Changes

If we were able to bend Galenic theory for the purpose of justified social inequality, then perhaps we can also use it to justify geographic differences in what people eat? In the Middle Ages, people throughout Europe were trying to eat according to the same ancient nutritional doctrine which they read quite literally. But eventually those in the north realized that Hippocrates and Galen had lived in the Mediterranean basin. Why assume that what was good for them is also good to those living in other climate zones? Northerners, after all, have different temperaments that the southrons, so it's only natural that they should follow a different diet than the Greeks and Romans did. But how do you know what is good for the northerners? Well, it's simple: whaterever food their organisms have got used over the centuries. In other words, if there's something a given nation really likes to eat and drink, then this is what is healthy for them. Perhaps wine was for Galen, but the Dutch are more suited to drinking hoppy beer; ancient dietary experts may have preferred tender veal over beef, but beef and mustard is works better to offset the cold climate of the English; and the Scots, living in harsher climes still, may even consume oatcakes, even if they would surely make everybody else sick. It's due to this great discovery that separate national cuisines could arise in Europe.

{{ Cytat