Ancient Egyptian Cuisine and Food Habits

Among the ancient civilizations, Egyptians enjoyed better foods than most did, thanks to the presence of the Nile River flowing through most of settled  Egypt, fertilizing the land with periodic flooding and providing a source of water for irrigating crops and watering livestock. The proximity of Egypt to the Middle East made trade easy, and hence Egypt enjoyed foodstuffs from foreign countries as well, and their cuisine was heavily influenced by outside eating habits.   The diet of the ancient Egyptians depended on their social position and wealth. Tomb paintings, medical treatises, and archaeology reveal a variety of foods. Peasants and slaves would, of course, eat a limited diet, including the staples of bread and beer, complemented by dates, vegetables, and pickled and salted fish, but the wealthy had a much larger range to choose from. For wealthy Egyptians, available food choices were easily as broad as they are for many people in the modern world.   Grains Barley, spelt,  or emmer wheat provided the basic material for bread, which was leavened by sourdough or yeast. Grains were mashed and fermented for beer, which was not so much a recreational drink as a means of creating a safe beverage from river waters that were not always clean. Ancient Egyptians consumed a great deal of beer, mostly brewed from barley.   The annual flooding of plains alongside the Nile and other rivers made the soils quite fertile for growing grain crops, and the rivers themselves were channeled with irrigation ditches to water crops and sustain domestic animals. In ancient times, the Nile River Valley, especially the upper delta region, was by no means a desert landscape.   Wine Grapes were grown for wine. Grape cultivation was adopted from other parts of the Mediterranean in about 3,000 BCE, with Egyptians modifying practices to their local climate. Shade structures were commonly used, for example, to protect grapes from the intense Egyptian sun. Ancient Egyptian wines were primarily reds and were probably used mostly for ceremonial purposes for the upper classes. Scenes carved in ancient pyramids and temples show scenes of wine-making. For common people, beer was a more typical drink.   Fruit and Vegetables Vegetables cultivated and consumed by ancient Egyptians included onions, leeks, garlic, and lettuce. Legumes included lupines, chickpeas, broad beans, and lentils. Fruit included melon, fig, date, palm coconut, apple, and pomegranate. The carob was used medicinally and, perhaps, for food. Animal Protein Animal protein was a less common food for ancient Egyptians than it is for most modern consumers. Hunting was somewhat rare, though it was pursued by commoners for sustenance and by the wealthy for sport.  Domesticated animals, including oxen, sheep, goats, and swine, provided dairy products, meat, and by-products, with blood from sacrificial animals used for blood sausages, and beef and pork fat used for cooking. Pigs, sheep, and goats provided most meat consumed; beef was considerably more expensive and was consumed by commoners only for celebratory or ritual meals. Beef was eaten more regularly by royalty.   Fish caught in the Nile River provided an important source of protein for poor people and was eaten less frequently by the wealthy, who had greater access to domesticated pigs, sheep, and goats.   There is also evidence the poorer Egyptians consumed rodents, such as mice and hedgehogs, in recipes calling for them to be baked. Geese, ducks, quail, pigeons, and pelicans were available as fowl, and their eggs were also eaten. Goose fat was also used for cooking. Chickens, however, seem to have not been present in ancient Egypt until the 4th or 5th centuries BCE.   Oils and Spices Oil was derived from ben-nuts. There were also sesame, linseed and castor oils. Honey was available as a sweetener, and vinegar may have also been used. Seasonings included salt, juniper, aniseed, coriander, cumin, fennel, fenugreek, and poppyseed.

Essay on The Most Dangerous Game - 786 Words

The Most Dangerous Game vs. The Destructors By: John P. Calloway Thesis Statement: Upon reading the two stories, â€Å"The Destructors and the Most Dangerous Game† you will find the settings for the two stories are that of two different times, places, and world views. One is placed in a dark and dreary post war setting, and the other in a vibrant jungle full of wild game hunting and fishing. Each with very different conflicts and endings. When you read the Destructors the main characters of the story are Mr. Thomas, T or Trevor, and Blackie. Trevor and Blackie were the two kids in the story that were more or less head of the gang that the story talks about. They were the guys responsible for tearing up Old Misery’s also known as Mr.†¦show more content†¦When reading the story of the Most Dangerous Game, the main characters were Mr. Rainsford and General Zaroff. The setting of this story is a bright colored jungle, when reading the visualization is that of sunshine and animals. It seems like a very upbeat beautiful story about a hunter who incidentally fell off of his boat and swam to shore on this wonderful island. He was a great hunter believing that his prey didn’t have feelings of fear or anything of the sort. When he gets to the island he finds that there is civilization on the island. When reading further it gives the idea of an elegant giant home almost like in the movie Jumanji, with ani mal heads hung on the walls. Upon meeting General Zaroff however, the story becomes a lot more intense. Suddenly the great hunter Mr. Rainsford becomes the object of Zaroff’s eye. Rainsford is now the prey and is being hunted by Zaroff. It adds a lot more excitement to the story portraying Rainsford running and hiding to get away from Zaroff in fear for his life. I think that even for this day and time this could still potentially have the same outcome. There are plenty of people out there that would perhaps hunt another human as game. I think when you first start to read the story that it does start off leading you to think that the outcome would be something totally different. It starts off making you think that you are going to read about theShow MoreRelatedThe Most Dangerous Game Essay738 Words   |  3 PagesRyan Long English 102-501 Monday Night Essay #2 23 September 2012 Essay #2 Question: Discuss the characterizations of Rainsford and General Zaroff in â€Å"The Most Dangerous Game.† Which one is more fully characterized? Are both characters plausible? The Most Dangerous Game by Richard Connell, the author portrays two distinctly alike men, who yet are very different. The two main characters, Sanger Rainsford and General Zaroff both have a strong passion for hunting. The first is Rainsford and heRead MoreThe Most Dangerous Game By Rainsford929 Words   |  4 PagesThe Most Dangerous Game In the short story The Most Dangerous Game, the tell of a man named Rainsford is set with a very difficult choice. Rainsford is first cast off his yacht. After getting onto the railing to look for where gunshots had come from, and reaching from his falling pipe and losing grip of the pole. When Rainsford then swims towards shore to find blood where a animal ,he thought, had struggled. Rsinsford sees the gothic building on the hill and makes his way to it. When RainsfordRead MoreThe Most Dangerous Game Essay598 Words   |  3 PagesI will be comparing the video verion of The Most Dangerous Game to the story. I will be telling what was the same , and what was different . By comparing and contrasting the story to the movie. I will be addressing these similarities and differences in three catigories characters , events , and setting of the Most Dangerous Game. I will talk about each of the catigories in three separate paragraphs. And I will be comparing the movie to the story and the story to the movie. Read MoreThe Most Dangerous Game Essay815 Words   |  4 Pagesfantasies. Out of these numerous stories, there is one that will remain a fascinating and thrilling story - that is ‘The Most Dangerous Game’ by Richard Connell. To me ‘The Most Dangerous Game’ encompasses multiple different notable aspects; of my favorites being adventure as well murder. Sanger Rainsford is portrayed as a smart protagonist of the story The Most Dangerous Game. He s an excellent, knowledgeable huntsman, and in the story, he ends up on Ship-Trap Island where he meets General ZaroffRead MoreEssay on the most dangerous game826 Words   |  4 Pages Richard Connells quot;The Most Dangerous Gamequot; is a very exciting story of a manhunt. This story made me think about the morality of hunting: Humans are the cleverest creatures on earth, but does it give them a license to kill the other animals and even human beings weaker than themselves? I give below a short summary of the story to set the scene and then I will explore the ethics involved in hunting as a sport. quot;The Most Dangerous Gamequot; presents the story of a hunter, GeneralRead MoreThe Most Dangerous Game Analysis1004 Words   |  5 Pagessatisfy the need without ever reaching satisfaction,† (Fromm). The Most Dangerous Game, by Richard Connell, is a short story about a hunter named Sanger Rainsford who is lost on an ex-military general’s island and forced to play his â€Å"game.† In this book, the retired military general, named General Zaroff, is growing tired of his favorite sport, hunting. Because of that, he decides to take hunting to the next level by creating his own game to kill the only animals with the ability to reason, humans. ThroughoutRead MoreThe Most Dangerous Game By Richard Connell1398 Words   |  6 Pages Richard Connell s short work of fiction â€Å"The Most Dangerous Game† blurs the line between humans and animals and explores some of the causes of fear, especially the primal fear of being hunted. Appropriately, it is a suspense-dr iven work and relies heavily on the use of certain techniques to make sure the reader feels, or at least understands, the terror that the protagonist Sanger Rainsford feels. In the narrative, two techniques are combined to create suspense: careful use of foreshadowing createsRead MoreThe Most Dangerous Game And The Cask Of Amontillado1162 Words   |  5 PagesNarcissism is characterized by grandiosity, a lack of empathy for other people, and a need for admiration. Both General Zaroff from â€Å"The Most Dangerous Game† by Richard Connell, and Fortunato from â€Å"The Cask of Amontillado† by Edgar Allen Poe exhibit these qualities, when General Zaroff killed his prey and when Montresor got revenge on Fortunato. They were too absorbed in themselves to see how their humanity was impaired. In both texts, the authors utilize a violent conflict, an isolated setting,Read MoreLord Of The Flies And The Most Dangerous Game1357 Words   |  6 Pages Think of your favorite book. Why do you love it so much? Most people like their favorite book just because of the book’s conflict. The conflict is the most interesting part of the story. A story without a conflict is like a grilled cheese without the cheese. â€Å"Lord of the Flies† and The Most Dangerous Game are two very different stories- on the outside. If you dig deeper you can see that the conflicts in both of these stories have strikingly similar conflicts. By examining theMan versus Man , ManRead MoreArgumentative Essay On The Most Dangerous Game1091 Words   |  5 Pagesnever decrease nor increase. The narrative â€Å"The Most Dangerous Game† by Richard Connell shows both sides of this belief. In the story, one of the main characters named Rainsford believes all human lives are equal and slaughtering any human life is murder. He shows this in â€Å"Rainsford thinks this is terrible and feels awful. He says, ‘That’s not hunting, that’s murder.’ † this is stated after General Zaroff (another main character) states his favorite game to kill is human flesh. General Zaroff is on

Medicaid Free Essays

Check Point: Summarizing the Medigap Program Write a 250-300 word summary reflecting on the Medigap program address the following in your summary: What are the core benefits in the Medigap insurance program? How well does the program meet coverage needs of its consumers? Is the cost of each plan fair considering the benefits and limits offered by each plan? Explain your opinion and provide examples What are the implications of having a private company associated with a government insurance program? Medigap is a supplemental health insurance policy, designed to cover what Medicare doesn’t cover. In order to be eligible for the Medigap program individuals must have either Medicare Part A or B and will be required to pay the premiums. There are 12 supplemental insurance policies that will pay for health services that Medicare does not cover in their original policy. We will write a custom essay sample on Medicaid or any similar topic only for you Order Now All 12 plans are required to have certain basic health services. The core benefits for participants in Medicare Part A are daily coinsurance for 61 to 90 days of hospitalization daily coinsurance for each of Medicare’s lifetime inpatient hospital days and 100 percent of covered hospital charges for 365 days after all Medicare hospital benefits have been used. Medicare Part B the core charges are coinsurance amount after the deductible and the first 3 pints of blood for the year. Each plane extends a different benefit targeted at filling the gaps in Medicare coverage. Private health insurance companies sell Medigap insurance but they must follow federal and state laws. Medigap will cover deductibles, coinsurance and other services not covered by Medicare. Medigap plans are for the individual and what they personally want so to keep premiums down shop around and compare, there might be discounts for women, nonsmokers, medical underwriting, and deductibles. Medigap offers a variety of plans that are available to choose from and give the consumer a package that will fit their health needs. The health plans are fair compared to other insurance companies. It just depends on what the individual wants to cover and their current health needs at that time. How to cite Medicaid, Papers

In Incidents in the Life of a ... free essay sample

In Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl, Harriet Jacobs, at first, introduces to the reader two appalling individuals, Dr. Flint and Mrs. Flint, who are slave owners. Jacobs quickly moves past the obvious message that these two individuals are corrupt, instead she focuses on the system, arguing that slavery pushes white people to become monsters, and that it can be blamed for individual slave owners cruelty. She expands on this concept as she suggests that slavery influences white children at a young age, encouraging them to be irresponsible and abusive of their power, and ultimately robbing them of their moral compass. This theft makes it easy for white people to become the perpetrators of violence and abuse, and blinds them to their own victimhood within the system. Once the reader understands the effect the system of slavery has on slave owners, Jacobs returns to the individual, using the character of Mr. Sands as an example of how slavery can take a kind and sympathetic adult white person, and cause them to become heartless towards slaves. Jacobs uses these elements to argue that slavery pushes white people to become monsters, and that the blame for slaves suffering should be shifted from the individual slave owners towards the system of slavery, which harms everyone involved. Initially, it seems that Lindas master, Dr. Flint, is the vile monster who should be blamed for all of her suffering (26). His abominable actions impact Linda in every aspect of her life, and it appears that he is the source of all her problems. This idea is affirmed by Lindas descriptions of his abuse towards her, as he tries his utmost to corrupt [Lindas] pure principles, and she is obliged to stand and listen to such language as he s[ees] fit to address to [her] (26). Unfortunately for Linda, her troubles also extend to her relationship with Mrs. Flint. Linda describes how Mrs. Flints nerves [a]re so strong, that she could sit in her easy chair and see a woman whipped, till the blood trickled (14). If these awful accounts of Dr. Flints and Mrs. Flints behavior are isolated, the reader may interpret the message of the book to be that these two people are simply monsters and should be despised. However, the full message of the book is not stuck within the idea that these two people are corruptthis point is obvious to the reader early on. Rather, Jacobs uses them as examples of how the practice of slavery shapes white people into monsters. Linda explains this concept as she says that there is no shadow of law to protect [a slave] from insult, from violence, or even from death, therefore putting the emphasis of her troubles on the lawlessness of slavery, not the slave masters (26, my italics). Furthemore, she says that the mistress, who ought to protect the helpless victim [the slave], has no other feelings towards her but those of jealousy and rage, showing that slaverys lawlessness is to blame for both the slave master and mistress abuses (26). Jacobs effectively shifts the emphasis of the books message from how awful Dr. and Mrs. Flint are as people, to the system that nourishes their lives. Linda explains that slavery is a curse to the whites as well as to the blacks, as it makes the white fathers cruel and sensual; the sons violent and licentious, and contaminates the daughters, and makes the wives wretched (46). She declares that the degradation, the wrongs, the vices, that grow out of slavery should be stopped, but again focuses on the practice of slavery as a whole, not on just the slave masters (26, my italics). Instead of simply blaming Dr. Flint and Mrs. Flint, Jacobs creates a picture of society in which slavery itself is portrayed as the culprit. It is slavery that allows for white people to act horribly, and even encourages them to do so. The book contains many more of these subtler moments that argue that white peoples horrific actions are caused by the irresponsible power the practice of slavery lends them. One tool Jacobs uses to illustrate the faults of slavery as a whole, is comparing the futures of two beautiful children playing together, one [] a fair white child; the other [] her slave (28). Linda hear[s] their joyous laughter as they play[] together, at a time in their life where they are innocent and untouched by slaverys blight (28). She emphasises how scarcely one day of [the white girls] life [is] clouded to show how slavery puts white children in a situation where they only experience the benefits of slavery and observe no other way of life (28). In contrast, the playmate of [the white girls] childhood, the black girl, feels the inevitable blight of slavery, and is robbed of her innocent childhood early on (28). This demonstrates that slavery takes children, who may have no prejudices, and puts them in a situation where they experience a racial divide. Because slavery infects children with prejudices, the white children learn the ease that comes with their power, and soon forget their playmates humanity. This timeline of childrens lives shows how the practice of slavery is the root of the injustices that occur later on in their lives. Slavery deals white children the upper-hand at birth, robs them of their morals, and only exposes them to the cheery parts of life, essentially encouraging them to become power-crazed monsters like Dr. Flint. Jacobs gives the reader an understanding of slavery that no slaveholder could ever have. As Linda explains, few slaveholders seem to be aware of the widespread moral ruin occasioned by this wicked system (46).After demonstrating to the reader how the system of slavery is responsible for depraved individuals actions, Jacobs returns to an individual, Mr. Sands, to reflect the readers new understanding of how the broader system shapes character. Specifically, Jacobs uses him as an example of how ignorant slave owners are to slaverys faults, and how slavery can make formerly kind and humane slave owners, cruel and immoral. At first, Mr. Sands appears to be Lindas savior, as she is flatter[ed] by so much attention from [him] and feels grateful for his sympathy (48). He continues to display kindness and sympathy, as he promise[s] to care for [Lindas] child, and to buy [Linda], leading the reader to think that he might be the exception of a good slave owner (51). However, his reaction to William escaping from him proves that he too is unaware of slaverys monstrosities. He claims that William only ran away because hes young and inconsiderate and was urged away by abolitionists, proving himself to be ungrateful for [Mr. Sands] kindness (112). Mr. Sands is so self-assured in his good conscience, that he goes so far as to feel confident that [William] will soon return to [him], showing that he truly considers himself to be free of guilt (112). William later gives his reasons for leaving, that Mr. Sands might indefinitely postpone the promise he [makes] to give [William] his freedom, and thus exposes Mr. Sands lack of sympathy for slaves desire for freedom (112). He has a relaxed time frame of five years to free William, but fails to understand how William would suffer during this time, and the lack of security simply trust[ing] in [Mr. Sands] brings to his life (112). Mr. Sands also fails to understands Lindas request for her childrens freedom, as he claims that the children are free, and he considers their contractual freedom a formalit[y] of law, again missing Lindas lack of trust in [] Slavery! (114). While Mr. Sands may consider the childrens written freedom just a formalit[y] of law, Linda can only know peace [when her] children [are] emancipated with all due formalities of law (114, my italics). Jacobs uses Mr. Sands as an example of how slavery warps seemingly good white people into unsympathetic masters, and to show how white people have no understanding of slaves desire for freedom. At first the reader appreciates him, as he helps and sympathizes with Linda; but after he becomes upset with William for running away, the reader quickly sees that his participation in the system has changed him, and has given him a distaste for freeing his slaves. Sands is surprise[d] to hear that Linda is asking for her childrens emancipation, as he considers them to be free, ignoring the fact that their legal status is that of a slave (114). When we think of slavery, we think of black and white, clear divides. These divides include not only those between races, but between individuals and the system. Jacobs captures the importance of the individual as she writes about the Flints cruelties. She then refocuses the readers attention to the system, as she claims that slavery causes the Flints to act in such ways. Finally, when Jacobs writes about Mr. Sands she combines the two, taking the perspective of the system and applying it to an individuals character. When Sands is debating with Linda about the legal status of the children, the reader forgets that these are his own children, he should not be focusing on the law surrounding them, but rather loving them. Yet, the system dehumanizes his relationship with them, and as a result of this, the reader dehumanizes Mr. Sands as a cruel slaveholder who is just accepting the system. Jacobs message is that we cannot focus on the individual and ignore the system that raises them, but at the same time, we cannot dehumanize the individual slaveholders by portraying them as only existing in the system. The system of slavery is personal, but the people living under it are formed by the system.