caldrail Posted June 22, 2007 Report Share Posted June 22, 2007 many poorer homes had no facilities to cook, so I guess fast food was a necessity really, and one exploited by traders. This is often the reason given for many inner-city peoples, and the subsequent health issues are blamed on this in our society. But I'm just guessing that this Roman fast food was just a hair healthier than meal deal #1, supersized. Though this brings to mind cost: many moons ago, I used to think that, because I was always broke, I couldn't afford as many veggies and fruit. Then I did a cost-analysis, learned how to buy in the right proportion and in the season...suddenly I realized that it's way cheaper to buy veggies and fruit--and not buy so much that it goes to waste!--than to buy mac n cheese and the like. And to be honest, when in Spain the 'authentic' fast food was relatively cheap--like 5 euros--for quite a decent sized portion of food. Bottom line is, do we know how much (roughly) this food was? If you live in a place with meager cooking facilities, if anything, you probably don't have much money to start with...so this 'fast food' couldn't have been very expensive. The question of whether roman fast food was healthier is an interesting one. In some respects, it has to be. The factory food of our day didn't exist then, so perhaps everything might be considered 'organic'. However, there are other issues that say something different. The romans didn't have modern hygiene standards in cooking, lord knows what some roguish traders were putting in the meals, and some of the ingredients might not have been as healthy as we imagine. Roman bread for instance is healthier because it contains plenty of roughage, yet the gritty texture will wear down your teeth unlike our modern day rubber subsitute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nephele Posted June 22, 2007 Report Share Posted June 22, 2007 (edited) However, there are other issues that say something different. The romans didn't have modern hygiene standards in cooking, lord knows what some roguish traders were putting in the meals, and some of the ingredients might not have been as healthy as we imagine. So true. I remember reading somewhere (and I'll have to hunt it out again) that some unscrupulous Roman bakers were in the habit of putting inedible substances into their bread dough in order to bulk it up for the consumer. It wasn't beyond them to use chalk and alum, too, as whitening agents for the bread. And how could the consumer tell, if the product nevertheless tasted gooood? (I'm sure those crafty ancient Roman bread entrepreneurs had tricks for enhancing the taste of their product, as well.) In our modern society we're accustomed to knowing the food we eat has at least passed minimum health department standards -- but the free-wheeling Roman marketplace didn't have such governmental constraints. The hardcore libertarian in me wants to say: "Go, Romans!" On the other hand, I think I'll remain in favor of at least a limited government that still oversees the quality of our food and water. -- Nephele Edited June 22, 2007 by Nephele Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M. Porcius Cato Posted June 22, 2007 Report Share Posted June 22, 2007 Because government oversight can range in quality as much as the very products that are being checked, Caveat emptor is as valid today as it was for the Romans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flavia Gemina Posted June 23, 2007 Report Share Posted June 23, 2007 In my books my characters are always eating fast food: chickpea pancakes, pistachio nuts, garlic cheese rolled in a cabbage leaf or a papyrus cone of roast chestnuts (in winter). Yum! I get my ideas from the literary sources, re-enactment events and modern life. You can still buy paper cones of roast chestnuts at the foot of the Spanish Steps in Rome... Flavia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursus Posted June 23, 2007 Report Share Posted June 23, 2007 Olives, bread and chicpea soup? Yeah, even if there is some 'baker's surprise' in the bread it sounds pretty healthy to me in comparison to the greasy chicken and hamburger most (increasingly obese) Americans consume. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docoflove1974 Posted June 23, 2007 Report Share Posted June 23, 2007 Olives, bread and chicpea soup? Yeah, even if there is some 'baker's surprise' in the bread it sounds pretty healthy to me in comparison to the greasy chicken and hamburger most (increasingly obese) Americans consume. Not to mention the bleached 'wheat' used in making white bread...and the list goes on. I will say that the wonderful trend of the last 5-10 years here in the States of the Farmers' Market has been so good for me, and many others. Many states (including California) mandate that anything sold must come from the farm of the person selling it, so it is truly fresh, often organic, and straight off the farm. Not to mention how fun it is to go around and see everyone's wares! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.