Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1872-06-04
OLD TIME DINNERS.
How the Romans Dined.

An article entitled, "Our Dinners" in
St. Paurs Magazine, contains the fol
lowing:
The Romans in their most luxurious
days ate with their fingers. This fact
assures me that although they certainly
had large dishes upon their table, they
must have managed to carve them in a
more refined way than we do, otherwise
they could not have eaten without
greatly splashing and soiling their costly
garments. .H.
The English, celebratedin the fifteenth
and sixteenth centuries for being the
largest eaters in the world, used no knives
or forks, and yet had joints, nay, even
whole pigs and bullocks set before them.
Did they soil their delicate furs, and
long trains woven with seed pearls
Certainly they must have soiled them,
and | do not doubt that not only were
they very dirty people, but they must
have presented a revolving spectacle at
DINNER. Probably the bullock, or the
eternal Swine" they seemed to live on
was seldom cooked through, and each
guest flung himself upon his favorite
food, tore It ia his hands, and crammed
it into his mouth, and what he could not
swallow he would cast upon the table
cloth, which, as no plates were used,
must have been drenched with grease.
But the Greek and Roman dinners
we're not like this. Their table was rich
with art, their walters were beauteeus in
form and attire, the cana was accompa-
MED by burning perfumes and soft music
their dishes were prepared with the
most fastidious sense of propriety and
attractiveness. How different from our
method was their preparation for their
c9nd, the one great meal, the festive eli
max of the day Did they prepare them
selves for a close pack by tightening
all their garments as we do, fastening
straps to our dress trousers, pulling in
our waistcoats at the waist, fixing a
painfully sharp-edged collar and ire
proachable muslin tie (very much like a
piece of muslin tape) upon a shirt front
as expansive and as stiff as sheet Of
TIM Did their ladies throw aside the
days easy gown for a low-necked gar
meut of bursting tightness, with no
sleeves, no kerchief; and did they sit re-
gardless Of draughts for three hours
wearing bracelets Of the most dangling
and inconvenient form ever made for
dinner time? nl
On the contrary, the Romans prepared
for their meals by extra ease and com
fort Of attire. Their loose and sweeping
garments of the day we're exchanged for
a dress still more convenient, the short
and colored synthesis-they loosened their
girdles, they adorned their heads with
chaplets of roses or ivy-their very san
dals were removed by an attendant, who
offered them perfumed water as they took
their places. Nine, the number OF the
MUSES., was the utmost number OF guests
for one table, only three Of whose sides
we're occupied by the Injurious couches,
or lecti, covered with costly drapery,
and inlaid with ivory and tortoiseshell,
on which the men reolined dnring the
repast; the fourth side was left vacant
for the servants 70 place the tall trays
containing the different eourses-each
course being changed at once, and no
single dishes being brought in one by
one, after the modern ridiculous fashion.
Three men usually occupied one lectus,
the seats being indicated by cushions,
on which the diner leaned his left elbow,
as he ate the clean delicate viands,
without knives (sometimes q kind Of
spoon was used(, and contemplated
table covered with works OF art made of
the rarest materials--all that the master
possessed Of the richest or best was there
displayed, whilst bright flowers or lighted
perfumes, burning in vases OF exquisite
workmanship, prevented the havors of
one course from injecting the next the
women, who did not recline, but sat
upon chairs, we're sufficiently isolated 20
be set of to proper advantage and the