Journal articles on the topic 'Glassware History'

The article deals with the main periods, the history of the emergence of Yusupov glassworks in the Arkhangelskoye estate and its importance in the development of Russian glass art. Yusupov glass-making in Arkhangelskoye was developing under the influence of European trends in shaping and decoration in synthesis with the Russian tradition and the specifics of Russian materials, raw material bases and national perspective on the wide range of techniques and technologies. The author pays special attention to the artistic, stylistic and technological features of the manufactured products, as well as to the decor specifics of cut glass technique. Author divided the history of the Yusupov factory into two main stages. The first one lasted from 1811 to 1820. During this time the enterprise was operating as a full-scale production and the process of manufacturing crystalware or glassware was going through all stages: from the preparation of the mixture and the cooking of “crystal material” to the decorative processing of finished objects. Although in fact such a cycle was fully followed only three times in the period of 1814-1816. However, the institution was regarded as a factory from 1811 until 1820, and only after the fire, the idea of reviving the production was finally rejected. During the second stage, from 1820 to early 1827, the factory was turned into a lapidary workshop, where the craftsmen were engaged in decorative processing of the purchased unfinished glassware. The identification of stylistic features and characteristic techniques of processing the products made in the estate factory and their evolution at different periods of the production history makes it possible to attribute the tableware of N. Yusupov’s enterprise in the collections of other museums. Moreover, the results could provide the basis for the re-emergence of the lapidary workshop in the modern Arkhangelskoye Estate Museum where craftsmen could reproduce the decorative techniques typical of the Yusupov factory based on the finished unprocessed glassware.

Irkutsk Regional Art Museum exhibition opened in September 2018 commemorated the 90th anniversary of the birth of Boris Timofe­evich Bychkov, Russian folk artist, corresponding member of Russian Art Academy, member of Irkutsk Regional Union of Artists and master of decorative glass. He had lived and worked in Irkutsk since 1962. A native of Moscow he graduated from Mukhina Leningard Higher Arts and Crafts College. For many years, he was an art director of Gusev glass manufacturing plant in Gus-Khrustalny. In 1962, he moved to Irkutsk and dedicated his whole life to Siberia. These are some of his art works known to natives of Irkutsk: stained glass windows «Irkutsk» in the hotel «Inturist», «The Blue Bird» in Bratsk community center, chandeliers in Irkutsk Music Theater, «Vostoksibsantechmontazh» and «Agrodorspecstroy» companies, and ornamental designs «Frozen sounds» and «Victory» in Irkutsk Art Museum Collection. Most of his designs and artifacts are stored in warehouses and are on exhibit in Irkutsk Art Museum, and all of them were featured in an exhibition. Besides the artist’s works, there were two other art works on display — «Portrait of B.T. Bychkov. Mural» and «Portrait of B.T. Bychkov on the optical glass» by painter-jewelers Natali and Arkadyi Lodyanovyh. This article is about the creative works of the glassware art artist himself and the story behind his portrait.

From ancient times to the present day, gout has been associated in the popular and scientific literature with wealthy men who overindulge in fancy foods, fine wine, and debauchery. Curiously, amongst diseases, gout was thought to be good, a malady to be accepted because of otherwise beneficial effects on health, and longevity. This narrative review critically examines the history of these associations and explores in detail the pathogenic factors contributing to development of gout prior to the 20th century. While lead toxicity has been previously implicated with wine, the specific association of gout and fine wine can be attributed to lead complexes in products such as sapa, a grape extract used to sweeten wine, in addition to lead nanoparticles leached from crystal glassware and lead glazed dinner plates. The health benefits of gout can be attributed to lead complexes in fine wine and lead nanoparticles from glazed dinnerware. These compounds have excellent antibacterial properties, thereby inhibiting the presence of pathogenic bacteria in foodstuffs. Probing the association of gout and fine wine provides a very well documented example of how the pathogenesis of disease becomes better understood with the passage of time and continuing, persistent scientific enquiry.

ArgumentGlass vessels such as flasks and test tubes play an ambiguous role in the historiography of modern laboratory research. In spite of the strong focus on the role of materiality in the last decades, the scientific glass vessel – while being symbolically omnipresent – has remained curiously neglected in regard to its materiality. The popular image or topos of the transparent, neutral, and quasi-immaterial glass container obstructs the view of the physico-chemical functionality of this constitutive inner boundary in modern laboratory environments and its material historicity. In order to understand how glass vessels were able to provide a stable epistemic containment of spatially enclosed experimental phenomena in the new laboratory ecologies emerging in the nineteenth and early twentieth century, I will focus on the history of the material standardization of laboratory glassware. I will follow the rise of a new awareness for measurement errors due to the chemical agency of experimental glass vessels, then I will sketch the emergence of a whole techno-scientific infrastructure for the improvement of glass container quality in late nineteenth-century Germany. In the last part of my argument, I will return to the laboratory by looking at the implementation of this glass reform that created a new oikos for the inner experimental milieus of modern laboratory research.

Introduction. The article is devoted to the analysis of objects discovered during the excavation of the “Kamennaya mogila” (Stone Grave) kurgan on Medovaya mountain (southern outskirts of Zheleznovodsk). Methods and materials. The comparative typological method was used as a worker. It is based on classification by material, processing method, shape, ornamentation, as well as on the study of types of gold jewelry, glass and black-glazed dishes, bronze horse plate foreheads and cheek pads, etc. Analysis. The typological and chronological analysis was carried out on gold jewelry (plaques, rings, pendants), antique ceramic and glassware, items of horse dress and weapons. Analogies to imported items from the crypt, found in the monuments of ancient culture and in the burials of the barbarian nobility, allow them to be dated to the 4th – 2nd centuries BC. Items of equestrian dress and weapons date back to the 3rd – 2nd centuries BC. Results. The author, regarding the social structure of the local population, ranked the monument as stratum No. 2 (nobility of the first level). A complex burial structure of the tomb with a significant number of ritual offerings is recorded. Burial items have numerous analogies in the status burials of the Bosporan, Meotian and Scythian nobility of the Northern Black Sea region and the North Caucasus of the 4 th – 2nd centuries BC. The sophisticated frame structure of the horse harness made of iron parts from the crypt of the Stone Grave is unique. Only a member of the nobility with a very high status could afford such a special bridle as a ritual offering.

The aim of this study is to introduce the glass vessels housed in Eskişehir Archaeological Museum. Thirty vessels are housed in the museum, out of which 19 are currently exhibited. Most of the vessels entered the collection by purchase. One vessel (no 5) was found during a rescue excavation of a Roman tomb in Bilecik in 1985, although unfortunately we do not have detailed information about the tomb. Another vessel found during a rescue excavation at the tumulus of Alpu Kocakizlar and a further one from the Pessinus excavations are not included in this article.The vessels in the museum are very limited in their forms and decoration, and it is possible that these plain vessels were produced for daily use. The glasswares are classified by typology, and five major groups are recognised. The vessels are first considered by their usage, and then typological differences are considered within each group. Underneath the vessel-type headings the groups are discussed and then their catalogues are given. The examples in the museum are dated from the first to fifth centuries AD.

Glass bangles are found in southern England and Wales from the mid-first century ad and become common in the north of England and southern Scotland in the late first century, before their numbers decline a century later. British bangles develop at a time of change, as Roman glassmaking practices were introduced across large areas of Britain, and as blown, transparent, colourless and naturally-coloured glassware became increasingly popular. In many communities, however, there was still a demand for strongly coloured opaque glass, including for bangles, and glassworkers devised ways of extending their supplies of opaque coloured glass. This study is based on over one hundred and fifty analyses of bangle fragments from sites in Wales, northern England and southern Scotland, spanning this transitional period. The bangle makers recycled coloured glass from imported vessels, and probably beads and bangle-making waste, to supplement supplies of fresh coloured glass. The novel methods used to modify and extend the coloured glass may derive from pre-Roman bead-making industries, and made use of widely available materials, including smithing hammerscale and possibly plant ashes. The results show the shifting balance of indigenous and Roman influences on different bangle types, depending on when and where they were made, and by whom.

Considering a sociocultural perspective, the role of language in the teaching and learning process in Chemistry goes beyond a simple vehicle for the transfer of information, such as names of substances, laboratory glassware and formulas. This new reading of the role of language in the process of teaching and learning is anchored in Vygostsky's studies, which emphasizes the importance of the social and cultural nature of mental activities. The Tomasello's ideas can clarify the discussion about cultural processes at the origin of language acquisition. For this discussion, in the form of a theoretical essay, from contemporary readings of these authors, some approximations between their ideas are established, highlighting some implications on language in the teaching and learning process in Chemistry, such as: i) students need to participate in their own acquisition of the scientific language; (ii) this acquisition is not through memorization, but through problematization, and (iii) teachers must recognize how students are perceiving that language and not simply consider it as already acquired. However, this debate on the new role of language must be investigated by researchers in the field, since in addition to the difficulties pointed out in this essay, the nominalization process and the grammatical metaphor, for example, are important sources of difficulties found in the acquisition of scientific language.Resumo A partir de uma perspectiva sociocultural, o papel da linguagem no processo de ensino e aprendizagem em Química ultrapassa a característica de um simples veículo para a transferência de informações, como por exemplo, nomes de substâncias, vidrarias de laboratório e fórmulas. Neste contexto, o papel da linguagem no processo de ensino e aprendizagem baseado nos estudos de Vigostski ressalta a importância da natureza social e cultural das atividades mentais. E, a inserção das ideias de Tomasello enriquece a discussão dos processos culturais no desenvolvimento da aquisição da linguagem. Para essa discussão, em forma de ensaio teórico, a partir de leituras contemporâneas desses autores, são estabelecidas algumas aproximações entre suas ideias. A apresentação dessas semelhanças permite clarear o entendimento dos professores acerca do novo papel da linguagem, além de enfatizar implicações importantes relacionadas ao processo de ensino e aprendizagem em Química, tais como: i) os estudantes precisam participar de sua própria aquisição da linguagem científica; ii) essa aquisição pode ser mais efetiva pela problematização, e não pela memorização e, iii) os professores devem reconhecer como os estudantes estão percebendo essa linguagem, e não, simplesmente, considerá-la como já adquirida. No entanto, esse debate sobre o novo papel da linguagem deve seguir adiante pelos pesquisadores da área, visto que, além das dificuldades apontadas neste ensaio, há de se considerar que, o processo de nominalização e a metáfora gramatical, por exemplo, são fontes importantes de dificuldades para a aquisição da linguagem científica.ResumenDesde de una perspectiva sociocultural, el papel del lenguaje en el proceso de enseñanza y aprendizaje en Química excede la característica de un vehículo para la transferencia de informaciones, como por ejemplo nombres de sustancias, vidriería de laboratorio y fórmulas. En este contexto, el papel del lenguaje en el proceso de enseñanza y aprendizaje se ancla en los estudios de Vygostsky, que resalta la importancia de la naturaleza social y cultural de las actividades mentales. Y la inserción de las ideas de Tomasello enriquece la discusión de los procesos culturales en el desarrollo de la adquisición del lenguaje. Para esta discusión, en forma de ensayo teórico, a partir de lecturas contemporáneas de esos autores, se establecen algunas aproximaciones entre sus ideas. La presentación de estas semejanzas permite clarificar el entendimiento de los profesores acerca del nuevo papel del lenguaje, además de enfatizar implicaciones importantes relacionadas al proceso de enseñanza y aprendizaje en Química, tales como: i) los estudiantes necesitan participar de su propia adquisición del lenguaje científico; ii) esa adquisición puede ser más efectiva por la problematización, no por la memorización y, iii) los profesores deben reconocer cómo los estudiantes están percibiendo ese lenguaje, y no, simplemente, considerarla como ya adquirida. Sin embargo, este debate sobre el nuevo papel del lenguaje debe seguir adelante por investigadores del área de Educación, ya que, además de las dificultades señaladas en este ensayo, hay que considerar que el proceso de nominalización y la metáfora gramatical, por ejemplo, son fuentes importantes de dificultades para la adquisición del lenguaje científico.Keywords: Sociocultural perspective, Chemistry Education, Language.Palabras clave: Perspectiva sociocultural, Educación Química, Lenguaje.Palavras-chave: Abordagem sociocultural, Educação em Química, Linguagem.ReferencesÁLLAN, S.; Souza, C. B. A. O modelo de Tomasello sobre a evolução cognitivo-linguística humana. Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa, v. 25, n. 2, p. 161-168, 2009.CHILDS, P. E.; MARKIC, S.; RYAN, M. C. The role of language in the teaching and learning of Chemistry. In: GARCÍA-MARTÍNEZ, J.; SERRANO-TORREGROSA, E. (Eds.). Chemistry Education: Best Practices, Opportunities and Trends. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co, 2015. Cap. 17. p. 421-445.DRIVER, R.; ASOKO, H.; LEACH, J.; MORTIMER, E.; Scott, P. Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, v. 23, n. 7, p. 5-12, 1994.HALLIDAY, M.A.K. Some grammatical problems in scientific English. In: Halliday, M. A. K.; MARTIN, J. R. Writing science. London: Falmer Press, 1993.HODSON, D. Teaching and learning science: towards a personalized approach. Berkshire, UK: Open University Press, 1998.JACOB, C. Interdependent operations in chemical language and practice. HYLE–International Journal for Philosophy of Chemistry, v. 7, n. 1, p. 31-50, 2001.KOKKOTAS, Panagiotis V.; RIZAKI, Aikaterini A. Does history of science contribute to the construction of knowledge in the constructivist environments of learning? In: KOKKOTAS, Panagiotis V.; MALAMITZA, Katerina S.; RIZAKI, Aikaterini A. (Eds.). Adapting historical knowledge production to the classroom. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers, 2011. Cap. 5, p. 61-84.LABINGER, Jay A.; WEININGER, Stephen J. Controversy in chemistry: how do you prove a negative? – The cases of Phlogiston and Cold Fusion. Angewandte Chemie International Edition, v. 44, p. 1916-1922, 2005.MARKIC, S.; CHILDS, P. E. How to deal with linguistic issues in chemistry classes. In: Eilks, I.; Hofstein, A. (Eds). Teaching chemistry: a study book. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers, 2013. Cap. 5. p 127-152.MARKIC, S.; CHILDS, P. E. Language and teaching and learning of chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, v. 17, p. 434-438, 2016.MORTIMER, E. F. Construtivismo, mudança conceitual e ensino de Ciências: para onde vamos? Investigações em Ensino de Ciências, v. 1, n. 1, p. 20-39, 1996.MORTIMER, E. F.; SCOTT, P. Atividade discursiva nas salas de aula de Ciências: uma ferramenta sociocultural para analisar e planejar o ensino. Investigações em Ensino de Ciências, v .7, n. 3, p. 283-306, 2002.MORTIMER, E. F. Linguagem e formação de conceitos no ensino de Ciências. Belo Horizonte: Editora UFMG, 2011. 373 p.MORTIMER, E. F.; SCOTT, p.; EL-HANI, C. N. Bases teóricas e epistemológicas da abordagem dos perfis conceituais. Tecné, Episteme y Didaxis, n. 30, p. 111-125, 2011.MORTIMER, E. F.; EL-HANI, C. N. Uma visão sócio-interacionista e situada dos conceitos e a internalização em Vygotsky. In: IX ENCONTRO NACIONAL DE PESQUISA EM EDUCAÇÃO EM CIÊNCIAS, 2013, Águas de Lindóia. Anais... São Paulo: IX ENPEC, 2013. p. 1-9.PEREIRA, A. P. Distribuição conceitual no Ensino de Física Quântica: uma aproximação sociocultural às teorias de mudança conceitual. 2012. 210f. Tese (Doutorado em Ensino de Física) – Instituto de Física, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, 2012.TABER, K. S. Exploring the language(s) of chemistry education. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, v. 16, p. 193-197, 2015.TOMASELLO, M. Origens culturais da aquisição do conhecimento humano. Martins Fontes: São Paulo, 2003.VIGOTSKI, L. S. A formação social da mente: o desenvolvimento dos processos psicológicos superiores. 5. ed. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 1994.VYGOTSKY, L. S. The genesis of higher mental functions. In: WERTSCH, J. V. (Ed.). The concept of activity in Soviet psychology, Armonk, NY: Sharpe, 1931/1981. p. 144-188.WELLS, G. Learning and teaching “scientific concepts”: Vygotsky’s ideas revisited. Conference, “Vygotsky and the Human Sciences”, Moscow, Sept. 1994.WERTSCH, J. V. Vygotsky y la formacion social de la mente. Barcelona: Ediciones Paidós, 1988.WOCH, J. The language of chemistry: A study of English chemical vocabulary. Beyond Philology, v. 12, p. 77-108, 2015.

IntroductionFirmly located within the discourse of visible culture as the lofty preserve of art exhibitions and museum artefacts, the noun “curate” has gradually transformed into the verb “to curate”. Williams writes that “curate” has become a fashionable code word among the aesthetically minded to describe a creative activity. Designers no longer simply sell clothes; they “curate” merchandise. Chefs no longer only make food; they also “curate” meals. Chosen for their keen eye for a particular style or a precise shade, it is their knowledge of their craft, their reputation, and their sheer ability to choose among countless objects which make the creative process a creative activity in itself. Writing from within the framework of “curate” as a creative process, this article discusses how the state banquet for Queen Elizabeth II, hosted by Irish President Mary McAleese at Dublin Castle in May 2011, was carefully curated to represent Ireland’s diplomatic, cultural, and culinary identity. The paper will focus in particular on how the menu for the banquet was created and how the banquet’s brief, “Ireland on a Plate”, was fulfilled.History and BackgroundFood has been used by nations for centuries to display wealth, cement alliances, and impress foreign visitors. Since the feasts of the Numidian kings (circa 340 BC), culinary staging and presentation has belonged to “a long, multifaceted and multicultural history of diplomatic practices” (IEHCA 5). According to the works of Baughman, Young, and Albala, food has defined the social, cultural, and political position of a nation’s leaders throughout history.In early 2011, Ross Lewis, Chef Patron of Chapter One Restaurant in Dublin, was asked by the Irish Food Board, Bord Bía, if he would be available to create a menu for a high-profile banquet (Mahon 112). The name of the guest of honour was divulged several weeks later after vetting by the protocol and security divisions of the Department of the Taoiseach (Prime Minister) and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. Lewis was informed that the menu was for the state banquet to be hosted by President Mary McAleese at Dublin Castle in honour of Queen Elizabeth II’s visit to Ireland the following May.Hosting a formal banquet for a visiting head of state is a key feature in the statecraft of international and diplomatic relations. Food is the societal common denominator that links all human beings, regardless of culture (Pliner and Rozin 19). When world leaders publicly share a meal, that meal is laden with symbolism, illuminating each diner’s position “in social networks and social systems” (Sobal, Bove, and Rauschenbach 378). The public nature of the meal signifies status and symbolic kinship and that “guest and host are on par in terms of their personal or official attributes” (Morgan 149). While the field of academic scholarship on diplomatic dining might be young, there is little doubt of the value ascribed to the semiotics of diplomatic gastronomy in modern power structures (Morgan 150; De Vooght and Scholliers 12; Chapple-Sokol 162), for, as Firth explains, symbols are malleable and perfectly suited to exploitation by all parties (427).Political DiplomacyWhen Ireland gained independence in December 1921, it marked the end of eight centuries of British rule. The outbreak of “The Troubles” in 1969 in Northern Ireland upset the gradually improving environment of British–Irish relations, and it would be some time before a state visit became a possibility. Beginning with the peace process in the 1990s, the IRA ceasefire of 1994, and the Good Friday Agreement in 1998, a state visit was firmly set in motion by the visit of Irish President Mary Robinson to Buckingham Palace in 1993, followed by the unofficial visit of the Prince of Wales to Ireland in 1995, and the visit of Irish President Mary McAleese to Buckingham Palace in 1999. An official invitation to Queen Elizabeth from President Mary McAleese in March 2011 was accepted, and the visit was scheduled for mid-May of the same year.The visit was a highly performative occasion, orchestrated and ordained in great detail, displaying all the necessary protocol associated with the state visit of one head of state to another: inspection of the military, a courtesy visit to the nation’s head of state on arrival, the laying of a wreath at the nation’s war memorial, and a state banquet.These aspects of protocol between Britain and Ireland were particularly symbolic. By inspecting the military on arrival, the existence of which is a key indicator of independence, Queen Elizabeth effectively demonstrated her recognition of Ireland’s national sovereignty. On making the customary courtesy call to the head of state, the Queen was received by President McAleese at her official residence Áras an Uachtaráin (The President’s House), which had formerly been the residence of the British monarch’s representative in Ireland (Robbins 66). The state banquet was held in Dublin Castle, once the headquarters of British rule where the Viceroy, the representative of Britain’s Court of St James, had maintained court (McDowell 1).Cultural DiplomacyThe state banquet provided an exceptional showcase of Irish culture and design and generated a level of preparation previously unseen among Dublin Castle staff, who described it as “the most stage managed state event” they had ever witnessed (Mahon 129).The castle was cleaned from top to bottom, and inventories were taken of the furniture and fittings. The Waterford Crystal chandeliers were painstakingly taken down, cleaned, and reassembled; the Killybegs carpets and rugs of Irish lamb’s wool were cleaned and repaired. A special edition Newbridge Silverware pen was commissioned for Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip to sign the newly ordered Irish leather-bound visitors’ book. A new set of state tableware was ordered for the President’s table. Irish manufacturers of household goods necessary for the guest rooms, such as towels and soaps, hand creams and body lotions, candle holders and scent diffusers, were sought. Members of Her Majesty’s staff conducted a “walk-through” several weeks in advance of the visit to ensure that the Queen’s wardrobe would not clash with the surroundings (Mahon 129–32).The promotion of Irish manufacture is a constant thread throughout history. Irish linen, writes Kane, enjoyed a reputation as far afield as the Netherlands and Italy in the 15th century, and archival documents from the Vaucluse attest to the purchase of Irish cloth in Avignon in 1432 (249–50). Support for Irish-made goods was raised in 1720 by Jonathan Swift, and by the 18th century, writes Foster, Dublin had become an important centre for luxury goods (44–51).It has been Irish government policy since the late 1940s to use Irish-manufactured goods for state entertaining, so the material culture of the banquet was distinctly Irish: Arklow Pottery plates, Newbridge Silverware cutlery, Waterford Crystal glassware, and Irish linen tablecloths. In order to decide upon the table setting for the banquet, four tables were laid in the King’s Bedroom in Dublin Castle. The Executive Chef responsible for the banquet menu, and certain key personnel, helped determine which setting would facilitate serving the food within the time schedule allowed (Mahon 128–29). The style of service would be service à la russe, so widespread in restaurants today as to seem unremarkable. Each plate is prepared in the kitchen by the chef and then served to each individual guest at table. In the mid-19th century, this style of service replaced service à la française, in which guests typically entered the dining room after the first course had been laid on the table and selected food from the choice of dishes displayed around them (Kaufman 126).The guest list was compiled by government and embassy officials on both sides and was a roll call of Irish and British life. At the President’s table, 10 guests would be served by a team of 10 staff in Dorchester livery. The remaining tables would each seat 12 guests, served by 12 liveried staff. The staff practiced for several days prior to the banquet to make sure that service would proceed smoothly within the time frame allowed. The team of waiters, each carrying a plate, would emerge from the kitchen in single file. They would then take up positions around the table, each waiter standing to the left of the guest they would serve. On receipt of a discreet signal, each plate would be laid in front of each guest at precisely the same moment, after which the waiters would then about foot and return to the kitchen in single file (Mahon 130).Post-prandial entertainment featured distinctive styles of performance and instruments associated with Irish traditional music. These included reels, hornpipes, and slipjigs, voice and harp, sean-nόs (old style) singing, and performances by established Irish artists on the fiddle, bouzouki, flute, and uilleann pipes (Office of Public Works).Culinary Diplomacy: Ireland on a PlateLewis was given the following brief: the menu had to be Irish, the main course must be beef, and the meal should represent the very best of Irish ingredients. There were no restrictions on menu design. There were no dietary requirements or specific requests from the Queen’s representatives, although Lewis was informed that shellfish is excluded de facto from Irish state banquets as a precautionary measure. The meal was to be four courses long and had to be served to 170 diners within exactly 1 hour and 10 minutes (Mahon 112). A small army of 16 chefs and 4 kitchen porters would prepare the food in the kitchen of Dublin Castle under tight security. The dishes would be served on state tableware by 40 waiters, 6 restaurant managers, a banqueting manager and a sommélier. Lewis would be at the helm of the operation as Executive Chef (Mahon 112–13).Lewis started by drawing up “a patchwork quilt” of the products he most wanted to use and built the menu around it. The choice of suppliers was based on experience but also on a supplier’s ability to deliver perfectly ripe goods in mid-May, a typically black spot in the Irish fruit and vegetable growing calendar as it sits between the end of one season and the beginning of another. Lewis consulted the Queen’s itinerary and the menus to be served so as to avoid repetitions. He had to discard his initial plan to feature lobster in the starter and rhubarb in the dessert—the former for the precautionary reasons mentioned above, and the latter because it featured on the Queen’s lunch menu on the day of the banquet (Mahon 112–13).Once the ingredients had been selected, the menu design focused on creating tastes, flavours and textures. Several draft menus were drawn up and myriad dishes were tasted and discussed in the kitchen of Lewis’s own restaurant. Various wines were paired and tasted with the different courses, the final choice being a Château Lynch-Bages 1998 red and a Château de Fieuzal 2005 white, both from French Bordeaux estates with an Irish connection (Kellaghan 3). Two months and two menu sittings later, the final menu was confirmed and signed off by state and embassy officials (Mahon 112–16).The StarterThe banquet’s starter featured organic Clare Island salmon cured in a sweet brine, laid on top of a salmon cream combining wild smoked salmon from the Burren and Cork’s Glenilen Farm crème fraîche, set over a lemon balm jelly from the Tannery Cookery School Gardens, Waterford. Garnished with horseradish cream, wild watercress, and chive flowers from Wicklow, the dish was finished with rapeseed oil from Kilkenny and a little sea salt from West Cork (Mahon 114). Main CourseA main course of Irish beef featured as the pièce de résistance of the menu. A rib of beef from Wexford’s Slaney Valley was provided by Kettyle Irish Foods in Fermanagh and served with ox cheek and tongue from Rathcoole, County Dublin. From along the eastern coastline came the ingredients for the traditional Irish dish of smoked champ: cabbage from Wicklow combined with potatoes and spring onions grown in Dublin. The new season’s broad beans and carrots were served with wild garlic leaf, which adorned the dish (Mahon 113). Cheese CourseThe cheese course was made up of Knockdrinna, a Tomme style goat’s milk cheese from Kilkenny; Milleens, a Munster style cow’s milk cheese produced in Cork; Cashel Blue, a cow’s milk blue cheese from Tipperary; and Glebe Brethan, a Comté style cheese from raw cow’s milk from Louth. Ditty’s Oatmeal Biscuits from Belfast accompanied the course.DessertLewis chose to feature Irish strawberries in the dessert. Pat Clarke guaranteed delivery of ripe strawberries on the day of the banquet. They married perfectly with cream and yoghurt from Glenilen Farm in Cork. The cream was set with Irish Carrageen moss, overlaid with strawberry jelly and sauce, and garnished with meringues made with Irish apple balsamic vinegar from Lusk in North Dublin, yoghurt mousse, and Irish soda bread tuiles made with wholemeal flour from the Mosse family mill in Kilkenny (Mahon 113).The following day, President McAleese telephoned Lewis, saying of the banquet “Ní hé go raibh sé go maith, ach go raibh sé míle uair níos fearr ná sin” (“It’s not that it was good but that it was a thousand times better”). The President observed that the menu was not only delicious but that it was “amazingly articulate in terms of the story that it told about Ireland and Irish food.” The Queen had particularly enjoyed the stuffed cabbage leaf of tongue, cheek and smoked colcannon (a traditional Irish dish of mashed potatoes with curly kale or green cabbage) and had noted the diverse selection of Irish ingredients from Irish artisans (Mahon 116). Irish CuisineWhen the topic of food is explored in Irish historiography, the focus tends to be on the consequences of the Great Famine (1845–49) which left the country “socially and emotionally scarred for well over a century” (Mac Con Iomaire and Gallagher 161). Some commentators consider the term “Irish cuisine” oxymoronic, according to Mac Con Iomaire and Maher (3). As Goldstein observes, Ireland has suffered twice—once from its food deprivation and second because these deprivations present an obstacle for the exploration of Irish foodways (xii). Writing about Italian, Irish, and Jewish migration to America, Diner states that the Irish did not have a food culture to speak of and that Irish writers “rarely included the details of food in describing daily life” (85). Mac Con Iomaire and Maher note that Diner’s methodology overlooks a centuries-long tradition of hospitality in Ireland such as that described by Simms (68) and shows an unfamiliarity with the wealth of food related sources in the Irish language, as highlighted by Mac Con Iomaire (“Exploring” 1–23).Recent scholarship on Ireland’s culinary past is unearthing a fascinating story of a much more nuanced culinary heritage than has been previously understood. This is clearly demonstrated in the research of Cullen, Cashman, Deleuze, Kellaghan, Kelly, Kennedy, Legg, Mac Con Iomaire, Mahon, O’Sullivan, Richman Kenneally, Sexton, and Stanley, Danaher, and Eogan.In 1996 Ireland was described by McKenna as having the most dynamic cuisine in any European country, a place where in the last decade “a vibrant almost unlikely style of cooking has emerged” (qtd. in Mac Con Iomaire “Jammet’s” 136). By 2014, there were nine restaurants in Dublin which had been awarded Michelin stars or Red Ms (Mac Con Iomaire “Jammet’s” 137). Ross Lewis, Chef Patron of Chapter One Restaurant, who would be chosen to create the menu for the state banquet for Queen Elizabeth II, has maintained a Michelin star since 2008 (Mac Con Iomaire, “Jammet’s” 138). Most recently the current strength of Irish gastronomy is globally apparent in Mark Moriarty’s award as San Pellegrino Young Chef 2015 (McQuillan). As Deleuze succinctly states: “Ireland has gone mad about food” (143).This article is part of a research project into Irish diplomatic dining, and the author is part of a research cluster into Ireland’s culinary heritage within the Dublin Institute of Technology. The aim of the research is to add to the growing body of scholarship on Irish gastronomic history and, ultimately, to contribute to the discourse on the existence of a national cuisine. If, as Zubaida says, “a nation’s cuisine is its court’s cuisine,” then it is time for Ireland to “research the feasts as well as the famines” (Mac Con Iomaire and Cashman 97).ConclusionThe Irish state banquet for Queen Elizabeth II in May 2011 was a highly orchestrated and formalised process. From the menu, material culture, entertainment, and level of consultation in the creative content, it is evident that the banquet was carefully curated to represent Ireland’s diplomatic, cultural, and culinary identity.The effects of the visit appear to have been felt in the years which have followed. Hennessy wrote in the Irish Times newspaper that Queen Elizabeth is privately said to regard her visit to Ireland as the most significant of the trips she has made during her 60-year reign. British Prime Minister David Cameron is noted to mention the visit before every Irish audience he encounters, and British Foreign Secretary William Hague has spoken in particular of the impact the state banquet in Dublin Castle made upon him. Hennessy points out that one of the most significant indicators of the peaceful relationship which exists between the two countries nowadays was the subsequent state visit by Irish President Michael D. Higgins to Britain in 2013. This was the first state visit to the United Kingdom by a President of Ireland and would have been unimaginable 25 years ago. The fact that the President and his wife stayed at Windsor Castle and that the attendant state banquet was held there instead of Buckingham Palace were both deemed to be marks of special favour and directly attributed to the success of Her Majesty’s 2011 visit to Ireland.As the research demonstrates, eating together unites rather than separates, gathers rather than divides, diffuses political tensions, and confirms alliances. It might be said then that the 2011 state banquet hosted by President Mary McAleese in honour of Queen Elizabeth II, curated by Ross Lewis, gives particular meaning to the axiom “to eat together is to eat in peace” (Taliano des Garets 160).AcknowledgementsSupervisors: Dr Máirtín Mac Con Iomaire (Dublin Institute of Technology) and Dr Michael Kennedy (Royal Irish Academy)Fáilte IrelandPhotos of the banquet dishes supplied and permission to reproduce them for this article kindly granted by Ross Lewis, Chef Patron, Chapter One Restaurant ‹http://www.chapteronerestaurant.com/›.Illustration ‘Ireland on a Plate’ © Jesse Campbell BrownRemerciementsThe author would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their feedback and suggestions on an earlier draft of this article.ReferencesAlbala, Ken. The Banquet: Dining in the Great Courts of Late Renaissance Europe. Chicago: University of Illinois, 2007.———. “The Historical Models of Food and Power in European Courts of the Nineteenth Century: An Expository Essay and Prologue.” Royal Taste, Food Power and Status at the European Courts after 1789. Ed. Daniëlle De Vooght. Surrey: Ashgate Publishing, 2011. 13–29.Baughman, John J. “The French Banqueting Campaign of 1847–48.” The Journal of Modern History 31 (1959): 1–15. Cashman, Dorothy. “That Delicate Sweetmeat, the Irish Plum: The Culinary World of Maria Edgeworth.” ‘Tickling the Palate': Gastronomy in Irish Literature and Culture. Ed. Máirtín Mac Con Iomaire, and Eamon Maher. Oxford: Peter Lang, 2014. 15–34.———. “French Boobys and Good English Cooks: The Relationship with French Culinary Influence in Eighteenth- and Nineteenth-Century Ireland.” Reimagining Ireland: Proceedings from the AFIS Conference 2012. Vol. 55 Reimagining Ireland. Ed. Benjamin Keatinge, and Mary Pierse. Bern: Peter Lang, 2014. 207–22.———. “‘This Receipt Is as Safe as the Bank’: Reading Irish Culinary Manuscripts.” M/C Journal 16.3 (2013). ‹http://journal.media-culture.org.au/index.php/mcjournal›.———. “Ireland’s Culinary Manuscripts.” Irish Traditional Cooking, Recipes from Ireland’s Heritage. By Darina Allen. London: Kyle Books, 2012. 14–15.Chapple-Sokol, Sam. “Culinary Diplomacy: Breaking Bread to Win Hearts and Minds.” The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 8 (2013): 161–83.Cullen, Louis M. The Emergence of Modern Ireland 1600–1900. London: Batsford, 1981.Deleuze, Marjorie. “A New Craze for Food: Why Is Ireland Turning into a Foodie Nation?” ‘Tickling the Palate': Gastronomy in Irish Literature and Culture. Ed. Máirtín Mac Con Iomaire, and Eamon Maher. Oxford: Peter Lang, 2014. 143–58.“Details of the State Dinner.” Office of Public Works. 8 Apr. 2013. ‹http://www.dublincastle.ie/HistoryEducation/TheVisitofHerMajestyQueenElizabethII/DetailsoftheStateDinner/›.De Vooght, Danïelle, and Peter Scholliers. Introduction. Royal Taste, Food Power and Status at the European Courts after 1789. Ed. Daniëlle De Vooght. Surrey: Ashgate Publishing, 2011. 1–12.Diner, Hasia. Hungering for America: Italian, Irish & Jewish Foodways in the Age of Migration. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 2001.Firth, Raymond. Symbols: Public and Private. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1973.Foster, Sarah. “Buying Irish: Consumer Nationalism in 18th Century Dublin.” History Today 47.6 (1997): 44–51.Goldstein, Darra. Foreword. ‘Tickling the Palate': Gastronomy in Irish Literature and Culture. Eds. Máirtín Mac Con Iomaire and Eamon Maher. Oxford: Peter Lang, 2014. xi–xvii.Hennessy, Mark. “President to Visit Queen in First State Visit to the UK.” The Irish Times 28 Nov. 2013. 25 May 2015 ‹http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/uk/president-to-visit-queen-in-first-state-visit-to-the-uk-1.1598127›.“International Historical Conference: Table and Diplomacy—from the Middle Ages to the Present Day—Call for Papers.” Institut Européen d’Histoire et des Cultures de l’Alimentation (IEHCA) 15 Feb. 2015. ‹http://www.iehca.eu/IEHCA_v4/pdf/16-11-3-5-colloque-table-diplomatique-appel-a-com-fr-en.pdf›.Kane, Eileen M.C. “Irish Cloth in Avignon in the Fifteenth Century.” The Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland. 102.2 (1972): 249–51.Kaufman, Cathy K. “Structuring the Meal: The Revolution of Service à la Russe.” The Meal: Proceedings of the Oxford Symposium on Food and Cookery 2001. Ed. Harlan Walker. Devon: Prospect Books, 2002. 123–33.Kellaghan, Tara. “Claret: The Preferred Libation of Georgian Ireland’s Elite.” Dublin Gastronomy Symposium. Dublin, 6 Jun. 2012. ‹http://arrow.dit.ie/dgs/2012/june612/3/›.Kelly, Fergus. “Early Irish Farming.” Early Irish Law Series. Ed. Fergus Kelly. Volume IV. Dublin: Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, 1997.Kennedy, Michael. “‘Where’s the Taj Mahal?’: Indian Restaurants in Dublin since 1908.” History Ireland 18.4 (2010): 50–52. ‹http://www.jstor.org/stable/27823031›.Legg, Marie-Louise. “'Irish Wine': The Import of Claret from Bordeaux to Provincial Ireland in the Eighteenth Century.” Irish Provincial Cultures in the Long Eighteenth Century: Making the Middle Sort (Essays for Toby Barnard). Eds. Raymond Gillespie and R[obert] F[itzroy] Foster. Dublin: Four Courts Press, 2012.Mac Con Iomaire, Máirtín. “Haute Cuisine Restaurants in Nineteenth and Twentieth Century Ireland.” Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy. Section C. DOI: 10.3318/PRIAC.2015.115.06. 2015.———. “‘From Jammet’s to Guilbaud’s’: The Influence of French Haute Cuisine on the Development of Dublin Restaurants.” ‘Tickling the Palate’: Gastronomy in Irish Literature and Culture. Eds. Máirtín Mac Con Iomaire and Eamon Maher. Oxford: Peter Lang, 2014. 121–41. ‹http://arrow.dit.ie/tschafbk/15/›.———. “Exploring the 'Food Motif' in Songs from the Irish Tradition.” Dublin Gastronomy Symposium. Dublin, 3 Jun. 2014. ‹http://arrow.dit.ie/dgs/2014/june314/7/›.———. “Gastro-Topography: Exploring Food Related Placenames in Ireland.” Canadian Journal of Irish Studies. 38.1-2 (2014): 126–57.———. “The Pig in Irish Cuisine and Culture.” M/C Journal 13.5 (2010). ‹http://journal.media-culture.org.au/index.php/mcjournal/article/viewArticle/296›.———. “The Emergence, Development and Influence of French Haute Cuisine on Public Dining Restaurants 1900–2000: An Oral History.” Doctoral Thesis. Dublin Institute of Technology, 2009. ‹http://arrow.dit.ie/tourdoc/12/›.———. “A History of Seafood in Irish Cuisine and Culture.” Wild Food: Proceedings of the Oxford Symposium on Food and Cookery 2004. Ed. Richard Hosking. Totnes, Devon: Prospect Books, 2006. ‹http://arrow.dit.ie/tfschcafcon/3/›.———. “The Pig in Irish Cuisine Past and Present.” The Fat of the Land: Proceedings of the Oxford Symposium on Food and Cookery 2002. Ed. Harlan Walker. Bristol: Footwork, 2003. 207–15. ‹http://arrow.dit.ie/tfschcafcon/1/›.———, and Dorothy Cashman. “Irish Culinary Manuscripts and Printed Books: A Discussion.” Petits Propos Culinaires 94 (2011): 81–101. 16 Mar. 2012 ‹http://arrow.dit.ie/tfschafart/111/›.———, and Tara Kellaghan. “Royal Pomp: Viceregal Celebrations and Hospitality in Georgian Dublin.” Celebration: Proceedings of the Oxford Symposium on Food and Cookery 2011. Ed. Mark McWilliams. Totnes, Devon: Prospect Books. 2012. ‹http://arrow.dit.ie/tfschafart/109/›.———, and Eamon Maher. Introduction. ‘Tickling the Palate': Gastronomy in Irish Literature and Culture. Eds. Máirtín Mac Con Iomaire and Eamon Maher. Oxford: Peter Lang, 2014. 1–11. ‹http://arrow.dit.ie/tschafbk/11/›.———, and Pádraic Óg Gallagher. “The Potato in Irish Cuisine and Culture.” Journal of Culinary Science and Technology 7.2-3 (2009): 152–67. 24 Sep. 2012 ‹http://arrow.dit.ie/tfschafart/3/›.McConnell, Tara. “'Brew as Much as Possible during the Proper Season': Beer Consumption in Elite Households in Eighteenth-Century Ireland.” ‘Tickling the Palate': Gastronomy in Irish Literature and Culture. Eds. Máirtín Mac Con Iomaire and Eamon Maher. Oxford: Peter Lang, 2014. 177–89.McDowell, R[obert] B[rendan]. Historical Essays 1938–2001. Dublin: The Lilliput Press, 2003.McQuillan, Deirdre. “Young Irish Chef Wins International Award in Milan.” The Irish Times. 28 June 2015. 30 June 2015 ‹http://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/food-and-drink/young-irish-chef-wins-international-award-in-milan-1.2265725›.Mahon, Bríd. Land of Milk and Honey: The Story of Traditional Irish Food and Drink. Cork: Mercier Press, 1991.Mahon, Elaine. “Eating for Ireland: A Preliminary Investigation into Irish Diplomatic Dining since the Inception of the State.” Diss. Dublin Institute of Technology, 2013.Morgan, Linda. “Diplomatic Gastronomy: Style and Power at the Table.” Food and Foodways: Explorations in the History and Culture of Human Nourishment 20.2 (2012): 146–66.O'Sullivan, Catherine Marie. Hospitality in Medieval Ireland 900–1500. Dublin: Four Courts Press, 2004.Pliner, Patricia, and Paul Rozin. “The Psychology of the Meal.” Dimensions of the Meal: The Science, Culture, Business, and Art of Eating. Ed. Herbert L. Meiselman. Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen, 2000. 19–46.Richman Kenneally, Rhona. “Cooking at the Hearth: The ‘Irish Cottage’ and Women’s Lived Experience.” Memory Ireland. Ed. Oona Frawley. Vol. 2. Syracuse: Syracuse UP, 2012. 224–41.Robins, Joseph. Champagne and Silver Buckles: The Viceregal Court at Dublin Castle 1700–1922. Dublin: The Lilliput Press, 2001.Sexton, Regina. A Little History of Irish Food. Dublin: Gill and Macmillan, 1998.Sobal, Jeffrey, Caron Bove, and Barbara Rauschenbach. "Commensal Careers at Entry into Marriage: Establishing Commensal Units and Managing Commensal Circles." The Sociological Review 50.3 (2002): 378-397.Simms, Katharine. “Guesting and Feasting in Gaelic Ireland.” Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland 108 (1978): 67–100.Stanley, Michael, Ed Danaher, and James Eogan, eds. Dining and Dwelling. Dublin: National Roads Authority, 2009.Swift, Jonathan. “A Proposal for the Universal Use of Irish Manufacture.” The Prose Works of Jonathan Swift D.D. Ed. Temple Scott. Vol. 7: Historical and Political Tracts. London: George Bell & Sons, 1905. 17–30. 29 July 2015 ‹http://www.ucc.ie/celt/published/E700001-024/›.Taliano des Garets, Françoise. “Cuisine et Politique.” Sciences Po University Press. Vingtième Siècle: Revue d’histoire 59 (1998): 160–61. Williams, Alex. “On the Tip of Creative Tongues.” The New York Times. 4 Oct. 2009. 16 June 2015 ‹http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/04/fashion/04curate.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0›.Young, Carolin. Apples of Gold in Settings of Silver. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2002.Zubaida, Sami. “Imagining National Cuisines.” TCD/UCD Public Lecture Series. Trinity College, Dublin. 5 Mar. 2014.