|
Post by yumehime on Aug 2, 2012 8:27:56 GMT -5
Milk and other dairy products failed to become popular in Japan, China, and Korea. In fact, the only Japanese dairy product known to history was so, produced between the eighth and fourteenth centuries. Milk was boiled down to yield this semisolid product. But even this food, consumed at the court and among the noble class, disappeared as a result of the demise of the aristocracy. Cattle were raised only for drawing carts or plowing fields. To utilize them for meat or even for milk was, until relatively recently, a long-forgotten practice. from www.cambridge.org/us/books/kiple/japan.htmUntil I read this, I had never really associated milk products with Japanese period food.
|
|
|
Post by Noriko on Aug 2, 2012 12:25:36 GMT -5
It probably also failed to take off because lactose intolerance[1] is more prevalent in certain Asian populations. Given how Japan was settled, with a distinct founder population, there may have been few carriers of the lactose tolerance genes. So just because people could consume dairy, it may have not been worth it in the end, if you catch my meaning. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should But this is pure speculation. [1]Though perhaps it is more accurate to say that lactose tolerance is less prevalent. The 'default' for most mammals, including humans, is to be lactose intolerant after weaning. Being able to consume dairy after this point is a unique mutation and has arisen in some populations, most notably in European ones. A quick google reveals about 80-90% of Japanese people are lactose intolerant. Scandinavian people have a 5% rate in comparison.
|
|
|
Post by Sō Haruko on Aug 2, 2012 13:06:38 GMT -5
Putting on my cook's hat briefly, it's worth noting that cooking denatures lactose. Most people who are lactose-intolerant can still tolerate some amount of yogurt and cheese because the lactose has been reduced and altered sufficiently.
That said, with a large enough population of lactose-intolerant people, and the natural extensions of the Buddhist religion, it may simply have been easier -- and fashionable -- to let this cheese leave the table.
|
|
|
Post by Noriko on Aug 2, 2012 13:29:07 GMT -5
Ah, neat. Most of the people I've known who are lactose intolerant are very much so, meaning that any dairy they consumes, even with pills beforehand, better have a taste worth suffering for later. However, this situation mostly seems to come up in the context of ice cream consumption, which is, I assume, high in lactose. Most people seem to have the willpower to not eat a pile of cheese cubes at a cocktail party but an ice cream sundae?
|
|
|
Post by Sō Haruko on Aug 2, 2012 13:35:40 GMT -5
Ice cream still has plenty of lactose in it, yup. *nodsnods* The more fermented or cooked the milk is, the more likely it is to be tolerated -- heavily fermented yogurt or hard cheese would be my recommendation for someone very lactose-intolerant who still loves their milk.
Ice cream is pretty much just a sweetened custard base, so it's not very different from plain milk. Frozen yogurt might be better, but the current fro-yo you can buy at a yogurt shop is pretty much a lot like ice cream, so perhaps not -- or perhaps something to experiment with making at home.
Edited to add: I'd also like to note that for some people, not all, continued exposure to milk helps with the tolerance. I speak purely from personal experience here. With a nearly-pure Italian heritage, most of my family is lactose-intolerant. I make a point of drinking two 12-oz glasses of milk a day or the equivalent, and manage to retain enough enzymes to digest that amount of milk, plus an occasional gelato, reasonably well. Going to double that amount can be bad, though. {:
|
|
|
Post by yumehime on Aug 2, 2012 20:39:40 GMT -5
Let me submit the possibility that since it was a practice of the nobles, that the nobles relatively isolated genetics may be the reason they could handle milk. Amusing that only 90% of the nation is dairy intolerant, the that leaves 10% who can eat dairy. This may have been one of the marks that set the noble class apart form the poor along with being able to afford to eat rice. and that's amusing that as So points out, that there was any lactose left to react to. this would also be labor intensive, so only the wealthier people could afford it.
Also, Noriko, may I recommencement your fiends look into soy, rice, almond, and hemp alternatives for yummy creamy treats. As a cheese head who loves milk, I can attest that there are some great tasting alternatives now available.
|
|
|
Post by Please Delete on Aug 9, 2012 10:53:34 GMT -5
I don't necessarily think lactose intolerance plays so big a part here. As mentioned, sou itself is a processed product, so less likely to have the same kinds of problems. Interesting article (perhaps) on lactose intolerance in Japan can be found here: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1234085Abstract: 1. The incidence of milk intolerance is approximately 19% in Japanese adults when 200 ml of milk is given. However, a much greater incidence was assumed when considered under the criteria of Western standard. 2. The lactase activity was significantly greater in milk drinkers than non-drinkers. And, internationally, the active is higher in those nationalities whose milk consumption is greater. 3. Lactase is an adaptive enzyme and rather easily induced by lactose load feeding in animals. From the data of our own and of the literature, it was further confirmed that environmental factors play a more important role than genetic factors in the etio-pathogenesis of milk intolerance. Anyway, that gives a much higher population that have the ability to eat than has been quoted. Furthermore, some things to consider: 1) Cattle were draft animals, used to increase production, taking the place of horses in many places (Japanese horses were smaller and more like the Asian steppe horses. 2) The "sou" was medicinal. I don't know if it was ever "normal" food. A royal herd was kept for a while, but it doesn't appear to have been something that caught on elsewhere. 3) Buddhism arrived with much of the other Chinese imports, and this likely cut down on seeing cattle as food objects rather than beasts of burden. 4) Many other imports were also discarded: Chairs, spoons, the more intricate parts of the calendar, etc. In all, I don't think that speculation is going to yield much better results. It is easy to speculate, but we have to be careful about speculation on top of speculation. -Ii
|
|
|
Post by yumehime on Sept 4, 2012 16:16:00 GMT -5
In other words, between the 8th and 14th century was just a passing medicinal fad? Just a measly little 6 centuries of use? Starting in the century AFTER the meat ban was declared?That's kind of like saying the samurai were just a passing fad, or like America is just a blip in history. Even as just a passing fad, this kind of suggests that the noble classes were taking a calcium supplement, something that would have upped the nutrient content of the noble woman's milk production, and also would have meant that the nobles had better bones then commoners if it was consumed by the adults. I would also like to note that Buddhism alone would not have meant the death of dairy as a food source since India forbids the slaughter of cattle, but considers butter and cheese staple, and they are not the only Buddhist that are willing to use dairy. Check out this bit on the Himalayan monks. www.prweb.com/releases/2011/12/prweb9024829.htm foods
|
|
|
Post by Sō Haruko on Sept 4, 2012 16:27:42 GMT -5
As I understand it (and people who have spent more time in Japan may certainly correct me), there is very little pasture in Japan. The country is so mountainous and wet that I'm really not sure it's at all conducive to raising cattle on a large scale for milk production.
On the flip side, you'd think it'd be great country for goats or mountain sheep, but that doesn't seem to be the case either.
|
|
|
Post by yumehime on Sept 4, 2012 17:19:50 GMT -5
Given we are in a group that assumes that we are all low level nobility, and the nobility of period SCA only represent a very small portion of the actual period population, "lack of space" and "only used by nobles" are thoroughly invalid arguments in the face of practices of nobles that ARE HISTORICAL DOCUMENTED! That's like saying that the junihito style was only used by a very few women in Japan and was terribly labor intensive, so it is not appropriate SCA costuming.
It may also be a good time to consider that at the time we study, Japan had a much smaller population and a much greater amount of land dedicated to agriculture. During this time, grain is primarily produced locally, especially during isolationism periods, and the noble classes could have afforded extra land for dairy production. Since we know cattle were a food source prior to the ban on eating them in 675, that implies that there were cattle to eat in the first place. You don't put a ban on eating avocados in a country that can't obtain them. Why would you ban eating cattle in a country that has no room to raise them? How do you get documented dairy in a country that has no room to raise the beast it comes from for 6 centuries?
|
|
|
Post by Sō Haruko on Sept 4, 2012 17:45:51 GMT -5
Frankly, we don't have enough documentation in English to know how common it was, how long it really was made, how it was made, what it tasted like, and whether it was used medicinally or as food.
Is it period and appropriate for us? Possibly, assuming the sources we have are accurate. This is difficult to say given how little is written about it in English.
If you want to work on researching and redacting so, I'm sure that the rest of us will be glad to read your translations and test out your recipes. Sadly, my Nihongo is too poor to be up to that task.
|
|
|
Post by yumehime on Sept 4, 2012 18:21:21 GMT -5
Ah, so the academic and professional writings of a press started in 1584 for a world renown college are only "possibly" accurate documentation in English text on period japan? To think, all the people who pay for this stuff are buying poorly documented history books. It makes me wonder what a college education is worth if the text books are so poorly researched. I guess I should no longer look to colleges for historical information. Or am I the only one who CHECKED where the web site came from? You guys DO double check the quality of your web resources, don't you? And here's shopping info for the book. www.cambridge.org/gb/knowledge/isbn/item1140195/?site_locale=en_GB
|
|
|
Post by Please Delete on Sept 4, 2012 23:28:22 GMT -5
Pasture land was definitely available. I've visited modern day "bokujo" and the kanto region was famous for its pastures. Yumehime, as an FYI, your tone appears exasperated and your rhetorical question appears to be meant in insult more than respectful commentary. I hope it wasn't meant that way, and if I come across as attacking you, personally, I apologize and would like to know. I admit, I didn't see the "14th century"--it survived much longer than I had thought. I still don't think lactose intolerance was the reason it was abandoned. Probably fell out of fashion--and if it was the 14th century, it still could have been the decline of the court. The coffers of the shogunate were depleted in the 13th century by the Mongol invasions, which cost resources but provided nothing in return, leaving the court in debt to many of the warrior class. This debt is often cited as one of the reasons that Go-Daigo was able to rally men to overthrow the shogunate, which of course led to a period of civil war. I could easily see the luxuries of the nobility becoming much less available at a time like that. As for the accuracy of Cambridge's publications--that imprimatur is not, by itself, indicative of accuracy. Moreso than the publisher it is going to depend on the author, when it was written, and what scholarship backs it up. Is it a book (or article) specializing on the subject or is it something more general? Who is the audience and what is its purpose? I've seen some otherwise good scholars who still think that bamboo is a major component of Japanese armor, because it isn't their area of study. That said, I see nothing in here that would lead me to question their article on dairy products, and they even state that the decline of the aristocracy was the reason it fell out of favor. As for Himalayan monks: Monks who live in extremely cold climates with little protein that doesn't come from animals are often given dispensations, as Buddhism adapted to the climate. I'm not sure what your point was, there. You seem to be putting words into my mouth, e.g. "fad", and then constructing an argument against my point from there, so let me be clear: My study of Japanese and English sources has not led me to find enough evidence to draw a conclusive reason as to why so was abandoned as a food. I will also point out that I have had "so", or at least as it was recreated for a 10th Century feast by a Japanese food historian for "Rokusei" in Kyoto. It was rather hard and tasteless, as I recall. Not really something that I would eat on a regular basis, personally, and nothing that would get you much praise at any feast. The nearest "cheese" type that I can think of is Indian paneer, which is much softer. Something to note on the study of something like this. "So" ( ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%98%87; yes, it is Wikipedia, but it gives the characters and possible leads to search on) is the pronunciation of the character "蘇". This doesn't really give us much to go on. Unless there are actual recipes detailing its manufacture, it is going to be difficult to recreate, and even Japanese sources seem to have a hard time pinning down what it is. Okay, I've spent way too much time on this. Yes, "So" is period. If you can recreate it, that is awesome. I don't think that attempting to show that lactose intolerance led to its decline as a foodstuff is going to get you anywhere, but good luck if you want to try. I'm not sure what you want or what you are upset about. Maybe if we knew we could better help. -Ii
|
|
|
Post by yumehime on Sept 5, 2012 0:56:31 GMT -5
The chain is fairly simple when you think about it. The standard explanation of period costuming works from the premise that all Japanese people were not only short, but skinny due to malnourishment. In order to actual establish the fact in historical context I did research of my own, only to find a great deal of contrary documentation that actually suggests that diets, and there for body fat potential, would have been quite different, including a Shinto priest. The Himalayan example was provided with an Indian example to demonstrate that Buddha dose not specifically ban dairy, a relevant point since Buddhism is one of the point's made to claim dairy would not be used at all, and since religion can affect diet.
If we don't actual look at the diet and body mass, the costuming proportions extrapolated from museum examples are wrong. Since our primary documents for clothing as well as existing pieces are from the noble class, that makes the noble diet and the affect on the body especially relevant. By adding a food that is likely high in protein and possibly fat as well if the cream is left in to an otherwise lean diet, you change calories and nutrient content and the very fluffy women with 3 chins in the old paintings start looking less like exaggerations and a 16-17 inch wide bold also has a different reason for being in demand(bigger bellies need wider dresses).
Or we could ignore the milk and just pretend that the double chins were artistic liberty and the extra inches in a bolt width were just for show and not to cover big bellies. Then again, slop research is one of the things I have found many anti-SCA people voicing objections to, so perhaps it is time I lower my expectations of my fellows after 30 years of play since so many are happy to tell me I'm wrong without actually checking my resources. I apologize for getting annoyed with people for for forgetting why the society was founded in the first place. I will go back to pretending that what everyone else says is true without actually checking facts.
|
|
|
Post by Sō Haruko on Sept 5, 2012 9:09:47 GMT -5
The standard explanation of period costuming works from the premise that all Japanese people were not only short, but skinny due to malnourishment.
It does? *blinks* News to me.
Edited to add:
An excess consumption of polished white rice is just as much a possibility for the more stoutly-built people in the images you refer to.
|
|