'Me and the bois throwing random stuff we found into a pot' is the most common historical military cooking I know of.
1 week ago | 17
Cooking is an essential survival skill. Its weird how the role became gendered. I feel that way about a lot of traditional "women's" work, the so-called "pink collar" jobs. Nursing? Teaching? These jobs seem so masculine when you look at the job descriptions. I guess it's the servile nature of the roles, but still.
2 weeks ago | 83
My brain connected "large parts of ration logistics were handled through non state apparatus" with "camp followers are non state apparatus". If only my brain had made the third step, that the poor fellows recieving most of the food probably had a hand in actually making it at some point.
2 weeks ago | 11
Lord Ramsey Duke of This steak is so raw a good vet could bring it back to life.
2 weeks ago | 5
I don't know about the British but in the Spanish military, the soldiers had and still have to take up kitchen duties (though nowadays they also have hired cooks). It was partially rotatory and partially used as a mild punishment for low-level offenses.
2 weeks ago | 2
I just figured that would be a lot of cooking for a few people to do, each cooking their own just made the most sense in terms of efficiency.
2 weeks ago | 0
Camp followers can either be a benefit or a burden. I think the most famous example of the latter was Napoleon’s invasion of Russia in 1812 (more specifically, that terrible retreat).
2 weeks ago | 2
Food is too important a to entrust to camp followers. Food = life, and you want your life in the hands of a comrade, hopefully one who would never steal from his fellow soldiers, but at least would be subject to the army's discipline, both formal and informal, if he did.
1 week ago | 0
I don't actually know the answer to this question, but in American camps it was absolutely the men.
2 weeks ago | 1
In the Canadian army today it’s the same thing where one guy is responsible for cooking for his squad usually he has to carry all the cooking equipment too
2 weeks ago | 1
It is ridiculous for people to apply oversimplified and popular stereotypes of gender roles (women= cooking only) to any era in the past. However, I find it equally ridiculous that some people seize upon the nuisances of gender roles (women did a lot more than cooking) to argue that the 18th century or any age of their choosing was somehow an egalitarian paradise, and that rigid gender roles were only imposed in times beyond their interest. The 18th century was very much a gendered world (and I frankly don’t have much problems with) and the fact that camp followers or even civilian women did other tasks than cooking does not disprove the existence of gender roles back then.
2 weeks ago | 2
If I had to guess, these women were paid out of the pockets of the soldiers, right? Knowing that modern militaries do as muc has possible in-house with fully integrated logistics, it is wild to think that for most of human history, soldiers were just given money and expected to pay for much of their own logistics needs (especially provisions). I suppose it is no wonder, then, that armies so often found themselves with no provisions.
2 weeks ago (edited) | 2
Yay! I got an ace badge, mostly from watching you! Does that make it cheating? 🤔
2 weeks ago | 0
Honestly I just picked „men“ cuz if it was women it would’ve been to obvious for you to make this into a poll question, considering current societal norms
2 weeks ago | 0
Brandon Fisichella
In a typical 18th Century British military encampment, who would be doing most of the cooking?
2 weeks ago | [YT] | 502