1403, there were two series of courses, three of meat, and
three of fish and sweets; in which we see our present fashion to a
certain extent reversed. But at the coronation of Henry V. in 1421,
only three courses were served, and those mixed. The taste for what
were termed "subtleties," had come in, and among the dishes at this
latter entertainment occur, "A pelican sitting on her nest with her
young," and "an image of St. Catherine holding a book and disputing
with the doctors." These vagaries became so common, that few dinners
of importance were accounted complete without one or more.

One of the minor "subtleties" was a peacock in full panoply. The bird
was first skinned, and the feathers, tail, head and neck having been
laid on a table, and sprinkled with cummin, the body was roasted,
glazed with raw egg-yolk, and after being left to cool, was sewn back
again into the skin and so brought to table as the last course. In
1466, at the enthronement of Archbishop Nevile, no fewer than 104
peacocks were dressed.

The most extraordinary display of fish at table on a single occasion
took place at the enthronement feast of Archbishop Warham in 1504; it
occurred on a fast day; and consequently no meat, poultry or game was
included in the _menu_, but ample compensation was found in the lavish
assortment of confectionery, spices, beer and wine. Of wine of various
vintages there were upwards of 12 pipes, and of ale and beer, thirty
tuns, including four of London and six of Kentish ale.

The narratives which have descended to us of the prodigious banquets
given on special occasions by our early kings, prelates and nobles,
are apt to inspire the general reader with an admiration of the
splendid hospitality of bygone times. But, as I have already
suggested, these festivities were occasional and at long intervals,
and during the intervening space the great ones and the small ones of
mediaeval and early England did not indulge in this riotous sort of
living, but "kept secret house," as it was called, both after their
own fashion. The extremes of prodigality and squalor were more
strongly marked among the poorer classes while this country was in
a semi-barbarous condition, and even the aristocracy by no means
maintained the same domestic state throughout the year as their modern
representatives. There are not those ostentatious displays of wealth
and generosity, which used to signalise certain political events, such
as the coronati