#thomas somerville

[mybeautifulchristianjourney]

Humility

by Thomas Somerville

"After that, He poured water in a basin and began to wash the disciples' feet, and to wipe them with the towel with which He was girded." - John 13:5

In the present state of society it is hardly possible that we should fall into so gross a delusion as that which, for a season, possessed the minds of the apostles. We know that our religion is not the path to worldly honor and prosperity. But there are various symptoms by which a proud aspiring disposition may still be discovered in those who profess to be the disciples of Jesus. As often as we see them swelling with a fond conceit of their own abilities, intoxicated with prosperity and looking down with contempt and insolence upon their brethren; as often as we see them eagerly struggling for rule and preeminence, dictating to others with unwarrantable authority, and angry because their favorite opinions are not implicitly adopted; as often as we see Christians prone to resentment, ready to apprehend injuries which never were intended and to exaggerate offenses which are frivolous and the effects of inadvertence rather than of malice; as often as we see them envious, turbulent, and active in vexing and disturbing their neighbors -- then it is that we behold that haughty and domineering temper which stands in direct opposition to the genius and tendency of our religion.

We obey the spirit of our Lord's precept when we attain the practice of humble and condescending charity. There are many who do not altogether neglect the duty of charity but still have not attained that species, or kind of it, which is recommended by the example of Jesus. They consider indigence, or want, as the only legitimate claim to charity. When they give alms to the poor they think that they fulfil the great law of love. This is a very meager and partial view of our duty. Alms are a part, often an essential part, but by no means the whole of charity. It ought to be the study of the Christian to minister to the comfort as well as to the necessities and wants of his brethren. Many opportunities occur for the exercise of sympathy and tenderness where alms are not required. We may exercise the former when we have it not in our power to bestow the latter. To communicate counsel and direction to the ignorant and perplexed, to patronize the friendless, to pour consolation into the heart pierced with sorrow, to encourage the feeble-minded, to solicit with address the confidence of the man who is ready to sink under obdurate and concealed grief, to bear one another's burdens as well as to relieve one another's wants -- this is to fulfil the law of Christ.

The example of our Lord, in this and every other instance, teaches us to perform acts of kindness in that easy, affable, and condescending manner which will render them most pleasing and acceptable to those who receive them. Many do generous actions with so bad a grace that their favors are a grievance rather than a relief to the persons on whom they are conferred. Insolence and upbraiding crush the tender spirit and repress the satisfaction which otherwise might arise from the emoluments of charity. Jesus never broke the bruised reed nor quenched the smoking flax. The temper, or spirit, recommended by his example is not confined to good offices of any particular description. It enters into common life. It pervades the whole system of conduct. "Whosoever would be great among you, let him be as the least."

[autodidact-adventures]

Culinary History (Part 20): Turning the Spit

The spit had to be turned, and the job was a dreadful one.  It was done by the turnspit, or turnbroach, who was usually a boy.  John Aubrey wrote, “In olden times, the poor boys did turn the spits, and licked the dripping pans.”

In the early 1500's, Henry VIII's household had many turnspits in the kitchen.  They crammed themselves into cubbyholes beside the fireplace, and it would have been extremely hot.  Until 1530, the kitchen staff at Hampton Court worked either naked or in little clothing.  Henry VIII addressed the situation by giving the junior staff a clothing allowance, so now they were even hotter.

It wasn't just noble households that had turnspits.  In 1666, the lawyers at London's Middle Temple had one “turnbroach”, two scullions, an under-cook and a head cook.

Children worked as turnspits well into the 1700's.  John Macdonald (1741-96) was a famous footman, and he wrote about his experiences in service.  He was sacked from a job rocking an baby's cradle, and found his next job as a turnspit in a gentleman's house, at the age of only 5yrs.

However, by the time Macdonald was a turnspit, it wasn't all that usual for a child to do the job, for it had been taken over by animals.  This change had gradually happened over the 1500's & 1600's.  In 1576, a book about English dogs defined a turnspit as “a certain dog in kitchen service”.  These dogs were forced to walk like a guinea-pig in a wheel about 0.75m in diameter, suspended from a wall near the fireplace.  The wheel was connected to the spit by a pulley.

Some cooks used geese instead of dogs.  In the 1690's, it was written that they were better than dogs, because they kept going for longer (sometimes up to 12 hours).  In the 1700's Thomas Somerville said that the dogs “used to hide themselves or run away when they observed indication that there was to be a roast for dinner.”  So perhaps dogs were smarter, too.

Dogs were still being used as turnspits well into the 1800's.  Henry Bergh was an animal-rights activist, and he campaigned against this abuse, along with other things such as bear-baiting.  While this gave some stigma to the practice, it didn't change for the better. Several times when paying surpise visits to kitchens to check for dogs, he found that young black children were doing the job instead.

But mechanization ended the abuse of children, dogs and geese in the kitchen (at least in this sense).  Inventors had been working on mechanical jacks since the 1500's.  Peter Kalm (a Swedish naturalist) said in 1748 that the “meat jack” was “a very useful invention, which lightens the labour amongst a people who eat so much meat.” He claimed that “every house in England” had a simply-made weight-driven jack, but this was unfortunately an exaggeration – inventories show that about only half did.  Still this was pretty good.

The basic mechanism of a spit-jack was a weight on the end of a cord, which was wound around a cylinder.  The weight descended slowly, and the energy was transmitted to the spit/s, by a series of cogwheels & pulleys.  Some jacks rang a bell when the spit stopped.  These jacks were sometimes called “gravity jacks” because of how they worked.

There were other types of spit-jacks.  Smoke-jacks used the updraught from the fire to power a vane.  They were cheap, and didn't need winding up.  But they were dreadfully wasteful of fuel – in 1800, it was worked out that 1/1000 of the fuel needed for a smoke-jack could power a small steam engine.  Huge amounts of wood or coal had to be kept burning in the fire for it to work.

Spit-roasting was a key part of British cuisine, so much energy and effort was put into spit-jacks and improving them.  Water, steam and clockwork were tried.  Spit-jacks were the espresso machine of the day – the new technology that many kitchens had, while the rest of the kitchen objects had been around for aeons.

By the mid-1800's, the spit-jack was on the way out, because open-hearth cooking was being superseded by ovens.