To the preceding observations from the “Almanach des Gourmands,” we may add, that the Mouthician will have a still better chance of success, if he can prevail on his master to observe the same régime which he orders for his cook; or, instead of endeavouring to awaken an idle appetite by reading the index to a cookery book, or an additional use of the pepper-box and salt-cellar, rather seek it from abstinence or exercise;—the philosophical gourmand will consider that the edge of our appetite is generally keen, in proportion to the activity of our other habits; let him attentively peruse our “Peptic Precepts,” &c. which briefly explain the art of refreshing the gustatory nerves, and of invigorating the whole system. See in the following [chapter] on INVITATIONS TO DINNER—A recipe to make FORTY PERISTALTIC PERSUADERS.
[27-*] “She must be quick and strong of sight; her hearing most acute, that she may be sensible when the contents of her vessels bubble, although they be closely covered, and that she may be alarmed before the pot boils over; her auditory nerve ought to discriminate (when several saucepans are in operation at the same time) the simmering of one, the ebullition of another, and the full-toned wabbling of a third.
“It is imperiously requisite that her organ of smell be highly susceptible of the various effluvia, that her nose may distinguish the perfection of aromatic ingredients, and that in animal substances it shall evince a suspicious accuracy between tenderness and putrefaction; above all, her olfactories should be tremblingly alive to mustiness and empyreuma.
“It is from the exquisite sensibility of her palate, that we admire and judge of the cook; from the alliance between the olfactory and sapid organs, it will be seen that their perfection is indispensable.”—A. C., Jun.
[28-*] A facetious gourmand suggests that the old story of “lighting a candle to the devil,” probably arose from this adage—and was an offering presented to his infernal majesty by some epicure who was in want of a cook.
[29-*] “A gentlewoman being at table, abroad or at home, must observe to keep her body straight, and lean not by any means with her elbows, nor by ravenous gesture discover a voracious appetite: talk not when you have meat in your mouth; and do not smack like a pig, nor venture to eat spoonmeat so hot that the tears stand in your eyes, which is as unseemly as the gentlewoman who pretended to have as little a stomach as she had a mouth, and therefore would not swallow her pease by spoonfuls; but took them one by one, and cut them in two before she would eat them. It is very uncomely to drink so large a draught that your breath is almost gone—and are forced to blow strongly to recover yourself—throwing down your liquor as into a funnel is an action fitter for a juggler than a gentlewoman: thus much for your observations in general; if I am defective as to particulars, your own prudence, discretion, and curious observations will supply.”
“In CARVING at your own table, distribute the best pieces first, and it will appear very comely and decent to use a fork; so touch no piece of meat without it.”
“Mem. The English are indebted to Tom Coryat for introducing THE FORK, for which they called him Furcifer.”—See his Crudities, vol. i. p. 106.—Edit. 1776, 8vo.
[30-*] “Almost all arts and sciences are more or less encumbered with vulgar errors and prejudices, which avarice and ignorance have unfortunately sufficient influence to preserve, by help (or hindrance) of mysterious, undefinable, and not seldom unintelligible, technical terms—Anglicè, nicknames—which, instead of enlightening the subject it is professedly pretended they were invented to illuminate, serve but to shroud it in almost impenetrable obscurity; and, in general, so extravagantly fond are the professors of an art of keeping up all the pomp, circumstance, and mystery of it, and of preserving the accumulated prejudices of ages past undiminished, that one might fairly suppose those who have had the courage and perseverance to overcome these obstacles, and penetrate the veil of science, were delighted with placing difficulties in the way of those who may attempt to follow them, on purpose to deter them from the pursuit, and that they cannot bear others should climb the hill of knowledge by a readier road than they themselves did: and such is l’esprit de corps, that as their predecessors supported themselves by serving it out gradatim et stillatim, and retailing with a sparing hand the information they so hardly obtained, they find it convenient to follow their example: and, willing to do as they have been done by, leave and bequeath the inheritance undiminished to those who may succeed them.”—See p. 10 of Dr. Kitchiner on Telescopes, 12mo. 1825, printed for Whittaker, Ave Maria Lane.
[32-*] “In the present language of cookery, there has been a woful departure from the simplicity of our ancestors,—such a farrago of unappropriate and unmeaning terms, many corrupted from the French, others disguised from the Italian, some misapplied from the German, while many are a disgrace to the English. What can any person suppose to be the meaning of a shoulder of lamb in epigram, unless it were a poor dish, for a pennyless poet? Aspect of fish, would appear calculated for an astrologer; and shoulder of mutton surprised, designed for a sheep-stealer.”—A. C., Jun.