Salsamenta pictavensium: <i>Gastronomy and Medicine in Twelfth-Century England</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article presents a collection of culinary recipes from a manuscript produced in England from the later twelfth century. The suite of ten recipes for ‘Poitou sauces’ or ‘Poitou relishes’ (salsamenta pictavensium—literally ‘of the Poitevins’) to garnish various kinds of meat, fish and fowl are introduced and analysed, with an appended edition and translation. These are, to date, the oldest extant medieval recipes for such sauces, and in their role as gastronomic enhancements, the earliest surviving medieval culinary recipes. The historical and cultural contexts for the recipes at Durham Cathedral Priory are explored: the nature of the community for whom the recipes were written, its choices of library acquisition, its relationships with the bishopric, and attitudes within the community towards food and medicine in a monastic setting. The Poitevin designation of the sauces is also considered. Above all the article investigates the question of the relationship between gastronomy and medicine in the twelfth century, and seeks to demonstrate that any distinction between medical and culinary recipes suggests a false dichotomy, particularly in the case of salsamenta. The authors argue against the position that medieval cuisine is, in its origins and essence, applied dietetics, and suggest that in the twelfth century salsamenta belonged in the first instance to gastronomy, but were in the process of being appropriated as medicines by the authors of the new literature of therapeutics.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".