Culture of Food

For many nobles, the country estate was the place where they spent entire seasons off the year, or lived with their family full-time. Such periods of suburban noble life are filled with certain aspects of everyday life. One such aspect is the culture of eating.

Conditions of the feast and cuisine of the imperial time can be found in many literary works of the 19th century: “Eugene Onegin”, “War and Peace”, “Dead Souls”, etc. The execution of the traditional Russian feast is described in great detail, which gives us the opportunity to compile a comprehensive visualization of what is happening inf the dining room, as well as the kitchen, of the manor estate. It should also be noted that extent of a meal adequately showed the wealth and position of a nobleman. Therefore, the feast was one of the many pleasures in the life of a nobleman.

The layout of the dining room came to be an important role of the estate. This room became one of the most essential and ceremonial halls of a noble manor at the end of the 18th and early 19th centuries. Much attention was paid to the interior of the dining room; along the walls hung paintings (mostly still life), family portraits, or paintings inspired by historical motifs. As a rule, the dining room would house the most comfortable furniture in the estate. This was necessary, as feasts and meals lasted many hours.

Throughout 18th century Russia, the culinary arts took on two variations: national and foreign. Traditional Russian meals were served by the hands of domestic serf chefs. These domestic chefs were considered to be zealots of classic dishes.

Fillip Vigel (Wigell) clearly illustrates the tableau culture of the nobility. Vigel argues that in order “to judge the unpretentiousness of the way of life of the Penza nobles at that time, one must know that none of them had faience, all were served clay and Murat (to glaze) dinnerware (although at least a few people did not sit down at a table without 24 dishes, soup, jellies, cooks, cakes). Only Mikhail Ilich Martynov, the owner of 1000 souls, more than the other hospitable and luxurious, had half a dozen silver spoons; they were put in front of honorable guests, while others had to be content with tin. “We can clearly see how the social status affected even the distribution of silver and tin spoons in a noble environment, and also notice what a varied menu was present even among middle-class nobles.

The noble feast is described in detail in Ivan Turgenev’s “Hamlet of the Shchigrovsky District”, one of the Hunting Sketches stories. “It is hardly necessary to tell the reader how the dignitary was given the seat of honor between the civil-service general and the provincial marshal of nobility, a man of unrestrained and dignified expression entirely in keeping with his starched shirt-front, infinitely broad waistcoat and round snuff-box full of French tobacco; how our host fussed, dashed about, busied himself importantly, urged his guests to partake of what was offered, smiled in passing at the dignitary’s back and, standing in one corner like a schoolboy, hastily spooned down a plate of soup or had a bite of beef; how the butler brought in a fish more than three feet long with a floral bouquet in its mouth; how the servants, all liveried and severe of face, morosely approached each member of the gentry either with Malaga or dry madeira and how almost all these gentlemen, especially the elderly, drank glass after glass as though submitting unwillingly to a sense of duty; how finally bottles of champagne began to pop and toasts began to be made: the reader is, no doubt, only too familiar with such matters. But particularly noteworthy, it seemed to me, was an anecdote told by the dignitary himself amid a universally joyous hush” (translated by Richard Freeborn). The excerpt from this story once again confirms the importance of feasting in the Russian aristocratic environment as one of the most significant activities in everyday life, where every owner tried to show himself most worthy.

The dinner table played an important role in the feast in a variety of ways. At the time, there were many important trends surrounding the method of serving. The nobles strictly followed these updated methods. Nikolai Kostomarov distinguishes three types of serving: “French serving consisted of four changing of dishes. The first change consisted of soups, light, hot, or cold snacks, as well as hot dishes. Interestingly, the hot dishes of the first course were prepared differently than those subsequent courses. The second change consisted, as a rule, of two dishes: roast meat and game. The third change included vegetable dishes or various salads. The fourth change of dishes consisted of desserts. After the main feast, guests would commonly serve fruit or cheese.

In the midst of 19th century Russia, the English way of serving became very popular. It came to be known as a kind of “spontaneous economy” because all the dishes were served at the same time, and the gentlemen were served besides the seated ladies. All of these traditions share similarities with the modern-day feast. Nevertheless, the domestic service system remained more popular throughout Russian aristocratic circles. The English way of serving looked very solemn, the guests sat down at a table decorated with flowers and porcelain figurines and then the waiters began to make already cut and hot dishes.”

The Russian landowners liked to organize dinners with a large number of guests. Often, the feast was planned as a genuine theatrical occasion with a director and actors. The feast was accompanied with an orchestra, which would play throughout the entirety of the dinner in order to fill pauses between the changing of dishes.

Surprising guests with exquisite dishes was far from the main role. The nobles wanted to impress their guests with their cooking skills, and the artistic serving methods. This elaborate presentation mimicked a theater.

Because of St. Petersburg’s geography, it was not possible to deliver fresh fish to the country, making it a delicacy. During the first half of the 19th century, it should be noted that a provincial landlord could afford to serve such meals – specifically, ukha, a fish soup prepared from live sterlet sturgeon. This would have been very difficult for an average St. Petersburg nobleman, seeing as he first lived on his estate on the Volga River. However, at the turn of the 19th century, the advent of railways allowed for changes in this restriction. All provinces essentially had equalized access to food.

Speaking about the noble feast, we cannot fail to mention some dishes that were popular and loved in almost all households.

We should start with the famous Russian pie, which united the tastes of both noblemen and ordinary peasants. Often times, pies would be so large, that one could fill them with whole mushroom hats, large pieces of fish fillets, and legs and breast of various game. The pie was traditionally cooked in a Russian oven.

Roast platter, known as grand platter or grand-assortment of roast meat, became very popular among aristocratic circles. Grand assortments were served only on special occasions, as this dish was not affordable by an average nobleman. The assortment included several varieties of meat: bear, hare, elk, bovine (fillet), boar, chamois, lamb (exclusively saddle cut), pigs, veal, as well as goose (breast), turkey and rooster (cockerel). During the 18th century, rooster cockerels were very popular amongst nobles. During the 19th century, the recipe for this delicacy already became difficult to reproduce, as it ceased to be published in Russian cookbooks after 1775.

Additionally, rooster cockerels were only on sale from December to April, and were delivered by sledge transport from Vologda and Velikii Rostov, which were the main suppliers for this gourmet food.

The turn of the 18th and 19th centuries hosted a satisfying variety of menus, in which dishes of Russian and French cuisines coexisted peacefully and comfortably. The first course, which was always soup, was offered in an unusually wide variety. The assortment consisted of fresh and pickled cabbage soup, fish soup (ukha), brothy stews, and much more. Considering the extravagant array of the soups, one can only imagine the rich offerings presented for the second course. There were all kinds of meat dishes cooked from beef, lamb, pork and veal. This culinary mystery of boiled, roasted, baked, semi-braised, fricassee, ground meat, and, finally, simple corned beef, added to the extravagant assortment.

The fish course is no less elaborate than the meat course. The most basic dishes included boiled, fried, or baked fish. The provincial nobility always appreciated the taste of game – from pheasants and partridges, black grouses, wood grouses and ducks. Sergei Okhliabinin described the diverse menu of the nobility in his work “Everyday Life of the Russian Manor of the 19th Century”.

In regard to drinks, during the first half of the 19th century, European wines – Bordeaux, Burgundy, Italian and Spanish – were always present at the noble table. The wines came in all kinds of varieties: dessert, dry and semi-dry, fortified, and sparkling. Vodka was always present due to its popular success in Russia.

As a rule, certain types of wine were served with certain dishes. Fortified wine was commonly served with pies, as well as soups. White table wine was served with fish; however, each type of fish dish required its own wine selection. The main meat dish, as well as game, required red table wine (port – to roast beef, Chablis – to veal, Sauternes – to turkey).

An interesting attitude was held towards champagne. Noblemen would drink it throughout the entirety of dinner. Champagne was considered to be a defining symbol of the food festivities.

Generally speaking, the use of wine spoke volumes among the aristocratic environment. In his work on the novel in verse “Eugene Onegin” by Alexander Pushkin, Iurii Lotman notes an interesting moment, in which Onegin’s neighbors reproach him for drinking wine in large quantities.

“Must be a Mason; drinks, they say …

Red wine, by tumbler, night and day!”

The provincial landowning nobility were in perplexity at the thought of Eugene Onegin’s wine consumption: he drank bottles of expensive foreign wine every day. This irritated the neighbors in the capital dandy.

After the main course, dessert was served. Originally, fruit, such as peaches and apricots, was served. However, later in many country estates, at an attempt to replace the southern fruit, estates began serving young cucumber with honey. This was purely a Russian delicacy, which was always served as a dessert dish.

Russian peasant feast in modern semiotics of folklore

One of the most important aspects of everyday life is a feast. The feast has been endowed with many beliefs at all times and been a part of sacred activities, which defined both the sense of the meal and the mood of the companions. In the Russian peasant environment, food and drink were always treated as one of the most important daily rituals. Food and drink, as well as cutlery, kitchen utensils, furniture, and miscellaneous kitchenware, held a definite symbolic place in their lives. The development of semiotics of culture has opened the possibility of studying the latter at a qualitatively new level. The number of studies on the peasant feast has substantially increased, among which should be noted the works of Andrei Toporkov, A.B. Moroz, Albert Baiburin, etc. The feast began to be realized as a multifaceted, multifunctional phenomenon of culture. The study of which is accessible only to a complex of scientific disciplines. The semiotics of the feast is a fascinating study.

Semiotics of eating and drinking, the most expressive moments of the feast, as well as in almost all rituals, can be observed at the beginning and at the end of the meal. This can be explained by a gap in the process of the ritual, which then in turn needs to be filled. One way or another, the end and the beginning of the ritual make up these losses. Considering the initial and final phases of the meal, we can penetrate into the very depths of the sacral actions of the feast.

Igor Morozov also notes that in the traditional Russian feast, the song and prayer marked the beginning and end of the meal. But in the process of developing the ritual, the prayer began to occupy the dominant role; it was with prayer that the meal began and ended. Prayer took place not only on celebratory occasions, such as Easter, funerals, Christmas, etc., but also began occurring on a daily basis. Singing, as part of the ritual, was performed only during certain family and calendar holidays, including: harvest, weddings, tea parties, etc. Young people also sang during celebrations and at Christmas.

The semantic opposition of the first and the last course of the feast is also important. It is known that the first guest to arrive was given special privileges in regards to food, as the first guest was the winner of the competition that began the celebration. He, for example, was instructed to cut the holiday cake. The latter, or the loser, became the opposition of the winner and may have been teased, and even instructed to do dirty work.

Drinks played a significant role in the feast. The meals always began and ended with drinks.  The first drink was always shared as a symbolic gesture, as this act of sharing seemed to unite all those present during the feast, as well as cordially introduce the guest to the dinner table. The drinks performed an adaptive role; with their help, an atmosphere of mutual trust was established among the dinner guests. Traditionally, a late guest was presented with a cup, so that when he drank the contents, he became a part of the mutual trust. Although he was not there for the act of sharing, this common ritual still united with the guests. Unexpected guests were treated with their share of the meal, as they were commonly accepted as spirits of ancestors.

The final part of the feast was no less important than the first, as it symbolizes the end of the meal. It was filled with beliefs and rituals. All that was offered for the guests should be eaten or drunk, as the act of acceptance symbolizes the common union that was shared since the beginning, general health, and well-being.

The last bite of the meal, as with the last sip, was consumed by the guest without any leftovers. This indicated the final division of the union between the host and the guest. It also relieved the guests of any worries related to the belief that evil forces may have possibly kidnapped the food remains. Had there been leftovers after the feast, the remnants were distributed to beggars or people from out-of-town, which was part of the ritual meal.

One of the most semiotically saturated items of a peasant feast, as well as a peasant dwelling, was the table. The table was the center of the household, as well as the symbol of the feast. Its significant value was emphasized by the fact that the table was usually in a red corner. Throughout village life, when every member of the family had many duties and responsibilities, it was the table that became the place of family unity during the feast.
In the joint work “At the Origins of Etiquette,” A.K. Baiburin and A.L. Toporkov considered the table as an object filled with symbols of Christianity. The peasants compared the table with the Throne of God, and the Kiot (icon case) in the red corner with the iconostasis. And since the table was placed in a red corner, it was the second in status after the icons, symbolizing the sacred male presence of the hut.

The unity of the family and its ties to generations was established by the performance of the rituals of everyday feasts, festivities, or funerals. According to the rules, the whole family had to be present from the beginning to the end of the meal. Before the beginning of the feast, a short prayer was always read, and after the feast the family thanked the Lord for the meal.

The table had strictly regulated seating. The owner of the hut sat at the head of the table, under the icons. Men sat at his side. Opposite from him, sat the hostess, near the stove. This was due to the division of the interior space of the hut; the red corners were for men, while the corner with the stove was for women. The regulated seating was also more practical when it came to serving the feast. Analyzing the layout, we can imagine the design of the house. That is, we can see how the division of the table into male and female parts was transferred into the household roles as well. Tatiana Bernshtam also mentions that, on occasion, the hostess stood, and the children sat at the table after the adults.

The surface of the table was not left untouched, and in fact, had many traditions of its own. Hostesses watched to ensure that the table was always clean. After the meal, everything was cleaned down to the tablecloth. The table could not be swiped with one’s hand, as it was believed to be a sin, and would cause troubles. A.B. Moroz expressed an interesting idea regarding the clean table. He believes that everything is a matter of semantic opposition: naked and dressed. Hence, in the opinion of Moroz, a table without a tablecloth meant festive meals would be banned.

The funeral meal, in the peasant environment, had a special menu and represented an event that called for certain etiquette. Kutia, blini, kissel, and alcoholic drinks were always present. Additionally, there was a tradition in which the funeral feast included those dishes that the deceased loved.

Bread had a special place in the peasant meal. It was considered the main food, and was a kind of synonym for “share.” When the host at the table distributed bread, it was regarded as a shared distribution. At memorial feasts, shared bread was supposed to be received by everyone, including the deceased. Usually a piece of bread and salt was put into the coffin. Bread was also given to beggars in remembrance of the deceased’s soul. This tradition was believed to ensure peace of the deceased, as well as security to living members of the family.

A few of the semantic meanings of bread are virility and well-being, which are also true for many grain varieties. Grain seeds were thrown in front of the deceased, facing the coffin. It was considered to be bad luck and drainage of well-being if the grains were thrown behind the deceased. At the cemetery, grains were also scattered for birds.

Pies and blini held the same values as bread during the funeral feast. It was believed that the more pies and blini on the table, the more honorable the deceased. On commemoration days, the first blin was put in the red corner for the deceased.

The most popular dish among the memorial meal was kutia. In its present form, kutia is a sweet porridge with boiled rice and raisins. However, in the past, it has been prepared from rye and honey, and in some rare cases, wheat. This was due to the fact that a simple peasant could not afford rice and raisins. Kutia, like bread, has a semantic connection with fertility. According to Nikolai Sumstov, “the ritual use of porridge bears religious-mythical and everyday significance, similar to the ritual usage of grains.” Kutia was the first dish that was served at funeral feast, and was oftentimes eaten directly at the cemetery. Kutia was served from a cauldron in small portions, usually one spoon per person.

Kutia was an obligatory dish for everyone present; it was impossible to refuse kutia. It is interesting that throughout the funeral ritual, kutia occupied the transition of the burial itself, and the main feast. It was thought of as a new share even though the deceased was no longer present.
While kutia was considered the main funeral dish, kissel was considered to be the main drink at a traditional funeral feast. Kutia was served first, while kissel was served last. Usually, at a wake, mourners cooked a thick, sweet kissel from oats and honey. It had the consistency of porridge, and was usually eaten with spoons. As it was with kutia, it was impossible to refuse kissel.

The similarity of these dishes – the strict order in which they were served, the sweetness, the consumption (kutia and kissel were both served from a cauldron – makes them, along with bread, key dishes of a funeral feast. The peculiarity in their sweetness can be related to the idea of paradise as a place where everything is well-to-do, including sweet and flavorful food. The use of sweet food at funerals symbolizes the “sweet” afterlife of the deceased.

Alcohol occupied a special place in the funeral feast. Its use was not mandatory, but it was almost always present at a funeral. Its significance at the funeral was usually determined by the lifelong habit of the deceased. If the person in which the funeral was being held drank alcohol, then at his or her funeral, alcohol was present. Traditionally, the first glass was poured into the deceased and covered with a piece of bread, and even at the cemetery they would water the grave with alcohol. This ritual was not performed at children’s funerals.

It should be noted that the consumption of alcoholic beverages during funerals has never exceeded a certain norm. All attending guests tried to behave with restraint. Usually, the amount of alcohol consumed increased on the fortieth day, as well as on the day of commemoration of the deceased parents. The use of alcohol at a funeral feast allowed the living to approach the world of the dead.

Seating at the funeral meal was quite free. The only rule was that the head of the table was reserved for the deceased, under a red corner. Dishes were placed at this empty seat. It should be noted that this tradition was often personalized. Sometimes, the dishes of the deceased were placed at the center of the table. This showed that the deceased did not have a place at the table of the living. Additionally, having a place at the center noted that the deceased occupied the leading place, the center of attention. The place at the head of the table, in the red corner, was often occupied by the priest, as he was a kind of deputy to the deceased.