Why on earth would anyone want a late-17th century diet? Do these authors realize that the food needs of the vast majority of people back then was met by bread? And that those same people were one misstep from literally starving to death?
Or are they referring to a fantasy of 17th life, based on the lives of people who didn’t have to grow their own food or wonder where their next meal was coming from?
Which reminds me: which ancestors? I have obviously well-off ancestors from one-line of my family tree, and lots of not-well-off ancestors in the others: which diet gets precedence? The well-off ancestors are French and English: which cuisine do I follow?
Do we use era-appropriate cooking techniques? Techniques which are dependent upon the work of women and/or servants? I highly doubt that any of my ancestors, of whatever social class, would begin to recognize food from an Instapot, for example.
No sushi? No pasta (unless you are Italian)? No Ethiopian food for me, because my ancestors didn’t eat it?
Also? The well-off ate a metric fuckton of sugar beginning in the Middle Ages, so these authors realize that sweets of all sorts are going to be on the menu, yes? Incredible, fantastical sweets?
Didn’t Pollan once proclaim that Democracy is dependent upon wives and mothers producing hot, home-cooked dinners every night?
Reactionary, much?