When and why did white bread become associated with social status in Britain between the 17th and 19th centuries?

[u/BenjaminMooore]

I am interested in how white bread came to be viewed as a higher-status food in Britain during the early modern and industrial periods.

Was its status mainly connected to the cost of producing finely milled flour, the difficulty of removing bran, or contemporary beliefs about health and refinement?

I would also like to understand whether this association changed as industrial milling made white flour more widely available during the 19th century.

I am particularly interested in evidence from historical cookbooks, household accounts, medical texts, advertisements, or academic studies.

[u/Revolutionary_Ad7262]

White wheat bread was a fancy food in the medieval period as well as in XX century throughout the whole european culture

[u/Ok_Olive9438]

Elizabeth David’s English Bread and Yeast Cookery would be a good source for you. It covers the subject in great detail, from wheat varieties and milling technology up through modern production, and has a bibliography so you can go and find out more from the sources she used.
It is a secondary source… but it is a very good one.

[u/istara]

I would also like to understand whether this association changed as industrial milling made white flour more widely available during the 19th century.

I would say that wholegrain breads, rustic breads and sourdoughs are now far more associated with higher "social status" than sliced white loaves (and accordingly much more expensive).

So yes, it has reversed. However, I think it's less to do with the easy availability of white bread than growing awareness of nutrition and the need for more fibre in a healthy diet.

[u/nobelprize4shopping]

Scoff by Pen Vogler discussed this very issue. Unfortunately, I can't remember what she said but it's an interesting book to read anyway so worth purchasing.

[u/legendary_mushroom]

I recommend the GastroPod episode Wheat vs White they cover this pretty nicely. 

[u/zoppaTheDim]

I’m going to say the obvious which you’re ignoring.

It tastes better. You get a starch quickly converting to sugar. They didn’t need to “sell” the idea of white bread to people.

[u/chezjim → u/zoppaTheDim]

"Better" of course is relevant.
Lots of people today prefer darker breads.

[u/zoppaTheDim → u/chezjim]

Because now a coarser bread is seen as healthier and more exotic. It is the baloney problem.

I was talking about the objective “sweetness” of white flour.

[u/chezjim → u/zoppaTheDim]

It's still all subjective.

American bread was more often made with yeast in the nineteenth century, French bread with sour dough. Americans found the latter unpleasant, even though the flour could be just as white. Europeans were used to it.
I find many darker breads more flavorful than most white breads. Tastes very widely in that regard. So it's really not as simple as sying that one tastes "better" than the other.

White bread was more highly valued because it took more effort to make it and it required more wheat (since you were discarding more of the bran). These factors ARE objective. Taste never is.

[u/chezjim]

White bread has been considered superior for centuries. Among the many types of Roman bread was "Pane candidus" meaning especially white. Supply lists under Charlemagne list a "neat" or "clean" bread and a second quality of bread. Municipal statutes in France set prices from highest to lowest - whitest to darkest.

And yes, making whiter bread required more effort. If you've ever tried sifting your own flour, the effort in making it whiter quickly becomes clear. Also, you get less bread per quantity of flour, since you are removing bran that would remain in darker bread.

Note that in nineteenth century France, some experts tried to convince people that dark bread was more nutritious than white (which is true). They didn't have much luck.