Tuesday, June 14, 2016

Mughal Women's Dresses with Plunging Necklines?

I've seen a lot of evidence of robes in Mughal attire, but this one is drawing my attention.

Here's the illumination in question.


The description:

In 1564, the Mughal emperor Akbar visited the house of a man called Khwaja Mu’azzam. At a time when Mughal authority was frequently challenged, rebellions broke out frequently and occasional attempts were made on Akbar's life. On this occasion, Akbar sensed that one of the Khwaja’s Gujarati servants was about to kill him. He swiftly ordered one of his own men, Qutlaq Qadam Khan, to strike first. The unnamed artists who designed the composition and applied the colours vividly depict the incident described in the Persian text . The would-be attacker was instantly decapitated and, in the words of Henry Beveridge's English translation, ‘for a moment the trunk remained standing and the black blood spouted from the arteries of the neck’. The event took place in 1564, and was illustrated in this partial copy of the text written by Abu'l Fazl between about 1590 and 1595. On the reverse is another painting (IS.2:38-1896) thought to be by the same, unidentified artist. 

Now, that's a pretty gorey explanation for an illumination, but apt. The first thing that caught my attention was the guy drawn outside the space - which I may incorporate into future illuminations of my own. But then I saw all the women upstairs.

Note the top quarter of the illumination.


There's a lot going on here.  But what I'm noticing is, except for the lady in the hat, everyone's neckline plunges below the breast.  


That hat is shorter and seems built over a folded frame, and I'll probably attempt that soon.  She's wearing the older woman's robe with the covered hand sleeves, so I suspect she is married.  The other ladies at first appear to be wearing short, tight-cap sleeves with lots of jewelry. But man, look at those necklines.


Because of the artist's lines, I can't tell if those are puckers in the fabric, jewelry or patterning.  But boy, there's no question about how far that neckline does down.


So my question is, is this a foldover dress? Or is it tucked at the waist?  What's going on here?

A later manuscript depicting, of all things, the presentation of the Christ 40 days after his birth.

The interpretation:
Contact between Europe and the Mughals began in 1573, when the emperor Akbar (r. 1556-1605) led his forces into Gujarat and captured the great port city of Surat. Here, he encountered Westerners for the first time. They were from the Portuguese settlement of Goa to the south, and as a result of this meeting Akbar decided to send an embassy to Goa. This led in 1582 to the first of several Jesuit missions from Goa to the Mughal court. The Jesuits brought prints and paintings that were shown to the royal artists, who began to copy or adapt elements from them. This scene may be based on a depiction of the presentation of the infant Jesus in the temple at Jerusalem, forty days after his birth. It probably dates to ca.1600-1610, and was formerly in the collection of Arthur Churchill, from whom the museum bought it in 1913.
So here's a similar dress, worn OVER a chemise.


Okay, so what's up with pinchy boobs?


This overdress is full length and still has the gathers.  I'm not convinced those gathers aren't a peticoat string, but they are awful uniform.

Sunday, June 5, 2016

More Mughal Woman Costuming Research.

I've been digging through the fine collection that the Victoria and Albert Museum has put online of Mughal works, most from the Akbarnama and Baburnama.  An overwhelming number of these illuminations feature men fighting, men negotiating, and men relaxing together.  Finding women in the illuminations is a bit harder.  But it can be done.

This morning, I found Mariam Makani in this image.


This illumination by Tulsi and Dursa is believed to be from around 1586-1589.  From the interpretation:

This painting from the official history of Akbar's reign depicts his mother, Mariam Makani, travelling to Agra by river. It is related to IS.2:3-1896 which shows several boats including that of the emperor, and was painted by Tulsi and Durga.
The Akbarnama (Book of Akbar) was commissioned by the emperor Akbar as the official chronicle of his reign. It was written by his court historian and biographer Abu'l Fazl between 1590 and 1596 and is thought to have been illustrated between c. 1592 and 1594 by at least forty-nine different artists from Akbar's studio. After Akbar's death in 1605, the manuscript remained in the library of his son, Jahangir (r. 1605-1627) and later Shah Jahan (r. 1628-1658). The Victoria and Albert Museum purchased it in 1896 from Mrs. Frances Clarke, the widow of Major General Clarke, an official who had been the Commissioner in Oudh province between 1858 and 1862.

Mariam appears to be wearing both a shawl and a veil, but no apparent hat.


It's pretty hard to see what else she is wearing, thought it is certain the outfit covers most of her.  I suspect this is a one piece full body dress.  She appears to be of advanced age.  She also appears to be wearing some form of jewelry in the form of necklaces.

Overall, as an illuminator, I am fascinated by the tiny depictions of patterns in the cloth behind her - yet thre doesn't appear to be any pattern in the dress she is wearing.

Another image, this one unaccredited and with little interpretation, shows two women.


The lady on the left appears to be wearing a coat of some sort over a full length chemise or gown.  It does appear to have closures.  But is she wearing one lined coat or two separate coats? I'm thinking separate, since the long right sleeve is the dark, patterned blue that appears to also be a lining at the opening.  But the hems... hm.  Maybe it's a particolor coat.  

The hairstyles, though.  These women are wearing their hair uncovered.  Interesting.

The museum only says this image dates back to the late 16th century.  Here's the link.

Another unknown late 16th century manuscript, and this one really changes a few perspectives for me.



This has my attention.  The interpretation:

Painting, in opaque watercolour on paper, Khujista, the merchant's wife, talking to the parrot. Illustration to the story of the 11th evening from a manuscript of the Tuti-nama, 'Tales of a Parrot', by Ziya al-din Nakhshabi.

Holy fish, what is she wearing?


There's a LOT to take in here.  She appears to be wearing a very sheer dupatta over a jeweled headpiece, earrings and so many necklaces, wristlets and arm bands - which, just by the term "wife," she has the rights to wear (widowed women don't wear much adornment).  But I'm noting several things here. 

1.  Her hair, while dressed in jewels, also appears to be at least knee length.
2.  She appears to be wearing an overtunic of some sort instead of a coat.  It's mid-bicep length, and probably about mid-thigh as well.  I've read descriptions of undergarments of similar length, but so far hadn't encountered an overgarment.  That being said, it also might be tightly closed, as noted with those two lines between her breasts to the waist.
3.  I can't tell if she is wearing pants or a chemise, but if they are pants they are quite baggy.

I could totally do this.

Next image, from Lahore, Pakistan - which means it would likely have both Mughal and Persian influences.  It has ALL the LITTLE HATS.

And, honestly, this artist seemed to love the boobs.


This one is credited as possibly Pakistani AND Mughal.  The interpretation:
This drawing relates closely to a fully coloured painting in a copy of Nezami's Khamsa now in the British Library and done for the Mughal emperor Akbar in 1004 AH/1595-6. It depicts Shirin entertaining Khusraw in a garden pavilion, accompanied by female attendants who play music and pour wine. Two others stand behind the couple holding a sword wrapped in cloth and a sash, both emblems of royalty. The features of Khusraw resemble those of the emperor as seen in contemporary paintings.

So, I'm seeing some definite handkerchief-style bottoms here...


This chick has all sorts of action going on (outside of those strangely perkified breasts, which I'm not certain would really occur that way in nature).  The cross-over and bottom of the outfit do appear to resemble the bottom of the dels Grav has been constructing.



It's as if these front pieces are intentionally triangular/trapezoidal or there are additional gore pieces added, which backs up the gored but open flaps Grav has been using on the dels.

But the coats (or dels) are also longer.

There's also the hat, which is more Persian than Mughal (note the little peaked top).  I'd love to have a hat like this, which hugs the head tight.  

She's also wearing pants. And a thin sash that wraps around and then dangles from the waist.

But look in the lower right corner.


Unlike other examples of this hat, the veil here appears to be pinned to the hat's back, or bottom, edge.  There's also a definitive lip.  Is this a stiff hat?  Unfortunately, not being able to see the bottom of her garment, it's almost impossible to tell if she's wearing a simple long coat or layers of coats.  

But that is DEFINITELY a keyhole neckline.  I'm planning to convert the tight necks of each of my current underdresses to keyholes for comfort.




It's a brush drawing on paper.  The interpretation:
Drawing, in ink and opaque watercolour on paper, a monochrome brush drawing in black and grey tones (slightly tinted in places), copied, in adapted form, from an Italian late 16th century or early 17th century drawing or print of the type distributed by the Jesuit missionaries in India and Persia at that period. Depicting a lady of high rank (possibly St. Catherine of Alexandria) with preceptors; seated in discussion, with other male and female figures in costumes suggesting Indianised Elizabethan garments.

WHAT?

Hot diggety daffodil.  This piece has ALL THE WINS.

It's a depiction of Elizabethan clothing as Indian daily wear.

This chick.


What is going on with her?  Here's this ornate headband and jeweled waistband, some sort of pinned up over and underdress or coat and bare feet...

And this chick...


She seems to be wearing something comparable, but it doesn't really look like anything Persian, Mughal OR Italian.  It looks like some sort of cross between I Dream of Jeannie and a coat-and-tails, made of pajama silk.  I can't even.

This chick


is like "leave me alone and let me read my book already."

And this guy...


is SAUCY.  Though what he's wearing? I don't even.

All right, another one, a prince and a lady.


This is different!  She's totally handkerchiefing that bottom edge there.


There is so much going on here.  Her duppatta or veil is colored silk, possibly patterned.  She has short sleeves but they're part of the overdress.  She's wearing pants AND SHOES.  Lots of jewelry.

Those points, though.  DAMN. What IS that?

Also, his coat is crossed like a del but flares like a Persian coat.  I need more information.

So, here's another piece commissioned by Akbar.


And the interpretation:

The Hamzanama, or Book of Hamza, was commissioned by the great Mughal emperor Akbar (r.1556–1605) in the mid 16th century. It is based very loosely on the life of the uncle of the Prophet Muhammad. The epic story chronicles the fantastic adventures of Hamza as he and his band of heroes fight against the enemies of Islam and against monsters, demons, dragons and sorcerers. The tales, from a long-established oral tradition, were written down by calligraphers in Persian, the language of the court, in multiple volumes. These originally had 1400 illustrations, of which fewer than 200 survive today. Work probably began in about 1562 and took 15 years to complete.
This scene, set in a rocky landscape, has not been conclusively identified. A king, distinguished by the feather aigrette in his turban, grasps a demoness by the hair and raises his sword to behead her. His companions stay behind the rocks, making conventional gestures of amazement. The blue sky is filled with stylised clouds typical of Chinese decoration and derived from Iranian painting.

Okay, so a demoness might not look like other women, but I am guessing there are costume clues here.  The bit one is hey, there's a bold pattern on that dress.


There's a LOT of detail here.  The dress appears to either have a pleated waistband or that's a very, very thin belt.  It's a single, shortsleeved shift with what appears to be a plain underdress.  And she's wearing a shawl or veil around her shoulders.  Also, she has hips like me.  A whole lot of the Mughlai women are depicted with these big hips.  Makes me feel at home in the clothing.

Okay, another... here's a wedding.


The interpretation:
In this illustration to the Akbarnama by La'l and Banwali Khord, musicians and dancers perform for the celebration of the marriage of Maham Anaga's son. Maham Anaga was the foster-mother of the emperor Akbar and was a powerful figure in the court. The painting is half of a double page composition, the related page (IS.2:9-1896) showing Maham Anaga sitting next to Akbar in the royal pavilion.
The dancers.  The musicians.  This is a full-blown party going on right here.


All in one image - women in conical hats, women in hair jewelry and translucent but colored veils, women in shawls.  Short sleeves.  Long sleeves.  Patterns.  Whatever that cross-your-heart number is on the chick in yellow.  Here, right here, is a nice display of all sorts of attire at one point.

And, as far as I can tell, no coats.

Also, this guy.


Whatever epic story is being told here.


And epic handlebar moustache dude. What is he doing?  And why is it pleasing that other fellow so much?


The patterning is exquisite.

The other side:


The interpretation.

This is part of a double-page illustration from the Akbarnama (Book of Akbar). It depicts the marriage festivities of the son of Maham Anaga, the foster-mother of the Mughal emperor Akbar (r.1556–1605). Maham Anaga held a powerful position at court, as shown by her dominant position in the painting, sitting next to Akbar. An accompanying painting, Museum no. IS.2:8-1896, illustrates dancers and musicians performing in the celebrations. The Mughal court artist La’l was responsible for the design of the two-page composition, with Sanwala painting the details of this half.

A closeup of Maham Anaga.


Except for the shape of her head and her reversed position, not that much different from Mariam Makani in the boat.  Maham has a little bit of a belly going on there, too.  Necklaces and small bracelets but no other jewelry.  A single shift with a veil or two.

Also, these coats


are freaking incredible and I want them both.  Look at that patterning on the right.  Look at that design on the left.

And then look at what appears to be a blue del at first, but then seems to be more of a foldover robe, on the dude on the right.

What have we here?

What IS that?  Can I have one?

Tuesday, May 31, 2016

Doughnut Bread Pudding for Breakfasts at Events.

I'm always looking for reasonably priced dishes that give a good bang for the buck for any SCA event.  I don't have a lot of requirements, just that whatever is made tastes great, feeds the masses and has at least some sort of bearing on SCA life.

Hence doughnut bread pudding.

Now. this may not make any sense at all to the layman.  How can something that's become a fad for up and coming chefs of the 21st century have any sort of historical roots in our Current Middle Ages? Stick with me for a moment.

To start off with, doughnuts themselves as we know them today aren't even close to period. There are archaeological digs in different Native American settlements where breadstuffs were made in rounds with holes in them, sure, but the first thing we can really start pointing to in the doughnut lineage happens to be olykoeks - "oily cakes," as they came to be known.  They were created by Dutch immigrants and first appeared on the streets of Manhattan around the turn into the 19th century. Culinary anthropologist Paul R. Mullins cites an 1803 English cookbook as the first of its kind to mention doughnuts (in an appendix of “American” recipes) in his book Glazed America: A History of the Doughnut.

But Mullins' own work gives rise to a dispute over the doughnut's true origin.  He cites a 1669 Dutch recipe for "olie-koecken" as a possible evolutionary link between pastries of the 17th century and the American favorite that would eventually give soldiers from the United States the name "doughboys" during World War I (thanks to American doughnut girls who delivered sweet morsels of relief).

Without dispute, some genius had the idea of taking bits of dough and frying them in hot oil and serving them up with sugar or a sugar glaze - and they took off like hotcakes - or doughnuts.  Most folks agree that the modern American doughnut started that way. But surely someone else made that connection beforehand.  After all, hot oil and pastry go ways back.

In fact, there are several distinctive fried dough products present throughout the Middle Ages in cultures spanning Europe and Asia.  The Germans were packing jam into pastry as early as the 15th century and calling it a Gefüllte Krapfen (renamed the Berliner a few centuries later), a filling of jam between two yeast rolls deep fried in lard that came to be known as the sufganiyah, as recorded in the Kuchenmeisterei (Mastery of the Kitchen) published in 1485. Mind you, this delicacy was more likely to be stuffed with fish or beef, but what the heck, it's close.

The Anonymous Andalusian Cookbook of the 13th Century gives us a number of fried pastries, including Shabât, a layered dough interspersed with butter and fried in duck fat.  You may now remove the drool from your keyboard.  I've had arguments with others over another dish from that very chapter, Sanbûsak, which is also a pastry fried in fat - but from what I understand, you roll the dough out very flat, put in a filling and then fry it, making it a closer approximation to today's fried pies. There goes the drool again.

Arab cooks would take bits of dough, fry them and then soak them in a sugar syrup. In the Kitabh al-Tabikh, one of two Arab cookbooks from the 8th-10th centuries, several recipes could be pointed at as predecessors to the doughnut.  For instance, there was zulaabiyyah, a fritter made by pouring batter into hot oil (Charles Perry has a lovely article on the book here).  From a second book with a very similar name, also known by Perry's title A Baghdad Cookery Book, we get Aqras Mukarrara with its discs of hot oil fried golden pastry (Check out this version in Fearless Kitchen).

Even the Romans had their own version - a sweetened sticky bun that was easy to carry.  These, when piled up at marriage festivities, would go on to become the pre-medieval predecessor to the modern wedding cake, and brides and grooms would be compelled to see if they could kiss over the tops of these tasty towers.  As in all things of that time, a taller tower meant more favorable fertility possibilities.

Still, even with this sort of documentation about the mighty doughnut, where does bread pudding come in?  That, my friends, can be traced back to the French, through the art of pain perdu, or lost bread.  Two breakfast-related culinary traditions come from this "lost bread."

In many places, the combination of stale bread, sour milk and old eggs resulted in a dish of what eventually came to be known as French toast.  In others, the three ingredients would be slopped together, mashed a bit, and thrown in a pan to slide into a cooling oven after the rest of the meal was cooked.  This combination was first recorded in the very first extant cookbook we know of today, that of the Roman dude Apicius, who recorded this recipe "Aliter dulcia" (another sweet): Break slice fine white bread, crust removed, into rather large pieces which soak in milk and beaten eggs fry in oil, cover with honey and serve. Sounds like French toast to me.

There are a lot of different versions that could be considered the forerunners of bread pudding. There's Om Ami, an Egyptian dish of phyllo dough, milk, eggs, honey and pistachios.  There's also Shahi tukra, a Mughlai dish (yes, relevant to my current interests) that translates as Royal Morsel and which contains bread fried in ghee then soaked in rosewater and cream.  A lack of perfected recipes in European menus, however, more indicates that the dish was lowly, an opportunity to utilize scraps or sops, and not until the emergence of English whitepot in the 17th century did the pudding start getting its just due.

When sugar was added, and when the mess was covered with rum sauce when pulled out and served, this became the bread pudding best known for its New Orleans connections. But sugar was not a necessary ingredient, and thrifty bakers using whatever was on-hand managed to scrape up savory bread puddings of ham, bacon, beef, cheese, vegetables or whatever was available to create hearty, gut-filling meals.

Bread pudding came to me twice in my life.  When I was a young girl, I watched a perfectly good loaf of white bread be ruined with a thorough soaking in milk at my paternal grandmother's home - an action that made me cringe knowing how lovely it would have been as a slice of French toast.  The milk emulsion with its few beaten eggs was rendered brown and speckledy with additions of cinnamon, nutmeg, vanilla and brown sugar, and the slice of bread were allowed to dissolve helplessly before the smooth resultant batter was poured into a pan.  The resulting eggy bricks were heavy and sad, a homogenized sign of surrender that could not be resurrected by a sweet buttery icing (alcohol was frowned upon by that side of the family).

I couldn't bear the thought of bread pudding for years afterwards.  But in 2000, I traveled to New Orleans for a respite and made my first venture to the New Orleans School of Cooking.  There, Chef Michael and Big Kevin and Little Kevin all passed through that day while I learned many different dishes of the area, including bread pudding.

And I immediately got it - old eggs, stale bread and spoiled milk - and the magic they could render. So I took it home with me, and rendered bread pudding for breakfast that following February at Candlelight Camp.  My concoction, which included pineapple and cherries, was a hit, and from then on I tried to fit a bread pudding into any feasty thing I did -- from apple pie bread pudding at Fall Crown List 2002 to ham and cheese bread pudding at Barbearian Brawl in 2005 to black-and-white bread puddings at Barbearian Brawl 2013 and pineapple upside down bread puddings for Christmas 2015.

And along the way, I learned something else.  You could make a lot of bread pudding with any bread, but for sweet bread puddings, doughnuts were an awesome choice.  I made more of these over the years and shared the information with my friends.  Some of those friends are chefs.  I'm not saying I created the doughnut bread pudding craze, but I certainly fed it.

So doughnuts have been around for centuries, and lost bread for millenia.  Is it really so crazy to think that the two could have come together?

The short of it is, doughnut bread pudding is here to stay.  Every event where I'm responsible for breakfast, it comes out.  Every event that happens at, I have to explain it.  So yeah, there are some historical components.  But it's more to take advantage of cheap ingredients - even cheaper when you learn that my local Kroger bakery gal just gives me a box when she sees me coming and lets me fill it with as many day-olds as I can shove in.  Yeah, always get to be friends with the folks at your local grocery store.

For those who have asked, here's a quick version of the recipe, scaled down to family sized. Remember, you do not have to be exact. And it does not matter if your doughnuts are glazed, cake, old-fashioned or even filled - they'll work.

Doughnut Bread Pudding
1 dozen doughnuts (stale is better)
1 pint milk (or 1 1/2 cup heavy cream, 3 personal containers of yogurt or similar dairy equivalent)
3 eggs
1/2 cup sugar

Tear doughnuts into pieces.  In a measuring pitcher, beat eggs and mix in dairy component and sugar. Place doughnut pieces into greased 13x9 pan, pour egg mixture over and mush lightly with fingers. Bake at 350 degrees for 40 minutes or until knife inserted in center comes out clean.

Variations:
Chocolate raspberry - Make recipe with chocolate glazed and raspberry filled doughnuts.
Pineapple upside down - In Bundt pan, arrange one can's worth of pineapple rings.  Place maraschino cherries inside the rings.  Replace half of milk with reserve pineapple liquid.
Apple pie - In Bundt can, arrange half of bread-egg mixture.  Spoon in one can of apple pie filling. Add in the rest of the bread-egg mixture.  Note - knife will not come out of pudding clean.
Croque Monsier - Add 1 teaspoon black pepper, 1/4 teaspoon nutmeg, six ounces Gruyere and six ounces Parmesan to the mixture.  Put down half the mixture into the pan, top with thin sliced ham, add the rest.  Bake.  Serve with mustard or jam.


Sunday, May 1, 2016

2009 Gleann Abhann Kingdom A&S Entry - Curries and Curry Powder

(this is the documentation for a previous A&S entry)

A Powder of Curry

In modern times, cooks tend to take whatever shortcuts are necessary.  We go for spice blends that remind of us what we should be cooking -- whether it’s a pepper blend for Cajun cooking, a jerk chicken blend for Caribbean fare, or curry powder for Indian food.

But what is considered Indian food today is actually a conglomeration of cuisines, primarily that of the southern part of the subcontinent and of English cookery, combined by wives and servants brought by the English to southern India in the late 16th and early 17th Centuries to appease the English palate with what was available. 

In her book Curry:  A Tale of Cooks and Conquerors, Lindsey Collingham describes the process that the cuisine took, from its true roots on the dirt kitchen floors of India to the barracks for soldiers to the English housewife and the introduction of Indian spices into the world of fish and chips.  In the book, Collingham cites many examples of what is considered to be Indian fare across the world, and traces its origins to the creation of the curry powder.

Collingham contends that  the  term “curry” is actually a European term (think The Forme of Curye) -- a term that the was synonymous with “cuisine.”  Though the term may be European, the spice blend is certainly not.

Collingham and Indian Food Historian K.T. Achaya agree on the British influence in the name, and that the term “curry” may have well referred to any sort of Indian-esque dish.  In fact, Achaya points out in his book Indian Food:  A Historical Companion that the term “curry” is defined not as a spice blend in India but as a gravy served with or over meat or vegetables.

In fact, the closest thing we have to a western viewpoint on Indian cuisine would be that of French explorer Francis Bernier, who traveled the Moghul empire in 1656, a half century outside of our purvey of cuisine in SCA times.  Bernier did describe elaborate meals presented in the post-Akbarian courts of the Moghuls, and expounded on the cooking methods therein used.  Throughout his landmark tome, Travels in the Moghul Empire,  Bernier never mentions any sort of powder in use in the courts.

Collingham’s work does trace the eponymous beginnings of curry powder.  She notes the appearance in the late 18th Century of a “curry powder” in English cookbooks, but none in Indian texts. 

So does this make curry powder a non-period item?

I found myself searching for the answer to this question when I began my research for a feast back in 2004.  I had been collecting redactions and period mentions of dishes in Northern India for my documentation, but had at the time been unsuccessful in locating any actual period recipes I could work on redacting.  To a fault, I found that every recipe I had encountered at the time contained at least some reference to “curry powder.”

The easiest part of my research would come from finding out what’s in modern curry powder.  That wasn’t as hard as I thought.  Through the blessings of good timing, an Indian grocery store had just opened up not far from my home.  I simply purchased several types of curry powder, went home, and read the labels.  What I found was a preponderance of ingredients that varied as much as you might expect the spice blend to change between one cook and another at a chili cookoff.  Very few items were standard.

I had at the time recently discovered Achaya’s research.  This scientist and eminent researcher worked with India’s Council of Scientific and Industrial Research and had in his efforts help define the very history of Indian cuisine.  I only regret that I had not discovered his work earlier; he passed away in 2002.  In the book Indian Food:  A Historical Companion, Achaya told of his visits to archaeological digs throughout India, and of his careful documentation of the remnants of food at such sites.  He talked with teams that had found cloves burned to ancient floors and long and black peppers contained in partially crushed clay vessels.  Through this book and through A Historical Dictionary of Indian Food, I was able to document the spices used in the powders.

At the time, I was all about “faster and better.”  I knew that the feast ahead would take much time and effort, and I aimed to take whatever shortcuts I could to make sure patrons weren’t waiting for their supper for an undue length of time.  Through experimentation and by utilizing only spices and herbs that were documented in Achaya’s work from archaeological digs, I was able to create a spice blend of my own to use in my cooking.

I could have quite easily walked away after the feast and had nothing more to do with any of the different cuisines I had so painstakingly researched for the project.  But my curiosity was still there.  Moreso, my husband was still there, and he had developed a particular fondness for the curry blend I had created.  So I continued to periodically gather the ingredients and grind them for the blend that I used, and I started to share this blend with others.

However, a kind lady with Al-Mahala at Gulf Wars encouraged me to take a further step and teach about the very spices I was using in my curry powders.  I felt that some explanation for each spice was necessary, and so I came up with a course curriculum that featured all of the spices I had researched in my efforts.  I even offered a hands-on class where participants could mix bits of dried spices to take home and try in their own homes.

In my class handouts and in the class itself, I shared the following information about the spices that might be found in curry powders, and why I chose the spices I did for my own blend.  I also mentioned that the idea of curry powder itself is a post-SCA time period invention, and encouraged my students to seek out more information and whole spices so they could experiment with their own attempts.

The spices I included in my paper are as follows.  The information about each spice was culled from Achaya‘s archeological digs and from references in Bernier‘s epistle and Collingham‘s later work, derived from cookbooks of the British Raj era and later.  Further cited works are referenced with each relevant spice.

Bay Leaves:  In period, these would not have been the laurel leaves we know of today.  Achaya found the similar shaped and sized tej pat, a plant of the Indian subcontinent, in kitchen remains.  The plant is known as Cinnamomum tejpata or the more modern Malabathrum.  Its leaf has a flavor similar to cinnamon, but much milder.  Unfortunately, confusion between the two has resulted in the traditional European bay leaf being included in many modern curry spice mixtures.  Apicius cites the use of bay laurel leaves many times in his Roman era cookbook De Re Coquinaria.

Cardamom:  There are actually two very different sort of cardamom -- green and black.  Green cardamom (Eletaria cardamomum) is a green fibrous pod derived from a plant similar to the ginger plant.  Its flavors range from eucalyptus to citrus and it is considered far milder than its similarly named cousin.  Black cardamom (Cardamomum amomum) is a dark brown pod that brings smoky and camphor-like flavors to food.  It’s often used in tandoori-cooked foods like modern cooks use Liquid Smoke -- as a smoke-flavor agent.  If you have tried Chai tea, you have likely consumed green cardamom.  Achaya noted both of the cardamoms in kitchen ruins.  Both plants originate from southern India and Sri Lanka.

Cassia and Cinnamon:  These two barks are similar in nature, though cassia is generally less pungent and spicy than cinnamon.  Cassia is mentioned in the Bible (Exodus 30:23-24) as ingredients to anoint the Ark of the Covenant.  It comes from a tree believed indigenous to China, while cinnamon is a native plant of Sri Lanka and southern India.   In sources too many to mention, I have discovered cinnamon referenced as an ingredient.  Achaya noted that they appeared to be interchangeable in pre-Moghul and Moghul cuisine.

Cloves:  Achaya mentions the oldest clove found burnt to a floor in an archaeological dig.  It dates back to approximately 1721 B.C.  (give or take a millennium!).  Originally from the Spice Islands, they were known to have been cultivated as far west as Rome a hundred years before the birth of Christ.  They and their essential oils have been used in Ayurvedic medicine for centuries as a painkiller.  In modern curry powders from my own research, they appear to be interchangeable with allspice.  Clove or clove oil may have been added to food by Indian cooks.

Coriander seed:  Yes, it’s from the same plant as cilantro.  But the two spices are so far apart, there’s good reason to call them separate names.  The seed is actually the dried fruit of the plant.  Achaya notes that coriander was often used as a thickener.  It is a key ingredient in both garam masala (a traditional blend of whole spices common in Indian kitchens today) and “traditional” curry powder.  It’s native to the southwestern part of India through the Middle East and northern Africa.  From my research, coriander is apparently used much as file powder (the ground leaves of the sassafras tree) are used here in North America as a thickener.  I might extrapolate that coriander and its cooking could be the bridge between the term “curry” and its synonymous usage for the English term “gravy” in modern India.

Cumin:  Also a spice used since antiquity, cumin is native to most of India.  It’s the dried seed of the parsley relative Cuminum cyminum, and has been used in both Eastern and Western cooking extensively.  To me, the scent of cumin reminds me of the scent of chili (the dish, not the spice).  Achaya noted a prevalence of cumin throughout his archaeological travels.

Fenugreek leaves:   These are commonly known today as Methi leaves.  Both the leaves and the seeds of the fenugreek plant have been found at archeological digs and dated back as far as 4000 BC.  The leaves are used not only in Indian food as a spice for the curry gravy but also in yogurt and as a hair conditioner.  The leaves, to me, smell like what you encounter when you enter a modern Indian restaurant.

Fenugreek seeds:  Have you ever been told you smell like curry (guilty!) -- if so, chances are, you’ve been eating fenugreek seeds in some form or fashion.  The oils from the seed of the fenugreek plant give the aromas of Indian food (and consequently, people who eat it) that certain “tang” we all recognize. 

Garlic:  Where did it come from?  Everywhere!  There are varieties of garlic found in almost every region of the world not covered with ice.  But whether garlic was used in period Indian dishes as an addition to curry-type dishes is up for debate.  Achaya did document it in a few of his digs, but overall it’s not a spice that’s encountered in the typical pre-British influence kitchen.

Ginger:  Strangely enough, this most Indian of spice is also questioned as an ingredient in period Indian dishes.  There is documentation of candies in South India prepared with ginger, but not much to substantiate that it would have been used in other parts of the subcontinent before Akbar.  I would personally postulate that its arrival came with exploration, both from European influences and through the expansion of the Moghul Empire from the late 15th Century onwards.  However, I did find it included in many of the modern curry spice blends I encountered.

Mustard seed:  The seed is often used to flavor dishes but not often eaten whole.  It’s often cooked in oil to take advantage of its essential oils, which produce a distinctive tartness to a dish.  The Indian mustard seed is light brownish in color; other varieties range from a light yellow all the way to black.  Achaya’s work notes a wide spread across the Indian subcontinent of mustard varietals.  In curries it carries a bit of a zing.

Pepper:  Black, white, red, and green peppercorns all come from the same plant, piper nigrum.  It is not related to the capsicum peppers of the New World.  Long pepper or pippali (piper longum) is from the same genus and retains much of the “heat” we consider pepper to bring to our dishes.  Yet its flavor is considered to be more pungent.  Pippali is still a common ingredient in India with dishes, but there and especially in British and American-influenced applications the long pepper has been replaced with spices from members of the capsicum family, which would not have been utilized in India until the early 16th Century.  Peppercorns are another of the spices that Achaya found common with most pre-British influence kitchen ruins.

Star anise:  This spice is sometimes confused with anise, but the two are completely separate.  Star anise are star shaped fruits harvested just before they ripen.  They originate in China and are a key component of Chinese Five Spice Powder.  First records of it being brought to Europe in the late 16th Century.  It is cited as a component of many period Indian applications.

Turmeric:  This root (or rhizome) is what gives much of Indian food its yellowish coloring.  It’s also used in cosmetic applications to give a glow to the skin of the wearer -- and as a hair growth deterrent.  The flavor is mild but often used as a base for other flavors to build on.

On the use of capsicum peppers:  red peppers, chillies, and other “hot” peppers come from the New World.  There are some who will tell you over and over and over again that these spices were not used in period.  They are almost but not quite right.  Capsicum peppers did not come to the Old World until the “discovery” of America. However, while they were used mostly for medicinal purposes in the West, they were embraced by many Eastern cultures.  There is some debate over whether the introduction of capsicum lead to the end of cultivation (and therefore near extinction) of what is considered in India to be the “long pepper,” the spice pippali.  I have found it difficult to locate pippali in the States.

Once I had researched the different spices and created my blend, I shared that blend with others.  The original blend itself, from spices I ground in the coffeemaker:

A tej pat leaf (I used bay leaf in a pinch)
A tablespoon cardamom powder
A tablespoon of cinnamon powder
A half teaspoon of ground cloves
A tablespoon of coriander powder
Four tablespoons of ground cumin
A pinch of methi leaves
A teaspoon ground fenugreek
½ teaspoon mustard seeds, ground in my coffee grinder (ground mustard doesn’t work)
½ teaspoon ground black pepper
2 tablespoons powdered turmeric

I chose not to use ginger or garlic partly because it seemed that the spices weren’t used all through India, but moreso because I didn’t like what they brought to the table when mixed with the other ingredients in my curry powder attempt.  The taste, to me, was too sharp and a bit too modern.

This mix got me through my first attempt at Indian cooking in a feast, but I wasn’t satisfied with it.  I did more research, and read through the works of Collingham and Achaya, and also Joyce Westrip’s book Moghul Cooking:  India’s Courtly Cuisine.    After this and after discussions with cooks at Little Rock restaurants Star of India and Kebab and Curry in 2005, I started experimenting with a spice mixture that comes closer to what a cook would have used in the 16th Century.  I learned about the necessity of heating spices in ghee and letting them release their essential oils.  I also determined that the whole idea of curry powder is prevalent today even with these cooks, simply on the basis of consistency and ease.  But there are still cooks who want to retain the traditions of whole spice curried dishes.  With this knowledge and assistance, I came up with my own, better spice blend.  Unlike the other blend, I keep the whole spices available to use when I make curry at home.  The amounts sometimes vary depending on what I’m cooking or what mood I’m in, but the base curry has come to this.

Four green and one black cardamom pod
1 2-inch section of cassia bark or 1 one inch section of cinnamon bark or 1 tablespoon chopped cinnamon bark (do not use ground)
1 clove
2 teaspoons coriander seeds
1 ½ Tablespoons cumin seeds
1 teaspoon fenugreek seeds
1/2 teaspoon mustard seeds
1/2 teaspoon peppercorns, freshly and coarsely ground
1 star anise
1 bay leaf
1 ¼ Tablespoons powdered turmeric
1 healthy pinch methi (fenugreek) leaves (appox. 1 tablespoon)

As you can see from this listing, I am still not confident with cooking with some whole spices, in this case the turmeric.  Experimentations with this root have come out with a flavor that’s far from comfortable with my Americanized tongue, and my one attempt at using the whole root in a group situation failed to enthrall the diners that partook of my dibblings.  Besides, the root is somewhat wet, which makes putting it into the grinder or pulping it in the pestle come out as a paste that has to be refrigerated if not used right away.  It’s far more convenient to me to have the dried variety of the building blocks of  my own curry powder available for me to just throw into a skillet with whatever I decide to cook up.

When it does come to advance preparation, especially as it happens in SCA practice (ie, feast cooking for events), I have found it far easier to rely on a pre-made powder of my own creation.  Finding the time to listen for popping seeds or getting spices to evenly roast when the curry is just one of a couple of dozen dishes heading for the platters and plates of feast diners, having a powdered contingent on-hand that allows me to sidestep the roasting and mortaring process has been a blessing.  I can simply start at the roux stage and go from there.

Now, I did learn a bit more.  From attempting the making of curries with the whole spices, I’ve learned to start out with a dry skillet and place spices that come from seeds in it.  Let it toast a bit.  Cumin and mustard seeds will pop… and there’s a distinctive roasted scent similar to meat cooking that emanates.  When they’re toasted, take them out and let them cool a little, then grind them.  While that’s going on, throw the rest of the ingredients except the methi leaves and the turmeric powder into the same skillet with a tablespoon of ghee (that’s clarified, shelf stable butter).  Keep them from burning but get them thoroughly heated and mixed.  Add the ground seeds back in along with the ground turmeric and stir it like a roux. 

Now comes the fun part.  While I was doing all that research on curry powders and the like, I discovered something.  There’s always a liquid component in meat dishes.  Sometimes it’s yogurt, buttermilk, or milk.  It can also be fruit juice, coconut milk, or honey.  The general rule is to treat that spice blend like a gravy -- keep it moving like a roux so it won‘t burn (and if it does burn, throw it out).  Thin it with the liquid component and then add in the meat or vegetable that will cook in it. 

Strangely enough, most of what we get as far as entrée dishes at Indian restaurants today seem to be based on this basic equation (except, of course, that the gravy starts with the powder).  For instance, add ground cashews and cream to the gravy equation and you have a Korma sauce.  Tomatoes and potatoes with some capsicum-type pepper element brings you to a Vindaloo.  Masala is the same sort of spice gravy but with a tomato component -- which is sometimes ketchup. 

Even non-sauce dishes come from this gravy.  Biriyanis in period were the spice gravy layered between layers of rice and either meat or vegetables in a heated pot that was then left to cook on its own in the embers until ready to serve (think medieval casseroles).  Today it’s meat soaked in the curry gravy that’s then mixed by hand into rice and allowed to sit for a little bit.

But I digress.

The past several years of accumulating this information and practicing its applications on my friends and upon willing feast goers has brought me to the conclusion that, while there is no such thing as a period curry powder, most of the same spices were used in Indian cooking.  I have learned that though I have created a pretty decent recipe that others could follow to create a simulation of my curried dishes, that on any given day I might choose to throw in this or that or change the amounts of spice used or even to omit something that I usually utilize.  By doing so, I have started to cook a little closer to my culinary predecessors.

However, as a feast cook, time and ease will likely leave me clinging to my homemade curry powder.  I am not comfortable with the results of freezing or otherwise utilizing advance preparation methods in my curried dishes.  The results, to me, don’t taste as fresh.  Therefore I find myself offering this compromise when cooking for crowds of 100 or more.  It is my modern compromise to historical cookery that seems to be acceptable to the palates for which I cook.


Bibliography

Achaya, K.T.  Indian Food:  A Historical Companion.  Oxford University Press 1994. 

Apicius. De Re Coquinaria (The Roman Cookery Book). Translated by Barbara Flower and Elizabeth Alföldi-Rosenbaum. London and Toronto: Harrap, 1958.

Bernier, Francis.  Travels in the Mughal Empire.  Original publication in France in 1670.  South Asia Books 1989.

Collingham, Lindsey.  Curry, A Tale of Cooks and Conquerors.  Oxford University Press 2007.

Various Authors.  The Bible.  King James Version.

Westrip, Joyce.  Moghul Cooking:  India’s Courtly Cuisine.  Serif Publishing 2005.

  
A note on the display:
While an attempt was made at a period-esque display, this wasn’t completely possible.  Requirements being what they are (for each entry to be presented at serving temperature and for entries to be available from 9am to after court), I had to improvise.  Therefore, the applications of curried chicken are within the electrical device.  However, the curry powder display itself is presented on a dish I painted myself.  The design is based on the small five petaled flowers seen in the borders of several examples of Mughal paintings of the 16th and 17th Centuries.  The specific examples that inspired the painting of these items comes from the British Library’s exhibition of an illumination, King Khusraw hunting, by Abd us-Samad dated 1595. 
  

The Period-Style Curry

Four green and one black cardamom pod
1 2-inch section of cassia bark or 1 one inch section of cinnamon bark or 1 tablespoon chopped cinnamon bark (do not use ground)
1 clove
2 teaspoons coriander seeds
1 ½ Tablespoons cumin seeds
1 teaspoon fenugreek seeds
1/2 teaspoon mustard seeds
1/2 teaspoon peppercorns, freshly and coarsely ground
1 star anise
1 bay leaf
1 ¼ Tablespoons powdered turmeric
1 healthy pinch methi (fenugreek) leaves (appox. 1 tablespoon)
2 Tablespoons honey
4 Tablespoons ghee
1 pound chicken breast

Place pan over low to medium heat.  Spread cumin, cardamoms, cassia or cinnamon, clove, coriander, fenugreek and mustard seeds, star anise and bay leaf over the bottom of the pan.  Grind peppercorns and add to pan.  Listen to the pan and stir frequently until the cumin and mustard seeds begin to pop (they sound a little like Rice Krispies).  Remove pan from heat and let cool a moment.

Remove star anise and bay leaf.  Add other ingredients to a mortar or a purposed electric grinder.  Grind to a coarse consistency (think coffee grinds).

In the same pan, heat ghee over low to medium heat until melted.  Add ground mixture and turmeric to the pan (it works better this way; otherwise, the powder will clump, as I discovered in my tests).  Stir together until it becomes gravy-like, a roux of spices.  Add the honey and stir to combine.  Add the bay leaf and the star anise back in.  Add in the methi leaves and stir.

Slice the chicken breast into ½ inch slices and place in pan, turning to coat in the spice mixture.  Cover and let simmer on medium heat for five minutes.  Remove lid and stir.  Add up to ¼ cup water if the spices are too clumpy.  Cook uncovered until the chicken is almost cooked through (155 degrees F).  Remove from heat and let sit 10 minutes (the chicken will come to 165 degrees F).  Remove bay leaf and star anise.  Serve curry on its own, over rice, or with naan.


The Powder-Based Curry

1 teaspoon ground bay leaf
1 Tablespoon cardamom powder
1 Tablespoon cinnamon powder
½ teaspoon ground cloves
1 Tablespoon coriander powder
4 Tablespoons ground cumin
1 teaspoon methi leaves
1 teaspoon ground fenugreek
½ teaspoon mustard seeds, ground in a purposed electric grinder
½ teaspoon ground black pepper
2 Tablespoons powdered turmeric
4 Tablespoons ghee
2 Tablespoons honey
1 pound chicken breast

Place pan over medium heat.  Melt ghee.  Add spice blend to ghee and stir into a roux.  Add honey and combine.

Slice chicken breast into ½ inch slices.  Add to pan and coat with ghee-spice-honey mixture.  Cover and let simmer on medium heat for five minutes.  Remove lid and stir.  Cook uncovered until the chicken is almost cooked through (155 degrees F).  Remove from heat and let sit 10 minutes (the chicken will come to 165 degrees F).  Serve curry on its own, over rice, or with naan.