche and the fruiterie
for candelabras and fruits, respectively; and the fourrire for fire and coal. Meat
and poultry, synonymous with wealth, were among the monarchs favorites, and
were thus served two to three times a day, depending on the religious calendar.
N. Elias, The Court Society (Dublin, 2006), p. 94.
Ibid., p. 90.

Ibid., p. 149.

J. DeJean, The Essence of Style: How the French Invented High Fashion, Fine Food,

Chic Cafs, Style, Sophistication and Glamour (New York, 2005).

A. Castelot, LHistoire table Si la cuisine mtait conte (Paris, 1972), p. 388.
The Ceremony of Dining at Napoleon IIIs Court Between 1852 and 1870
145
Each dish was prepared differently to demonstrate uniqueness. Sixty-nine

poultry birds were used to prepare a sauce for one of the ordinary meals that
was served to him exclusively. Ceremony was a must; as soon as the monarch
was seated for dinner, timpani and fifes announced the beautifully arranged meat
that was ceremoniously brought into the kings bedroom by a matre dhtel
accompanied by 36 servants, along with 12 men carrying cloche-covered, silverplated trays from the kitchen (located in another building). Appearance and
presentation mattered tremendously; thus, Louis XIV placed greater importance
on the pleasure of the eyes than on the pleasure of the palate. For instance, even
a simple ingredient such as bread was covered in a napkin, which was folded
differently each time. The high number of servants was also an indication of the
monarchs power. He never served himself, but rather several servants were there
to help each time he needed something to drink.
As another sign of power, the Sun King would usually eat alone in front of
the window at a square table set on which silverware and crystal glasses were
shining. When not eating alone, he and his family, along with high court guests
such as the noblesse (princes, dukes, and marquis), would have dinner together
for the grand couvert, which was open to the public. Everyone was invited to
admire the monarch eating, and travelers and onlookers would invade the
various galleries to see Louis eating his soup. Louis XIVs dinner was a culinary
spectacle, not only because the king was put on a pedestal while eating in front
of the public, but also because of the etiquette, food preparation, and service
exclusively designed for him.
Thanks to La Quintinie, the kings intendant, and the kings own preferences,
fresh produce started appearing on the table, especially in Versailles, where a large
variety of fresh vegetables and fruits were planted in the potagers and vergers. This
contributed to better nutrition and brought innovation in food consumption.
At Versailles in 1651, 300 different types of pears, 88 different kinds of apples,
and 37 varieties of peaches were grown,10 in addition to figs, strawberries, and
cherries.11 These were used to reinforce status through ornamentation, with
pyramids of fruits and flowers arrayed in the middle of the table.12
M.-L. Verroust, Cuisines et cuisiniers (Paris, 1999), p. 36.

H. Parient and G. de Ternant, Histoire de la cuisine franaise (Paris, 1994), p. 169.
Castelot, LHistoire table, p. 387.
Ibid., p. 389.
10
Verroust, Cuisines et cuisiniers, p. 41.
11
12
G. Blond and G. Blond, Histoire pittoresque de notre alimentation (vol. II) (Paris,
1961), p. 343.
Royal Taste
146
Table settings were another way to impose etiquette. The table, always visually
superb, was impeccably set, with a long white damask tablecloth reaching down
to the floor. Matching napkins were folded artistically before being placed on the
guests laps, and were changed after each course to remain immaculate. Dishes
in Versailles were made from precious silver. Personal plates, soup bowls, dinner
plates, and dessert platesnovelties in the seventeenth centuryhad replaced
the single platter. Even though silverware existed, people still ate with their
fingers, using a spoon and a knife, but not a fork. It was not yet customary in
the seventeenth century for a host to provide glassware, therefore guests had to
bring their own, which they would leave on the sideboard.13 Another example of
etiquette was to keep ones hat on while eating, but to remove it when addressing
the king. Nothing was too lavish for the Sun King; elaborate meals for up to 600
people were served by servants in the formal gardens, with music, entertainment,
and fountains, and punctuated with fireworks. Amusement and performance
were, thus, a central element of life in Versailles.14
Through his utilization of etiquette and ceremony, Louis XIV established
new conventions with regard to table manners and table settings at the French
court that would subsequently spread throughout the world: The French court
was extremely influential for European courtly society. During the reigns of
Louis XIV, Louis XV, and Louis XVI the elaborateness of the royal table was
well established.15 Obviously, these dining spectacles, so important under the
Sun King, proved the major role that food and entertainment played. As stated
earlier, pleasing the guests and making them envious was a requirement:
For centuries, the grand couvert, the protocol-wrapped meal open to an audience,
had impressed the observer with the distance separating him from the monarch.
[] By the late eighteenth century, however, the grand couvert, along with other
court ceremonies, had become to many an empty formality; no longer inspiring
awe, it instead provoked slight embarrassment. [] [H]ow many of them, in
leaving the sight of these sumptuous tables, ha[d] nothing on which to dine or
sup?16
Napoleon III and his wife Eugenie were the hosts at the Louvre Palace during
the Second Empire (18521870). The new imperial family used this inherited
etiquette and ceremony expected from the ruling family of France to help
Parient and de Ternant, Histoire de la cuisine franaise, p. 170.
15
A. Trubek, Haute Cuisine: How the French Invented the Culinary Profession
13
14
(Philadelphia, 2000), p. 55.

16
R. Spang, The Invention of the Restaurant (Cambridge, MA, 2000), p. 97.
147
establish itself, as that was the protocol. However, as the emperor and empress
were also Louis Napoleon and Eugenie (and, thus, people), examining their
backgrounds will help in understanding their preferences, dislikes, and practices.
Understanding Napoleon III and Eugenie
From an early age, Louis Napoleon felt the need to fulfill an epic mission, an
idea mostly nourished by his mother, Hortense, and later reinforced by his
wife, Eugenie. The Bonapartes had a strong sense of grand spectacle centered
around them, modeled on the ceremonies of the great dynasties of the past.
Extremely proud of his ancestry and a strong admirer of his uncle Napoleon I,
Louis Napoleon followed in his uncles footsteps to become a general, and then
emperor (though he lacked his uncles abilities or genius to rule). He understood
very well that in order to be elected he needed the support of the people, and
therefore positioned himself as the only defender of the French people. Very
skillfully taking advantage of the fragile political situation in the country and
turning dissension to his favor, he was elected Prince-prsident thanks to a
popular vote in December 1848. By restoring universal male suffrage in time for
the plebiscite in December 1850, he received dictatorial powers as president for
a time span of ten years; a year later, in another plebiscite, he won the approval,
by an overwhelming majority, to be emperor of France. In other words, the
constitution established by Napoleon III, with the mandate of the plebiscites
of 1851 and 1852, enabled him to rule with virtually unrestricted personal
authority, much like Louis XIV, whom he greatly admired. The rapport he built
with the French people explained many of his actions and tastes in ruling and
hosting.
At the same time, his wife Eugenie, the Countess de Montijo, grew up in
Spain in a privileged environment, and as with any young person of her status,
received an education that enabled her to become a good hostess; she was,
among other things, a sparkling conversationalist. She enjoyed reading, took
drawing and painting lessons, studied English, and participated in sporting
activities. In her twenties, her main occupations were traveling and discussing
political conflicts. As public figures, women of her status were supposed to stand
by their husbands, and Eugenie did (Louis Napoleon, not surprisingly, did have
extra-marital affairs). She enjoyed her role as empress, entertaining people and
appearing next to the emperor whenever required. In terms of food, she did not
have a good palate, and evidently everything tasted good to her. However, she
was a great admirer of Marie-Antoinette and, therefore, adopted some of her
habits and tastes to camouflage her lack of taste.
Royal Taste
148
The emperor soon understood the importance of building his own public
image. Figurative art, symbols, myths, and illusions were all used to contribute to
promoting his power, prestige, and position and to his myth.17 Appearance and
extravagance played a major role in building the image of a great leader, and thus
traditions from the past were emulated:
There was, it is true, as in the Ancien Rgime, the same emphasis on spectacle,
on symbols of centrality and of continuity within a prestigious tradition. There
was the same theatricality, a seeking after effect or clat, the same highly elaborate
ritualization of significant domestic events such as a wedding or a baptism, and
there were the triumphal displays on occasions of military significance. There was,
furthermore, the same multiplication of images of the sovereign, surrounded by
the symbols of his power as majesty, with equivalent stylization to show the ruler
to best effect, abstracting him from the imperfections of his private reality and
transporting him into the idealized and ornate modes of representation of his
public image.18
All this was just an illusion (Louis Napoleon was not, as previously mentioned,
a particularly adept ruler), but it had an effect, especially on the French people,
who were Napoleon IIIs power base. They reacted positively to images and
ceremonies that represented the nation and its heroic aspirations. He projected
the image of a heroic leader in charge of a modern nation: he took inspiration and
continuity from his relation with his uncle to give the impression of reinstating
the empire, but relied on illusion, appearances, masks, and reflections to sustain
his power.19
Appearance mattered tremendously for Napoleon III (as it had to Louis
XIV and Napoleon I). He wanted a court that was even more beautiful than his
uncles had been. Above all, he wanted to have his revenge by impressing all those
who were against him or who had not supported him prior to 1848. Hosting
the Fte Impriale (meaning a constant lavish reception) in order to show off
the regime was an important element contributing to this appearance. Actually,
numerous ceremonies of the Second Empire were aligned with memories of
Napoleon I, such as his birthday on August 15 (declared as a national holiday
or Fte Nationale, and thus celebrated extravagantly with grandiose fireworks
and elaborate decorations).20 Another important aspect of appearance was the
D. Baguley, Napoleon III and His Regime: an Extravaganza (Baton Rouge, 2000),
pp. 14950.
18
Ibid., p. 150.
19
Ibid., p. 160.
20
Ibid., p. 165.
17
149
rebuilding program in Paris, which contributed to the prestige of the regime;

this was also (not coincidentally) one of his uncles unfinished programs. The
emphasis here too was more on decorativeness than on utility; modernizing
buildings, introducing new materials, and creating a nice faade did, without a
doubt, result in exactly what he wanted, an amazing effect.
The Palace of the Tuileries had two important functions: first, it served as
the courts residence; and second, it was where political decisions were made
during most of the year. Utilizing this sumptuous building exhibited the power
of the regime. The Palace of the Tuileries became a place of no-expense-spared
extravagant displays, which reminded all of Versailles under Louis XIV. On
December 12, 1851, the senate-consul agreed to allocate:
some twenty-five million francs a year, of which six million were allocated for
the expenses of the imperial household and twelve million for the improvements
and decoration of the imperial palaces, libraries, museums, estates, and forests, the
court could move in grand style in the hallowed royal tradition from one splendid
monument of the royal past to another, according to the season.21
No previous ruler had received such a lavish amount of money on which to

live. Yet, sumptuousness was not synonymous with the aesthetical norms of the
time. Upon completion, the Tuileries was the most majestic and largest palace
in the world, which was enough to bedazzle nouveau riche society, the French
people, and other nations. But old money was much more critical towards the
dcor and the lack of comfort.22 In terms of politics, Napoleon III had deemed
it necessary to impress other nations, and the people at home. The court was the
showcase of France, reflecting its splendor, power, and glory,23 even as pauperism
continued to exist in Paris.
The Napoleon III Apartments
The Napoleon III apartments were inaugurated on February 11, 1861. Used
as reception areas, they had been fitted out in the new Louvre to house the
Ministry of State. Although the dcor clearly reflected the period and the style
of the Second Empire, there was a strong similarity between Versailles and the
Napoleon III wing at the Louvre. The emperor was a strong admirer of Louis
Ibid., pp. 2523.
P. Milza, Napolon III (Paris, 2006), p. 524.
23
Baguley, Napoleon III and His Regime: an Extravaganza, pp. 2012.
21
22
Royal Taste
150
XIV, which may explain why the Louis XIV style was chosen and apparently
became the rule for official buildings.24 According to Anne Dion-Tenenbaum:
The coves of the ceiling illustrate the stages of construction of the Louvre and
Tuileries under Franois I, Catherine de Medicis, Henri IV, and Louis XIV, for the
continuity of building under successive monarchs was a theme dear to Napoleon
III. [] When the rooms were first opened a journalist for the Paris newspaper Le
Monde illustre of February 16, 1861, wrote:
One cannot imagine a more opulent residence, and one wonders how it will be
possible to decorate the renovated Tuileries even more richly, as befits the state
residence of the sovereign!25
After all, under Louis XIV, France was the leading European power, not only in
terms of military and politics, but also for its grandiose style.
The reception rooms were utilized for special occasions and immediately
created a theatrical effect for the guests. In the center of the grand dining room
was the table that could accommodate 40 guests or more, of ebonized wood
with turned feet, the same red leather chairs as in the small or everyday dining
room, and a large buffet with gilt bronze ornamentation curved to fit in the
rooms hemicycle.26 The ceilings and wall panels of the dining rooms were
illustrated with mythology, outdoor, and hunting scenes, thus emphasizing
the imperial familys interests and elevating them to the rank of mythic
characters.
At the Louvre, two dining rooms, one leading into the next, were located
in the Louis XIV salon, and were possibly united for large receptions since
they had similar dcor and neo-Boulle style furniture (Figure 6.1). The small
or everyday dining room was unique, with a trompe lil painting in the
niche representing a stone balustrade, caryatids, and atlantes, theatrically
giving the strange impression of being outside. This image contrasted with
the dark wainscot lit with gilt arabesques, making the room look larger. The
furniture (the table and the buffet) was made from ebonized wood with rich
gilt bronze ornamentation. The oval table, with its quadrupled pedestal, was
surrounded by chairs in the Louis XIV style, upholstered in red leather.27
A. Dion-Tenenbaum, The Napoleon III Apartments (Paris, 2006), p. 8.
A. Dion-Tenenbaum, The Napoleon III Rooms in the Muse du Louvre, Paris,
24
25
Magazine Antiques (March 1994).

26
Dion-Tenenbaum, The Napoleon III Apartments, p. 50.
27
Ibid., p. 44.
Figure 6.1
151
The large dining room at the Louvre Palace
Black, red, and goldrepresenting severity, life, and wealthwere the colors
of the Second Empire.28
Pictures of both dining rooms can be found on the following website: http://www.
louvre.fr/llv/musee/visite_virtuelle_detail.jsp?CURRENT_LLV_DEP%3C%3Efolder_id
=1408474395181114&CURRENT_LLV_VISITE_VIRTUELLE%3C%3Ecnt_id=1013
4198673232578&baseIndex=4&CONTENT%3C%3Ecnt_id=10134198673232579&b
mLocale=en.
28
Royal Taste
152
There was no specific style developed during the Second Empire; it was
rather a derivative and eclectic mixture of grand styles of the past.29 However,
these styles had a strong effect, since the nouveau riche society was to reproduce
them for their luxury and comfort, and more than anything else, for their
extravagance in their own htel priv. Imitation, profusion, and ostentation were
synonymous with the Second Empire, and these effects certainly mattered more
than originality.
The ubiquitous presence of gold definitely added to the lavishness and
opulence of the ensemble, covering the walls and the beautifully carved
ornamentation with its high relief effects representing flowers and trophies. Also
important for the dcor was the sculpted decoration of the ceilings, made of
stucco and fixed on wooden panels. Lefuel, the architect in charge of the Louvre
project, deliberately chose inexpensive materials for the dcor, but was still able
to produce theatrical effects and trompe lil illusions. He utilized carton-pierre,
which was light, solid, and very popular in the nineteenth century. He also used
galvanization (a form of metal-plating) to cover inexpensive metals with silver
or gold. Surfaces were covered with faux painting, imitating marble or Boulle
marquetry. Beautiful and large fresh bouquets of flowers were present throughout
the rooms. Although all these elements (except for the flowers) were fake, the
ensemble of all these details created an effect and gave the illusion of wealth and
grandiosity in the reception rooms, such as the grand salons, the theater-salon,
and the dining rooms, making them more impressive when entering.
For an even more impressive effect, the extravagant and unique dcor was
exaggerated; an element was never used only one time, everything had to be
multiplied. Each room had its own set of doors: four-leaf doors graced the
theatre-salon, while the neo-Boulle ornamentation of gold filets on black
grounds covered the doors separating the dining rooms; glass doors separated
the grand dining room from the halls, allowing the magical effect created by
the massive chandeliers. Unity between the dcor and the furniture was not the
point; what mattered was the extensive use of gold.30
In 1842, Charles Christofle purchased the patent for galvanization, a
process for gilding and silvering by electrolysis, which became a commonly used
technique during the Second Empire, allowing the gold plating of the large
metal parts made for the banister, grand staircase chandelier, and chimney-piece
ornaments. The more affordable price of plated base metal allowed the purchase
of spectacular centerpieces and candelabra present in the dining rooms, the
Baguley, Napoleon III and His Regime: an Extravaganza, pp. 2523.

Dion-Tenenbaum, The Napoleon III Apartments, p. 49.
29
30
153
door patera in gilt bronze, and the profusion of silverware.31 Items were not only
galvanized but were also extremely ornamental, which added to the extravagance
of the palace in a way very similar to Versailles.
Very quickly, the new techniques of illusion became popular among the
emperors circle and the bourgeoisie, and became a great success economically.
France could no longer afford the extravagances of the pre-Revolution period,
and therefore only fake and inexpensive materials for the Palace of the Tuileries
could be used. In 1852, Napoleon III ordered a Christofle centerpiece for a
dinner for 100 people at the Tuileries (Figure 6.2). In 1862, the half-brother of
the emperor, the Duke of Morny, requested one in Louis XVI style, composed
of several dozen elements, with one being at least a meter long.
Figure 6.2 Christofle basket

(Source: Muse du Louvre).
Ibid., p. 52.
31
Royal Taste
154
The elite of the Nouveau Rgime did not have the same upbringing as did the
Ancien Rgime, and consequently lacked values, knowledge, and savoir-vivre.
None of them could differentiate an original from a replica; though the look of
an object was the same, the weight and feel were not.
The Imperial Couples Receptions
The imperial couple used the small dining room, conveniently located next to
the empresss apartments, for their ordinary lunch. Lunch usually started around
noon, shared by the emperor and his wife in tte--tte. Dinners took place in
the formal dining room in the Louis XIV salon, involving a lot of ceremony,
reminiscent of life in Versailles and Napoleon Is court. Napoleon III admired
these two rulers and therefore, as in the Ancien Rgime, there was:
the same emphasis on spectacle, on symbols of centrality and of continuity within
a prestigious tradition. There was the same theatricality, a seeking after effect or
clat, the same highly elaborate ritualization of significant domestic events such
as a wedding or a baptism, and there were the triumphal displays on occasions of
military significance.32
Before reaching the dining area, guests and presiding grandees in charge of the
organization of the mealthe grand chambellan, the grand marchal du palais,
the grand cuyer, the grand aumnier, the grand veneur, and, above all, the grand
matre des crmonies (exactly the same type of personnel and protocol used at
Louis XIVs court)were all invited to eat with the imperial couple. Napoleon
III selected people directly working for him at the palace and who, therefore,
depended on him. Sitting at the imperial familys table meant being part of the
intimate circle. All were gathered in the Apollo Gallery, forming a procession
preceded by the emperor and empress, both wearing lavish costumes.33 This
contributed to the formal atmosphere of the dinners.
Napoleon III and the court occupied the castle of Compigne every fall for
four or five weeks, where the court celebrated the empresss birthday on November
15. This beautiful castle, the emperors favorite, was used for sumptuous weeklong visits by their guests. In a manner somewhat reminiscent of Louis XIVs
court, the empress would select about 60 guests (politicians, diplomats, highranking military officers, industrial leaders, financiers, and artists) to come
Baguley, Napoleon III and His Regime: an Extravaganza, p. 150.
Ibid., p. 252.
32
33
155
and stay with the imperial family. The theme would change each week, based
on personalities present.34 Such visits required meticulous preparations, with
schedules and personal habits carefully evaluated, and resulted in a memorable
stay for each guest, which gave the impression of being a part of the emperors
inner circle. Each evening, two different guests were designated to escort the
emperor and Eugenie from the Galerie des Cartes to the dining room, following
the same ceremony used at the Louvre Palace.35
Guests gathered around the table in the dining room,36 which was graced by a
spectacular centerpiece (a gilded replica of a piece with illustrated hunting scenes
that had belonged to Louis XV). The beauty and detailed ornamentation took
ones breath away, as fake gold shined even more brightly than real gold.37 The
profusion of galvanized silverware added to the ostentatious table decoration.
Beginning with the Second Empire, separate crystal glasses (Baccarat and SaintLouis) for each kind of wine and also water stood on the table in front of each
plate. As during the reign of the Sun King, dinner plates were made of silver,
however dessert plates were blue Svres porcelain with gold ornamentation.
The choice for this beautiful dinnerware was not anodyne, since this porcelain,
manufactured under royal supervision at Svres, was renowned for its elegance
and delicacy.38 Starting in the eighteenth century, Svres dinnerware was
commissioned not only for each royal French residence before the revolution
but also for the monarchs of other nations.39 Louis XV often gave dinner services
as presents to royal visitors.
As at the Palace of the Tuileries, the table settings at Compigne were
designed to impress the dinner guests through profusion and magnificence.
Consequently, guests had certain expectations when eating at the emperors
table. Meals were copious and merely good; a total of 14 dishes were divided
into four services each containing two dishes, not including dessert. Service la
russe had by then become the norm. Despite a sufficient number of dishes, some
guests pointed out the lack of innovation in the culinary preparations. A regular
Milza, Napolon III, pp. 5345.
Castelot, LHistoire table, p. 197; Milza, Napolon III, p. 536.
36
A picture of the dining room in Compigne can be seen at: http://www.napoleon.
34
35
org/en/gallery/pictures/files/Chateau_Compiegne_Emperor_s.asp.
37
38
39
It was easily identifiable because of its floral and figural decoration, with lavish
applications of gilding, and rich background colors of royal blue, yellow, pea green, and pink.
After 1789, the manufacturer innovated its work and came up with new dcor based on the
political climate and also new styles of containers, thus satisfying the evolving arts of the table
of the nineteenth century.
Royal Taste
156
guest at the court, Princess de Metternich, spouse of the Prince de Metternich

who held a high position at the court and was old money, mentioned the
copiousness and also the continuous absence of refinement of the culinary
dishes.40 In The New York Times on January 18, 1860, a guest at court who had
been invited to have dinner in Compigne with the imperial couple and a few
of their friends, reported his impressions: The dinner was most superb. []
The eating and drinking is more abundant and soign than ever. Despite the
profusion of dishes and wines, there are no details about what was served. As
Rebecca Spang points out, although travelers were eager to taste French cuisine,
they had little to say about meals they ate, due to their lack of experience. They
instead focused on the dcor and table settings.41
Following the French Revolution, the grand bourgeoisie and the bourgeoisie
became the new elite, especially during the Empire (18041814) and the
Restoration (18151830), both periods of splendor and prosperity. They
too wanted to show refinement. But starting with the July Monarchy (1830),
Parisian society changed, and the aristocratic salons were neglected in favor of
parvenu salons. Furthermore, most participants at the Fte Impriale were from
the monde and demi-monde, more impressed by profusion, opulence, and flashy
dcor than by refined culinary preparations.
Abundance (quantity) and refinement (quality) are two distinct concepts
and both were to be expected from any court. Chefs carried huge responsibilities
as they had to satisfy the appetites of their patrons and their guests. Unlike his
predecessors and many of his contemporaries, however, Napoleon III did not
have the greatest chefs cooking for him. With his simple culinary taste, he not
only revealed his modest interest in fine food but also his awareness that the
menus of imperial banquets, which were often reprinted in newspapers, were
seen by the French people, who formed a significant element of his support.
In addition, most of the illustrious chefs had been hired at foreign courts. Jules
Gouff was considered the best chef, or officier de bouche of that period, but was
employed at the Jockey Club in Paris. Emile Bernard started his career at the
Louvre Palace under Napoleon III, only to later join Urbain Dubois and cook for
Wilhelm I of Prussia,42 leaving the most prestigious palace in France, the country
of haute cuisine, to go to a foreign court. Yet, the kitchens at the Tuileries were
well equipped and suitable for any type of culinary preparation. As a print of
the time period illustrates, multiple chefs and sous-chefs worked in the kitchens
Ibid., p. 619.
Spang, The Invention of the Restaurant, p. 198.
42
Verroust, Cuisines et cuisiniers, pp. 2089.
40
41
157
preparing elaborate meals.43 Between 1800 and 1900, the number of personal
chefs in the private sphere decreased, whereas it increased in the public sphere
(where haute cuisine was fulfilling the culinary interests and delights of the
bourgeoisie).44 Although the imperial couples aim was to impress their guests,
they used a profusion of plain culinary preparations to do so rather than by the
refinement of the dishes.
The imperial couple had simple culinary tastes and liked the fresh vegetables
and fruits grown in Versailles, which were offered every day.45 However, this may
simply be mimicry of Louis XIVs taste for the fresh fruits and vegetables grown
by La Quintinie, also at Versailles. It is clear, however, that neither Napoleon III
nor Eugenie seemed concerned with haute cuisine.46 The empress remained fond
of Spanish food where all of the ingredients were mixed together, even though
it did not have a good reputation in France: these dishes contained onion, olive,
and pimento as a base, combined with local ingredients. According to Prosper
Mrime, a loyal friend of the empress, The worst ratatouille dish finds grace in
front of her palate whereas others hold on to their heads or their stomachs. In
one instance she asked for a second serving of an awful omelet cooked in stinky
oil.47 Was it because of her loyalty to her country? Perhaps she simply liked the
familiar taste of olive oil, then unknown in France.
Meals at the court lasted no more than 45 minutes48 and no one lingered over
the cuisine even when foreign dignitaries were present; this again suggests a lack
of interest in the arts of cooking. The imperial couple was, on the other hand,
served by their own domestic staff, thus distancing them from their guests who
were served by different household staff,49 a protocol established by Louis XIV.
Another indication of their limited curiosity for food is the lack of variety in
the manner in which it was prepared. Below are three menus served to Napoleon
III and Eugenie covering a period of five years (Table 6.1). There is no indication
43
p. 80.
J.-P. Poulain and E. Neirinck, Histoire de la cuisine et des cuisiniers (Paris, 2004),
Trubek, Haute Cuisine, pp. 4041.

46
Blond and Blond, Histoire pittoresque de notre alimentation, p. 443.
47
La plus infecte ratatouille trouve grce devant son palais tandis que les autres
44
45
(convives) se tiennent la tte ou le ventre. On raconte qu un repas, o lon servait une

omelette innommable accommode dans une huile puante, elle scria, ravie: Donnez-moi
encore un peu de cette dlicieuse omelette, il ny en a pas assez pour tout le monde. Castelot,
LHistoire table, pp. 28081.
48
Milza, Napolon III, p. 526.
49
158
Royal Taste
whether or not special guests were present at these dinners.50 As mentioned

previously, service la russe had been generally adopted by this time. There were
four services with a minimum of 14 dishes: two potages; two grosses pices; four
entres, two rts; and four entremets, which indeed represented a copious meal.
After the French Revolution, we do observe a plurality of the services; it became
the norm as well to serve one dish of fish at every meal, and not only on Friday,
usually in the grosses pices. However, if offered more than once, then it was as
an entre.51
When comparing the various courses offered over the five-year period,
the few choices are beef (served twice on the 1860 menu), veal, lamb, capon,
kidney beans, salmon or trout, or sole, and rice (served twice on the 1858 menu),
each time fixed simply and often prepared the same way. These were the main
ingredients repetitively served at the Palace of the Tuileries; though every possible
foodstuff was accessible in Paris, this was not reflected in menus of the imperial
table. Serving luxurious ingredients such as turbot, crawfish, or oysters would
have been against the emperors commitment to the people and too reminiscent of
the Ancien Rgime. Though foie gras was not a summer dish it was still present
during the 1860 meal, which was most likely a summer meal based on the seasonal
cauliflower, artichokes, and green beans (also present in the 1855 and 1858
dinners). Vegetables were prepared simply and did not highlight the chefs talent
or gastronomy. Also, some identical dishes recurred: the potage la bourgeoise,
roast beef, capon prepared with watercress, kidney beans, butter sauce, charlotte,
petits pts au naturel, with the pains la Mecque offered twice.
Above all, these dishes were not generally innovative, which again reflected
the royal lack of interest in and understanding of food; menus were obviously
tailored to their personal tastes, and needed to appear unostentatious. One can
actually agree with Princess de Metternich, who claimed that there was a lack
of culinary refinement and creativity in the dinners hosted by Napoleon III and
Eugenie. Though Napoleon III wanted to impress the haute bourgeoisie and
the bourgeoisie, and succeeded with the grandeur of his dining rooms, this was
certainly not the case when related to the food served therein.
Napoleon III, however, certainly did impress the people and in particular the
petite bourgeoisie, the rising social class constituted primarily of shopkeepers and
small business owners. They supported the political power through plebiscites
in 1851 and 1852 in exchange for protection, and benefited from it financially as
well. Typically working at the Halles, they fed the upper classes and bourgeoisie
50
For the first and second menus, see: J.-L. Flandrin, LOrdre des mets (Paris, 2002), p.
143; for the third, see Banquets Royaux, http://www.cuisine-classique.com/banquets_royaux.
htm.
51
Flandrin, LOrdre des mets, pp. 1424.
Table 6.1
159
Three menus served at the imperial court of Napoleon and

Eugenie, spanning a period of five years
Samedi 12 aot 1855
Vendredi 18 juin 1858
Potages:
A la bourgeoise
Aux nouilles dItalie
Potages:
A la bourgeoise
Riz au consomm
Hors duvres:
Petits pts au naturel
Grosses pices:
Grosses pices:
Truite sauce anchois
Saumon lcossaise
Filet de buf au madre la Longe de veau dans son jus
jardinire
aux tomates farcies
Entres:
Entres:
Ctelettes dagneau
Noix de veau aux pois
Filets de volaille la
pigrammes aux pois
Marchale lcarlate
langlaise
Ctelettes de gibier la
Canetons la
Richelieu
Bourguignonne
Salade de homard la Russe Casserole de riz la
financire
Cte de buf la gele
Rts:
Rts:
Canetons au cresson
Chapons au cresson
Quartier dagneau
Cailles aux crotons
Entremets:
Chicore aux crotons
Haricots flageolets
Beignets souffls
Pots de crme au chocolat et
la vanille
Entremets:
Asperges sauce au beurre
Haricots flageolets
la matre dhtel
Charlotte russe aux fraises
Pains la Mecque
1860
Potages
Pot-au-Feu
Pure la Reine
Hors duvres:
Petits pts au naturel
Grosses pices:
Pice de boeuf la jardinire
Rosbif garni de croquettes
Tte de veau en tortue
Entres:
Petites timbales la
Lavallire
Grenadins la chicore
Suprme de poulets, pointes
dasperges
Chauds-froids de foie gras
Salade de filets de sole la
ravigote
Rts:
Faisans et chapons au
Cresson
Artichauts frits
Entremets:
Choux-fleurs, sauce au
beurre
Haricots verts sauts
Charlotte Russe au chocolat
Timbale de poires
lItalienne
Gele, macdoine de fruits
Pains la Mecque
Desserts
and also nourished themselves with what they prepared and sold. Finding food
had been an issue during the French Revolution, but that was no longer the case
by the 1850s. Eating became a pleasure more than a necessity, especially for the
lower classes who were eager for copious amounts of food. To them, meats, any
type of stew, and filling preparations were much appreciated, whereas fish, or
Royal Taste
160
dishes considered too delicate, were regarded as unrewarding. Quantity mattered

over quality.
Although they are fictional, Zolas works illustrated well how the lower classes
lived. Gervaise, the shopkeeper in LAssommoir,52 prepared a feast for her birthday
celebration, and even when no longer hungry, her guests continued to eat until all
the dishes were cleared. She fixed three types of meat, an expensive ingredient by
definition, and potatoes, but no fish. As at Napoleon IIIs table, Gervaise did serve
some pot-au-feu bouillon, which she said was always appreciated. A dish often
offered at the imperial table, kidney beans, had the reputation of being popular and
among the favorites of the petite bourgeoisie, since it was inexpensive and filling.
Instead, Gervaise served potatoes, also considered a filling dish.
There are no indications about the wines served at the Tuileries. We do know,
however, that Napoleon III, an amateur of the Bordeaux wine Cos dEstournel (St
Esthphe classified in 1855), loved this wine so much that he had several thousand
bottles sent to the Palace of the Tuileries; nothing is said about how much he shared,
but it does give us an indication of the sort of wine favored by the emperor.
During the Ancien Rgime and even during the Empire, culinary extravagance
was the norm. Banquets were a way to underscore the leaders superiority and
to put the social stratification on parade.53 However, at Napoleon IIIs court,
there were no displays of rare foodstuffs in the menus that suggested culinary
extravagance. Instead, display related to the setting (of both place and table) and
was used as a means to awe.
Restaurants and Haute Cuisine

As previously mentioned, the Ancien Rgime had access to haute cuisine and
culinary extravagance. They had the best chefs who used the finest produce and
employed superior methods of preparation. Following the French Revolution,
personal chefs opened their own restaurants to make a living by satisfying the
new elite of the nineteenth century, the bourgeoisie, who were eager to taste
these exquisite culinary preparations:
Haute cuisine became the privilege of all those who can afford it. The first home
of French haute cuisine was the court, but with the passage of time and changes
E. Zola, LAssommoir (Paris, 1996). See chapter 7.

P.P. Ferguson, Accounting for Taste: The Triumph of French Cuisine (Chicago, 2004),
52
53
pp. 1512.
161
in social and economic institutions, haute cuisine became part of a much broader
and deeper configuration of elite culture.54
In the early nineteenth century, Paris, the French center of politics, culture, and
arts, was also the gastronomic capital of France, and indeed, of Europe. Paris was
the most frequently visited place by foreigners, due to the variety of delightful
activities available in the city, including dining on exquisite food. Paris had the
most reputed cuisine prepared by the most talented chefs and was also the place
where good chefs went for training.55 While nothing was grown in the capital,
paradoxically every possible foodstuff was available. One could hardly ignore
the large quantities and varieties of fresh and exotic produce shipped to the
capital and available in Paris as a result of the industrial revolution. Oysters, all
kinds of fresh fish, different types of meats, game, charcuterie, vegetables, cheese,
and all sorts of other edibles became available in Paris. Because the central
administration of France was established in Paris, all routes converged there. As
a representation and recognition of the regions, each province produced and
shipped the best produce to be prepared and consumed in Paris; the products
of the provinces, as well as international foodstuffs from neighboring lands and
from overseas, nourished Paris. Needless to say, wealth created the demand for
illustrious chefs to develop innovative recipes based on the variety of ingredients,
thus shaping another dimension of cuisine and causing culinary preparations to
peak in the first half of the nineteenth century.
Restaurants began to burgeon with the growth of gastronomic discourse and
literature. Cafs and clubs already existed during the eighteenth century, favored
by bourgeois men as places to discuss politics and public matters; women,
excluded from these conversations, hosted their salons littraires at home or
devoted time to charity.56 There were fewer than 100 restaurants in Paris prior
to 1789, but by 1834 there were over 2,000. Throughout the first half of the
nineteenth century, the restaurants trope was copiacornucopia, to be precise.
The restaurant was full to overflowing.57 People now dined out for pleasure,
selecting restaurants based on their income, the bourgeois inviting either his
spouse (rarely) or a mistress (usually); or, very simply, men would eat with other
men.58 At first, the bourgeoisafraid of showing ostentatious tastes in public
Poulain and Neirinck, Histoire de la cuisine et des cuisiniers, p. 69.
56
D. Davidson, France after Revolution: Urban Life, Gender, and the New Social Order
54
55
(Cambridge, 2007), p. 132.

57
Spang, The Invention of the Restaurant, p. 170
58
M. Toussaint-Samat, Histoire de la cuisine bourgeoise du Moyen Age nos jours (Paris,
2001), p. 164.
Royal Taste
162
and embarrassed by their new social statusordered only a few dishes that were
served one at a time, which is where the term la carte originated.59 Obviously,
only a few la carte restaurants existed, first located in the neighbourhood
around the Palais Royal and then on the boulevards. The Frres Provenaux, the
Vfour, and the Maison Dore, each serving their own specialties, were renowned
for their cuisine, resulting from very impressive la carte options (over one
hundred dishes long), the excellent chefs in the kitchens, and their extensive
wine lists. These restaurants attracted a wealthy clientele, not only from France,
but from all over the world, eager to savor exquisite culinary preparations. The
dcor was refined, with a profusion of tables and dinnerware reminiscent of the
Ancien Rgime, with its strong emphasis on food and wines.60
The role that highly trained chefs first played in the private sphere and
later in the public one cannot be neglected. These artists determined, shaped,
and gave meaning to food resulting in a mark of haute.61 The most refined and
expensive ingredients were prepared in every possible way, thus showing off the
chefs talents and dazzling patrons. Consumers were especially interested in
those ingredients coming from overseas.62 Maintaining a solid reputation was
challenging since it depended on the chef, who was solely responsible for pleasing
and impressing the clientele as well as earning his own income. Because there
was such demand, chefs were able to exercise their talents. The strong leadership
and reputation established by a chef made it difficult to find a successor once he
passed away; many restaurants did not remain open after such an event or had
difficulties doing so. The trend in restaurants and cuisine tended to change every
30 years, the average length of a career.63 Competition was stiff and was fueled
by restaurant guidebooks. Many of the earliest establishments around the Palais
Royal were unable to survive.
New cooking methods were developed and, more importantly, new sauces
were invented. Throughout the century, these sauces, which functioned to
highlight fine dishes, were developed and refined by the talents of the best
chefsBeauvilliers, Carme, and later Urbain Dubois. This allowed a particular
item to be served in a multitude of ways. Nineteenth-century chefs continued
to invent and elaborate on culinary preparations using the most refined and
delicate foodstuffs, requiring the most attentive and lavish preparations:
61
62
63
59
Poulain and Neirinck, Histoire de la cuisine et des cuisiniers, p. 71.

Spang, The Invention of the Restaurant, p. 155, p. 184.
B. Girveau, Le Restaurant pour tous. In A table au XIXe sicle: Paris Muse dOrsay
4 dcembre 20013 mars 2002 (Paris, 2002), p. 188.
60
163
Classified by Carme at the beginning of the 19th century, and redefined by

Escoffier a century later in his Guide culinaire (1903), this luxurious, sumptuous
and decorative cuisine used and combined in complex, sophisticated ways the
rarest and most expensive defined producetruffles, foie gras, fillet of beef,
pheasant, woodcock, salmon, lobsterfor the delectation of a wealthy and
privileged clientele [].64
In order to appreciate dishes of this sort, one had to be a gastronome. This

term first appeared in 1803, referring to someone who likes and knows how
to appreciate refined cuisine, unlike a gourmand who enjoys eating to excess.
Gastronomie (or the art of good eating) first entered the Dictionnaire de
lAcadmie franaise in 1806 as one means of satisfying the incessant hunger for
aesthetic debates,65 and was, thus, more applicable to the amphitryon (or host).
As we now use the term, it refers to a culinary tradition implying refined cuisine.
However, to identify as a gastronome one had to show some savoir-faire, savoirvivre, and education from guidebooks and gastronomical literature such as Le
Manuel des amphitryons, by Grimod de La Reynire. Diners became capable of
appreciating what chefs prepared for them in the public sphere. Chefs created
a demand on the part of gastronome consumers, especially in the Palais Royal
neighborhoods. By the 1820s and 1830s, the boulevards had started to attract
diverse crowds; with the opening of theaters and dance halls they became the
new home of trendy Parisian street life.66 This success consequently led to new
restaurants and cafs.
The type of cafs with the accent on appearance with sumptuous dcor and
carefully chosen furniture, caught the eye of the new bourgeoisiethe dandies.
These young people with new money, no class, no savoir-faire, no refined palate,
and no taste frequented these establishments with the goal of flaunting their
wealth. Alas, they were unable to appreciate what they were served.67
Despite the high number of restaurants and clubs in Paris, very few
succeeded; more and more chefs left the private sphere to work in the public
circle, but only a few stood out. Also new diners (the nouvelle bourgeoisie)
focused on frequenting trendy restaurants in order to be seen rather than to
enjoy exquisite cuisine, and this meant diners went in large numbers to a small
number of establishments that were the rage at any given moment. Additionally,
Louis Napoleons coup dtat brought France under a (benevolent) dictatorship
that rejected the principles of refined eating and forced distinguished celebrities
66
67
64
65
P. Freedman (ed.), Food: The History of Taste (London, 2007), p. 277.

Davidson, France after Revolution, p. 78.
J.-P. Aron, Le Mangeur du XIXe sicle (Paris, 1989), p. 63.
Royal Taste
164
such as Victor Hugo and Alexandre Dumas (one of the finest gastronomes in
French history) into exile. After having trained prestigious culinary chefs who
had developed skills to the highest level, France no longer seemed to be the place
where these chefs wanted to practice their knowledge and passion for food!
Emile Bernard, Urbain Dubois, Jules Gouff, and Auguste Escoffier, among
others, worked for the most prestigious foreign courts or palaces,68 where haute
cuisine was highly appreciated.
But not every chef went abroad. Adolphe Duglr (18051884)after
managing the Baron de Rothschilds kitchens until 1848, and then the Frres
Provenaux restaurantdecided to take over the kitchens of the Caf Anglais
in 1866 (Urbain Dubois, his former apprentice, followed him there before
taking a position in Russia). The dcor of the Caf Anglais was sumptuous, with
mahogany and walnut wood panels, flashy gold mirrors, and red velvet sofas and
love seats in the grand salons. With Duglrs culinary talents, the Caf acquired
a first-class culinary reputation and became the place where the tout-Paris and
the most famous people visiting the capital wanted to eat, especially during the
World Fair in 1867. Due to its chef s illustrious reputation, the Caf was full
almost every night, a strong indication of the interest Parisians had in gastronomy
(and perhaps of the dearth of top-class options available at the time). On June
7, 1867, Wilhelm I, King of Prussia, a regular of the Caf, invited Alexander II,
the future Alexander III, and Otto Von Bismarck for a gastronomic dinner at
the Caf Anglais, while touring Paris for the World Fair.69 The emperors asked
Duglr to prepare a memorable menu. This became the dinner for the Three
Emperors, and the bill came to 1,200 francs, or in todays terms $12,950, which
still remains the most expensive meal in history.70
Potages:
Impratrice et Fontanges
Souffls la Reine
Relevs:
Filets de sole la vnitienne
Escalopes de turbot au gratin
Selle de mouton pure bretonne
Verroust, Cuisines et cuisiniers, pp. 2089.

Parient and de Ternant, Histoire de la cuisine franaise, p. 270.
70
For more details see the following website: http://menus.free.fr/page109.html.
68
69
165
Entres:
Poulet la portugaise
Pt chaud de cailles
Homard la parisienne
Sorbets au vin
Rtis:
Cannetons la rouennaise
Ortolans sur canap
Entremets:
Aubergines lespagnole
Asperges en branche
Cassolettes princesse
Bombes glaces
Vins:
Madre retour de lInde 1810
Xrs de 1821
Chteau-Yquem 1847
Chambertin 1846
Chteau-Margaux 1847
Chteau-Latour 1847
Chteau-Lafite 1848
Champagne Roederer frapp
What an honor for the Caf Anglais to host such a dinner! However, the pressure
was intense, since not only was the reputation of the chef at stake, but also that
of French culinary art. Every step had to be perfect. Obviously the chef opted
for preparations reflecting cultural nationalism, such as selle de mouton pure
bretonne, homard la parisienne, and cannetons la rouennaise, symbolizing
France and French cultural power as well as showcasing culinary excellence.71
Due to his experience, Duglr knew what to cook to impress these special
visitors in Paris and no expense was spared. The most exquisite and therefore
the most expensive foodstuffs were selected for this dinner, which showcased
new and lavish dishes. Fish such as sole, turbot (the king of fish),72 and lobster
were used. Like his mentor, Carme, Duglr believed using fresh, quality
In his Almanach des Gourmands (Paris, 1803), Grimod de La Reynire explained
71
72
where to find the freshest produce in Paris.
Royal Taste
166
products was primary to success in cooking. He adopted some of the recipes he

had learned from Carme while working at the Rothschilds kitchens, and then
made them his own. Following the trend of the la carte restaurant, the grosses
pices became individual portions served in fillets (filets de sole la vnitienne, or
escalopes de turbot au gratin); both recipes were published in Carmes LArt de la
cuisine franaise au XIXe sicle. Warm hors duvres were served after the potages,
and fish appeared on the menu along with meat.73 Unlike Carme, Duglr
served individual portions, which was a novelty for the time. Delicate and rare
meats were prepared such as ortolan and cannetons, thereby contributing to
the elaborate presentation. Duglrs respect for fresh and seasonal ingredients
explains the absence of some French delicacies such as foie gras and truffles, which
were considered winter dishes.74 Obviously, Duglrs preparations that evening
must have been a success since Alexandre Dumas later adopted some of them.75
Other elements of refinement included that evening were the coup du
milieu (an alcoholic sorbet very much in vogue during the second half of the
nineteenth century as a palate cleanser, before or between the rts and the
entremets) and wines offered to complement particular dishes. Starting in the
1840s, fashionable restaurants featured extensive wine cellars (caves) to further
elevate the cuisine. The wine list became equally as important as the menu
since the variety of wines enabled the harmonization of dishes and wines. Mr
Delhomme, from Bordeaux originally, the proprietor of the Caf in 1855 and
noted wine connoisseur, invested heavily in Bordeaux wines and champagnes,
which he loved, over Burgundy to which he was indifferent. He also purchased
other wines to satisfy the tastes of his clientele, as well as foreign wines for
which there was a strong demand, especially Madeira and sherry.76 By the end
of the eighteenth century, Bordeaux was well known for its wines, and highly
appreciated in France and England. Wine was expensive and Delhomme had
in his cellar over 300,000 bottles of the best vintages, which he allowed to age.
From the start, this important investment turned out to be very fruitful and
contributed to the success of the Caf Anglais. To enhance the flavor of the
most stunning meals the best years of the top wines were selected; each bottle
was roughly 20 years old in the case of the French wines. The head sommelier,
Claudius Burdel, was in charge of selecting the pairings.
Flandrin, LOrdre des mets, pp. 1567.
Alexander II, fond of foie gras, had to accept the fact it was a winter dish and not a
73
74
summer preparation. This remark illustrates his knowledge and appreciation of French food
and its appreciation.
75
Le grand dictionnaire de cuisine, http://www.dumaspere.com/pages/biblio/
chapitrecuisine.php?lid=c1&cid=744.
76
http://hearsight.com/articles/d.johnson/sommelier3.html.
167
The evening of the three emperors at the Caf Anglais began with Madre
181077 and Xrs 1821 (as was common practice at the time). This was followed
by an offering of three out of four of the periods top grands crus classs: Margaux
1847, Latour 1847, and Lafite 1848. Other wines were served as well, such as
Chteau Yquem 1847, a fifth cru suprieur Sauternes. 1847 is still considered
the year for Bordeaux wines and some are savored even today. The meal was
completed with an excellent Chambertin 1846 and finally Champagne
Roederer. All these bottles added to the already exquisite food to make it a
memorable feast that only a few people could appreciate or afford, since the
wines themselves costed a fortune.
Why were so many Bordeaux wines offered on that particular evening? As
previously stated, the proprietor was from that region. More important, the
Bordeaux wines were already highly praised in France and around the world,
which motivated Napoleon III to have the Bordeaux wines represented at
the World Fair in Paris in 1855. The Chambre de Commerce et dIndustrie de
Bordeaux (CCI) with the help of the Syndicat des Courtiers (brokers syndicate)
was responsible for classifying the Gironde wines. At that time, only wines
from Mdoc and Graves were present at the World Fair and therefore classified
in 1855. Established according to the reputation of the crus and the price of
commercial transactions, the classification system reflects the market value of
the crus included. The scheme distinguished five classes, from the first to the fifth
growth and still highly respected today. In addition, 27 sweet white wines from
Sauternes and Barsac were also classified in1855: one premier cru suprieur,
Chteau Yquem.78 Needless to say, this classification helped market the Bordeaux
wines and led to a similar classification of Burgundy wines in 1861. The idea was
to categorize the best wine properties in Burgundy. At first, wines were classified
as first, second, and third vintage; and then, starting in 1935, France created a
classification system called Appellation dOrigine Contrle (AOC), still in use
today.
Again for that dinner, the Champagne Roederer was obvious since already
by 1850 their champagnes were served at the Prussian, Hungarian, Swedish, and
Russian courts. In 1876, thanks to Alexander II, the prestigious cuve prestige
Cristal was created for the tsar, in a crystal bottle adorned with the imperial
coat of arms.79 Thanks to this unique selection of grands crus classs wines and
champagnes, Burdel became the official buyer of three great European courts.
http://menus.free.fr/page109.html.
The 1855 Classification, http://www.bordeaux.com/Tout-Vins/Classification.
77
78
aspx?contentId=42.
79
Champagne Roederer, http://www.champagne-roederer.com.
168
Royal Taste
This dinner at the Caf Anglais lasted for eight hours. Wilhelm I, a
gastronome who wanted to satisfy the palates of two European dominant ruling
figures, intentionally commissioned it. Establishing good relations with such
leaders was another important reason. They would appreciate such an exquisite
evening, especially Alexander II, another gastronome, who requested foie gras
to satisfy his palate and who as a result of that dinner sent his own sommelier
to Maison Roederer. This dinner is the perfect example of what French culinary
artists were capable of preparing and actually wanted to do: creating the synergy
that comes by serving refined and lavish cuisine accompanied by the most
complementary wines. None of the guests were French, but it did not matter.
What was important and universal was to be a gastronome that evening. Due to
its excellent reputation, they visited the best restaurant in Paris with the intent
of experiencing the most memorable meal of their life.
Concluding Remarks: Culinary Contrasts
In all cases presented, dinner took place in beautiful dining rooms, where
society was involved, and where food was displayed before being consumed.
On one hand, Napoleon IIIs dinners took place in the private sphere, at the
Louvre Palace or at Compigne, where the ruler of France invited the monde and
the demi-monde on a regular basis but where no illustrious chefs practiced their
talents. Table displays were extraordinary; but dinner only lasted 45 minutes,
and the cuisine was ordinary. Quantity was chosen over quality, a more bourgeois
and petite bourgeoisie characteristic. Although the emperor was invited from time
to time for dinner in the public sphere, and therefore was exposed to refined and
lavish preparations, he never showed interest in this type of food; nor did he
use fancy food for political power, which was a way to show his affiliation to the
French people.
On the other hand, Duglr, aware of his prestige and responsibilities as a
chef, used all of his talents and resources to please gastronomes, and moreover
to honor the three emperors who were touring France and who wanted this
experience to be memorable. Success and the reputation of his establishment
depended on his talents and his staff. He showed what a talented chef could do,
and, through his creativity and access to excellent ingredients, was able to impress
and please his diners. By creating an inviting atmosphere in a refined private
salon filled with conviviality, and by serving the rarest ingredients prepared with
the best recipes and accompanied by outstanding wines, this fabled meal became
the fabulous experience of every gourmets dreams.
169
Extravagant culinary arts were a way to underscore the power of the court,
as seen during the Ancien Rgime and the Second Empire. Personal chefs, the
profusion of fresh produce, table setting, and table manners all contributed to
conspicuous cuisine. However, starting in the 1830s, the number of excellent
chefs cooking in the private court diminished, while it increased in the public
sphere, the emphasis on cuisine shifting away from the aristocratic court to the
new elite, the bourgeoisie. Also, many talented chefs went to work at foreign
courts, where French culinary art was very much appreciated. However, those
who stayed and cooked in the great restaurants continued developing French
haute cuisine.
During the Second Empire, Napoleon IIIs court continued to host lavish
receptions, with the emphasis on appearance, room decoration, and table setting,
elements calculated to bedazzle guests. The more gold there was, the more
impressed people were, which heightened the sense of the power of Napoleon
IIIs court and of France. However, when it came to culinary excellence,
refinement was lacking because of his efforts to maintain an affiliation with
the French populous. French cuisine, so crucial for the courts of the Ancien
Rgime, lost some of its significance at the court of Napoleon III. His court
was based on superficialityto impress the nation and other states he created
effect through lavishnessand the grandiose receptions held at the palaces (as
well as the aggrandizement of Paris) were perfect examples of this attempt to
dazzle the people. The motivations for the imperial couple to host such large
and sumptuous events were to give the illusion of grandeur in order to maintain
power. Pomp worked well on the nouveau riche, the bourgeoisie, and the people,
but not on old money, which was very critical of dcor and food, stressing that
it lacked refinement. The emperors tastes were reflected through food served
at court. Quantity was interpreted as a form of opulence; his modest interest
in food explained why the Second Empires court food was simply copious
neither refined nor intriguing. Unlike leaders of other nations of the same time
period, Napoleon III and Eugenie rejected the powerful role culinary art played.
Nonetheless, French haute cuisine was at its apogee during the nineteenth
century, especially in refined restaurants like Chez Vry and the Caf Anglais,
hence satisfying the tastes of gourmets and gastronomes. Thanks to them, haute
cuisine survived and continued growing, to become the basis for contemporary
three-star restaurants.
Chapter 7
Culinary Networks of Power in a

Nineteenth-Century Court Society:
Dining with the Kings of the Belgians
(18311909)
Danille De Vooght
Although the impact of the French Revolution on aristocracy and monarchy

outside France may be exaggerated by some, it did bring forth the end of
absolutist regimes in Western Europe. Monarchs could no longer claim
superiority to everything and everyone as Gods representatives on earth, and
nineteenth-century rulersoften from newly established monarchiesrealized
this. Leopold I, the first king of the Belgians (18311865), was no exception.
This is apparent in his letters to his niece, the future Queen Victoria of Britain,
in which he contemplates the unpredictable circumstances under which he
became king of the recently founded Belgian kingdom.
In 1875, Leopolds son, Leopold II, the second king of the Belgians, arranged
the marriage of his 17-year old daughter Louise to a member of the Hungarian
branch of the Coburg family. With this marriage, the Belgian court became
connected to the Habsburg Empire; it already had family ties to Queen Victoria.
Although Belgium emerged as an independent nation with a king, it had rather
strong parliamentary control as well. Both kings, Leopold I and II, wanted
to be strong rulers; they embedded themselves in a well-built (international)
network. Princess Louises marriage served this cause perfectly, as is confirmed
See for example: J. Deploige and G. Deneckere (eds), Mystifying the Monarch: Studies
on Discourse, Power, and History (Amsterdam, 2006); P. Janssens, De evolutie van de Belgische
adel sinds de Late Middeleeuwen (Brussels, 1998).

D. De Vooght, Performing Power at the Dining Table: Dinner Guests of the Belgian
Kings in the Nineteenth Century, in P. Janssens and S. Zeischka (eds), The Dining Nobility,
from the Burgundian Dukes to the Belgian Royalty (Brussels, 2008), pp. 10411.

King Leopold I was also related (through marriage) to the last king of France, LouisPhilippe, who reigned between 1830 and 1848.
172
Royal Taste
by a passage in the journal LEcho du Parlement. LEcho, reporting about the

wedding, summarized the compilation of the royal guest list in the following
words: lAlmanach Royal y passerait tout entier.
Can the Belgian royal court indeed be approached as a privileged locus of
social, economic, cultural, and political power? The chapter at hand will examine
this by looking at the (con)figuration of Leopold I and IIs dinner guest lists.
Introducing Eliass The Court Society
It may seem somewhat masochistic for a historian to commence an argument
by referring to sociologist Norbert Eliass The Court Society. Indeed, Eliass
famous study sets about comparing the mtier of the historian with that of
the sociologist, the latter clearly being considered the more useful and real
craft, since sociology examines the social formations in which individuals
actions take place instead of these actions as such. According to Elias, what is
called history often looks like an accumulation of discrete actions by individual
people []. The connections between particular phenomena are often left to
arbitrary interpretation and speculation. Needless to say, historians, certainly
those of the (post-) Annales period, will not agree with Eliass depiction of their
trade. To use Roger Chartiers words, Thus kings have been dethroned in
historical preoccupations, and with them the illusion of the power of individual
intentions.
When examining the introduction to The Court Society more closely, it
becomes clear that Elias actually pleads for a collaboration between both history
and sociology. He even reproaches sociologists for coming up with grand
theoretical schemes that lack the empirical evidence to back them up.10 In The
Court Society, Elias combines what he considers to be the better of two worlds:
using ample historical empirical material to formulate and test sociological
theories. Therefore, when studying a court, even as a historian, it appears that

LAlmanach Royal is a list of personnel employed by the Belgian State, including
members of Parliament, government, ministries, et cetera.

Archief Koninklijk Paleis, Fonds Leopold II. Departement Grootmaarschalk, 81.

N. Elias, The Court Society (Dublin, 2006).

Elias, The Court Society, p. 6.

One should not forget that this work was actually written by Elias in the early
1930s.

R. Chartier, Social Figuration and Habitus: Reading Elias, in E. Dunning and S.
Mennell (eds), Norbert Elias. Volume I (London, 2003), p. 258.
10
Elias, The Court Society, pp. 2531.
Culinary Networks of Power in a Nineteenth-Century Court Society
173
Elias cannot be ignored. But can Eliass findings actually be used as a lead when
researching all courts?
In the aforementioned work, Elias examines courts of the Ancien Rgime,
especially focusing on the reign of Frances Louis XIV (16611715). More
specifically, he wonders how and why during a certain phase in state formation
it was possible that one person was so remarkably powerful; how and why a
king could become an absolute ruler.11 His study could be read (superficially) as
a description of a place of ritual and symbolic display. However, as Elias boldly
states, it is the task of sociology to bring the unstructured background of much
previous historical research into the foreground and to make it accessible to
systematic research as a structured weft of individuals and their actions,12 it
is clear that his study of a court society should transcend the illustrative level.
Elias actually wants to prove that, whether examining a group of friends, the
inhabitants of a village, or a group of courtiers, one should always focus on the
relationships between people, not on individuals as such. By looking at the
structure of dwellings as well as at etiquette and ceremony, Elias argues that it
was the specific figuration of the residents of Louis XIVs court, a situation of
reciprocal respect and fear of losing ones position within the figuration, that
provided for the Sun Kings emergence as an absolute monarch. Determining
whether or not Elias was right falls outside the scope of this chapter. Moreover,
several authors have already tackled this question.13 Nonetheless, the usefulness
of the concept of figuration should be further explored.
According to Elias, talking of the individual and society can lead us to
forget that people always come in groups and that society is nothing more
than a structured set of individuals.14 This oversight should be avoided at all
cost. Furthermore, it is imperative that these structured sets of individuals are
not considered to be static. In Eliass opinion, sociologists should abstain from
considering a stable community to be normal and a changing one to be
unusual.15 The processual character of sociologys subjects should be included
in (instead of abstracted from) the concepts that are being used to describe them.
Consequently, Elias refrains from employing the denomination structure
when describing society, but instead talks about dynamic figurations of

13
For more information on this topic: see this chapters bibliography.
14
E. Dunning and S. Mennell, Editors Introduction, in Dunning and Mennell,
11
12
Norbert Elias. Volume I, p. xvi.

15
N. Elias, Wat is sociologie? (Utrecht and Amsterdam, 1970), p. 127.
Royal Taste
174
interdependent humans,16 figurations alluding to both human individuals

actions and their interdependence.17 Important notions for grasping the
concept of figuration therefore are formation, interdependence, and balance of
tensions:
A figuration is a social form of extremely variable extent (made up of a group
playing cards together, the patrons of a caf, a school class, a village, a city,
a nation) in which the individuals involved are linked by a specific mode of
reciprocal dependence and the reproduction of which supposes a mobile balance
of tensions.18
The advantage of this approach is the flexibility of the interdependency chains

modes of definition. With his notion of changing social formations Elias
wishes to transcend the polarity between free individuals and human beings as
members of a community, and between concrete human beings and abstract
social bindings between people.19 Finally, Eliass representation of social reality
should be mentioned. Eliass social reality unifies intentions and non-intentional
actions, it does not separate these two levels. Rather it emphasizes that the
interconnections between intentions can have a non-intentional character.20
Social reality should not be equated with intentional (meaningful) connections
between human beings, since both intentions and individuality are the outcome
of unplanned processes.21 With this perspective Elias tries to avoid having too
much significance attributed to either intentions or non-intentional actions.22
Eliass perception of power emanates from this changing and relational
worldview. Or perhaps it is the other way around. On the one hand, power can be
This formulation incites Dunning and Mennell to state that through this and similar
formulations, Elias succeeded in circumventing what philosophically minded sociologists
such as Anthony Giddens call the agency-structure dilemma. Unfortunately, an in depth
discussion of this sociological issue falls outside the scope of this chapter. However, it remains
an interesting topic. For more information: Dunning and Mennell, Editors Introduction,
p. xvi.
17
E. Dunning, Agency and Structure in the Work of Norbert Elias, in Dunning
and Mennell, Norbert Elias. Volume I, p. 327.
18
Chartier, Social Figuration and Habitus: Reading Elias, p. 263.
19
Ibid., p. 264.
20
A. Bogner, The Structure of Social Processes: A Commentary on the Sociology of
Norbert Elias, in Dunning and Mennell, Norbert Elias. Volume I, pp. 2067.
21
Ibid., p. 207.
22
This idea has been thoroughly elaborated on in The Civilizing Process. J. Goudsblom,
J. Heilbron and N. Wilterdink (eds), Norbert Elias. Het civilisatieproces. Sociogenetische en
psychogenetische onderzoekingen (Amsterdam, 2001).
16
175
possessed and exercised by individuals, but power remains relational and altering,
following the shifts in balance within social networks/figurations.23 On the other
hand, it is because of the multitude of centers of resources and the asymmetry
of human relationships that power can only occur in a dynamic environment,
therefore requiring a processual social reality.24 Anyhow, according to Elias,
power relations and (changing) figurations of interdependency are interrelated
and he stresses the dynamic nature of the concept of power: Power is not like an
amulet that is possessed by one and not by another; it is a structural characteristic
of human relationsall human relations.25 In order to explain how (groups of )
people are always related, even unintentionally, and how these relationships have
a bearing on the balance of power, Elias has developed figuration models based
on games, for example playing a game of cards.26 In these models, he discerns
game situations in which two players are competing, and games in which more
than two players are involved. For each type of game he then visualizes what
would happen if the playing strength of the different players varied during the
course of the game: Like figuration itself, Eliass term power is the name of
a relational and processual concepta combination which is far from trivial.27
From these experiments it indeed becomes clear that, for Elias, power relations
are related to the existence of asymmetric networks of control and constraint.28
Looking for Figurations at Courts
This is the case in all kinds of social groups, as there are court societies,
which, according to Elias, have been neglected by sociologists for too long.
In The Court Society he concentrates on the emergence of the absolute ruler.
However, he does not focus on the individual king,29 but instead wonders how
this royal position, which holds an exceptional amount of power, could have
developeda development that only came to a halt as a result of the extension
R. Sibeon, Rethinking Social Theory (London, 2004), p. 65.
J. Arnason, Figurational Sociology as a Counter-Paradigm, in M. Featherstone
23
24
(ed.), Norbert Elias and Figurational Sociology. Special issue of Theory, Culture & Society:
Explorations in Critical Social Science (London, 1987), pp. 4423.
25
Translation by author. Text in Dutch from Elias, Wat is sociologie?, p. 81: Macht is
niet een amulet, die de een bezit en de ander niet; het is een structuurkenmerk van menselijke
betrekkingenvan alle menselijke betrekkingen.
26
Elias, Wat is sociologie?, pp. 79113.
27
Bogner, The Structure of Social Processes, p. 210.
28
Arnason, Figurational Sociology as a Counter-Paradigm, p. 433.
29
This is what historians would do, according to Elias.
Royal Taste
176
of industrialization and urbanization. As already mentioned, his study uses

Louis XIVs court as a starting point. According to Elias, even Louis XIV,
le Roi Soleil, who is often taken as the supreme example of the omnipotent
absolute monarch [] could preserve his power only by a carefully calculated
strategy which was governed by the peculiar structure of court society in the
narrow sense, and more broadly by society at large.30 Although he focuses on
one court in particular, with his approach, Elias aims at developing a model
that makes it possible to compare different court societies and to understand
and even explain the rulers actions.31 He even suggests that the findings
emerging from studying a court society can provide insight in all human
relations: even as a limited model, court society is well suited to test through
practical application, and so to clarify the meaning of concepts that may seem
unfamiliar, such as figuration, interdependence, balance of tensions, and
the evolution of a figuration.32
Different aspects of Eliass approach, however, have been criticized.33 For
example Sibeon mentions (combining the arguments of different authors) that
social networks/social systems vary in the degree of integration, unitaryness
or homogeneity that they exhibit.34 Critics also point out that focusing on
social networks might underrate the significance of individual actions for the
sake of structure.35 More concrete is Jeroen Duindams critique of the model of
figuration Elias applied to court society:
In their abstract form the mechanisms in Eliass model mesh well with one
another; the logic disappears, however, when the model is applied to concrete
situations and individuals. [] Thus in Elias there is a yawning gap between fact
and theory, which he, like those he criticized for this deficiency, was unable to
bridge.36
32
33
30

Ibid., p. 5.
Ibid., p. 226.
See, for example, Part Seven. Critiques and Counter-Critiques in E. Dunning and
S. Mennell (eds), Norbert Elias. Volume IV (London, 2003); M. Featherstone, Norbert Elias
and Figurational Sociology; Special Issue of Theory, Culture & Society: Explorations in Critical
Social Science (London, 1987); M.-J. de Jong, Grootmeesters van de sociologie (Boom, 1997).
34
Sibeon, Rethinking Social Theory, p. 160.
35
D. De Vooght, Culinary Networks of Power: Dining with King Leopold II of
Belgium (18651909) Food & History, 4/1 (2006): p. 89.
36
J. Duindam, Myths of Power: Norbert Elias and the Early Modern European Court
(Amsterdam, 1995), p. 183.
31
177
Nonetheless, Elias did introduce some important conceptual principles.37

Without disregarding the aforementioned remarks, one could indeed benefit
from focusing on a group of individuals rather than concentrating mainly on
the individuals as such. Analyzing networks helps one to picture the dynamics
within a group, define its (con)figuration, and examine this (con)figurations
influence on the mode of operation of both the group and the individuals
comprising it, and it might even allow the investigation of the formations long
term evolution. [] it could be argued that the concept of figuration is a useful
descriptive (rather than explanatory) tool for analysing the ways in which []
networks of people interrelate [] over time in terms of their different degrees
of power over one another.38 Indeed, Eliass approach is especially useful as far
as the notion of power is concerned. As Duindam formulates it, he puts the
phenomenon of power into perspective by regarding it as a permanent fact of
any relationship [] a shifting, flexible balance of power.39 It is particularly this
relational and dynamic understanding of power that might be of use for court
studies:40 In the pre-industrial era, the princely court was the most common
form of power [] The comparison of the courts of early modern Europe with
courts of the pre-industrial era and courts outside of Europe, however, indicates
[] a significant degree of continuity.41
Can Eliass figurational model be used, not as an explanatory factor of
a specific process, but as a framework of analysis, for example when studying
courts other than seventeenth-century Versailles?
Performing Power at the Dining Table
The introductory chapter of this book has clearly established a relationship
between food (culture) and the execution of power. With this in mindas well
as Eliass dynamic and figurational perception of power, his suggestion that a
court society can be utilized as a proxy for society (cf. supra), and the idea that
food is a central issue within a court (cf. the introductory chapter of this book)
analyzing the kings dinner guests in order to gain insight into (a societys) shifting
power relations is not that far-fetched. Court life as it occurred in the seventeenth
Sibeon, Rethinking Social Theory, p. 65.
D. Layder, A Critique of Eliass Conception of Sociological Analysis, in Dunning
37
38
and Mennell, Norbert Elias. Volume IV, p. 315.

39
Duindam, Myths of Power: Norbert Elias and the Early Modern European Court,
p. 189.
40
Ibid.
41
Ibid., p. 192.
Royal Taste
178
and eighteenth centuries ceased to exist in post-French Revolution Western

Europe. Courts no longer assembled a group of courtiers around an absolute
monarch. Nonetheless, courtly dinners did convene all sorts and conditions of
people on an almost daily basisas opposed to state balls, weddings, and funerals,
which were mostly sheer manifestations of pomp and circumstance.42
Who was invited to join the king and queen at the dining table for lunch or
dinner?43 How did the guest lists evolve over time? Can subgroups be detected,
and do the culinary networks (or figurations) at the kings dining table reflect a
(shifting) balance of power within Belgian society at that moment in time? And
was food at a nineteenth-century royal court relevant in the context of exerting
power, as was the case at Louis XIVs court, for example?
This chapter will examine dinner guests at the court in the years 1835, 1855,
1869, and 1888, which takes into account different periods within the reign
of both the first king of the Belgians, Leopold I (18311865), and the second
king, Leopold II (18651909), and consequently enables a comparison between
two distinct eras. It will analyze the figuration of the king and queens dinner
guests making use of the technique of Social Network Analysis (SNA).44 The
core of network analysis consists of several key concepts. Members of a group,
departments in a firm, or even nation-states in the world are actors. Actors are
connected to one another by relational or social ties. A social network is the finite
set of actors and the relations defined on them. It is these relationships among
social units and the fact that the focus of the analysis is on a group of individuals
that embody the distinctiveness of Social Network Analysis.45 Although Elias
stresses the importance of a relational worldview, he does not provide for an
See also: G. Deneckere, The Impossible Neutrality of the Speech from the Throne:
A Ritual between National Unity and Political Dispute. Belgium, 18311918, in Deploige
and Deneckere, Mystifying the Monarch, pp. 20521; De Vooght, Performing Power at the
Dining Table: Dinner Guests of the Belgian Kings in the Nineteenth Century.
43
Guest lists were kept at the Belgian Royal Archives. The department of the lord
chamberlain started keeping track of dinner guests from the very beginning of the Belgian
monarchy. The chronologically sorted lists go back to September 1831 and cover every year
(almost without exception) until 1909. The alphabetically arranged guest lists are preserved as
of 1844. We find names, titles, and governmental position (when applicable) of the guests and
often there is a seating chart included. For more information: De Vooght, Culinary Networks
of Power: Dining with King Leopold II of Belgium (18651909), pp. 925; Archief
Koninklijk Paleis, Fonds Leopold II. Departement Grootmaarschalk, Genodigdenlijsten.
44
I will use Pajek software. This software is especially interesting when dealing with large
networks, of 1,000 actors and more. For more information: http://pajek.imfm.si/doku.php.
45
For more detailed information on Social Network Analysis, see also: P. Merckl, La
sociologie des rseaux sociaux (Paris, 2004); J.P. Scott, Social Network Analysis: A Handbook
(London, 2000); S. Wasserman and K. Faust (eds), Social Network Analysis: Methods and
42
179
analytical tool. Therefore, SNA is a useful technique when looking for figurations
in the spirit of Eliass work.
Gaining a first insight into the culinary networks at the Belgian royal court
might provide a glimpse at the power relations within Belgian society of the
nineteenth century. Moreover, the analysis can help determine whether Eliass
figurational approach is indeed a useful tool when analyzing power relations
between people.
In Search of Networks at the Belgian Kings Dining Table
A first understanding of changes in the composition of the dinner guest lists can be
retrieved by merely looking at the number of dinner occasions and the number of
guests (unique and on average). This exploration shows a steep decline between 1835
and 1888, but especially between 1835 and 1855 (with a decrease of 20 percent in
both the number of dinner occasions and the average number of guests).46 Between
1855 and 1888 the number of unique entries increased, while the average number of
guests and the number of dinner occasions hardly changed during the same period.
This probably means that more individuals were invited at the court, but that fewer of
them got an invitation more than once in the same year. Indeed, in 1835, 60 percent
of the guests were invited only once during that year, while 6 percent received seven
dinner invitations or more. Already in 1855, 67 percent received only one invitation,
but this did not seem to have an influence on the number of guests who were invited
seven times or more. This situation altered during the reign of King Leopold II. The
number of guests who were to have dinner at the royal court seven times or more
decreased to 3 percent in 1869 and only 2 percent in 1888. This is a decline of more
than 60 percent in the number of (very) frequent guests in a period of just over 50
years. Meanwhile, the number of one-time-per-year guests increased by 18 percent.
In the following, the dinner occasions will be examined a bit more closely by
using the SNA technique.
Figure 7.1 shows dinners at the Belgian royal court in 1835. The ties (lines)
between the occasions represent those guests who were invited to both of two
occasions. It is clear that all dinner occasions are connected to one or more other
events. This is not surprising, since the king and queen and their staff are considered
guests as well, and were present at all occasions taken into account.
Applications (Cambridge, 1994); De Vooght, Culinary Networks of Power: Dining with
King Leopold II of Belgium (18651909), pp. 85104.
46
For a more detailed analysis of these data: De Vooght, Performing Power at the
Dining Table: Dinner Guests of the Belgian Kings in the Nineteenth Century.
Figure 7.1
Visual representation of all dinner occasions at the Belgian royal court in 1835 and how these are linked by guests.
(Pajek software).
181
Table 7.1 Line values of the one-mode network consisting of dinner

occasions, 1835 (Pajek Report Window).
Line Values
( 1.0000)
(1.0000 2.0000)
(2.0000 3.0000)
(3.0000 4.0000)
(4.0000 5.0000)
(5.0000 6.0000)
(6.0000 7.0000)
(7.0000 8.0000)
(8.0000 9.0000)
(9.0000 10.0000)
(10.0000 11.0000)
(11.0000 12.0000)
(12.0000 13.0000)
(13.0000 14.0000)
(14.0000 15.0000)
(15.0000 16.0000)
(16.0000 17.0000)
(17.0000 18.0000)
(18.0000 19.0000)
(19.0000 20.0000)
(20.0000 21.0000)
(21.0000 22.0000)
(22.0000 23.0000)
(23.0000 24.0000)
(24.0000 25.0000)
(25.0000 26.0000)
(26.0000 27.0000)
(27.0000 28.0000)
(29.0000 29.0000)
Frequency
CumFreq%
20
2
2
8
15
17
30
58
39
39
28
24
16
10
9
10
7
5
3
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
5.7803
6.3584
6.9364
9.2486
13.5838
18.4971
27.1676
43.9306
55.2023
66.4740
74.5665
81.5029
86.1272
89.0173
91.6185
94.5087
96.5318
97.9769
98.8439
98.8439
98.8439
99.1329
99.4220
99.4220
99.4220
99.4220
99.7110
99.7110
100.0000
Royal Taste
182
Table 7.2 Line values of the one-mode network consisting of dinner guests,
1835 (Pajek Report Window).
Line Values
( 1.0000)
(1.0000 2.0000)
(2.0000 3.0000)
(3.0000 4.0000)
(4.0000 5.0000)
(5.0000 6.0000)
(6.0000 7.0000)
(7.0000 8.0000)
(8.0000 9.0000)
(9.0000 10.0000)
(10.0000 11.0000)
(11.0000 12.0000)
(12.0000 13.0000)
(13.0000 14.0000)
(14.0000 15.0000)
(15.0000 16.0000)
(16.0000 17.0000)
(17.0000 18.0000)
(18.0000 19.0000)
(19.0000 20.0000)
(20.0000 21.0000)
(21.0000 22.0000)
Frequency
CumFreq%
26386
1888
529
223
129
56
43
21
6
17
17
12
3
9
4
4
5
3
5
3
2
3
89.8461
96.2749
98.0761
98.8355
99.2747
99.4654
99.6118
99.6833
99.7038
99.7616
99.8195
99.8604
99.8706
99.9013
99.9149
99.9285
99.9455
99.9557
99.9728
99.9830
99.9898
100.0000
Nonetheless, when these actors47 are removed48 from the equation, the picture
remains the same: all events in 1835 are connected to each other by one or more
guests and, thus, have one or more guests in common. Zooming in on the ties
between the events (Tablw 7.1), it becomes clear that approximately 66 percent of
these ties (lines linking a pair of dinner occasions) have a line value of ten or fewer
guests (or: two dinner occasions are connected to each other by ten lines, and thus
guests, or fewer). In other words, 66 percent of the total pairs of events have ten
or fewer guests in common. One pair of dinner occasions (0.29 percent) has 29
In Pajek, actors are called vertices. I use the word actor because this is more clear.
Le Grand Marchal, le Capitaine de Garde, le Grand Ecuyer, le Gnral de Han (head
47
48
of the kings military household), Leurs Majests, Monsieur Vanpraet (the kings secretary), la
Comtesse de Mrode, and la Baronne de Stassart (ladies-in-waiting) were removed from the
network and the network was redrawn without these actors.
Figure 7.2
Visualization of the component of the one-mode network consisting of guests (tied by occasions), 1869 (Pajek).
Royal Taste
184
guests in common (29 people that were invited for one event, were also invited for
the other), 20 pairs of events (5.78 percent) have only one guest in common.49
Does this mean that dinners at the Belgian royal court were not a place of
frequent gatherings and contacts between invitees, and, consequently, were
not really privileged loci of power as was the case in the early modern period?
Looking at the network of guests might shed some light on this issue.
Table 7.2 shows that almost 90 percent of the pairs of guests are tied to one
another by only one dinner occasion. This means that if two people met (at
dinner) at the court in 1835, there was a 90 percent chance they would not meet
each other again that year for dinner at the court. This rate does indeed imply
that dinner occasions at the court (in 1835) were not places where people could
meet and interact. Perhaps the number of guests one could interact with makes
up for the lack of frequency.
Looking at the degree50 of the invitees might help answer this question.
Apparently, when one was to have dinner at the Belgian royal court in 1835,
a year in which 715 different guests were invited, one was to meet at least 14
different people: ten percent of the invitees were directly connected to 1449
persons present; almost 15 percent were related to 54 other guests; and 75
percent were tied to 1477 other invitees. However, it is imperative to realize
that this direct connection is a consequence of how Social Network Analysis
works. These people were invited to the same dinner occasion, and are therefore
tied; but this does not necessarily mean they actually had direct contact with one
another. Nonetheless, before taking their places at the dining table in one of
the palaces salles manger, dinner guests were welcomed in the salon, which is
where guests departed from as well.51 Therefore, the relationship between dinner
guests should not be minimized either, since these people did indeed have the
chance to interact and interpersonal ties matter [], because they transmit
behavior, attitudes, information, or goods.52 Moreover, the one-mode network
of guests only has one component.53 This means that, even though two people
The king, queen, and their staff included.
In a simple undirected network, the degree of a vertex is equal to the number of
49
50
vertices that are adjacent to this vertex: its neighbors. Each line that is incident with the vertex
connects it to another vertex [] W. de Nooy, A. Mrvar and V. Batagelj (eds), Exploratory
Social Network Analysis with Pajek (Cambridge, 2005), p. 64.
51
Archief Koninklijk Paleis (s.d.), Fonds Leopold I. Departement Grootmaarschalk,
141bis: protocollaire richtlijnen.
52
de Nooy, Mrvar and Batagelj (eds), Exploratory Social Network Analysis with Pajek, p. 3.
53
A network is connected if each pair of vertices (actors) is connected by a (semi)path.
A (semi)path is a sequence of lines between two vertices (actors) in which no vertex (actor)
occurs more than once (and is therefore the most efficient route between two vertices
185
were not invited on the same day, they might have been invited together with
a third (or fourth, or fifth ) person. Consequently, the first pair of invitees is
related as well. Apparently, invitees of 1835 were all connected to one another
in an indirect way, and, thus, information could be distributed to all members of
the network of dinner guests in an indirect way.
In the preceding paragraphs, it has been established that people did not
meet often (at dinner) at the court in 1835, but that they did have access to
a substantial network of other invitees. Let us examine how these networks
evolved over the nineteenth century.
In all three other years that were examined (1855, 1869, and 1888), again all
dinners shared guests with one or more other event.
Table 7.3 Interpretation of the line values of the one-mode network
consisting of all dinner occasions (tied by guests)54
Year
1835
1855
1869
1888
Percentage of pairs Max. number of

of events with 10 guests in common
or fewer guests in
common
66.47
59.52
86.03
87.86
29
25
17
20
Percentage of
pairs of events
with the max.
number of guests
in common
0.29
0.48
0.55
1.16
Percentage of
pairs of events
with 1 guest in
common
5.78
0.48
4.47
1.16
Table 7.3 shows an interpretation of the line values of the pairs of dinner
occasions in the four different years. No clear pattern emerges when looking at
these numbers, but two things can be pointed out. First, there is a dramatic increase
in the percentage of pairs of events that have trn or fewer guests in common,
especially when the reign of Leopold I (1835 and 1855) is compared to that of
Leopold II (1869 and 1888). Second, the maximum number of guests that a pair
of events had in common decreases throughout the century, again implying a
difference between the reigns of both kings. The idea that dinner occasions at
the Belgian royal court of the nineteenth century were not venues for frequent
gathering is also reinforced by these data. Moreover, the line values of the pairs
of guests in the one-mode network consisting of all guests add up to this equation,
since these show a 90 to 95 percent chance that two people who met each other
[actors]). A component is a maximal connected sub-network. For more information on
components: de Nooy, Mrvar and Batagelj (eds), Exploratory Social Network Analysis with
Pajek, pp. 6670.
54
This table summarizes the report windows generated by Pajek.
Royal Taste
186
once at a dinner occasion at the court would not meet again for dinner at the court
in that particular year.55
Table 7.4 Interpretation of the degree of all vertices in the one-mode network
consisting of all dinner guests (tied by occasions)56
Year
1835
1855
1869
1888
Min. number of
people someone
was connected to
14
21
15
11
Number of guests Number of guests Number of guests

that 10% of guests that 50% of guests that 75% of guests
were connected to were connected to were connected to
1449
1456
1477
2128
2152
2199
1524
1576
1599
1129
1177
1185
Although the year 1855 seems to differ slightly from the other three years,
important changes do not seem to have taken place as far as the number of ties
between guests is concerned (Table 7.4). When invited for dinner at the court, one
was to meet at least ten to 20 other invitees, and 75 percent of the invitees were tied
to between ten and almost 100 dinner companions. Moreover, these networks were
also composed of only one component, implying that all invitees were connected
to one another in a direct or indirect way. Figure 7.2 illustrates the visualization of
the components of the 1869 network by Pajek. It is clear that all actors within this
network are directly or indirectly tied to one another.
Apparently, people were not to have dinner often at the Belgian royal court
in the nineteenth century; but when they did, they had access to a substantial
network of other invitees, either in a direct or indirect way.
Let us now take a look at the composition of the guest lists. From the
evolution of the number of dinner invitations per year it is clear that ever fewer
people were invited often, and that increasingly more people got invited only
once per year. Of course, the members of the royal family and of the Maison du
Roi57 are to be found among the people who were to have dinner at the court
Percentages of pairs of guests who have one dinner occasion in common:
55
1835: 89.85 percent

1855: 91.38 percent
1869: 95.55 percent
1888: 95.61 percent.
This table summarizes the report windows generated by Pajek.

La Maison du Roi consists of four departments. Every department plays its part in
56
57
assisting the king. Le Cabinet du Roi is occupied with the social and political life in Belgium
and organizes meetings with the government. The Military Office takes care of the security
187
ten times or more per year. This did not change over the course of the century.
However, the composition of the remainder of the guest list did change. In 1835,
almost half of the frequent dinner guests of the king were members of notable
Belgian families (e.g. de Mrode, Vilain XIIII, dHooghvorst). The guest list was
completed by members of the government58 and several high-ranking military
officers. In 1855, the king and his family were again accompanied most often by
members of the government59 and by Charles de Brouckre, a former minister
but by then the mayor of Brussels. Unless they had taken up a governmental
position, the prominent families were no longer habitus at the Belgian royal
court. They did not even make up the majority of people who were invited four
to six times per year; these were mostly military fonctionnaires.
The years 1869 and 1888 show the same habitus: the royal family, the Maison
du Roi, and the most important members of government. In 1888 only le Baron
de Lambermont, ministre dtat, and le Prince de Chimay, ministre des affaires
trangres, were invited for dinner more than seven times. Moreover, they were
invited on the same day four times that year and both sat at the kings table;60 75
percent of the time they were invited together and they sat next to each other
in close proximity to the king.61 Reminding ourselves of the fact that Leopold
II bought lEtat Indpendant du Congo in 1885, and that Lambermont played
of the royal family and advises the king on cases concerning defense strategies. La Liste Civil
is responsible for finances at the court and the Department of the Royal Chamberlain is
occupied with the public appearance of the king and his family.
For more information on this topic: A. Molitor, La fonction royale en Belgique (Brussels,
1994); G. Janssens, De koningen der Belgen. Inzet voor vrede en evenwicht in eigen land en
in Europa, in A. Molitor, G. Janssens, M. Vermeire and G. de Greef (eds), Koninklijk paleis
Brussel (Brussels, 1993), pp. 2457.
58
Le Vicomte Charles Vilain XIIII (ministre des affaires trangres), Monsieur De
Decker (ministre de lintrieur), le Gnral Greindl (ministre de la guerre), Monsieur Dumon
(ministre des travaux publics), Monsieur Mercier (ministre des finances), and Monsieur
Nothomb (ministre de la justice).
59
Le Vicomte Charles Vilain XIIII (ministre des affaires trangres), Monsieur De
Decker (ministre de lintrieur), le Gnral Greindl (ministre de la guerre), Monsieur Dumon
(ministre des travaux publics), Monsieur Mercier (ministre des finances), and Monsieur
Nothomb (ministre de la justice).
60
In 1869 also, the most frequent guests were often invited on the same day and sat
at the kings table. This information can be obtained from the table arrangements that were
saved with the guest lists for the period of the reign of King Leopold II. Unfortunately, this
information is not available for the reign of Leopold I.
61
Archief Koninklijk Paleis, Fonds Leopold II. Departement Grootmaarschalk, Diners.
Chronologische lijst der genodigden. Register 461 (18861892).
188
Royal Taste
a substantial part in this purchase, one might wonder about the subject of the
table talk in those days []62
At the same time that the number of habitus decreased, the number of
one-time-per-year invitations expanded. And the profile of these guests seems
to be ever more diversified. While fonctionnaires importants and members of
prominent families dominated Leopold Is guest lists, Leopold II also invited
artists, curators, architects, and members of the financial world.
Finally, the number of guests one is related to in a network (the degree,
cf. supra) provides an insight into the position of each table companion in
the network. In the years 1835 and 1855 it was not King Leopold I who was
tied to the most other guests in the network of dinner companions, but the
Grand Marchal. In 1869 and 1888, King Leopold II counted for the most
connections with other guests. As can be expected, members of the royal family
and of the Maison du Roi were tied to the most other invitees, since they also
were present at almost every occasion. Proportional to the number of dinner
invitations, members of government take a high spot in this ranking. In 1888,
for example, le Prince de Chimay and le Baron de Lambermont are connected to
298 and 248 people respectively, which puts them in eighth and ninth place. The
diversification in the guests profile is also confirmed by the degree of the actors.
Notables drop down the list when the number of relations is concerned, while
representatives seem to climb the ranking, and in 1888, artists and architects
appear. For example, Monsieur Robin, a painter, is connected to 88 other guests
in 1888 and takes 54th place. Of course, these numbers as such are not that
important. However, knowing which people were the cores of the network (and
knowing who was directly and indirectly tied to these cores) means being able to
identify how information (and thus power?) could have been distributed easily
and quickly within the network.
Culinary Networks of Power
The theatre of power63 in which monarchs had to perform changed dramatically
over the nineteenth century, mostly due to what happened in the wake of the
French Revolution. Instead of being Gods representatives on earth, the kings and
queens of the nineteenth century were to be approachable, human, familiar,
but nonetheless magical. Kings Leopold I and Leopold II were each titled King
62
De Vooght, Performing Power at the Dining Table: Dinner Guests of the Belgian
Kings in the Nineteenth Century, p. 110.
63
J. van Osta, Het theater van de Staat. Oranje, Windsor en de moderne monarchie
(Amsterdam, 1998).
189
of the Belgians, which already explains a lot about the transformations that had
occurred since the eighteenth century.
Like monarchy, aristocracy underwent drastic changes in the aftermath
of the French Revolution. Although the often-drawn picture of decay and
disintegration proves to be wrong, nobles of the nineteenth century did need to
adjust to retain power.64
In Belgium, a monarchy with strong parliamentary control was instituted
after the revolution against the Kingdom of the Netherlands in 1830. Although
Belgium was founded by revolutionaries with extreme opinions who definitely
did not want to go back to the Ancien Rgime, the nation-state was built more
pragmatically, and old noble families also got a part in it.65 This is not hard to
understand, since these families were still very important social and economic
forces with a political and cultural impact that could not be ignored. However,
this changed over the course of the century: bankers, industrialists, and merchants
became ever more important in ruling the country in not only economic and
political terms, but in cultural and social ones as well.
The analysis of the kings dinner guests confirms and amplifies the actuality
of this situation. It also shows that the kings inner circle became smaller and
that the guest lists became ever more diversified, including for example artists
and architects in 1888. This diversification is an echo of the shifting balance of
power within the Belgian ruling classes. Indeed, although some habitus clearly
embodied the kings personal interestse.g. the Minister of War who was often
nothing less than subordinate to the king and le Baron Lambermont with his
part in the purchase of the Congobeing invited for dinner at the court was
mostly a direct consequence of a persons function in society.
It also became clear that the Belgian royal court of the nineteenth century
did not provide for a place of frequent gathering by organizing dinner occasions.
People did not get invited often enough for this to happen. Nonetheless, dinners
provided a substantial network for all invitees and therefore presumably facilitated
power performance for those present, andpossibly even more interesting
made it more difficult for those absent. Altogether, dinner occasions at the court
confirmed the playing field of power relations, and provided perhaps not the, but
a place to be in nineteenth-century Belgium.
This analysis demonstrates as well that studying food culture indeed provides
an interesting tool to tackle broader questions. Even though one cannot compare
the relationship between an absolute ruler and his royal household of courtiers
Janssens, De evolutie van de Belgische adel sinds de Late Middeleeuwen.
E. Witte, De constructie van Belgi, 18281847, in E. Witte, J.-P. Nandrin, E.
64
65
Gubin and G. Deneckere (eds), Nieuwe geschiedenis van Belgi I: 18301905 (Tielt, 2005),
pp. 10925.
Royal Taste
190
at an early modern court society with that between a post- French Revolution
monarch and his dinner invitees at a nineteenth-century court, examining
dinner occasions at the royal court proved to have more to offer than merely
menus of exuberant meals. In fact, without even taking the actual meals into
account, investigating food culture brings forth interesting elements about
shifting balances of power.
Which brings us back to our starting point: Eliass notion of a figurational
social reality. Is it useful to focus on the relationships between the members
of a group instead of looking at the individuals comprising the group? As
Duindam points out, Eliass model fits well with recent court studies, for one
of their general characteristics can be found in the perception of power. Power
is increasingly conceived as the power of the network, the group, the forms and
contacts.66 Although this statement actually concerns early modern courts, the
analysis of the dinner occasions at the Belgian royal court shows that it can also
be applied to a nineteenth-century Western European court. Shifting balances
within the network of dinner guests mirrored the situation of the Belgian ruling
class outside the palace walls. Although examining the invitees network as if it
were a proxy for society would be overestimating the importance of the court as
a locus of power, it indeed proves to be a utilitarian instrument when picturing
the shifting balance of power. More specifically, when investigating the position
of the monarchy and aristocracy in the nineteenth century, analyzing networks
between invitees uncovers a shift in the balances of power that would not have
been discovered when focusing on several interesting individuals.
From this exercise in the network (figuration) analysis of dinner guests of
the king of the Belgians, it can be concluded that Eliass concept of figuration
is indeed useful when describing the relationship patterns of the members of a
(closed) group.67 Whether it can also be employed to explain certain changes
within a cluster of people that transcends this closed gathering (e.g. society as
a whole) remains to be seen.
66
p. 189.
Duindam, Myths of Power: Norbert Elias and the Early Modern European Court,
67
Of course the group of invitees cannot be conceived of as a closed group, since its
members are also related to people outside the palace walls. Nonetheless, when taking the
position of the monarch as a starting point, looking at the network of invitees as a closed
group is less far-fetched.
Conclusion
Stephen Mennell
Hospitality, food, and eating have always played a part in the exercise of power
through royal and princely courts, at least since courts assumed their familiar
form as centers of leisure, luxury, and refinement.
Courts in this sense gradually emerged out of the households of territorial
warrior rulers. A.F. Pollard remarked that the English royal household was the
constitutional protoplasm out of which many of the institutions of the modern
state developed, including the courts of law, the legislature (formally the High
Court of Parliament), and the executive arm of government (beginning in the
Privy Council). What remained after the royal court had given birth to these
offspring gradually became part of what Walter Bagehot called the dignified as
opposed to the efficient part of the constitution, a center of ceremonial. Even
today, however, the British royal court and others like it are not totally devoid of
power, at least in the setting of social modelsthough this power is a shadow of
its former self. What Pollard observed about England had its parallels elsewhere.
Other European countries followed a broadly similar track of development
toward similar forms of princely court, as indeed did other parts of the world at
structurally equivalent stages of development (which is to say, not necessarily in
the same chronological periods). The impressive Tower of Justice in the Second
Court of the Topkap Palace in Istanbul signifies the unfolding of a similar
process of constitutional and political development in the Ottoman Empire.
Before this process of functional differentiation, princely courts were
above all military households. They contained the seeds not just of law courts,
parliaments and government ministries but also of the modern armed forces.
They were, in short, barracks, too. This may help to explain why, although in
most cultures throughout history domestic cookery has been associated with
women, whenever a technically more elaborate, socially more prestigious cuisine
has begun to developusually in princely courtsit has been associated with
male chefs. Jack Goody has noted how, since as early as ancient Egypt, it has
A.F. Pollard, The Evolution of Parliament (London, 1920), p. 25.
W. Bagehot, The English Constitution (London, 1867).

Royal Taste
192
been men who took over womens recipes and transformed them into a court
cuisine. I have speculated that the explanation may lie in the origin of the social
institution of the court not as a private or domestic household, but as a
military establishment. It is probable that men always served as cooks with armies
(and by extension on fighting ships), and that their function in the kitchens of the
courts began as an extension of their role in the field. The military connections
of male cooks were still perceptible in the courts of late medieval and early
modern Europe: Taillevent, for example, appears to have had some function in
the provisioning of armies, and La Varenne, whose title of cuyer retains military
connotations, speaks of cooking for his master, the Marquis dUxelles, in the
field. Unfortunately, I have not pursued further research to test this speculation,
and as far as I am aware no one else has done so, either.
In his book Luxus und Kapitalismus, Werner Sombart identified the papal
court at Avignon (130977) as the earliest clear instance in Western Europe of
a court in the sense of being a center of a cultured and leisured upper class. Of
course, as Norbert Elias noted, nothing is more fruitless, when dealing with
long-term social processes, than to attempt to locate an absolute beginning.
The process of court formation proceeded at different speeds in various parts
of Europe. A century after the court at Avignon, Urbino under Federico da
Montefeltro was simultaneously the seat both of one of the greatest fighting
condottieri and one of the greatest humanistic courts of the Italian Renaissance.
Nevertheless, the direction of development was clear. Court societies formed in
early modern Europe through the struggle of secular rulers toward the internal
pacification of their territoriesa pacification process that went paradoxically
hand in hand with an elimination contest involving larger-scale warfare with
their neighbors as territory was concentrated in the hands of a smaller number
of more powerful central rulers. Internal pacification involved the taming
of warriorsthat is, depriving the regional nobility of their capacity to wage
war independently of (and frequently against) the central ruler. The taming of
warriors is a central and essential, but neglected, part-process within the overall
J.R. Goody, Cooking, Cuisine and Class (Cambridge, 1982), p. 101.

Middle Ages to the Present (Oxford, 1985), p. 201.

Taillevent, G. Tirel dit, Le Viandier (Paris, 1887 [ca. 1380]); F.P. de La Varenne, Le
Cuisinier Franois (Paris, 1651).

W. Sombart, Luxury and Capitalism (Ann Arbor, MN, 1969).

N. Elias, The Court Society (Dublin, 2007), p. 249.

See S. Mennell, Norbert Elias: Civilization and the Human Self-Image (Oxford,
1989; rev. edn, Norbert Elias: An Introduction, Dublin, 1998), chapter 3.
Conclusion
193
process of state formation everywhere. It has, for example, been lucidly depicted
in Japanese history by Eiko Ikegami.10
Our knowledge of the part played by food, cookery, and eating at early courts
is no doubt abundant, but still requires collation and synthesis. From the classic
medieval cookery manuscripts such as Taillevent, The Forme of Cury and the
Libro di cucina,11 it would appear that there was a very similar elite cuisine in the
courts across Western Europe, from Italy to England. Cultural contact between
the courts was close (even if they were often at war with each other), but cultural
influence between courts remained for a long time stronger than between courtly
strata and within the same region. The contrasts in diet and cuisine between
strata were much greater than between courts; the courts were remote from the
mass of the people, and were model-setting centers for themin food as well
as in manners and ways of lifeto a much less marked extent than during the
period covered by the chapters in this book. Moreover, elite cuisine appears to
have been the prerogative of a small minority of a minority. There is a good deal
of evidence that even in many noble households, the daily diet in winter was
plain and not overabundant. Above all, the famous medieval banquets on great
occasions, which sometimes lasted days and involved hundreds of people, appear
to have been exercises in potlatch: in the demonstration of the hosts wealth and
power through the sheer wasteful abundance of foodstuffs rather than through
refined and elaborate cookery. By the early modern period, however, clear signs
of the development of a much more elaborate cuisine are evident in sixteenthcentury Italy (vide the recipes of the papal cook Scappi12) and in France from
the middle of the seventeenth through the eighteenth century, in the sequence
of works by La Varenne, Massialot, L.S.R., Menon (and many others) to which
Ken Albala refers. In All Manners of Food I argue that there was a transition in
the use of food for the assertion of social rank and power that can be roughly
described as moving from quantity to quality. As Albala notes, this was not the
first time such a transition can be observed in history: he points to Archestratus
as signaling such a process in ancient Greece. If earlier instances such as this did
In discussing state-formation processes, sociologists are (for once) nearly unanimous
in employing Max Webers definition of a state as an organisation which successfully upholds
a claim to binding rule-making over a territory, by virtue of commanding a monopoly of
the legitimate use of violence (M. Weber, Economy and Society (2 vols, Berkeley, CA, 1978
[1922]), vol. I, p. 54.
10
E. Ikegami, The Taming of the Samurai: Honorific Individualism and the Making of
Modern Japan (Cambridge, MA, 1995).
11
S. Pegge (ed.), The Forme of Cury (London, 1780); L. Frati (ed.), Libro di cucina del
secolo XIV (Livorno, 1899).
12
B. Scappi, Opera (Venice, 1570).
Royal Taste
194
happen, the underlying social conditions were probably similar. In my view, in

early modern Europe it happened because the courtly aristocracy had become
what Georg Simmel called a two-front stratum. On the one front, they were
increasingly subjected to royal power and deprived of the power their ancestors
had had, particularly to exercise independent military power and rule over
their own lands. As a consequence, virtuoso consumption as a badge of rank
became more centrally important to their social identity. This appears to have
been more true of eighteenth-century France than England,13 but also persisted
(according to Sarasa, cited by De Vooght and Scholliers in their introduction),
into the early nineteenth century among impoverished aristocrats in Spain. On
the other front, such aristocrats were subject to pressure from below exerted
by the increasingly prosperous merchant strata. In response to this two-way
squeeze, it appears that something recognizable as haute cuisine took shape in
aristocratic kitchens. Haute cuisine is not as easy to define as it is to recognize,
but one characteristic is that it involves the production of commodities by means
of commodities14many stages of production and planning, and therefore very
costly in terms of laboras well as a continuous pressure for innovation and
an ever-widening variety of dishes. The point is well illustrated by Anne Lairs
reference to 69 items of poultry being used to prepare a sauce for a dish at one of
Louis XIVs ordinary meals, and to the uniqueness of each dish; the reference
in zge Samancs chapter to 50 or 60 dishes being presented to the sultan at each
meal may indicate the same tendency, though the context is more ambiguous.
Reading the chapters in this volume has made me realize that the
conceptualization from quantity to quality is an oversimplification. The process
must at least be seen as involving a sliding scale, along which sheer quantity
continues to retain some significance even as qualitative refinement grows.
Rengenier Rittersmas research on the diplomatic use of truffles by the rulers of
Savoy is especially thought provoking. Admittedly, this did not directly involve
cooking and dining, the usual vehicles for the courtly signification of rank and
power. But the practice has a whiff of potlatch about it. Truffles themselves were
already one of the most prized and rare ingredients of a haute cuisine, probably
safely out of the reach of all but the wealthiest of the roturiers. Yet their diplomatic
use in manipulating the power ratios between two significant territorial powers
certainly smacks of the quantitative: the strategy of subordinating the recipient
through a generous gift. Since it would be undiplomatic to see any resemblance
between the white truffle and the oolichan oil, blankets, and zinc boilers of the
Mennell, All Manners of Food, pp. 10833.
When I used this phrase in All Manners of Food, it was as a private joke, alluding to
13
14
Piero Sraffas famous contribution to Marxist economic theory, Production of Commodities by

Means of Commodities: Prelude to a Critique of Economic Theory (Cambridge, 1960).
Conclusion
195
Kwakiutl, Rittersma is wise to draw more inspiration from Mausss Le Don than
from Franz Boass studies of potlatch.
The findings that emerge from Danille De Vooghts use of sophisticated
software to analyze the networks involved in royal entertaining after the
establishment of the Belgian royal court can be seen in a similar light. It is easy to
understand that hospitality had to play a large part in establishing the legitimacy
of the new monarchy and in the courts rooting itself in the social structure of
the newly independent country. Yet, even if that had been the personal taste of
members of the royal familywho stemmed from a minor Protestant principality
in Thuringia, and had to make a major religious realignment to be acceptable as
monarchs of Catholic Belgiumthe adoption of a cuisine many times removed
from that of the more prosperous of their subjects would very likely have been
counterproductive. The apparently well-planned, even calculated, character of
their choice of guests to eat at court, therefore, has a hint of the potlatch about it
and calls into question once more any rigidly dichotomous model of a transition
from quantity to quality.
The question of whether the quantity or quality of food plays the greater
part in social display at courts is indeed subsidiary to a broader question: to
what extent did courts in the period mainly under discussion in this book
the eighteenth and nineteenth centuriescontinue to play a model-setting
role? Did they continue to set the fashionin manners, food, and cultural taste
generallythat would be followed in the rest of their respective societies? Was
the pattern still overwhelmingly in one direction, trickle down? The chapters
collected here suggest that this is not the case.
The problem has to be framed carefully. Once more, it is dangerous to
pose it in a dichotomous either/or manner. As seats of heads of state, courts
plainly remained at the top of the social pyramid. As Lair remarks of the
court of Napolon III, the food was copious and goodone could scarcely
expect anything else. Ludington rightly points to the British royal courts from
George III to Victoria and Albert as continuing sources of fashion, whether seabathing, agricultural improvement, or Christmas trees. And there is evidence
that fashions spread from court to court through their continuing contact with
each other: Christmas trees once more, dining alafranga in Istanbul, or service
la russethough by no means in the medieval way, when the social distance
between noble elites and the lower orders was much greater. It is more suitable
to ask to what extent were courts still able to monopolize the model-setting
function, or did they now have to share it with other strata, or indeed did they
begin to follow fashions essentially being formed elsewhere in society? This is in
effect the question that De Vooght and Scholliers pose at the outset when they
write that this book:
Royal Taste
196
addresses [] the traditional top layer of society [and] considers the way royalty,
the nobility, and aristocrats wined and dined in the rapidly changing world of the
late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, a period in which the bourgeoisie and
even the menu peuple [] obtained political rights, economic influence, social
importance, and cultural authority.
That is the right question, but it leads me to disown a view attributed to Norbert
Elias and me. I dont think that Elias held the conviction that a court society
can be studied as a proxy for society as a whole (De Vooght, my italics). And
I feel equally uncomfortable with the idea attributed to me that the role of the
court, with its elites as a culturally powerful establishment that shapes good
taste and appropriate manners, must be seen as a blueprint of power relations in
society as a whole (De Vooght and Scholliers, my italics). All I would say is that
the study of courts tells us a lot about the wider society of which they are part,
and that courts can only be understood as parts of wider figurations of power.
More exactly:
The role and power of courts and their associated elites in determining such
models of good tastes requires much attention. So do the ways in which that role
and power differed between countries. And their power in cultural matters cannot
be understood separately from the unfolding patterns of power more generally in
each country as a whole.15
This book greatly advances just such a project, because the courts studied by the
authors vary considerably in their position in the broader social figuration of
their respective countries.
In the case of Russia, it appears to me (though I confess to knowing far less
about Russian history than I do about that of Western Europe) that the pattern
of culinary development described by Burrow is clearly related to the historically
very different power relations found in Imperial Russia. Yes, tsarsnotably Peter
the Greatwere concerned to subordinate and indeed to civilize their nobility.
But, no, the nobility did not experience very much in the way of pressure from
below. One can speculate that the relative informality of Russian dining among
the Russian elite (in the sense that Burrow defines it) and especially the slightly
potlatch character of the open table may be a reflection of the autocrats of All
the Russias sense of security in their own power, and that since the menu people
were not of much account, there was only a moderate pressure for either the tsars
or members of the elite to display their rank through ever-refined cookery.
Mennell, All Manners of Food, p. 108.
15
Conclusion
197
Another case, not mentioned in this book, is that of the Netherlands. The
court of the Stadhouder in Den Haag was recognizably courtly in style, but
the effective power in the Dutch Republic rested with the merchant Regenten
class of the trading cities; they were the real Dutch model-setting elite, and the
styles of everything from their houses to their food were very different from
those associated with the courtly tradition. This was in strong contrast to the
neighboring Austrian Netherlands, and I have suggested that it is one reason
for the sudden culinary shift that persists to this day when one drives over the
border from the Netherlands to Belgium.16 Something resembling the Dutch
case may also have been broadly the case in much of Germany, where there was a
historic ideological divide between the courtly culture symbolized by the concept
of Zivilisation and the ideal of Kultur adopted by the Bildungsbrgertum.17
Regional variations, reflecting the very late consolidation of the German state,
and a predominantly gutbrgerlich style of eating, are characteristic of German
food culture. Although the Prussian courtespecially under the Kaiserreich
attempted to emulate the absolutist courts of the past in the cultivation of
courtly ritual,18 French models seem to have been explicitly rejected in the case
of cuisine (at least for purposes of national propaganda).
As Lairs chapter makes clear, by the time of the Second Empire the locus
of innovation and development in French cuisinewhich had, to a remarkable
extent, by then achieved a kind of international hegemony in the best circles
had long since shifted to the restaurants and hotels. The driving force was
commercial competition in the marketplace. Despite a sufficient number of
dishes at meals in the Louvre and at Compigne, some people pointed out
the lack of innovation in the culinary preparations. In other words, the French
court was as much following fashion as leading it. The same was happening
elsewhere. Ludington demonstrates that by drinking port on such a lavish scale
the Georgian court was effectively giving its imprimatur to what had previously
been a socially middle-rank taste. (He also describes William IV, no doubt
correctly, as essentially a middle-class gentleman. Although no one could
possibly describe his elder brother, George IV, in such terms, it would appear that
S. Mennell, Eten in Nederland, De Gids 150/23 (1987): pp. 199207.
Elias, The Civilizing Process (rev. edn Oxford, 2000), pp. 543; W. Lepenies, The
16
17
Seduction of Culture in German History (Princeton, NJ, 2006); E. Barlsius, Sociale und
historisches Aspekte der deutschen Kche, in S. Mennell, Die Kultivierung des Appetits
(Frankfurt am Main, 1985), pp. 42344.
18
N. Elias, The Germans: Power Struggles and the Development of Habitus in
the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries (Cambridge, 1996), chapter 1B, Duelling and
Membership of the Imperial Ruling Class: Demanding and Giving Satisfaction, pp.
44119.
Royal Taste
198
under them and their father George III the royal court in Britain remained no
more than primus inter pares among the great Whig housesalbeit somewhat
less comatose than under the first two Georges.)
Also pointing in the same direction is the celebration of traditional foods at
state functions in various countries in the nineteenth centuryAlbala mentions
Hungarian goulash, Swedish (Danish?) smorgasbord and Spanish paella, as well
as Franklin D. Roosevelt serving hot dogs to the British king and queen on their
state visit to the USA in 1939. While it may be tempting to interpret this trend
as a manifestation of rising national pride and of increasing conflicts among
the great powers, such gestures toward popular tastes are also a sign of shifting
social power balances within the various countries. Eventually, conspicuous
consumption at court can actually become unacceptable or embarrassing. By the
mid-twentieth century, the food eaten at the royal courts that still survived in
Europe was more a reflection ofrather than a model foreating among their
subjects. The change is well documented in the memoirs of Gabriel Tschumi,
a Swiss cook who came to work in Queen Victorias kitchens at the end of the
nineteenth century.19 Then, and under King Edward VII (190110), lavish,
expensive, and above all copious food was eaten by the courtiers and (possibly
with greater gusto) by their kitchen servants. Under George V and Queen Mary
(191036), influenced to some extent by the tastes of the royal personages but
also clearly by the bleakness of the First World War and the mass unemployment
between the wars, royal food became much more domestic, much more like the
country housewife style that had long been dominant in England. And, in his
final years of royal service during the period of rationing after the Second World
War, Tschumi puts on a brave face to describe the preparation of bridge rolls (a
sort of sandwich) for royal receptions. Rationingindeed faminewould not
have so affected food at the courts of the Renaissance popes or of Louis XIV.
Still more symptomatic of changes in British society was the discontinuation
after 1958 of the presentation of debutantesyoung, aristocratic or otherwise
wealthy young womenat court. Such a ritualized line of demarcation between
courtly circles and the rest of society was no longer defensible.
Thus, by the mid-twentieth century, instances of trickle up (or social
capillarity) became as evident as the more familiar trickle down. Instances
include not just President Roosevelts hot dogs but also the adoption of blue
jeans (originally working mens clothing) by people of all ranks across the world.
Another is the notion that everyoneeven princes of the bloodought to
have an occupation, when not being involved in paid employment had long
G. Tschumi, Royal Chef: Recollections of Life in Royal Households from Queen
Victoria to Queen Mary (London, 1954).
19
Conclusion
199
been a mark of distinction for the upper classes. Trickle-up is associated with a
specific trend in society, toward diminishing power ratios between social classes
and other groups within society,20 or what Norbert Elias termed functional
democratisation.
Which brings us back to another question posed by De Vooght and Scholliers
in their introduction: can Eliass findings actually be used as a lead when
researching all courts? The question is pertinent because, directly or indirectly,
the contributions to this book are all inspired by Norbert Eliass classic Die
hfische Gesellschaft, or The Court Society in English.21
The answer to the question is both yes and no. Yes, his study can provide
a lead in drawing the historians attention to the similarities and differences
between courts in different countries and different periods. No, not all courts are
the same. But the social formation of the absolutist court did play a significant
part in the development of European society and culture; and it appears to have
its counterparts in other parts of the globe, such as India, China, Japan, and
the Islamic world. The discussion of courts needs to be set in the context of a
much older debate among historians regarding the transition from feudalism to
capitalism.22 In the Marxist tradition, feudal society is generally seen as giving
way directly to the capitalist phase. In the 1960s and 1970s, Marxism held a very
central place in European sociology, and Eric Dunning vividly recalls a party in
Leicester in 1968 at which pride of place was held by an argument between Elias
and Perry Anderson over whether Marxs feudalismcapitalism sequence was
adequate (as Anderson maintained), or whether the concept of an intervening
dynasticabsolutist phase was necessary.23 Elias must have landed some hard
punches, because a few years later Perry Andersons Lineages of the Absolutist
State appeared.24
On the other hand, Elias was not dogmatically arguing that the formation of
courts like the one he had studied in ancien rgime Versailles was an inevitable
20
2007).
See C. Wouters, Informalization: Manners and Emotions since 1890 (London,
The best texts are the new editions now published in the Norbert Elias Gesammelte
Schriften and Collected Works: Die hfische Gesellschaft (Frankfurt, 2002 [Gesammelte
Schriften, Bd. 2]); The Court Society (Dublin, 2006 [Collected Works, vol. 2]).
22
See: P.M. Sweezy et al., The Transition from Feudalism to Capitalism: a Symposium
(London, 1954); M. Dobb, Transition from Feudalism to Capitalism (London, 1963); R.J.
Holton, The Transition from Feudalism to Capitalism (London, 1985).
23
See Eric Dunnings footnote in N. Elias and E. Dunning, Quest for Excitement:
Sport and Leisure in the Civilizing Process, rev. edn by E. Dunning (Dublin, 2008 [Collected
Works, vol. 7]), p. 139.
24
P. Anderson, Lineages of the Absolutist State (London, 1974).
21
Royal Taste
200
social process, nor that all courts were necessarily much the same. He saw The
Court Society as advancing a real type model, rather than an ideal type.25
Weberian ideal types, abstracted in some unspecified way from a range of cases,
ended uphe arguedhaving an uncertain connection with any specific
empirical reality. Rather:
Princely courts have often emerged under certain conditions, in conjunction with
specific power constellations, quite independently of one another in the most
diverse societies. The very fact that the same conceptual symbol, the concept of
the princely court, can and must be related to all of them, indicates that we are
not concerned here with an idealising abstraction which actually has nothing in
common with, or similarity to, social reality. Systematic investigations enable
us to identify commonalities and differences in the structure and operation of
princely courts over the course of generations. Verifiable real-type models of
such a figuration, and the associated models of processes of court formation, can
sooner or later be standardised.26
Research on the history of courts has progressed a great deal since the publication
of Eliass Die hfische Gesellschaft in 1969, let alone since he completed the
basic research for the book in the early 1930s, so some of his theses need to be
modified in detail.27 Yet the court at Versailles can still serve as a benchmarka
real typefrom which the courts of other countries and later periods deviate in
varying degrees according to the disposition of social power in their own times
and places. The chapters in this book, which focus on food consumption, status,
and power, advance the task of understanding more precisely the development
of courts and the changing part they have played in the functioning of society
more generally.
Elias first advocated the use of real types, in opposition to the ideal types
associated with the work of Max Weber, in 1939 in The Civilizing Process (p. 533). The concept
of the real type was originally coined by the economist Carl Menger and was beginning to be
used by historians and economists in the late 1930s and 1940s. See R. Kilminster, Norbert
Elias: Post-philosophical Sociology (Abingdon, 2007), p. 165n for a brief overview and further
references on the subject.
26
N. Elias, Science or Sciences? Contribution to a debate with reality-blind
philosophers, in Essays I: On the Sociology of Knowledge and the Sciences (Dublin, 2009
[Collected Works, vol. 16]).
27
Jeroen Duindam undertook this task in his valuable critique, Myths of Power:
Norbert Elias and the Early Modern European Court (Amsterdam, 1995).
25
Bibliography
Introduction (Danille De Vooght and Peter Scholliers)
Food and Power: Studying Food at (Modern) Courts
Albala, K., The Banquet: Dining in the Great Courts of Late Renaissance Europe
(Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2007).
Allard, J., Repas et manires de table la court dEspagne au Sicle dOr, in J.-L.
Flandrin and J. Cobbi (eds), Tables dhier, tables dailleurs (Paris: Editions
Odile Jacob, 1999).
Bailey, H., No White House Food Fight, Newsweek, January 17, 2009. As
read on: http://www.newsweek.com/id/180097 (accessed on January 20,
2009).
Beardsworth, A. and Keil, T., Sociology on the Menu: an Invitation to the Study of
Food and Society (London and New York: Routledge, 1997).
Belasco, W., Food Matters: Perspectives on an Emerging Field, in W. Belasco
and P. Scranton (eds), Food Nations: Selling Taste in Consumer Societies (New
York and London: Routledge, 2002).
Bennassar, B. and Goy, J., Contribution lhistoire de la consommation
alimentaire du XIVe au XIXe sicle, Annales, Economies, Socits,
Civilisations, 30/23 (1975): 40230.
Bray, T.L., The Commensal Politics of Early States and Empires, in T.L. Bray
(ed.), Archaeology and Politics of Food and Feasting in Early States and Empires
(New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, 2003).
Chan Tat Chuen, W., A la table de lempereur de Chine (Arles: Editions Philip
Piquier, 2007).
Counihan, C. and Van Esterik, P., Introduction, in C. Counihan and P.
Van Esterik (eds), Food and Culture: A Reader (New York and London:
Routledge, 1997).
De Vooght, D., Culinary Networks of Power: Dining with King Leopold II of
Belgium (18651909), Food & History, 4/1 (2006): 85104.
Dietler, M., Feasts and Commensal Politics in the Political Economy: Food,
Power and Status in Prehistoric Europe, in P. Wiessner and W. Schiefenhvel
202
Royal Taste
(eds), Food and the Status Quest: An Interdisciplinary Perspective (Providence

and Oxford: Berghahn Books, 1996).
Ducptiaux, E., Budgets conomiques des classes ouvrires en Belgique, Bulletin
de la Commission Centrale de Statistique, VI (1855): 415.
Elias, N., The Court Society (Dublin: University College Dublin Press, 2006).
Fieldhouse, P., Food and Nutrition: Customs and Culture (New York: Nelson
Thornes Ltd, 1995).
Flandrin, J.-L., La diversit des gots et des pratiques alimentaires en Europe du
XVIe au XVIIIe sicle, Revue dHistoire Moderne et Contemporaine, 1983:
6683.
Gibson, R. and Blinkhom, M. (eds), Landownership and Power in Modern
Europe (London: Harper Collins Academic, 1991).
Goudsblom, J., Heilbron, J. and Wilterdink, N. (eds), Norbert Elias. Het
civilisatieproces. Sociogenetische en psychogenetische onderzoekingen
(Amsterdam: Boom, 2001).
http://www.courtstudies.org (accessed on December 31, 2008).
Huget, J., Eat, Drink, and Be Healthy, Washington Post, January 19,
2009. As read on http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/
article/2009/01/16/AR2009011604152.html?referrer=emailarticlepg
(accessed on January 20, 2009).
Jones, K., For the Royal Table: Dining at the Palace (London: Royal Collection
Enterprises Ltd, 2008).
Jones, M., Feast: Why Humans Share Food (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2007).
Laurioux, B., Alimentation de court, alimentation la cour au Moyen ge:
nouvelles orientations de recherche, Food & History, 4/1 (2006): 927.
Laurioux, B. and Moirez, P., Pour une approche qualitative des comptes
alimentaires: cour de France et cour de Rome la fin du Moyen ge, Food &
History, 4/1 (2006): 4566.
Lavandier, M., Flament-Guelfucci, E. et al., La table de lElyse: Rceptions
officielles des prsidents depuis la IIIe Rpublique (Milan: 5 Continents
Editions, 2005).
Mennell, S., All Manners of Food: Eating and Taste in England and France from
the Middle Ages to the Present (Oxford and New York: Blackwell, 1985).
Mennell, S., Murcott, A. and Van Otterloo, A., The Sociology of Food: Eating,
Diet and Culture (London: Sage Publications, 1992).
Mintz, S.W., Sweetness and Power: the Place of Sugar in Modern Society (New
York: Viking, 1985).
Mintz, S.W., Tasting Food, Tasting Freedom: Excursions into Eating, Culture, and
the Past (Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 1996).
Bibliography
203
Olden-Jorgensen, S., State Ceremonial, Court Culture and Political Power in

Early Modern Denmark, 15361746, Scandinavian Journal of History, 27
(2002): 6576.
Pierenkemper, T., Das Rechnungsbuch der Hausfrau, Geschichte und Gesellschaft,
14/1 (1988): 3863.
Sarasa, C., Upholding Status: the Diet of a Noble Family in Early NineteenthCentury La Mancha, in P. Scholliers (ed.), Food, Drink and Identity: Cooking,
Eating and Drinking Since the Middle Ages (Oxford and New York: Berg,
2001).
Scholliers, P., Twenty-Five Years of Studying un phnomne social total: Food
History Writing on Europe in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries,
Food, Culture and Society, 10/3 (2007): 44971.
Spang, R., The Invention of the Restaurant: Paris and Modern Gastronomic
Culture (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000).
Stigler, G.J., The Early History of Empirical Studies of Consumer Behavior, The
Journal of Political Economy, April (1954): 95113.
Chapter 1 (Ken Albala)
The Historical Models of Food and Power in European Courts of the Nineteenth
Century: An Expository Essay and Prologue
Ackerman, G., Jean-Lon Grme: His Life, His Works (Courbevoie: Art
Cration Ralisation, 1997).
Apicius, trans. C. Grocock and S. Grainger (Totnes: Prospect Books, 2007).
Apicius Redivivus, or the Cooks Oracle (London: Samuel Bagster, 1817).
Archestratus, The Life of Luxury, ed. J. Wilkins and S. Hill (Totnes: Prospect
Books, 1994).
Artusi, P., Science in the Kitchen and the Art of Eating Well (Toronto: University
of Toronto Press, 2004).
Athenaeus of Naucratis, The Learned Banqueters (Deipnosophistae), ed. S.D.
Olson (Cambridge: Loeb Classics, 2007).
Cato, On Farming, trans. A. Dalby (Totnes: Prospect Books, 1998).
Escoffier, A., The Escoffier Cookbook (New York: Crown Publishers, 1969).
Francatelli, C.E., The Modern Cook (London: Bentley and Son, 1880).
James, K., Escoffier: The King of Chefs (London: Hambledon and London,
2006).
Jeanneret, M., A Feast of Words (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998).
204
Royal Taste
Kelly, I., Cooking For Kings: The Life of Antonin Careme, the First Celebrity Chef
(New York: Walker and Co., 2004).
LArt de la cuisine franaise au XVIIe sicle (Paris: Payot, 1994).
La Varennes Cookery, ed. T. Scully (Totnes: Prospect Books, 2006).
Leonardi, F., LApicio Moderno (Florence, 1790).
Morris, W., News From Nowhere (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1980).
Petronius, The Satyricon (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1965).
Platina (Bartolomeo Sacchi), On Right Pleasure and Good Health, ed. and trans.
M.E. Milham (Tempe, AZ: Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies,
1998).
Rousseau, J.-J., Emile, trans. A. Bloom (New York: Basic Books, 1979).
Scappi, B., Opera (Venice: Tramezzino, 1570).
Shaw, T., The World of Escoffier (New York: Vendome Press, 1994).
Soyer, A., The Pantropheon (London: Paddington Books, 1977).
Spang, R., The Invention of the Restaurant: Paris and Modern Gastronomic
Culture (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000).
Trubek, A., Haute Cuisine: How the French Invented the Culinary Profession
(Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2000).
Vasselli, G., LApicio overo il Maestro deConviti (Bologna: H.H. del Dozza,
1647).
Wanninger, K. (ed.), A la Carte (3rd edn, Rosenheim: Verlagshaus Alfred Frg
GmbH & Co. KG, 1988).
Chapter 2 (Rengenier C. Rittersma)
A Culinary Captatio Benevolentiae: The Use of the Truffle as a Promotional Gift
by the Savoy Dynasty in the Eighteenth Century
Primary Sources
Archivio di Stato Torino (AST), C. Tes. gen. dAcaia, rot. 2; Casa Bona di
Borbone, rot. 33.
Archivio di Stato Torino (AST), Lettere Ministri Austria, Mazzo 48, 657,
8890, 945.
Bruckmann, F.E., Specimen botanicum exhibens fungos subterraneos vulgo tubera
terrae dictos (Helmstedt: Schnorr, 1720).
Die Korrespondenz Hans Fuggers von 1566 bis 1594. Regesten der Kopierbcher
aus dem Fuggerarchiv, ed. Ch. Karnehm (2 vols, Munich: Kommission fr
Bayerische Landesgeschichte, 2003).
Pantaleone da Confienza, Summa lacticiniorum (Turin, 1477).
Bibliography
205
Vigo, G.B., Tubera terrae. Carmen. I tartufi (1st edn, Turin: Typographia Regia,
1776; Borgosesia: Nexus, 1994).
Zedler, J.H., Grosses vollstndiges Universal-Lexikon (1st edn, 1749; Graz:
Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, 1994).
Secondary Sources
http://www.chasses-du-monde.com/europe/especes-chassees/perdrixbartavelle.htm (accessed May 2008).

http://oncfs.esigetel.fr/Oncfs/Obj/Pdf/Bartavelle.pdf (accessed May 2008).
http://www.saporidelPiedmonte.it/prodotti/bevande/16.htm (accessed May
2008).
Abry, C., Devos, R., Raulin, H. and Cuisenier, J. (eds), Les sources rgionales de
la Savoie: Une approche ethnologique: alimentation, habitat, levage (Paris:
Fayard, 1979).
Ainsworth, G.C., Introduction to the History of Mycology (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1976).
Algazi, G., Groebner, V. and Jussen, B. (eds), Negotiating the Gift: Pre-Modern
Figurations of Exchange (Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2003).
Aretin, K.O. (von), Das Alte Reich 16481806, Band 2: Kaisertradition und
sterreichische Gromachtpolitik (16481745) (Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta,
1997).
Barberis, W., I Savoia: Quattro storie per una dinastia, in W. Barberis (ed.),
I Savoia: I secoli doro di una dinastia europea (Turin: Einaudi, 2007), pp.
XVLIV.
Brard, L. and Marchenay, P., Les produits de terroir: Entre cultures et rglements
(Paris: CNRS, 2004).
Brard, L., Froc, J., Hyman, P., Hyman, M. and Marchenay, P., Inventaire des
produits rgionaux de la France: Rhne-Alpes (Paris: Albin Michel, 1995).
Bourdieu, P., Raisons pratiques: Sur la thorie de laction (Paris: Seuil 1994).
Bourdieu, P., The Work of Time, in A. Komter (ed.), The Gift: an Interdisciplinary
Perspective (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 1996), pp. 13548.
Bracco, G., La tavola dei Savoia nei secoli XVII e XVIII, in Accademia Italiana della
Cucina (ed.), Il terzo convegno dellAccademia Italiana della Cucina, Piemonte,
1517 Ottobre 1971 (Milan: Accademia Italiana della Cucina, 1973).
Burschel, P., Der Sultan und das Hndchen: Zur politischen konomie des
Schenkens in interkultureller Perspektive, Historische Anthropologie, 15/3
(2007): 40821.
Caligaris, G., Viaggiatori illustri e ambasciatori stranieri alla corte sabauda nella
prima met del Seicento: ospitalit e regali, Studi Piemontesi, 4/1 (1975):
15171.
206
Royal Taste
Castelnuovo, E. and Barberis, W. et al (eds), La Reggia di Venaria e i Savoia:

Arte, magnificenza e storia di una corte europea (Turin: Umberto Allemandi,
2007).
Cheal, D., Moral Economy, in A. Komter (ed.), The Gift: an Interdisciplinary
Perspective (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 1996), pp. 8195.
Daston, L., Die Lust an der Neugier in der frhneuzeitlichen Wissenschaft,
in K. Krger (ed.), Curiositas: Welterfahrung und sthetische Neugierde
in Mittelalter und frher Neuzeit (Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht,
2002), pp. 14775.
Elias, N., Die hfische Gesellschaft (4th edn, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp,
1989).
Falcke, J., Studien zum diplomatischen Geschenkwesen am brandenburgischpreuischen Hof im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert (Berlin: Duncker & Humblot,
2006).
Fantoni, M., Feticci di prestigio: Il dono alla corte medicea, in S. Bertelli and
G. Calvi (eds), Rituale, cerimoniale, etichetta (Milano: Bompiani, 1985), pp.
14163.
Ferrone, V., La Nuova Atlantide e i Lumi: Scienza e politica nel Piemonte di
Vittorio Amedeo III (Turin: Meynier, 1988).
Figeac, M., La douceur des Lumires: Noblesse et art de vivre en Guyenne au
XVIIIe sicle (Bordeaux: Mollat, 2001).
Flandrin, J.-L., Lhuitre et la truffe, in: J.-L. Flandrin (ed.), Chronique de Platine
(Paris: Odile Redon, 1992), pp. 14352.
Frigo, D., Principe, ambasciatore e jus gentium: Lamministrazione della politica
estera nel Piemonte del Settecento (Roma: Bulzoni, 1991).
Godelier, M., Lnigme du don (Paris: Fayard, 1996).
Gruppo Amis du patois, Dizionario del dialetto francoprovenzale di Hne, Valle
dAosta (Comune di Hne: Le Chteu, 2007), p. 407 (1).
Lazzari, G., Storia della Micologia Italiana: Contributo dei botanici italiani allo
sviluppo delle scienze micologiche (Trento: Saturnia, 1973).
Lvi-Strauss, C., The Principle of Reciprocity, in A. Komter (ed.), The Gift:
an Interdisciplinary Perspective (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press,
1996), pp. 1826.
Margreiter, K., Konzept und Bedeutung des Adels im Absolutismus (Florence:
European University Institute, 2005).
Mauss, M., Essai sur le don: Forme et raison de lchange dans les socits
archaques, LAnne Sociologique, seconde srie, I (192324): 5106. Online
version: http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1522/cla.mam.ess3 (accessed May 2008).
Merlhiac, G. (de), Essai historique sur la truffe, Chroniqueur du Prigord, 3
(1855): 91120.
Bibliography
207
Meyzie, P., Les cadeaux alimentaires dans le Sud-Ouest aquitain au XVIIIe

sicle: sociabilit, pouvoirs et gastronomie, Histoire, conomie & Socit, 25
(2006): 3351.
Moran, B.T., Courts and Academies, in K. Park and L. Daston (eds), The
Cambridge History of Science, vol. III: Early Modern Science (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2006), pp. 25172.
Oresko, R., The House of Savoy in Search for a Royal Crown in the Seventeenth
century, in R. Oresko, G.C. Gibbs and H.M. Scott (eds), Royal and
Republican Sovereignty in Early Modern Europe (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1997), pp. 272350.
Papa, C., Il tartufo: Dono di natura, La ricerca folklorica, 41 (2000): 2536.
Perrero, D., I regali di prodotti nazionali invalsi nella diplomazia piemontese
dei secoli XVIIXVIII, Atti della Reale Accademia delle Scienze di Torino,
31 (1896): 41132.
Piscitelli, E., La legazione sarda in Vienna (17071859) (Rome: Ministero degli
Affari esteri, 1950).
Ricuperati, G., Il Settecento, in P. Merlin, C. Rosso, G. Symcox and G.
Ricuperati (eds), Il Piemonte sabaudo: Stato e territori in et moderna (Turin:
UTET, 1994), pp. 441515.
Rittersma, R.C., Ces pitoyables truffes dItalie. Die franzsisch-italienische
Rivalitt auf dem europischen Trffelmarkt seit 1700. Zu einer Geschichte
des Gastrochauvinismus und des Terroir, sterreichische Zeitschrift fr
Geschichtswissenschaften, 21/2 (2010): pp. 81105.
Rittersma, R.C., Industrialised Delicacies: The Rise of the Umbrian Truffle
Business and the Pioneering Work of Mazzoneschi and Urbani (18601918),
in G. Dorel-Ferr (ed.), Nourrir les hommes, de la Champagne-Ardenne au
monde: Actes des premires rencontres de la section agroalimentaire de TICCIH
(Reims: Centre national de documentation pdagogique, 2011).
Rittersma, R.C., Subterranean Fieldwork: Marsilis Survey on the Biogeography
and Ecobiology of Truffles in 18th Century North and Central Italy, in C.
Ries, M. Harbsmeier and K.H. Nielsen (eds), Ways of Knowing the Field:
Studies in the History and Sociology of Scientific Fieldwork and Expeditions
(Aarhus: Aarhus University Press, 2011).
Rittersma, R.C., The Quest for the Holy Spores: Exploring the Truffle in
Early Modern European Science, unpublished paper (2008).
Ruata, A., Luigi Malabaila di Canale: Riflessi della cultura illuministica in un
diplomatico piemontese (Turin: Dep. subalpina di storia patria, 1968).
Sahlins, M., On the Sociology of Primitive Exchange, in A. Komter (ed.), The
Gift: an Interdisciplinary Perspective (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University
Press 1996), pp. 2639.
208
Royal Taste
Schwartz, B., The Social Psychology of the Gift, in A. Komter (ed.), The Gift:
an Interdisciplinary Perspective (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press,
1996), pp. 6981.
Simmel, G., Faithfulness and Gratitude, in A. Komter (ed.), The Gift: an
Interdisciplinary Perspective (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press,
1996), pp. 3949.
Storrs, C., La politica internazionale e gli equilibri continentali, in W. Barberis
(ed.), I Savoia. I secoli doro di una dinastia europea (Turin: Einaudi, 2007),
pp. 349.
Symcox, G., Let di Vittorio Amedeo II, in P. Merlin, C. Rosso, G. Symcox
and G. Ricuperati (eds), Il Piemonte sabaudo: Stato e territori in et moderna
(Turin: Einaudi, 1994), pp. 271441.
Tabacco, G., Lo stato sabaudo nel Sacro Romano Impero (Turin: Paravia, 1939).
Vaccarone, L., I Principi di Savoia attraverso le Alpi nel medioevo (12701520),
Club Alpino Italiano, Bollett. nr. 68 (1902): 191.
Veblen, T., The Theory of the Leisure Class: An Economic Study of Institutions
(New York: The Modern Library, 1934).
Windler, C., Tribut und Gabe: Mediterrane Diplomatie als interkulturelle
Kommunikation, Saeculum. Jahrbuch fr Universalgeschichte, 51 (2000):
2456.
Zemon Davis, N., The Gift in Sixteenth-Century France (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2000).
Chapter 3 (Charles C. Ludington)
Drinking for Approval: Wine and the British Court from George III to Victoria
and Albert
Primary Sources
Boswell, J., Boswells Book of Company at Auchinleck, 17821795, eds Viscountess

Eccles and G. Turnbull (Roxburghe Club, 1995).
British Library, Add. MS 27828, Place Papers.
British Library, Add. MS 38372, f. 42, Stock of Wine (Royal Household), 31
December 1841.
British Library, Add. MS 38372, ff. 456, Amount, in bottles, of wine consumed
in 1841.
British Libary, Add. MS 44401, ff. 3032. R.B. Sheridans tavern bills from L.
Reilly, 1777.
Bibliography
209
British Library, Add. MS 49186, ff. 12. Bill and receipt for wine order from
Christie and Barrow to the Hon. Spencer Perceval, 3 September 1790.
British Library, Add. MS 76782, Althorp Papers, Ledger for Althorp, 1847
1852.
British Library, Add. MS 76683, Summary of Monthly Returns made by the
Gentleman of Her Majestys Wine Cellar, 1 April31 December 1856.
British Library, Add. MS 77189, Althorp Papers, f. 862.
Buckingham and Chandos, Duke of, Memoirs of the Courts and Cabinets of
William IV and Victoria, from Original Documents (London, 1861).
Chambers, R., Traditions of Edinburgh (Edinburgh, 1980, reprint of 1868 edn;
originally published in 1824).
Christ Church College, Oxford, Common Room Accounts, MS C.R.2.
East Sussex Record Office, Lewes, Gage Account Book, A 741, S.A.S, 1792
1804.
Place, 15 February 1824.
East Sussex Record Office, Lewes MS 2723, List of the Wine Cellar, Ashburnham
Place, 10 November 1830.
Place, 18 April 1831.
Gronow, R.H., The Reminiscences and Recollections of Captain Gronow, Being
anecdotes of the Camp, Court, Clubs and Society, 18101860 (2 vols, London:
J.C. Nimmo, 1892; originally published in 186265).
Henderson, A., The History of Ancient and Modern Wines (London: Baldwin,
Cradock and Joy, 1824).
National Archives, Kew, LS 8/319, Expenses of His Majestys Visit to Ireland,
1821.
National Archives, Kew, LS 8/320, Expenses of His Majestys Visit to Scotland,
1822.
National Archives, Kew, LS 13/271, Wine Accounts for the Royal Household,
17611766.
National Archives, Kew, LS 13/272, Wine Accounts for the Royal Household,
17671770.
National Archives, Kew, LS 13/273, Wine Cellar, St Jamess Palace, 17971813.
National Archives, Kew, LS 13/275, Pitcher List, 18011807.
National Archives, Kew, LS 13/297, Board of the Green Cloth, Account of
Creditors not paid by salary, 1837.
National Archives, Kew, LS 13/298, Board of the Green Cloth, Account of
creditors not paid by salary, 1838, ff. 13.
210
Royal Taste
National Archives, Kew, PRO 30/8/219, William Pitts Wine Expenses, July
1784June 1785.
National Archives of Scotland, GD 10/925, Catalogue of the Magnificent
Household Furniture, etc. the property of the late Alexander Murray [] 13
January 1846.
Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, Parliamentary
Report C. 8706, Customs Tariffs of the United Kingdom from 18001897,
with some notes upon the history of more important branches of the receipt from
1600 (London, 1897).
Place, F., The Autobiography of Francis Place (17711854), ed. M. Thale
(Cambridge, 1972).
Theatre, The Times (February 19, 1798): 1.
Wraxall, N., The Historical and Posthumous Memoirs of Sir Nathaniel Wraxall,
ed. H.B. Wheatley (5 vols, London: Bickers, 1884).
Secondary Sources
Allen, H.W., Sherry and Port (London: Constable, 1952).

Anglo, S., Spectacle, Pageantry and Early Tudor Policy (Oxford: Clarendon,
1969).
Archer, J.E., Goldring, E. and Knights, S. (eds), The Progresses, Pageants and
Entertainments of Queen Elizabeth I (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2007).
Bagehot, W., The English Constitution (Eastbourne: Sussex Academic Press,
1997; originally published 1867).
Baxter, S., William III and the Defense of European Liberty, 16501702 (New
York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1966).
Barry, J., Introduction, in J. Barry and C. Brooks (eds), The Middling Sort of
People: Culture, Society and Politics in England, 15501800 (New York: St
Martins, 1994).
Beattie, J.M., The English Court in the Reign of George I (Cambridge: Cambridge
Bennett, D., King Without a Crown: Albert, Prince Consort of England, 1819
1861 (London: Heinemann, 1977).
Bolitho, H., Albert: Prince Consort (rev. edn, London, 1970).
Bucholz, R., The Augustan Court: Queen Anne and the Decline of Court Culture
(Stanford, 1993).
Burnett, J., Liquid Pleasures: A Social History of Drinks in Modern Britain
(London: Routledge, 1999).
Cannadine, D., The Context, Performance and Meaning of Ritual: The British
Monarchy and the Invention of Tradition, c. 18201977, in E. Hobsbawm
Bibliography
211
and T. Ranger, The Invention of Tradition (Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press, 1983).
Cannadine, D., The Last Hanoverian Sovereign?: The Victorian Monarchy
in Historical Perspective, 16881988, in A.L. Beier, D. Cannadine and J.
Rosenheim (eds), The First Modern Society: Essays in Honour of Lawrence
Stone (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989).
Cannadine, D., From Biography to History: Writing the Modern British
Monarchy, Historical Research, 22 (2004): 289312.
Carlton, C., Royal Mistresses (London: Routledge, 1990).
Carter, P., Men and the Emergence of Polite Society, Britain 16601800 (Harlow:
Pearson, 2001).
Clark, P., British Clubs and Societies, 15801800: The Origins of an Associational
World (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000).
Clarke, A., Manhood, Womanhood, and the Politics of Class in Britain, 1790
1845, in L.L. Frader and S.O. Rose (eds), Gender and Class in Modern Europe
(Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996).
Claydon, T., William III (London: Pearson, 2002).
Cohen, M., Fashioning Masculinity: National Identity and Language in the
Eighteenth Century (London: Routledge, 1996).
Cohen, M., Manners Make the Man: Politeness, Chivalry, and the Construction
of Masculinity, Journal of British Studies, 44 (April 2005): 31417.
Colley, L., Britons: Forging the Nation 17071837 (New Haven: Yale University
Press, 1992).
Colquhoun, K., Taste: The Story of Britain through its Cooking (London:
Bloomsbury, 2007).
David, S., Prince of Pleasure: The Prince of Wales and the Making of the Regency
(New York: Atlantic Monthly/Grove, 1998).
Davidoff, L. and Hall, C., Family Fortunes: Men and Women of the English
Middle Class, 17801850 (London: Hutchinson, 1987).
Duff, D., Albert and Victoria (London: Mller, 1972).
Earle, P., The Making of the English Middle Class: Business, Society and Family Life
in London, 16601730 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989).
Foss, M., The Age of Patronage: The Arts in England, 16601750 (Ithaca: Cornell
Francis, A.D., The Wine Trade (London: A&C Black, 1972).
Fulford, R., The Prince Consort (New York: St Martins, 1966).
Fulford, R. (ed.), Darling Child: Private Correspondence of Queen Victoria and
the German Crown Princess, 18711878 (London: Evans, 1976).
Gatrell, V., City of Laughter: Sex and Satire in Eighteenth-Century London (New
York: Walker & Co., 2006).
212
Royal Taste
Geertz, C., The Interpretation of Cultures (New York: Basic Books, 1973).
Geertz, C., Centers, Kings, and Charisma: Reflections on the Symbolics of
Power, in J. Ben-David and T.N. Clark (eds), Culture and Its Creators: Essays
in Honor of E. Shils (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977).
Habermas, J., The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry
into a Category of Bourgeois Society, trans. T. Burger (Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press, 1989).
Hardy, A., The Kings Mistresses (London: Evans, 1980).
Hendrickson, R. (ed.), Encyclopedia of Word and Phrase Origins (New York:
Facts on File, 1997).
Hibbert, C., George IV: Regent and King, 18111830 (London: Allen Lane,
1973).
Hunt, M., The Middling Sort: Commerce, Gender, and the Family in England,
16801780 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996).
Hogwood, C., Handel (London: Thames & Hudson, 2007).
Jacques, D., The Gardens of William and Mary (London: C. Helm, 1988).
Jenkins, S., Portrait of a Patron: The Patronage and Collecting of James Brydges,
1st Duke of Chandos, 16741744 (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2007).
Kelly, I., Beau Brummell the Ultimate Dandy (London: Hodder & Stoughton,
2005).
Kidd, A. and Nicholls, D., Introduction: History, Culture and the Middle
Classes, in A. Kidd and D. Nicholls (eds), Gender, Civic Culture and
Consumerism: Middle Class Identity in Britain, 18001940 (Manchester:
Manchester University Press, 1990).
Kidd, A. and Nicholls, D., Introduction: The Making of the British Middle
Class?, in A. Kidd and D. Nicholls (eds), The Making of the British Middle
Class? Studies of Regional and Cultural Diversity since the Eighteenth Century
(Stroud: Sutton, 1998).
Kuchta, D., The Making of the Self-Made Man: Class, Clothing, and English
Masculinity, 16881832, in V. de Grazia and E. Furlough (eds), The Sex
of Things: Gender and Consumption in Historical Perspective (Berkeley:
University of California Press, 1996).
Kuchta, D., The Three-Piece Suit and Modern Masculinity, England 15501850
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002).
Lemire, B., The Business of Everyday Life (Manchester: Manchester University
Press, 2005).
Linnane, F., Drinking for England: The Great English Drinkers of their Times
(London: JR Books, 2008).
Ludington, C., Politics and the Taste for Wine in England and Scotland, 1660
1860 (Columbia University, PhD, 2003).
Bibliography
213
Ludington, C., Claret is the liquor for boys; port for men: How Port Became
the Englishmans Wine, 17501800, Journal of British Studies, 48/2 (April
2009): 36490.
Ludington, C., The Politics of Wine: Power and Taste in England and Scotland,
16491860 (forthcoming, Basingstoke, 2011).
Miller, J., James II: A Study in Kingship (Hove: Wayland, 1978).
Mitchell, L.G., Charles James Fox (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992).
Moers, E., The Dandy: Brummell to Beerbohm (New York: Viking, 1960).
Newman, G., The Rise of English Nationalism (New York: St Martins, 1987).
Orr, C.C., The Feminization of the Monarchy 17801910: Royal Masculinity
and Female Empowerment, in A. Olechnowicz, The Monarchy and the
British Nation, 1780 to the Present (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2007).
OToole, F., A Traitors Kiss: The Life of Richard Brinsley Sheridan (London,
1997).
Plumb, J.H., The First Four Georges (London: Batsford, 1956).
Porter, R., English Society in the Eighteenth Century (Harmondsworth: Penquin,
1982).
Porter, R., The Drinking Mans Disease: The Pre-History of Alcoholism in
Georgian Britain, British Journal of Addiction, 80 (1985): 38596.
Porter, R., Introduction, in T. Trotter, An Essay, Medical, Philosophical and
Chemical on Drunkenness and its Effects on the Human Body, ed. R. Porter
(London: Routledge, 1988).
Prebble, J., The Kings Jaunt: George IV in Scotland, August 1822, one and twenty
daft days (London: Collins, 1988).
Richardson, J., Victoria and Albert: A Study of a Marriage (London: Dent,
1977).
Rogers, N., The Middling Sort in Eighteenth-Century Politics, in J. Barry and
D. Brooks (eds), The Middling Sort of People: Culture, Society and Politics in
England, 15501800 (New York: St Martins, 1994).
Simon, A.L., The History of Champagne (London: Ebury Press, 1962).
Smith, H., Georgian Monarchy: Politics and Culture, 17141760 (Cambridge:
Somerset, A., The Life and Times of William IV (London: Weidenfeld &
Nicolson, 1980).
Strong, R., The Cult of Elizabeth: Elizabethan Portraiture and Pageantry
(London: Pimlico, 1999).
Taylor, A., Bacchus in Romantic England: Writers and Drink, 17801830
(Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1999).
214
Royal Taste
Tobin, S., Marriage la Mode: Three Centuries of Wedding Dress (London:

National Trust, 2003).
Tosh, J., A Mans Place: Masculinity and the Middle-Class Home in Victorian
England (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1999).
Trevor-Roper, H., The Invention of Tradition: The Highland Tradition of
Scotland, in E. Hobsbawm and T. Ranger, The Invention of Tradition
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983).
Veblen, T., The Theory of the Leisure Class (New York: Modern Library, 2001;
first published 1899).
Wahrman, D., Imagining the Middle Class: The Political Representation of Class
in Britain, c. 17801840 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995).
Warner, J., Craze: Gin and Debauchery in the Age of Reason (New York: Four
Walls Eight Windows, 2002).
Watson, J.S., The Reign of George III, 17601815 (Oxford: Clarendon, 1960).
Weatherill, L., Consumer Behavior and Material Culture in Britain, 16601760
(New York: Routledge, 1988).
Weintraub, S., Albert: Uncrowned King (London: John Murray, 1997).
Willcox, W.B. and Arnstein, W.L., The Age of Aristocracy, 16881830 (8th edn,
Boston: MA, Houghton Mifflin, 2001).
Wilson, A.N., Eminent Victorians, Prince Albert (New York: W.W. Norton,
1990).
Wilson, B., The Making of Victorian Values: Decency and Dissent in Britain,
17891837 (New York: Penguin, 2007).
Wilson, K., Empire of Virtue: The Imperial Project and Hanoverian Culture, c.
17201785, in L. Stone (ed.), An Imperial State at War: Britain from 1689
to 1815 (London: Routledge, 1994).
Wilson, K., The Sense of the People: Politics, Culture and Imperialism in England,
17151785 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995).
Wilson, K., The Good, the Bad, and the Impotent: Imperialism and the Politics
of Identity in Georgian England, in A. Bermingham and J. Brewer (eds),
The Consumption of Culture 16001800: Image, Object, Text (London:
Routledge, 1995).
Ziegler, P., King William IV (London: Collins, 1971).
Bibliography
215
Chapter 4 (David Burrow)

Food at the Russian Court and the Homes of the Imperial Russian Elite, Sixteenth
to mid-Nineteenth Centuries
Becker, S., Nobility and Privilege in Late Imperial Russia (DeKalb: Northern
Illinois University Press, 1985).
Bergholz, F.V., Dnevnik Kamer-iunkera F.V. Berkhgoltsa 17211725, trans. I.F.
Ammona (3 vols, Moscow: Universitetskaia Tipografiia, 190203).
Blum, J., Lord and Peasant in Russia from the Ninth to the Nineteenth Century
(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1961).
Borrero, M., Communal Dining and State Cafeterias in Moscow and Petrograd,
19171921, in M. Glants and J. Toomre (eds), Food in Russian History and
Culture (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1997), pp. 16276.
Boym, S., Common Places: Mythologies of Everyday Life in Russia (Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press, 1994).
Classic Russian Cooking: Elena Molokhovets A Gift to Young Housewives, ed. and
trans. J. Toomre (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1992).
Crummey, R., Aristocrats and Servitors: The Boyar Elite in Russia, 16131689
(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983).
Custine, A. (Marquis de), Empire of the Czar: A Journey Through Eternal Russia
(New York: Anchor Books, 1990; reprint of 1843 Longman edn).
De Madariaga, I., Russia in the Age of Catherine the Great (New Haven: Yale
Delany, M. and Popova, N., A Forum of Drinks, Magic, and a Flying Pig, The
Moscow Times, June 2 (2008): 2.
The Domostroi: Rules for Russian Households in the Time of Ivan the Terrible, ed.
and trans. C. Johnston Pouncy (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1994).
Dunning, C.S.L., Who Was Tsar Dmitri?, Slavic Review, 60/4 (2001): 70529.
Dunning, C.S.L., Russias First Civil War: The Time of Troubles and the Founding
of the Romanov Dynasty (University Park: Pennsylvania State University
Press, 2001).
Elias, N., The Civilizing Process (Oxford: Blackwell, 2000).
Fitzpatrick, S., Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times: Soviet
Russia in the 1930s (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999).
Food in Russian History and Culture, eds M. Glants and J. Toomre (Bloomington:
Indiana University Press, 1997).
Goldstein, D., Gastronomic Reforms under Peter the Great, Jahrbcher fr
Geschichte Osteuropas, 48/4 (2000): 481510.
216
Royal Taste
Gordon, P., Passages from the Diary of General Patrick Gordon of Auchleuchries
A.D. 1635A.D. 1699 (Aberdeen: Spaulding Club Publications, 1859).
Hakluyt, R., The Principal Navigations (12 vols, Glasgow: Hakluyt Society,
1903).
Haxthausen, A. (von), Studies on the Interior of Russia, ed. and intro. S.F. Starr,
trans. E.L.M. Schmidt (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1972).
Hughes, L., Russia in the Age of Peter the Great (New Haven: Yale University
Press, 1998).
Iakovleva, A.I., Vospominaniia byvshei kamer-iungfery imperatritsy Marii
Aleksandrovnya, Istoricheskii Vestnik, 31 (1888): 173.
Jones, R.E., The Emancipation of the Russian Nobility, 17621785 (Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1973).
Karamzin, N., Letters of a Russian Traveller, trans. A. Kahn (Oxford: Voltaire
Foundation, 2003).
Kelly, C. Refining Russia: Advice Literature, Polite Culture, and Gender from
Catherine to Yeltsin (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001).
Kivelson, V., Autocracy in the Provinces: The Muscovite Gentry and Political Culture
in the Seventeenth Century (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1996).
Kolesov, V.V., The Domostroi as a Work of Medieval Culture, Russian Studies in
History, 40 (2001): 674.
Kollmann, N.S., The Seclusion of Elite Muscovite Women, Russian History,
10/2 (1983): 17087.
Kollmann, N.S., Kinship and Politics: The Making of the Muscovite Political
System, 13471547 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1987).
Korb, J.-G., Diary of an Austrian Secretary of Legation at the Court of Peter
the Great, ed. and trans. Count MacDonnell (4 vols, London: Cass, 1968;
reprint of London 1863 edn).
Le Donne, J.P., Absolutism and Ruling Class: The Formation of the Russian
Political Order, 17001825 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991).
Lincoln, W.B., The Great Reforms: Autocracy, Bureaucracy, and the Politics of Change
in Imperial Russia (DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 1990).
Love and Conquest: Personal Correspondence of Catherine the Great and Prince
Gregory Potemkin, ed. and trans. D. Smith (DeKalb: Northern Illinois
Margeret, J., The Russian Empire and Grand Duchy of Muscovy: A 17th-Century
French Account, ed. and trans. C.S.L. Dunning (Pittsburgh: University of
Pittsburgh Press, 1983).
Martin, A., Reformers, Romantics, Reactionaries: Russian Conservative Thought
and Politics in the Reign of Alexander I (DeKalb: Northern Illinois University
Press, 1997).
Bibliography
217
Meehan-Waters, B., Autocracy and Aristocracy: The Russian Service Elite of 1730
(Newark: Rutgers University Press, 1983).
Moon, D., The Russian Peasantry 16001930: The World the Peasants Made
(New York: Longman, 1999).
Mordvinova, N.N., Zapiski grafini N. N. Mordvinovoi, Russki arkhiv, 1 (1883):
1569.
Munro, G., Food in Catherinian St. Petersburg, in M. Glants and J. Toomre
(eds), Food in Russian History and Culture (Bloomington: Indiana University
Press, 1997), p. 33.
Osokina, E., Transchel, K.S. and Bucher, G., Our Daily Bread: Socialist
Distributions and the Art of Survival in Stalins Russia, 192741 (Armonk,
NY: M.E. Sharpe, 2001).
Randolph, J., The House in the Garden: The Bakunin Family and the Romance of
Russian Idealism (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2007).
Riasanovsky, N., Nicholas I and Official Nationality in Russia, 18241855
(Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1969).
Rogger, H., National Consciousness in Eighteenth-Century Russia (Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press, 1960).
Roosevelt, P., Life on the Russian Country Estate: A Social and Cultural History
(New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995).
Rothstein, H. and Rothstein, R.A., The Beginnings of Soviet Culinary Arts,
in M. Glants and J. Toomre (eds), Food in Russian History and Culture
(Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1997), pp. 17794.
Shcherbatov, M.M., On the Corruption of Morals in Russia, ed. and trans. A.
Lentin (London: Cambridge University Press, 1969).
Smith, A.K., Recipes for Russia: Food and Nationhood under the Tsars (DeKalb:
Northern Illinois University Press, 2008).
Smith, D., Working the Rough Stone: Freemasonry and Society in EighteenthCentury Russia (DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 1999).
Smith, R.E.F. and Christian, D., Bread and Salt: A Social and Economic History of
Food and Drink in Russia (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984).
The Travels of Olearius in Seventeenth-Century Russia, ed. and trans. S.H. Baron
(Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1967).
Wcislo, F.W., Reforming Rural Russia: State, Local Society, and National Politics,
18551914 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990).
Wilmot, M. and Wilmot, C., The Russian Journals of Martha and Catherine
Wilmot, 1803 1808, ed. the Marchioness of Londonderry and H. Montgomery
Hyde (New York: Arno Press, 1971; reprint of 1934 London edn).
Wirtschafter, E.K., Social Identity in Imperial Russia (DeKalb: Northern Illinois
218
Royal Taste
Wortman, R., Scenarios of Power: Myth and Ceremony in Russian Monarchy:

from Peter the Great to the Death of Nicholas I (2 vols, Princeton: Princeton
Wortman, R., Scenarios of Power: Myth and Ceremony in Russian Monarchy:
from Peter the Great to the Abdication of Nicholas II (abridged one-volume
edn, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006).
Chapter 5 (Ozge Samanci)
Pilaf and Bouches: The Modernization of Official Banquets at the Ottoman
Palace in the Nineteenth Century
Manuscript Sources

Yldz Perakende Hazine-i Hassa, no. 23/9.
Ottoman Archives of Prime Minister (Babakanlk Osmanl Arivi), Istanbul,
Catalog Cevdet Saray (Cevdet Saray), nos 3335, 3374.
Hazine-I Hassa MTA, no. 142/96.
Babli Evrak Odas Gelen-Giden defterleri, no. 904559, pp. 144.
Printed Primary Sources
Ahmet ., Ac Mektebi (Istanbul: Suhulet Library, 1920).

Carme, A., LArt de la Cuisine Franaise au 19e Sicle: Les Grands Classiques de
la Gastronomie Payot (Paris: Editions Payot, 1994).
DOhsson, M., Tableau Gnral de lEmpire Ottoman (vol. 2, Paris, 1761).
T. Efendi, Mecmua-i Etime-i Osmaniye: A Manual of Turkish Cookery (London,
1864).
Eldem, E., Bir mnnn anatomisi, Toplumsal Tarih, 114 (2003): 4850.
Escoffier, A., Le Guide Culinaire (Paris: Flammarion, 1993).
Fahriye, A., Ev Kadn (Istanbul: Mahmut Bey Press, 1882).
Gouff, J., Le Livre de Cuisine (Paris: Librairie Hachette, 1867).
kdam, no. 5246 (1909).
M. Kamil, Melcet Tabbahin (Istanbul, 1844).
Karay, R.H., Nesil Hayat (Istanbul: Inklap Publishing House, 1996).
Macgill, T., Travels in Turkey, Italy, and Russia, in R. Schiffer (ed.), Turkey
Romanticized: Images of the Turks in Early 19th Century English Travel Literature
with an Anthology of Texts (Bochum: Brockmeyer, 1982), pp. 1449.
Bibliography
219
Mehmet, K., Melcet Tabbahin (Istanbul, 1844).

Moltke, H. (von), Moltkenin Trkiye Mektuplari, trans. H. rs (Istanbul: Remzi
Publishing House, 1995).
Mller, M., Letters from Constantinople (London: Longmans, Green, 1897).
Osmanolu, ., Hayatmn Ac ve Tatl Gnleri (Istanbul: Bedir Publications,
1966).
Pardoe, J., The City of the Sultan and Domestic Manners of the Turks (vol. 1,
London: Colburn, 1838).
Saz, L., The Imperial Harem of the Sultans (Istanbul: Peva Publications, 1995).
Seferciolu, N., Trk Yemekleri (XVIII. Yzyla Ait bir Yemek Risalesi) (Ankara:
Ministry of Culture and Tourism MIFAD, 1985).
Slade, A., Records of Travels in Turkey, Greece (London: Saunders and Otley,
1854).
Trabi, E., Mecmua-i Etime-i Osmaniye: A Manual of Turkish Cookery (London:
W.M. Watts, 1864).
Yirmisekiz elebi Mehmed Efendi Sefaretnamesi, ed. A. Uman (Istanbul:
Tercman 1001 Temel Eser).
Yeni Yemek Kitab (Istanbul, 18831884).
Withers, R., Byk Efendinin Saray, trans. C. Kayra (Istanbul: Pera Tourism,
1996).
Secondary Sources
Aksin, S., Trkiye Tarihi 3 Osmanli Devleti 16001908 (Istanbul: Cem Yaynevi,
1993).
And, M., Istanbul in the 16th Century: The City, the Palace, Daily Life (Istanbul:
Akbank, 1994).
Aynur, H., Saliha Sultanin Dgn Treni ve Senlikler, Tarih ve Toplum, 1
(1989): 3039.
Berkes, N., The Development of Secularism in Turkey (Montreal: McGill
DAlmeida-Topor, H., Le Got de ltranger (Paris: Armand Colin, 2006).
Davison, R.F., Reform in the Ottoman Empire, 18561876 (Princeton: Princeton
Demirel, F., Dolmabahe ve Yldz Saraylarnda Son Ziyafetler (Istanbul: Doan
Kitap, 2007).
Dietler, M., Feasts and Commensal Politics in the Political Economy: Food,
Power and Status in Prehistoric Europe, in P. Wiessner and W. Schiefenhvel
(eds), Food and the Status Quest: An Interdisciplinary Perspective (Providence
and Oxford: Berghahn Books, 1998).
220
Royal Taste
Edhem, E., Bilin Bakalm Kim Yemee Geliyor? 19141918 yllar arasnda
dzenlenen ondrt ziyafet tertibinin siyasi ve prozopografik incelenmesi,
Yemek ve Kltr, 8 (2007), 86102.
Flandrin, J.-L., LOrdre des Mets (Paris: Odile Jacob, 2002).
Gek, F.M., East Encounters West (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987).
Gringoire, T. and Saulnier, L., Le Rpertoire de la Cuisine (Paris: Flammarion,
1986).
Karal, E.Z, Osmanl Tarihi: Nizam- Cedit ve Tanzimat Devirleri, 17891856
(Ankara: TTK, 1970).
Karal, E.Z., Osmanl Tarihi (18561861) (vol. 6, Ankara: TTK, 1988).
Karal, E.Z., Osmanl Tarihi: Islahat Ferman Devri (18611876) (vol. 7,
Ankara: TTK, 1988).
Karateke, H., Padiahm ok Yaa Osmanl Devletinin Son Yzylnda Merasimler
(Istanbul: KitapYaynevi, 2000).
Kavcar, C., Batllama Asndan Servet-i Fnun Roman (Ankara: Kltr ve
Turizm Bakanl Yaynlar, 1988).
Ktkolu, M., Son Devir Osmanl Ziyafetleri, in Prof. Hakk Dursun Yldz
Armaan (Ankara: TTK, 1995).
Mansel, P., Constantinople City of the Worlds Desire, 14531924 (London:
Penguin, 1997).
the Middle Ages to the Present (Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1996).
Necipolu, G., Architecture, Ceremonial, and Power the Topkap Palace in the
Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries (New York: MIT Press, 1991).
Nutku, ., Tarihimizden Kltr Manzaralari (Istanbul: Kabalc Publishing
House, 1995).
Orgun, Z., Osmanl Saraynda Yemek Yeme Adab, in Trk Mutfa Sempozyumu
Bildirileri 31 Ekim-1 Kasm 1981 (Ankara: University of Ankara, 1982).
Orgun, Z., Osmanl Saraynda Kilercibalk ve Kilerciba Defterinden Saray
Tatllar, in Geleneksel Trk Tatllar Sempozyumu Bildirileri (Ankara:
Mifad, 1984).
Poulain, J.-P. and Neirinck, E., Histoire de la cuisine et des cuisiniers (Paris:
Editions Jacques Lanore, 2004).
Quataert, D., The Age of Reforms, 18121914, in H. Inalck (ed.) An Economic
and Social History of the Ottoman Empire 13001914 (Cambridge:
Reindl-Kiel, H., The Chickens of Paradise: Official Meals in the MidSeventeenth Century Ottoman Palace, in S. Faroqhi and C. Neumann (eds),
The Illuminated Table: The Prosperous House Food and Shelter in Ottoman
Material Culture (Wrzburg: Ergon Verlag Wrzburg in Komission, 2003).
Bibliography
221
Robuchon, J., Larousse Gastronomique (London: Hamlyn, 2001).

Samanc, ., Continuity and Change in the Culinary Culture of the Ottoman
Palace in the Nineteenth Century (MA thesis in History, Istanbul: Boazii
University, 1998).
Samanc, ., Culinary Consumption Patterns of the Ottoman Elite During the
First Half of the Nineteenth Century, in S. Faroqhi and C. Neumann (eds),
The Illuminated Table: The Prosperous House Food and Shelter in Ottoman
Material Culture (Wrzburg: Ergon Verlag Wrzburg in Komission, 2003).
Samanc, ., 19. yzyl Osmanl Mutfanda Yeni Lezzetler, Yemek ve Kltr,
6 (2006): 8698.
Samanc, ., Fransz slubunda Osmanl Ziyafetleri: 19141918 yllar arasnda
dzenlenen on drt ziyafet mnsnn gastronomik dili zerine inceleme,
Yemek ve Kltr, 8 (2007): 4886.
Shaw, S., History of the Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press: 1976).
Schiffer, R., Turkey Romanticized Images of the Turks in Early 19th Century
English Travel Literature with an Anthology of Texts (Bochum: Studienverlag
Dr N. Brockmeyer, 1982).
nsal, A., The Symbolism of Food: Tokens of Political Power and Status,
Legitimization and Obedience and Challenging Authority, in A. Bilgin and
. Samanc (eds), Turkish Cuisine (Ankara: Turkish Ministry of Culture and
Tourism, 2008).
Yldz, N., ngiliz Basn ve Ariv Belgeleri Inda Krm Sava ile lgili Baz
Sosyal Etkinlikler, Tarih ve Toplum, 17 (1992): 249.
Chapter 6 (Anne Lair)
The Ceremony of Dining at Napolon IIIs Court Between 1852 and 1870
Aron, J.-P., Le Mangeur du XIXe sicle (Paris: Payot, 1989).
Baguley, D., Napoleon III and His Regime: an Extravaganza (Baton Rouge:
Louisiana State University, 2000).
Banquets Royaux, http://www.cuisine-classique.com/banquets_royaux.htm
(accessed on October 26, 2008).
Blond, G. and Blond, G., Histoire pittoresque de notre alimentation (vol. II)
(Paris: Fayard, 1961).
Carme, A., LArt de la cuisine franaise au XIXe sicle (Paris: Payot, 1994).
222
Royal Taste
Castelot, A., LHistoire table Si la cuisine mtait conte (Paris: Plon-Perrin,

1972).
Champagne Roederer, http://www.champagne-roederer.com (accessed on
October 26, 2008).
Davidson, D., France after Revolution: Urban Life, Gender, and the New Social
Order (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2007).
De La Reynire, G., LAlmanach des gourmands (Paris: Maradan, 1803).
DeJean, J., The Essence of Style: How the French Invented High Fashion, Fine Food,
Chic Cafs, Style, Sophistication and Glamour (Free Press: New York, 2005).
Dion-Tenenbaum, A., The Napoleon III Apartments (Paris: Muse du Louvre,
2006).
Dion-Tenenbaum, A. The Napoleon III Rooms in the Muse du Louvre, Paris,
Magazine Antiques (March 1994).
Elias, N., The Court Society (Dublin: University College Dublin Press, 2006).
Ferguson, P.P., Accounting for Taste: The Triumph of French Cuisine (Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 2004).
Flandrin, J.-L., LOrdre des mets (Paris: Odile Jacob, 2002).
Freedman, P. (ed.), Food: The History of Taste (London: Thames and Hudson
Ltd, 2007)
Girveau, B., Le Restaurant pour tous in A table au XIXe sicle: Paris Muse
dOrsay, 4 dcembre 20013 mars 2002 (Paris: Flammarion, 2002).
Fromkin, D., Dumas gastronomique, New Criterion, ( June 24, 2006):17.
Hron, N., Manufacture nationale de Svre. http://manufacturedesevres.culture.
gouv.fr/ (accessed on March 31, 2008).
Johnson, D.M., A Historical Perspective of the Art of the Sommelier, Hearsight,
http://hearsight.com/articles/d.johnson/sommelier3.html (accessed on
March 31, 2008).
Kother, J., Un menu de Napoleon III, Le Petit Journal du Pass, http://www.
leguidedesconnaisseurs.be/article2378.html (accessed on March 31, 2008).
Le grand dictionnaire de cuisine, http://www.dumaspere.com/pages/biblio/
chapitrecuisine.php?lid=c1&cid=744 (accessed on October 27, 2008).
Martin, C., http://menus.free.fr/page109.html (accessed on October 26, 2008).
Milza, P., Napolon III (Paris: Perrin, 2006).
Parient, H., and de Ternant, G., Histoire de la cuisine franaise (Paris: La
Martinire, 1994).
Paris guide: par les principaux crivains et artistes de la France (Paris: A.
Lacroix/Verboeckhoven, 1867), http://books.google.fr/books?id=BlYM
AAAAYAAJ&pg=PA1549&lpg=PA1549&dq=Chambertin+1846&sou
rce=bl&ots=V6pOnSBXBP&sig=eB5tEtyQXUOMyRwG2jdFroCB75
Bibliography
223
w&hl=fr&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=6&ct=result#PPA1549,M1
(accessed on October 15, 2008).
Paris Muse dOrsay, A table au XIXe sicle: Paris Muse dOrsay 4 dcembre
20013 mars 2002 (Paris: Flammarion, 2002).
Poulain, J.-P. and Neirinck, E., Histoire de la cuisine et des cuisiniers (Paris:
Lanore, 2004).
Revel, J.-F., Un Festin en paroles (Paris: Plon, 1995).
Spang, R., The Invention of the Restaurant (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press, 2000).
The 1855 Classification, http://www.bordeaux.com/Tout-Vins/Classification.
aspx?contentId=42 (accessed on October 27, 2008).
Toussaint-Samat, M., Histoire de la cuisine bourgeoise du Moyen Age jusqu nos
jours (Paris: Albin Michel, 2001).
Verroust, M.-L., Cuisines et cuisiniers (Paris: La Martinire, 1999).
Zola, E., LAssommoir (Paris: Le Livre de poche, 1996).
Chapter 7 (Danille De Vooght)
Culinary Networks of Power in a Nineteenth Century Court Society: Dining with
the Kings of the Belgians (18311909)
Archief Koninklijk Paleis, Fonds Leopold I. Departement Grootmaarschalk,
141bis: protocollaire richtlijnen.
Archief Koninklijk Paleis, Fonds Leopold II. Departement Grootmaarschalk, 81.
Archief Koninklijk Paleis, Fonds Leopold II. Departement Grootmaarschalk,
Diners: Chronologische lijst der genodigden. Register 461 (18861892).
Archief Koninklijk Paleis, Fonds Leopold II. Departement Grootmaarschalk,
Genodigdenlijsten.
Arnason, J., Figurational Sociology as a Counter-Paradigm, in M. Featherstone
(ed.), Norbert Elias and Figurational Sociology. Special Issue of Theory, Culture
& Society: Explorations in Critical Social Science (London: Sage Publications,
1987).
Bogner, A., The Structure of Social Processes: A Commentary on the Sociology
of Norbert Elias, in E. Dunning and S. Mennell (eds), Norbert Elias. Volume
I (London: Sage Publications, 2003).
Chartier, R., Social Figuration and Habitus: Reading Elias, in E. Dunning and S.
Mennell (eds), Norbert Elias. Volume I (London: Sage Publications, 2003).
224
Royal Taste
Deneckere, G., The Impossible Neutrality of the Speech from the Throne: A
Ritual Between National Unity and Political Dispute. Belgium, 18311918,
in J. Deploige and G. Deneckere (eds), Mystifying the Monarch: Studies on
Discourse, Power, and History (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press,
2006).
Deploige, J. and Deneckere, G. (eds), Mystifying the Monarch: Studies on
Discourse, Power, and History (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press,
2006).
De Vooght, D., Culinary Networks of Power. Dining with King Leopold II of
Belgium (18651909), Food & History, 4/1 (2006): 85104.
De Vooght, D., Performing Power at the Dining Table: Dinner Guests of the
Belgian Kings in the Nineteenth Century, in P. Janssens and S. Zeischka
(eds), The Dining Nobility, from the Burgundian Dukes to the Belgian Royalty
(Brussels: VUBPress, 2008).
Duindam, J., Myths of Power: Norbert Elias and the Early Modern European
Court (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 1995).
Dunning, E., Agency and Structure in the Work of Norbert Elias, in E.
Dunning and S. Mennell (eds), Norbert Elias. Volume I (London: Sage
Publications, 2003).
Dunning, E. and Mennell, S., Editors introduction, in E. Dunning and S.
Mennell (eds), Norbert Elias. Volume I (London: Sage Publications, 2003).
Elias, N. The Court Society (Dublin: University College Dublin Press, 2006).
Elias, N. Wat is sociologie? (Utrecht and Amsterdam: Uitgeverij Het Spectrum,
1970).
Featherstone, M. (ed.), Norbert Elias and Figurational Sociology. Special Issue of
Theory, Culture and Society: Explorations in Critical Social Science (London:
Sage Publications, 1987).
Goudsblom, J., Heilbron, J. and Wilterdink, N. (eds), Norbert Elias: Het
civilisatieproces. Sociogenetische en psychogenetische onderzoekingen
(Amsterdam: Uitgeverij Boom, 2001).
http://pajek.imfm.si/doku.php.
Janssens, G., De koningen der Belgen. Inzet voor vrede en evenwicht in eigen
land en in Europa, in A. Molitor, G. Janssens, M. Vermeire and G. de Greef
(eds), Koninklijk paleis Brussel (Brussels: Ludion nv Cultura Nostra, 1993).
Janssens, P., De evolutie van de Belgische adel sinds de Late Middeleeuwen
(Brussels: Gemeentekrediet, 1998).
Jong, M.-J. (de), Grootmeesters van de sociologie (Boom: Boom onderwijs, 1997).
Layder, D., A Critique of Eliass Conception of Sociological Analysis, in E.
Dunning and S. Mennell (eds), Norbert Elias. Volume IV (London: Sage
Bibliography
225
Merckl, P., La sociologie des rseaux sociaux (Paris: La Dcouverte, 2004).

Molitor, A., La fonction royale en Belgique (Brussels: CRISP, 1994).
Nooy, W. (de), Mrvar, A. and Batagelj, V. (eds), Exploratory Social Network
Analysis with Pajek (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005).
Osta, J. (van), Het theater van de Staat: Oranje, Windsor en de moderne monarchie
(Amsterdam: Wereldbibliotheek, 1998).
Part Seven. Critiques and Counter-Critiques, in: E. Dunning and S. Mennell
(eds), Norbert Elias. Volume IV (London: Sage Publications, 2003).
Scott, J.P., Social Network Analysis: a Handbook (London: Sage Publications,
2000).
Sibeon, R., Rethinking Social Theory (London: Sage Publications, 2004).
Wasserman, S. and Faust, K. (eds), Social Network Analysis: Methods and
Applications (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994).
Witte, E., De constructie van Belgi, 18281847, in E. Witte, J.-P. Nandrin, E.
Gubin and G. Deneckere (eds), Nieuwe geschiedenis van Belgi I: 18301905
(Tielt: Lannoo, 2005).
Conclusion (Stephen Mennell)
Anderson, P., Lineages of the Absolutist State (London: New Left Books, 1974).
Bagehot, W., The English Constitution (London: Chapman & Hall, 1867).
Barlsius, E., Sociale und historisches Aspekte der deutschen Kche, in S.
Mennell, Die Kultivierung des Appetits (Frankfurt am Main: Athenum,
1985).
Dobb, M., Transition from Feudalism to Capitalism (London: Historians Group
of the Communist Party, 1963).
Duindam, J., Myths of Power: Norbert Elias and the Early Modern European
Court (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 1995).
Elias, N., The Germans: Power Struggles and the Development of Habitus in the
Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1996).
Elias, N., The Civilizing Process (rev. edn, Oxford: Blackwell, 2000).
Elias, N., Die hfische Gesellschaft (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 2002 [Gesammelte
Schriften, Bd. 2]).
Elias, N., The Court Society, ed. S. Mennell (Dublin: University College Dublin
Press, 2007 [Collected Works, vol. 2]).
Elias, N., Science or Sciences? Contribution to a Debate with Reality-Blind
Philosophers, in Essays I: On the Sociology of Knowledge and the Sciences
(Dublin: University College Dublin Press, 2009 [Collected Works, vol. 16]).
226
Royal Taste
Elias, N. and Dunning, E., Quest for Excitement: Sport and Leisure in the
Civilizing Process, rev. edn by E. Dunning (Dublin: University College
Dublin Press, 2008 [Collected Works, vol. 7]).
Frati, L. (ed.), Libro di cucina del secolo XIV (Livorno: R. Giusti, 1899).
Goody, J.R. Cooking, Cuisine and Class (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1982).
Holton, R.J., The Transition from Feudalism to Capitalism (London: Macmillan,
1985).
Ikegami, E., The Taming of the Samurai: Honorific Individualism and the Making
of Modern Japan (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995).
Kilminster, R., Norbert Elias: Post-Philosophical Sociology (Abingdon: Routledge,
2007).
La Varenne, F.P. (de), Le Cuisinier Franois (Paris: Chez Pierre David, 1651).
Lepenies, W., The Seduction of Culture in German History (Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press, 2006).
the Middle Ages to the Present (Oxford and New York: Blackwell, 1985).
Mennell, S., Eten in Nederland, De Gids 150/23 (1987): 199207.
Mennell, S., Norbert Elias: Civilization and the Human Self-Image (Oxford:
Blackwell, 1989; rev. edn, Norbert Elias: An Introduction (Dublin: University
College Dublin Press, 1998).
Pegge, S. (ed.), The Forme of Cury (London: J. Nichols for the Society of
Antiquaries, 1780).
Pollard, A.F., The Evolution of Parliament (London: Longmans, Green, 1920).
Scappi, B., Opera (Venice, 1570).
Sombart, W., Luxury and Capitalism (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan
Press, 1969).
Sraffa, P., Production of Commodities by Means of Commodities: Prelude to a
Critique of Economic Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1960).
Sweezy, P.M. et al., The Transition from Feudalism to Capitalism: a Symposium
(London: Fore Publications, 1954).
Taillevent, G. Tirel dit, Le Viandier (Paris: Techener, 1887 [c. 1380]).
Tschumi, G., Royal Chef: Recollections of Life in Royal Households from Queen
Victoria to Queen Mary (London: W. Kimber, 1954).
Weber, M., Economy and Society (2 vols, Berkeley: University of California Press
1978 [1922]).
Wouters, C., Informalization: Manners and Emotions since 1890 (London: Sage
Index
alafranga 10, 112, 120, 122, 124, 193
alaturka 122, 124
Abdlaziz, Sultan 123
Abdlhamit, Sultan 124, 126, 127, 130,
134
Abdlmecit, Sultan 120, 121, 135
absolutism 24, 42, 89, 90
Albert, Prince 579, 635, 79, 8085, 195
Alexander I, Emperor 90, 103
Alexander II, Emperor 107, 108, 164, 167,
168
ambassador 10, 38, 41, 467, 5052, 968,
104, 11213, 11516, 120121,
125, 127, 130, 133, 136
Ancien Rgime 11, 24, 59, 148, 154, 158,
160, 162, 169, 173, 189, 199
AOC (Appellation dOrigine Contrle)
40, 44, 167
appearance 88, 102, 107, 145, 148, 163,
169, 187
architecture 15, 24, 58, 88, 11213, 127
army see military
artisan 7, 62, 68
autocracy/autocrat 89, 90, 92, 109, 196
banquet 9, 1416, 23, 71, 93, 97, 98, 100,
106, 107, 109, 11117, 11937,
156, 158, 160, 193
baklava 116, 121
beer 64, 67, 87, 124
Bernard, Emile 156, 164
brek 116, 121, 125, 130, 133, 134, 136,
138
bourgeoisie 2, 8, 20, 62, 78, 82, 153, 1568,
160, 163, 1689, 196
bread 1, 17, 25, 87, 913, 96, 100, 11415,

199, 124, 138, 140, 1445
budgets 35, 42, 5051, 78, 80
Caf Anglais 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169
Carme, Antonin 14, 23, 133, 134, 136,
162, 163, 165, 166
castle see palace
Catherine the Great, Empress 90, 92,
1013, 109
cellar see wine
ceremony/ceremonial 6, 1011, 14, 47, 72,
81, 88, 91, 93, 97, 11213, 121,
127, 1437, 149, 151, 1535, 157,
159, 161, 163, 165, 167, 169, 173,
191
cheese 17, 87, 93, 119, 1225, 134, 161
chef 2, 1416, 24, 26, 78, 124, 134, 136,
1568, 160165, 1689, 191, 198
Christian(s)/Christianity 9, 18, 21, 59,
913, 96, 100
Christmas 26, 65, 93, 195
Christofle, Charles 11, 152, 153
Church
Catholic 21, 73, 195
Orthodox 89, 923, 959, 104, 109,
118
Protestant 21, 195
civilization 17, 21, 135, 192
clothes/clothing 4, 645, 7071, 198
coffee 278, 35, 100, 105, 112
colonial(ism) 9, 269
consumption 17, 10, 34, 63, 67, 69, 70,
71, 7882, 845, 87, 912, 99, 103,
108, 118, 1256, 145, 194, 198,
200
228
Royal Taste
conspicuous 45, 7, 42, 62, 87, 100, 103,

144, 169, 198
cookbook 14, 16, 1920, 234, 26, 88, 104,
116, 126, 1334, 137
cooking
ingredients 17, 2021, 24, 26, 289,
116, 1225, 130, 145, 1578,
160162, 166, 168, 194
court
Belgian 11, 1712, 17881, 1847,
189190, 195
British 10, 5761, 636, 6870, 73, 76,
789, 816, 191, 195, 198
French9, 11, 1434, 1469, 1556,
15961, 1645, 169, 197
Ottoman 11, 11113, 115, 119120,
124, 1267, 1338, 191
Russian 10, 8793, 95101, 103,
1059, 1967
society 8, 37, 4042, 45, 47, 49, 50,
146, 1713, 1759, 190, 196,
198200
courtier 43, 61, 69, 81, 85, 113, 167, 173,
178, 190, 198
cuisine
French 24, 112, 121, 126, 1337, 156,
160, 169, 195
haute 11, 223, 1356, 157, 160161,
164, 169, 194
cutlery see tableware
dcor/decorations 2, 7, 11, 23, 29, 65,
945, 106, 120121, 148150,
152, 1556, 1624, 169
diet/dietary 24, 6, 1718, 21, 43, 91, 93,
113, 193
dignitary/dignitaries 11113, 117, 1213,
1257, 130, 1356
dining room 150152, 1545, 158, 168
dinner see meal
diplomacy/diplomats 2, 8, 10, 32, 359,

42, 445, 47, 4950, 52, 55, 69, 80,
100, 106, 136, 154, 194
discourse 7, 19, 103, 161, 171, 178
dish 7, 14, 16, 20, 236, 289, 44, 96,
100101, 112, 11516, 11827,
130, 1337, 1456, 1558, 160,
1623, 1657, 194, 1978
distinction 42, 54, 63, 90, 99, 199
Domostroi (House Order) 946, 109
drunkenness 668, 72, 75
Dubois, Urbain 156, 162, 164
Duglr, Adolphe 164, 165, 166, 168
Easter 93, 99, 100, 106
eating out see restaurant
Edward VII, King 24, 85, 198
Elias, Norbert 5, 78, 11, 49, 94, 1727,
179, 190, 192, 196, 199200
elite 4, 6, 8, 11, 15, 19, 22, 25, 28, 31, 40,
55, 59, 66, 67, 6970, 72, 74, 76,
81, 83, 8793, 95105, 107110,
113, 11719, 121, 126, 1356, 154,
156, 160161, 169, 193, 1957
Escoffier, Auguste 15, 16, 24, 134, 163
etiquettesee also table manners 7, 11, 94,
108, 119120, 1436, 173
Eugenie, Empress 11, 123, 146, 147, 155,
157, 158, 159, 169
exclusive/exclusively/exclusivity 4, 16, 34,
40, 55, 73, 88, 145
exotic(ism) 14, 16, 19, 259, 122, 125, 161
feast 2, 21, 34, 92, 93, 95, 978, 100101,
109, 11112, 117, 120121, 160,
167
Fte impriale148, 156
figuration see also sociology 7, 11, 13, 161,
1729, 190, 196, 200
fish 17, 2022, 101, 104, 119, 1234,
1335, 1379, 15861, 1656
Foie gras121, 1589, 163, 166, 168
Index
foodstyle
European 10, 112, 118, 120123, 127
Ottoman 10, 112, 115, 125
gastronomy 133, 136, 158, 164
gentry 57, 634, 68
George I, King 58
George III, King 10, 57, 59, 635, 6771,
86, 195, 198
George IV, King 59, 645, 718, 86, 197
gifts / gift giving 10, 315, 3942, 456,
49, 515, 978, 104, 194
Gouff, Jules 134, 156, 164
gourmand 14, 163, 165
gourmet 11, 108, 1689
government 23, 63, 117, 1878, 191
guest(s) 2, 78, 1011, 678, 73, 7881,
834, 93101, 103, 1067,
11213, 11516, 120127, 130,
1334, 136, 1456, 150, 1548,
160, 1689, 1712, 178190, 195
identity 12, 56, 62, 67, 70, 76, 8991,
97, 194
ideology/ideologies 2
imperialism 22, 28, 70
industrialization 15, 176
innovation 3, 21, 117, 145, 155, 194, 197
institutions 6, 910, 212, 31, 42, 50,
5960, 63, 82, 867, 95, 103, 113,
117, 135, 161, 191
intoxication see drunkenness
invitee see guest
kebab 116, 125, 133, 134, 136, 140
kitchen 15, 25, 101, 11213, 116, 1216,
134, 136, 1445, 156, 162, 164,
166, 192, 194, 198
Leopold I, King 20, 80, 1712, 178, 185,
188
229
Leopold II, King 1712, 1789, 185,

1878
Louis XIV, Sun King 5, 9, 24, 143, 144,
145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 154,
155, 157, 173, 176, 178, 192, 196
Louis XV, King 40, 146, 155
Louis XVI, King 40, 146, 153
luxury/luxurious 45, 9, 16, 1719, 578,
82, 99, 103, 152, 158, 163, 1912
Mahmut II, Sultan 112, 117, 118, 120, 121,
135
matre dhtel see staff
masculinity/manly 72, 76, 81, 82
meal
dinner 8, 11, 24, 26, 65, 7881, 84,
878, 934, 96101, 1037, 109,
11819, 121, 1256, 130, 143,
1456, 1536, 158, 162, 1645,
16768, 1712, 17882, 184190
lunch(eon) 79, 84, 103, 143, 154, 178
menu (card) 2, 5, 1011, 234, 26,
289, 878, 104, 112, 115, 1212,
1247, 129130, 1327, 156160,
164, 1667, 190, 196
middle class/middle ranks10, 20, 6063,
6772, 749, 816, 197
military77, 8890, 117, 120, 130, 135, 140,
143, 148, 150, 154, 182, 1867,
191,194
modernization 12, 111, 117, 120, 130, 135
monarch(y)Napoleon I, Emperor 143, 147,
148, 154
Napoleon III (Louis Napoleon), Emperor
143, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 153,
154, 156, 157, 158, 160, 163, 167,
168, 169, 193
Napolon, Prince 122, 123
nationalism 23, 88, 90, 104, 165,
230
Royal Taste
network(s) see also Social Network

Analysis2, 11, 171, 1759,
185190, 195
Nicholas I, Emperor 9092, 1069
noble(s)/nobility2, 4, 7, 910, 25, 28,
378, 42, 50, 54, 8892, 945,
979, 103, 1078, 118, 145, 189,
1923, 1956
nouveau-riche 20
novelty see innovation
palace/castle
Buckingham 83
Compigne 143, 154, 155, 156, 168,
195
Dolmabahe 118, 121, 126, 127,
13032
Kensington 58, 87
St Jamess 77, 78, 84
Topkap 111, 112, 113,114, 189
Tuileries (Louvre) 11, 143, 146, 149,
150, 151, 152, 153, 155, 156, 158,
160, 168, 195
Versailles 5, 9, 11, 124, 144, 145, 146,
149, 153, 154, 157, 177, 197, 198
Windsor 834
Yldz 12430, 134
parliament/parliamentary 61, 78, 134, 171,
189,191
Paris 8, 11, 26, 29, 55, 101, 124, 149, 150,
156, 158, 161, 163, 164, 165, 167,
168, 169
patriotism 78, 90, 104
Peter the Great, Emperor 89, 92, 98100,
109
Piedmont/piedmontese 10, 312, 35,
3741, 437, 52
pilaf 111, 113, 115, 116, 119, 121, 125,
126, 130, 133, 134, 136, 141
politics 2, 6, 8, 32, 59, 149150, 161
power 13, 515, 1819, 21, 269, 356,
38, 46, 5051, 5960, 623, 65,
72, 856, 88, 9091, 104, 106, 109,

113, 136, 1435, 147150, 158,
165, 1689, 17294
scenarios of 10, 88, 91, 1068, 110
present see gifts

prestige 25, 34, 37, 4041, 55, 64, 77, 85,
956, 144, 1489, 1678
professionalization 15, 42
protocol 14, 23, 100, 102, 121, 127, 130,
1467, 154, 157
public sphere/places 11, 58, 135, 157,
1623, 1689
quality 2, 4, 17, 26, 33, 70, 83, 94, 98,
102, 104, 143, 156, 160, 165, 168,
1935
quantity 2, 4, 17, 459, 70, 77, 100, 107,
156, 160, 1689, 1935
reception 8, 96, 107, 1113, 115, 120121,
1356, 143, 148150, 152, 154,
169, 198
refined/refinement 3, 7, 11, 17, 19, 1567,
1624, 166, 1689, 191, 1934,
196
Reformation 21, 117, 135
region/regional 6, 25, 278, 312, 35,
424, 62, 161, 167, 1923, 197
republican(s) 1819, 22, 106
restaurant 8, 11, 1516, 245, 289, 87,
143, 160164, 166, 1689, 197
revolution/revolutionary 8, 18, 55, 72, 92,
98, 99, 153, 155, 161
French Revolution 21, 55, 86, 143, 156,
158160, 171, 178, 188190
ritual 21, 24, 42, 51, 55, 95, 97, 100, 108,
148, 154, 173, 178, 197, 198
Roederer 165, 167, 168
Romanov 889, 96, 98, 107
Rothschild, James de 164, 166
royal(s)/royalty 2, 8, 1012, 24, 26, 367,
41, 49, 57, 5961, 65, 689, 71, 73,
Index
7780, 826, 121, 144, 146, 149,
155, 158, 1623, 172, 175, 17881,
18491, 1946, 198
Russianness 88, 103
Savoy/Savoia 10, 312, 353, 41, 43, 44,
4753, 55, 194
dukes of 34, 368, 46, 50, 55
princes of 32, 37
Second Empire 143, 146, 148, 149, 151,
152, 155
servant see staff
service la franaise/French service101,
1034
service la russe/Russian service26, 89, 93,
99, 1035, 133, 136, 158
sherbet 111, 116, 119
silver(ware) see also tableware 11, 93, 97,
111, 113, 115, 11921, 1456,
1523, 155
snobbery 4, 20
sobriety/temperance 62, 668, 72, 767,
8081
sociology 4, 1723, 199
slavery 1, 27, 78
SNA (Social Network Analysis) 11, 1779,
1845, 190
staff 16, 38, 51, 79, 84, 101, 1245, 144,
157, 168, 181
status 13, 5, 8, 59, 62, 80, 91, 96, 98,
100101, 113, 143, 145, 147, 162,
200
sugar 1, 14, 278, 123
symbol(ism) 5, 13, 4041, 51, 59, 63, 65,
68, 70, 76, 80, 82, 85, 113, 127,
130, 148, 154, 165, 173, 197, 200
table 2, 8, 1011, 1415, 20, 22, 26, 678,
81, 84, 92, 94107, 11213, 115,
11721, 124, 1267, 130, 135, 137,
1436, 150, 1546, 158, 160, 162,
1689, 1779, 184, 187, 188
231
manners 11, 116, 120, 126, 135, 143,

169
open table 10, 92, 1015, 109, 196
royal 146
settings 14, 156
tableware (fork, knife, spoon) 10, 22, 93,
97, 103, 11112, 114, 115, 11821,
124, 126, 146
Tanzimat 117, 120
tartufomania see also truffle 40, 43, 55
taste 2, 5, 6, 10, 13, 1520, 235, 289,
5860, 63, 6971, 734, 77, 79,
823, 8586, 97, 11718, 121,
1334, 147, 1568, 160161, 163,
166, 169, 1958
tea 28, 57, 100, 103, 105, 108
tobacco 27, 35, 112
tradition(al) 2, 10, 13, 16, 21, 65, 7072,
878, 92, 96, 100, 109, 119, 121,
127, 1489, 154, 163, 1969
truffle/tartufi 10, 26, 312, 345, 3949,
515, 125, 13841, 163, 166, 194
Turin 32, 379, 425, 489, 512, 54
urbanization 176
Victoria, Queen 26, 57, 59, 635, 68,
7986, 171, 195, 198
war
Franco-Prussian War 26
Napoleonic 62, 67, 756
Polish succession 378, 50
Spanish succession 37
Westernization 117, 135
Wilhelm I, emperor 156, 164, 168
wine 4, 10, 17, 256, 35, 41, 51, 57, 5960,
63, 65, 6771, 734, 7686, 97,
105, 11821, 124, 136, 144, 1556,
160, 162, 1668, 196
workers/working class 3, 7

De VOOGHT, Danielle, Royal Taste. Food, Power and Status at The European Courts After 1789

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

De VOOGHT, Danielle, Royal Taste. Food, Power and Status at The European Courts After 1789

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Royal Taste

Food, Power and Status at the

This page has been left blank intentionally

Danille De Vooght and the contributors 2011

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

ISBN 9780754668374 (hbk)

The Historical Models of Food and Power in European Courts of

2 A Culinary Captatio Benevolentiae: The Use of the Truffle as a

Drinking for Approval: Wine and the British Court

Food at the Russian Court and the Homes of the Imperial

Pilaf and Bouches: The Modernization of Official Banquets at the

Culinary Networks of Power in a Nineteenth-Century Court

List of Figures and Tables

Visualization of the component of the one-mode network

zge Samanc completed her graduate studies in History at Boazici

This page has been left blank intentionally

This page has been left blank intentionally

The Importance of Food and Everything That Comes With It

Modern Europe (London, 1991).

late 1950s, structuralist sociologists, strongly influenced by social scientists like

politically positioned within society.17 To use Warren Belascos words: Food

Belgium (18651909), Food & History, 4/1 (2006): p. 85.

Surprisingly, these questions have rarely been asked by academic researchers

In his chapter, Rengenier Rittersma examines the use of truffles as a

with gigantic societal turmoil. It adds to our understanding of the importance

The Historical Models of Food

The Historical Models of Food and Power

The Historical Models of Food and Power

also recorded in Athenaeuss massive food history, the Deipnosophistae. Within

The Historical Models of Food and Power

See for example Stuckius, Boulenger, Chacon et al. in M. Jeanneret, A Feast of

elsewhere.13 By the nineteenth century to be called an Apicius was fairly positive.

The Historical Models of Food and Power

The Middle Ages

The Historical Models of Food and Power

XVIIe sicle (Paris, 1994).

The Historical Models of Food and Power

culture or cuisine. That would change after Russian soldiers appeared in

The Historical Models of Food and Power

industrial society, an opportunity to express deep, fundamental, instinctual

The Historical Models of Food and Power

intensified. Indians were sent to England for education, Vietnamese learned

This page has been left blank intentionally

A Culinary Captatio Benevolentiae:

A Culinary Captatio Benevolentiae

motivations and should at least evoke gratitude, a strong sentiment, described as

A Culinary Captatio Benevolentiae

started to exploit them systematically in diplomatic relations. Until then, other

A Culinary Captatio Benevolentiae

A Culinary Captatio Benevolentiae

sister of the future Emperor Francis I, Elisabeth Theresa of Lorraine in 1737,

A Culinary Captatio Benevolentiae

conflict, as the anthropological phenomenon of the potlach illustrates.24 It would

A Culinary Captatio Benevolentiae

A Culinary Captatio Benevolentiae

Quantities of food gifts sent from Turin to Vienna (17381774)

M. 67, Dec. 3, 1740 (15 livres de tr.)

M. 88, Dec. 20, 1766

1767 84.5 livres = 32.1

1769 56 livr. = 21.3 kg

1773 28 livr. = 10.6 kg

M. 89, Jan. 3, 1767: 38,5 poids dici

A Culinary Captatio Benevolentiae