Talk:History of breakfast

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Japanese breakfast section[edit]

Rice soup is described as "hybrid porridge jook." I think it would be better left as rice porridge. Jook is a Cantonese word, or more specifically a romanization of the Cantonese pronunciation of the Chinese character 粥. There is a perfectly good Japanese word -why use a Chinese one? Unless anyone objects I suggest removing the phrase "rice soup (hybrid porridge jook)" and replacing with "rice porridge." Also, the source cited is a 19th century book about India, which is not relevant. --Bacon Man (talk) 11:17, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have now made the amendment, since no-one objected. --Bacon Man (talk) 10:39, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Middles Ages Section[edit]

This section is complete junk. Thomas Aquinas does not mention breakfast in the Summa Theologiae. The sources being used in this section are not academic sources, but popular audience sources, which necessarily involve simplifications, which usually means error. For example, one source speaks of a "ban" on breakfast, which it then admits later was an "unofficial ban", which is only to say that people generally did not eat breakfast. There was no ban. These are not the sources this article should be relying on. This section needs serious attention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:697D:1700:4DE1:D230:2435:863D (talk) 10:41, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above comment is so rude that I think it should be ignored for that reason alone. It's a massive exaggeration to say the section is "complete junk." There was (if we believe the author of the rude comment) a mild misuse of the word "ban" in the section. I would ignore this criticism until the critic composes himself or herself and makes a constructive suggestion or two. --Bacon Man (talk) 11:17, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The comment above is not "rude" and it is completely accurate. It's not "rude" to note that a section of an article is full of errors of fact and depends on third rate amateurish popular sources. There is much more wrong with this section that its references to some imaginary "ban" on breakfast. Most of it depends on one book - Breakfast: A History by Heather Arndt Anderson. She bills herself as "a Portland, Oregon-based food writer, culinary historian, and botanist", but her pages on breakfast in the Middle Ages is mostly wrong. As already noted, Aquinas does not even mention breakfast in his section on "gluttony" in the Summa Theologica - as anyone can see if they just look up his work: Part 2-2, Question 148, Article 4. So Anderson's claim that he declared breakfast an example of "praepropere" is factually wrong. It also makes absolutely no sense, since "praepropere" means "eating too soon after a meal", which is the very last thing breakfast could be regarded as. The claim that the other references to breakfast in medieval sources are somehow exceptions is also wrong. Breakfast was a small meal - usually a "sop" (hunk of bread) in wine, ale or milk or some bread, cheese and cold meat. But it was perfectly normal. Medieval literature depicts people eating breakfast routinely - I just found examples in the fourteenth century poem Sir Gawain and the Green Knight without even trying very hard (lines 1135 and 1312). The problem here is that something as mundane as breakfast rarely gets covered by real historians and so the only works that discuss it are bad popular works like those of Anderson and the two other equally bad secondary sources she draws on. But writing a much better section medieval breakfasts drawing on actual sources would be considered "original research" and so not allowed here. This is why Wikipedia is often so terrible on small topics like this. The section does need total revision, though - because I've just encountered a prominent Twitter account spreading the idea that "the Church thought breakfast was an affront to God" based on this article.TimONeill (talk) 07:14, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've tagged this section as "disputed" accordingly. Mvolz (talk) 10:18, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Having seen this on twitter (QI tweeted it out), and seen someone explain in detail why Aquinas didn't list breakfast as a sin - Anderson (2013) states he does in his Summa Theologiae, but a look into the Summa Theologiae shows that the sin of 'praepropere', one of the six ways to commit gluttony, refers to eating too soon after the previous meal, not breakfast - I've removed the paragraphs that falsely supported this. I've also removed another source listed in that section as supporting this conclusion, as a quick look in the book cited shows no mention of breakfast, shame in regards to it or praepropere. -- Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 10:27, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It certainly was rude, and the follow up reply was rude also. The words "third rate" "amateurish" "makes absolutely no sense" were all used to try to belittle people who do not agree. As for the line "something as mundane as breakfast rarely gets covered by real historians and so the only works that discuss it are bad popular works like those of Anderson and the two other equally bad secondary sources she draws on" - this is self-evidently not true. Of course "real historians" discuss breakfast. It's not a taboo subject. Bacon Man (talk) 13:57, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lumberjack breakfast[edit]

Full breakfast states that the lumberjack breakfast is another name for a full breakfast; however, my OR would say otherwise. In addition, this source doesn't mention the full breakfast at all. On another note, this is a common breakfast both in the United States and Canada, should it be included in both sections? We have a bit of a dilemma in that there's really no way to organize this article other than splitting it out by countries; however, we run the risk of redundancy. This will probably be fixed somewhat as some topics grow and get split off, but I was interested if anyone had an innovative way of dealing with it. Ryan Vesey 03:04, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan, I added a small section on what I could find about the lumberjack breakfast, in which there is also a section on the Canadian Cuisine wiki page. Ksb93 (talk) 15:59, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Suhoor[edit]

Is this really breakfast? It is an early morning meal, but it is a replacement for a traditional Muslim breakfast during the month of Ramadan. When thinking of breakfast traditionally as "breaking the fast", suhoor is the direct opposite. It certainly isn't acceptable to depict suhoor as an Islamic breakfast, but it might be acceptable to state that "During the month of Ramadan, Muslims replace traditional breakfast with suhoor..." I can leave a note at WikiProject Islam if we want another opinion. Ryan Vesey 05:00, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've reworded the selection per the suggestion above. Check out the "In Islam" section now back in the article at this time. Northamerica1000(talk) 05:24, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

From our research for our class project, we felt that Suhoor does not fall into the category of breakfast Suhoor Ksb93 (talk) 15:24, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination[edit]

This article has been nominated to become a Did you know entry. See: Template:Did you know nominations/History of breakfast. Northamerica1000(talk) 08:14, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Older material needed[edit]

This article presently has a particular focus on relatively recent history. I think that this current approach of focusing on the fairly recent histories of breakfast in presently existing countries may not be the best approach; we should be sure to include history from far more diverse eras of history. Some examples:

I guess overall what I'm saying is that we should lend more focus to more distant time periods than we currently are. The article may need to be reorganized to do this. --Philpill691 (talk) 01:22, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree, I think there needs to be more history in this history article. I found this BBC article interesting, which might give a starting point:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20243692 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.198.124.115 (talk) 04:13, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For our class proposal we added more content about the Middle Ages, Ancient breakfasts, and Medieval breakfast. Do you think that this is the kind of information you are looking for? Ksb93 (talk) 15:21, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal for Class Project[edit]

As students of Cornell University, we are taking a class that has us contribute to the Wikipedia community by helping to improve an article.
Our group has chosen to focus on History of breakfast.
To learn more about our course, you can visit its course page.

The members of the group are:


After an initial investigation of the site, its talk page, and history, we believe that a restructuring of the page will benefit it greatly. The scope of this article is extremely large, and making it a comprehensive article would be impossible in the allotted time. However, we do hope to see the article structured chronologically, rather than regionally, since it is a History. We plan on creating three major sections:

  • Ancient Breakfast - a framework for information about breakfast in ancient civilizations such as Ancient Egypt, Ancient Mesopotamia, Ancient Greece, Ancient Rome, etc...
  • Postclassical Breakfast- a framework for information about breakfast in cultures throughout the middle ages, maybe in the developing Islamic faith, and up until roughly 1500AD
  • Modern Breakfast- a framework for information about breakfast in cultures since the discovery of the Americas, throughout the industrial revolution and Renaissance, up until present day.


Hopefully, all the current information can be relocated into one of these three categories. The categories may be further divided up regionally or culturally within each time period. In order to collect as much citable information, we plan on utilizing resources cited by other Wikipedia articles about culture and food. Simultaneously, we plan on using the resources in the Cornell University network, including the online and offline libraries, and the history and anthropology departments. Hopefully, by the end of the assignment, we will leave this page with a greater framework for future expansion and development.

Each of the three group members will focus on developing one of the three major sections.
Nicole will work on the Ancient Breakfast, upon doing some preliminary exploration, she has found sources such as:

  • Encyclopedia of food and culture (Katz & Weaver 2003) ~ Available at school library
  • Food in the ancient world (Hill & Wilkins 2006) ~ Available at school library
  • Food in the ancient world (Alcock 2006) ~ Available at school library

And images in the WikiCommons such as the first two to the left.

Maler der Grabkammer des Menna 009
Frescos of three vignettes of fruit, Casa dei Cervi, Herculaneum (before 79 CE)


Jesse will work on the Postclassical Breakfast, upon doing some preliminary exploration, she has found sources such as:

  • Food in the Middle Ages (Wooglar 2010) ~ Available at school library
  • All Manners Food: Eating and Taste in England and France from the Middle Ages to the Present (Mennell 1996) ~ Available at school library
  • Food, Drink and Identity: Cooking, Eating, and Drinking in Europe since the Middle Ages (Scholliers 2001) ~ Available at school library

And images in the WikiCommons such as the images displayed to the left [[1]] [[2]]

Kate will work on the Modern Breakfast, upon doing some preliminary exploration, she has found sources such as:

  • A Brief History of Breakfast (Grocer, 2009) ~ Available through Cornell scholar subscription
  • The Cereals and Civilation (Wissler, 1947) ~ Available at school library
  • Encyclopedia of Food and Culture: Breakfast (2003) ~ Available at school library

And images in the WikiCommons such as the images displayed to the left

French Croissants
A traditional family breakfast in the Isan, Thailand


Please let us know if you have any feedback or concerns about our proposal. Nicole.cooprider (talk) 14:10, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Niteshgoyalwiki (talk) 15:11, 1 October 2013 (UTC)Feedback from Niteshgoyalwiki (talk)[reply]

  • Move the Template for Educational Assignment to the top of the Talk Page. Done. Good Job.
  • How do you plan to further divide each of the three ages - by countries? Will you be repurposing the original content?

I see that you will be adding content from encyclopedia and other resources - good to know that you have identified sources where you will be getting the new content from.

  • It'd be great if you can source images from the books and articles that you mentioned and add them to wikimedia.
  • I see that some one has already engaged with Nicole's post. Good job picking an article of interest and with some talk going on
  • I'd advise being more proactive and talking to other users on the talk page (like the useful comments below). Feel free to comment back to them suggest how you would like to incorporate their comments and suggestions, when necessary. This should improve chances of communication.
  • Remember to nominate your article to did you know by the end of class on Tuesday.
You might want to follow up the reference (#30 as things stand) from Simon Schama in Frederick Slare. Slare was writing on sugar, and seems to have advocated what in the UK gets called a "continental breakfast". This comes early in the nutritional debate on breakfast, "urbanization", savory versus sweet, drinks, and so on. There must be much more to say. Charles Matthews (talk) 19:00, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I hope this information will help you edit. Here are some of the most common citation templates that you can use:
Thanks for the hard work and hope you get an A! --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 08:10, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Feedback from Prof. Leshed:
Looks like you are going to put a lot of effort in organizing the article, and I look forward to see the improved article. Here are some comments for a successful project:
  • Since you are suggesting to change the structure and organization of the article, you will need to get other editors who have been working on this article to agree. This is not a minor edit or addition to the article. When you do so, explain your reasoning and request feedback from others on the talk page. Otherwise, other editors might decide to revert your changes, which will be sad.
  • Make sure at least one of the group members is comfortable with the wiki markup language and becomes familiar with the Wikipedia standards and guidelines to "wikify" your edits.
  • You've already started getting feedback from other editors. Follow up on these suggestions, thank them personally on their talk pages, and discuss the changes with them.
Happy editing! LeshedInstructor (talk) 15:23, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
@Nicole.cooprider: Thanks for this detailed explanation of your plans to contribute to this interesting article. I have a few comments, in addition to your professor's above:
  • References: they sound great. Such a good idea to find sources with relevant information before committing a lot of time to an article, as the cited statements are the only ones likely to "stick".
  • Reorganization: I understand your idea about restructuring this article. My biggest concern is that the current article currently links to many other specific histories of cuisine/breakfast within a region. This makes a lot of sense, since this article is an overview of breakfast in general. So the 'main articles' are essentially listed as further reading for any readers who'd like to dig a little deeper. I assume breakfast developed at different rates during different periods across regions, so if you restructure the entire outline based on chronology, it might get confusing. Does that make sense? Others might agree that it's a good idea, though! Just some feedback about the potential challenge ahead. Hope it helps! JMathewson (WMF) (talk) 19:03, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
We are thinking that once the article has been reorganized to be more of 'a history' being more chronological in nature, it may make sense to make sub categories more regional too. Certainly in each major era, breakfasts still different regionally. Does that sound like good middle ground? We certainly plan to keep the article functioning as a source of further readings, because it would be unnecessary and near impossible to make it a comprehensive history of all breakfast foods and practices. Thank you for your feedback! Don't hesitate to give us more! Nicole.cooprider (talk) 18:05, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
more photos at Breakfast; more assessment info here Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment ; might want to consider an infobox Template:Infobox recurring event -- you picked a hard topic since couldn't find much at google scholar; nothing at Encyclopedia Britannica; but series of essays by oliver wendell holmes s:The_Autocrat_of_the_Breakfast-Table. 98.163.68.34 (talk) 03:08, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lunch and Dinner WikiProject proposal[edit]

Well, this project makes me hungry... However, to the point; Kate Boxer, left me a message saying that she would like to know if I can be of any help (sorry if I reply so late). Lets also create WikiProject Lunch and WikiProject Dinner! Treat it however you like, maybe its a joke, but it might work!--Mishae (talk) 19:29, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on History of breakfast. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:29, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Cornell Students did this Dirty[edit]

This article needs to be fixed for Eurocentricism. The only history talked about is Europe, but from looking at other articles, like Chinese History of Food, there are other cultures that had Breakfast before Medieval Europe did. It needs to be fixed so it doesn't look like Europe invented the idea of Breakfast and includes a worldwide look. --KimYunmi (talk) 06:20, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The first sentence[edit]

Is anything in the first sentence correct other than breakfast is a meal?

"Breakfast is the first meal taken after rising from a night's sleep, always eaten in the early morning before undertaking the day's work"

What if you couldn't sleep? What if you wake up mid-morning? What if it's your day off? Does that mean you can't eat breakfast?

Maybe the sentence should start with "Traditionally" or "Originally" - or something. Or be replaced. Darrenyeats (talk) 08:49, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:History_of_breakfast&oldid=1183346664"