Sarah McCuan Stephens: Could we see the next line? The dash or mark at the end of the second line makes me think it might be part of a compound word. Seuet (suet) with an uncrossed "t" make any sense?

Fellow #Skystorians, any idea what the words after them in are (followed in the recipe by "Waters"? Both my students and I are stumped. #paleography #womenalsoknowhistory #butsometimesnotcookingwords

Could we see the next line? The dash or mark at the end of the second line makes me think it might be part of a compound word. Seuet (suet) with an uncrossed "t" make any sense?

Here's the whole text:

While I like @killgrove.bsky.social's idea, looking at the whole text, I don't think there's any way to read that as "Liters." Also this is from 1723, so pre-liters!

Haha, I love that syrup is spelled 3 different ways, none of which is syrup. Given the context, it could actually be "several waters". Making citrus jam or candied peel often requires boiling and dumping out the water several times, to remove the tartness.

Besides that word, I can't figure out "iuce"(?) in the second to last line. But the rest seems fairly straightforward!

Oh, juice! Just figured it out. Derp. :-)

No worries - that took the student and I a while too, but reading it aloud helps substantially.

I think it is indeed "seuelrall" waters for exactly that. The spelling is ... tricky ... but it makes sense for the recipe to have multiple boilings.

Spelling is not this cook's strong point, I think.

The perils of the English language, I suppose.

This reminds me of the 17th C Admiralty documents (multiple spellings of Princess, sometimes on the same page. (Long/short/German Double S). But yeah it's seuerall/several.

Spelling is for the weak in 1723....

Post