Eighteenth-century European writers frequently described foods as ‘nourishing’. Nourishing foods were acknowledged to play a central role in building the healthy, energetic populations identified as key to commercial and political success, but their objective scientific characterisation proved impossible. In practice, only the people actually eating the food could determine its nutritive power. Eighteenth-century nutrition was perforce a form of embodied knowledge, not a set of scientific facts. This article contrasts nutrition's unquestioned importance to enlightened political and economic discourse with its evolving position within scientific and vernacular systems of knowledge. Despite intense investigation of food chemistry, the embodied experience of eaters remained stubbornly central to all discussion of a food’s ability to nourish. The vernacular nutritional evaluations of ordinary people infiltrated more lofty discussions of diet to create an uneasy and unequal dialogue. Elite schemes to promote particular foodstuffs as suitable for the labouring population thus relied not simply on the expert opinions of scientists, but also on the bodies and opinions of the very people at whom these campaigns were aimed. Only in the nineteenth century was nutrition converted into an objective, quantifiable object of knowledge.

中文翻译：

---

18 世纪营养的政治经济学*

18 世纪的欧洲作家经常将食物描述为“有营养的”。营养食品被认为在建立健康、精力充沛的人群方面发挥着核心作用，这被认为是商业和政治成功的关键，但事实证明，它们的客观科学特征是不可能的。实际上，只有真正吃过食物的人才能确定其营养价值。18 世纪的营养确实是一种具体的知识形式，而不是一组科学事实。本文将营养对开明的政治和经济话语的毋庸置疑的重要性与其在科学和本土知识体系中不断发展的地位进行了对比。尽管对食物化学进行了深入研究，但食者的具体体验仍然顽固地成为所有关于食物营养能力的讨论的核心。普通人的白话营养评价渗入了更崇高的饮食讨论，制造了不安和不平等的对话。因此，推广适合劳动人口的特定食品的精英计划不仅依赖于科学家的专家意见，还依赖于这些运动所针对的人的身体和意见。直到 19 世纪，营养才转化为客观的、可量化的知识对象。但也取决于这些运动所针对的人的身体和意见。直到 19 世纪，营养才转化为客观的、可量化的知识对象。但也取决于这些运动所针对的人的身体和意见。直到 19 世纪，营养才转化为客观的、可量化的知识对象。