96

Wondering if there is an origin of the "3 meals a day" concept. For example, in English we have specific words for them:

  • Breakfast.
  • Lunch.
  • Dinner.

But we have a few more for other meals in the day (I can only think of one actually):

  • Brunch.

According to this we can add:

  • Elevenses.
  • Tea.
  • Supper.

And then we have many special occasion (time independent) ones:

  • BBQ.
  • Feast.
  • ...

But the main ones are Breakfast, Lunch, and Dinner. We don't have many other specific names for meal times in the day.

Wondering if it's like this in all cultures currently, and if not, how variable it is (I know nothing about this). And then wondering where it got started if it's not universal.

The paleo diet has a lot of experimentation with meal times. Some even suggest a 8-12 meals a day. But it's too early to have names for those. Then they speculate about hunter-gatherer societies potentially eating at most 1-time in a day, maybe not for several days in a row. So wonder what kind of concepts they had for meals.

Pieter Geerkens
  • 72,560
  • 9
  • 210
  • 330
Lance
  • 2,227
  • 1
  • 10
  • 20

6 Answers6

96

In "Millennium From Religion to Revolution: How Civilization Has Changed Over a Thousand Years"*, Mortimer explains the origin of 3 meals a day:

As for mealtimes, few people in northern Europe ate breakfast in 1501. The medieval two-meal rhythm of the day persisted: dinner was at about 11 a.m. and supper at about 5 p.m. But as more people moved into towns, and made their living by working long hours for other townsmen, the time at which they could have supper was pushed back into the evening. This meant that dinner, the main meal of the day, had to be eaten a couple of hours later and became lunch. It followed that you had to eat an early meal, breakfast, in order to get through to lunchtime. School also helped bring about this change, for more and more boys went to school, and the long lessons required that they eat breakfast. Hence breakfast was ubiquitous in towns by 1600.

Mortimer concludes:

By 1600 most people followed a routine that you will probably recognise. They washed their face and hands and cleaned their teeth when they got up in the morning. They had breakfast and went to school or work for about eight o’clock. They ate lunch around midday, and came home and ate supper with metal knives and spoons off plates, warming themselves at a fireplace.

As for hunter-gatherer, James Woodburn writes in Egalitarian Societies :

neither !Kung nor Hadza usually place much emphasis on formal meal times. A great deal of food is eaten informally throughout the day.[...] Marshall records that 'Meat is not habitually cooked and eaten as a family meal among the !Kung . . . The men, women, and children may cook their pieces when and as they wish, often roasting bits in the coals and hot ashes and eating them alone at odd times'

*The book was also printed under the title "Human Race: 10 Centuries of Change on Earth"

MagTun
  • 1,008
  • 1
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
    Nice answer, but I am not sure what to think about: By 1600 [...] went to school or work for about eight o’clock.... AFAIK, before artificial lighting became widespread, timetables were dependant on sunlight, so it would have been difficult to keep the same routine at the same hour all year round. Maybe the author is just simplifying his explanation, but still it seems a bit odd. – SJuan76 Sep 20 '18 at 15:22
  • 8
    The implication in the quotes is that Mortimer is only talking about townspeople. These were in the minority in 1600. Population of the UK was about 4 million. Population of London, 250,000. All the other towns were tiny by comparison - the second largest had population of only around 20,000. (One reason towns didn't grow bigger was regular epidemics of fatal diseases) – alephzero Sep 20 '18 at 15:38
  • 14
    Good answer, but I'm curious about people in 1501 not eating until 11am. Wouldn't they have mostly been farmers, waking up early and doing lots of manual labor? I would think they would be famished by 11am. – Jamie Clinton Sep 20 '18 at 19:09
  • 7
    I'm pretty sure they ate; they just didn't sit down with other people to do it. Grab a loaf of bread, head out to the fields, takes bites when possible and as necessary. – chepner Sep 21 '18 at 13:02
  • 1
    @SJuan 8AM as a start time could work for a lot of people. I looked up a northerly city at random, Glasgow, and it has sunrise after 8AM only one week a year. – Aaron Brick Sep 21 '18 at 23:34
  • 5
    @JamieClinton: A description of the life of field workers in the early 20th century in Alentejo (a region of Portugal): in summer, the workers would start working shortly after sunrise (c.6am) and have their first meal at 9am (lunch), then their second meal at 12pm (dinner). There might be a snack (merenda) in the mid-afternoon and at night they'd have the ceia (supper). However, the workers might eat some bread and olives in the field before the work started, or just some olives if they had no bread. This 'fast breaking' wasn't mentioned as a meal, though. Curiously, the hours are similar... – SC for reinstatement of Monica Sep 22 '18 at 21:20
  • ...are similar to the meal hours observed in the 14th century (according to Fernão Lopes's chronicles). – SC for reinstatement of Monica Sep 22 '18 at 21:21
  • @AaronBrick But that is not my point, my point is that people would not start working at 8am each day. In summer with an earlier sunrise they would awake earlier and start their activities earlier, in winter they would awake and start later. They were not going to an office or factory, they would live near their workplace (often in top of it) and they did not have to catch trains or buses. See Sara Costa point about field workers (in the 20th century!) setting their routines in relation to sunrise. – SJuan76 Sep 22 '18 at 23:20
  • @SJuan76 I agree with you about the original state of things. I suspect that clocks preceded artificial lighting in setting work hours for many (certainly not all). – Aaron Brick Sep 23 '18 at 02:12
  • @SJuan76: That's a good point. Since 'fast breaking' with a bit of bread wasn't considered a proper meal, perhaps it means that peope would eat it only when they woke up much earlier than 9 am or when they needed their strength for long, hardy tasks. Going back to the field workers, they were often unemployed during winter (no fields to tend to), which meant it was a season of hunger and some families might have only one proper meal (at around 12pm). – SC for reinstatement of Monica Sep 24 '18 at 13:53
  • This doesn't mean they didn't eat at all during the rest of the day: there'd be a bit of snacking involving whatever edible things were around. A friend of my grandmother's (1950's) sometimes complained of her son, because he would eat all her (raw) onions (which weren't many). He was that hungry and there was nothing else to eat at home. Which means that, just because the first meal is at 9, it doesn't follow people wouldn't eat whenever they felt hungry (and had food available). – SC for reinstatement of Monica Sep 24 '18 at 13:54
19

Wondering if it's like this in all cultures currently, and if not, how variable it is

Well, it certainly isn't like that in all cultures.
In Spain we have 5 meals:

  • Desayuno
    • Similar to breakfast. 7-8 am.
    • Mainly coffee and/or some dairy product. Maybe some fruit, juice or cereals (specially kids and people who are not in a hurry to get to work).
  • Almuerzo
    • Second breakfast, similar to English lunch. 10-11 am.
    • Sandwich or toast, maybe fruit or juice, and probably coffee or a cold beverage. Usually depends on what you "missed" during breakfast.
  • Comida
    • Similar to dinner, but earlier: 1-3 pm.
    • Your usual three-course meal.
  • Merienda
    • Similar to afternoon tea, but later: 5-6 pm.
    • Kids get a sandwich, fruit, or some sweet snack. Adults usually have just a coffee and maybe some pastries.
  • Cena
    • Evening dinner, i.e. supper. 8-10 pm.
    • Like the comida but lighter (unless you're dining out).

Those hobbits knew what they were talking about ;)

Now, it is true that some people skips desayuno and just have a heavier almuerzo, verging on a brunch; and merienda is barely a thing anymore for many adults, because work :( But, in a general sense, most people follow this meal plan.

Just in case anybody needs sources...
- Los horarios y las comidas en España ("Schedules and meals in Spain") [PDF]. Spain's Ministry of Education, Culture and Sports; 2010.

Another one, with interesting comments: A qué hora y cuántas veces se come en España.

walen
  • 373
  • 2
  • 8
  • 1
    For completeness one might also note that the three-course lunch may be a luxury that people no longer have time for on workdays. – Peter Taylor Sep 21 '18 at 16:33
  • 1
    Interesting. Am in Spain for 2 months and did not notice it. Is the Almuerzo and Comida, both, also usually practiced on workdays? – Jefrey Sobreira Santos Sep 21 '18 at 17:42
  • 3
    I think very few people in Spain eats 5 times a day. The standard is 3 times a day, just as the English example described by the OP. Of course, more words exist for optional meals. – Pere Sep 21 '18 at 18:11
  • My mom grew up on a farm in Missouri, USA, raised by German immigrants, and they ate 5 meals a day. This was in the timeframe 1930-1950. "Something fried at every meal" she liked to say. – Don Branson Sep 22 '18 at 01:43
  • Almuerzo (http://dle.rae.es/?id=21aDBf2) seems to be synonym of comida. And you forget recena, the 2nd cena (http://dle.rae.es/?id=VP6fIw4) –  Sep 22 '18 at 08:07
  • @PeterTaylor Most people I´ve had the pleasure to work with, did have a three-course meal even at work, meaning: a salad or the like, a main dish (meat/fish or some heavy stew), and a dessert (yogourth or fruit). So I'd say it's pretty usual at home and at the office, and the norm in restaurants. Of course, to some people it may be a luxury due to time or money constraints, but that's not the norm. – walen Sep 22 '18 at 14:58
  • @JefreySobreiraSantos I'd say they are practiced especially on workdays, because you get up earlier, have breakfast earlier, and nobody wants to go from desayuno at 8am to comida at 2pm without eating anything in between. On weekends, if you got up later and had breakfast later, you might skip almuerzo, sure. – walen Sep 22 '18 at 15:05
  • @Pere Every meal is optional. On several occasions, I've gone straight from breakfast to dinner because I just didn't feel like making a pause in my work day to have almuerzo or comida. But those are the exception. Most adults have at least 4 meals, and almost every child under twelve (i.e. school age) has 5 meals. I added some sources, you might want to have a look. – walen Sep 22 '18 at 15:31
  • @Leonardo You must've mistaken me for somebody interested in the Spanish language and the meaning of words :P Anyways, about comida = almuerzo: people from Andalusia call the comida "almuerzo", and they call the almuerzo "desayuno", and they call the desayuno... nothing. I mean, they do have a coffee or a glass of milk or whatever at desayuno time, but somehow to them that doesn't count ¯\(ツ)/¯ – walen Sep 22 '18 at 15:37
  • 2
    @walen That may depend on location, but after having lived all my life in Barcelona I can tell you that people having more than 3 meals a day are the exception - and the large exception are children who usually have a meal in the afternoon (merienda). Adults here don't usually eat in the afternoon, and although it's true that a lot of people makes a pause in the morning to eat, those who actually eat are those who haven't had breakfast at home. If you are right, maybe here in Barcelona we aren't Spanish and we don't follow Spanish customs - but that is a different issue. (continue) – Pere Sep 22 '18 at 18:30
  • @walen However, if you count a coffee as a meal, then you can say there are a lot of people who has a lot of meals a day - that would even be supported by the source you linked. – Pere Sep 22 '18 at 18:31
  • @Pere You've lived all your life in Barcelona. I've lived in Cartagena and Madrid and Galicia, and I've got family in Asturies and Huesca -- and in all those places, people had desayuno, almuerzo, comida and cena; and children had merienda every day, while adults had it on weekends. Coffee and pastries with some friends at 6pm? That's a merienda, mate! I'm basing my answer in travel guides and in MECD studies for many territories, you're basing your comments on your personal experience at Barcelona. I appreciate your commenting to share it with us, but it is not "the standard". – walen Sep 24 '18 at 08:00
  • @Pere Also, I won't comment in your use of the "Catalonia is not Spain" card. – walen Sep 24 '18 at 08:01
  • Two of the meals you listed sound like they're usually just coffee, and maybe a light snack, rather than meals, so really, sounds like the usual 3 meals a day... – ThomasRedstone Sep 24 '18 at 13:32
15

It is not like that in all countries.

In the Portuguese culture (Portugal, Brazil) there are typically 4 meals a day:

I don't know when this came about, but you can find out by opening a question on portuguese.se asking for the origin and earliest uses of "lanche" with its current meaning of "afternoon snack".

ANeves
  • 393
  • 2
  • 8
  • In Asian countries, breakfast is savoury and heavy. That might be interesting for you to look into - it's not different amount of meals, but it's different organization of them. – ANeves Sep 20 '18 at 19:06
  • 1
    It is the same in many countries. E.g. in Argentina – user1420303 Sep 21 '18 at 12:10
  • 4
    In Brazil, Breakfast is called "café da manhã" ("Morning's Coffe") or, more formally, "desjejum" ("break fasting"). – Jefrey Sobreira Santos Sep 21 '18 at 17:41
  • @walen They call it café ... – Daniel Sep 23 '18 at 21:39
  • But this is the modern pattern, and names. Farmers in the 1950s and 60s some 50 km north of Lisbon would have mata-bicho before leaving to the fields, then almoço later in the morning, jantar early in the afternoon (usually a kid would take these meals to the field), a bucha (just a piece of bread with something) later in the afternoon, and ceia in the evening. Wine they would have all day round. – Jacinto Oct 03 '19 at 07:39
  • This answer about names of meals in ELU describes a similar pattern on farms in the 1920s American Midwest. – Jacinto Oct 03 '19 at 07:51
7

According to this BBC article:

Breakfast as we know it didn't exist for large parts of history. The Romans didn't really eat it, usually consuming only one meal a day around noon, says food historian Caroline Yeldham. In fact, breakfast was actively frowned upon.

"The Romans believed it was healthier to eat only one meal a day," she says. "They were obsessed with digestion and eating more than one meal was considered a form of gluttony. This thinking impacted on the way people ate for a very long time."

This changed in the Middle Ages:

In the Middle Ages monastic life largely shaped when people ate, says food historian Ivan Day. Nothing could be eaten before morning Mass and meat could only be eaten for half the days of the year. It's thought the word breakfast entered the English language during this time and literally meant "break the night's fast".

Religious traditions also explain why the traditional British breakfast is an extremely unhealthy fatty meal:

On Collop Monday, the day before Shrove Tuesday, people had to use up meat before the start of Lent. Much of that meat was pork and bacon as pigs were kept by many people. The meat was often eaten with eggs, which also had to be used up...

Community
  • 1
Count Iblis
  • 181
  • 4
5

Well, according to this peer-reviewed academic research eating three meals a day is a product of the Industrial Revolution. Until about 1800 people in England ate 2 meals a day. And lunch is the latest addition, but a 1755 dictionary described it as an amount of food you can hold in your hand, rather than a meal at a specific time.

cathy halley
  • 51
  • 1
  • 1
4

Most countries I know have 4 meals: Breakfast, Lunch, a small afternoon meal or Snack and Supper. Please note that most of these countries have influence of Spain, Portugal and in my particular country, Italy. So you could say most of Latin countries (both from Americas as European) have 4 meals, not 3.

Furthermore: in my country (Argentina), there's a book called "Cuatro Comidas: Breve Historia Universal del Desayuno, el Almuerzo, la Merienda y la Cena" (which translates to "Four Meals: Brief Universal History of Breakfast, Lunch, Snack and Dinner"). I didn't read it, but the author says the research goes back to Greeks and Romans

enter image description here

Going out of the Latin influence, I noticed the same four meals in London and Paris.

And all this without going with the new recommendations of eating small portions many times a day

Bottom line is the 3 meals are far from being universal, and it seems to be just a localized subject, as proven by most answers provided here.

Devin
  • 1,478
  • 2
  • 10
  • 17