- by Owen Morton
The question I above pose is one that I am seriously considering tackling for my dissertation for my history degree. It’s not a question that has been analysed by historians in any depth, or even cursorily as part of a greater study. Not even Keith Thomas’ ‘Religion and the Decline of Magic’ which is a majestic study of English culture in the early modern period and which I am now reading seems to make any reference to sausages.
This is a sad gap in the literature. A work about the consumption of sausages among the poor in early modern England could achieve great commercial success and become a classic of popular history as well as becoming a standard text for historians of the early modern period. It is perhaps surprising, therefore, that no one has as yet attempted to write a history of this fascinating topic.
The reason for this, perhaps, is that there is such a sad dearth of evidence about the number of sausages the poor ate. In fact, it would appear that no contemporary source makes mention of sausages at all, and some would use to this to suggest that maybe sausages were not in existence at the time. I regard this as a conclusion reached by amateur historians who have not stopped to think of the full consequences of their decision. To take a totally random example, it is more than likely that contemporary sources from the fifteenth of July, 1234, do not make mention of the fact that most of the peasants in the diocese of St Albans were in possession of a full complement of limbs, but this does not mean to say that they were not. Some things are taken to be so obvious that they need not be reported – and I think that this is the case with sausages.
So the question that really needs to be answered is not, did the poor in early modern England eat sausages? but, how many sausages did the poor in early modern England eat on a regular basis? If this question can be answered in a simple manner, we will be able to draw some radically important sociological and historical conclusions which will doubtless greatly influence the way we think of this period.
Before we turn our attention to attempting to answer the question, there need to be some definitions made. The key words in the question are, of course, ‘sausages’, ‘poor’, ‘early modern’, ‘England’, ‘eat’ and ‘regular basis’. So we must first define these terms.
‘Sausage’ can be defined as meat from pigs, cows and occasionally sheep, sometimes mixed with herbs and shaped into finger-like protrusions, which are then consumed for nutrition and for pleasure.
‘Poor’ is more difficult. One parish’s poor might be positively well off by the standards of another. The north of England, for example, was generally poorer than the south. But I think a definition of ‘poor’ that will suit for our circumstances is the section of society that existed beneath the subsistence line; that is, that often could not find enough to eat.
‘Early modern’ is a term that historians do disagree over. However, I am willing to accept for this essay Wolfgang Behringer’s assertion that the early modern period starts in roughly the year 1450 and extends to 1750.
‘England’ is extremely easy to define. It is that portion of the British Isles that is not Wales, Scotland or Ireland.
‘Eat’ is similarly not difficult. To ‘eat’ is to consume food for the purpose of continuing to stay alive, and it is often pleasurable as well.
‘Regular basis’, however, is a bit trickier. What is regular? In the absence of any other way of defining it, though, we’ll say that ‘regular’ means once a week or more.
Right! Onto the question itself!
Obviously, no clear cut answers with precise figures can be reached, since we have absolutely no evidence for the consumption of sausages at this formative time of England’s history. However, we can make some educated guesses based on evidence which we make up. If we pretend, therefore, that Shakespeare’s ‘Much Ado About Nothing’ contains the line:
Swiftly as the poor do eat sausages.”
we can then draw further conclusions. As the courtiers in Much Ado About Nothing do seem to fall in love very swiftly, we can thus conclude that the poor ate their sausages very quickly. Further evidence can be made up along the lines of this passage which isn’t in Thomas More’s ‘Utopia’ but might have been were he inclined to have inserted it:
“The poor shall have all the sausages they need, for if the poor are deprived of sausages they are wont to rebel.”
This gives us clear evidence that the poor usually have access to sausages, but it is implied that in More’s lifetime a peasant rebellion inspired by the lack of sausages was caused, and that it was such an unpleasant experience that he did not wish it to be repeated, and thus attempted to make sure in his ideal society of Utopia that it would not be. More obviously did not wish the poor to have more sausages than they needed, however, for the phrase used was “all the sausages they need” and not “all the sausages they want”, which perhaps displays More’s opinion that a peasantry given more sausages than it needs is no better than a peasantry without enough sausages.
I think my case is proven. I could go on making up evidence for ever if I chose, but I believe the pieces of evidence I have already made up are more than enough to show that the poor ate sausages on a regular basis in the early modern period. Praise be to God.