[Ansteorra] BBQ? (a little on the long side...)

[drew russell]

It is interesting that this little debate is coming up now.  As life would have it, this subject was discussed on Food Network's "Good Eats" with Alton Brown just the other day.  And yes, BBQ as we know it now is not period.  Original BBQ also known as Barbacoa was used to preserve meats, the smoke flavoring of the meat was an accidental by product of the preserving method.  All this means it that any cooking of meat that uses indirect heat could be called BBQ.
 
Drew Russell> From: ansteorra-request at lists.ansteorra.org> Subject: Ansteorra Digest, Vol 32, Issue 18> To: ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 13:00:45 -0800> > 2. BBQ? (a little on the long side...) (Cat Clark)> 3. Re: BBQ? (a little on the long side...) (Chelsea Durham)>  > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------> >  > Message: 2> Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 15:19:32 -0600> From: Cat Clark <cat at rocks4brains.com>> Subject: [Ansteorra] BBQ? (a little on the long side...)> To: ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org> Message-ID: <49403264.8010001 at rocks4brains.com>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed> > I suppose that any arguments one might make as to the period-ness of BBQ > would depend on one's definition of BBQ. If BBQ were defined in the > strictest Southern Food sense, then no, BBQ is not at all period. The > OED has the origin of the word itself dating back to late 17th century > Haiti, a real hot bed of medieval culture (not!). My food history > sources indicate that Southern BBQ has its origins in the 18th southern > American colonies (what became the "The South" (tm)). You might argue > that spitted meat on a hearth or meat roasted in a medieval muffle oven > is sufficiently close to meat slow-smoked in a Southern-style BBQ pit, > but personally I think they are quite different methods and result in > different textures and flavors. Spitted meat comes closest but to my > eyes, it still lacks the essential slow-smoked nature of true Southern > BBQ that takes the collogen in the meat and transforms it from gristle > to something chewable and tender. I did a brief review of medieval pork > and beef recipes during this all-too-short lunch break of mine and > really saw nothing that really fit the slow-smoked Southern method of > cooking barbeque. (Note that I am making a distinction here between > "barbeque" and meats grilled or roasted without the slow-smoking > technique. Also note that "BBQ" means different things in different > places as exemplified by the two "barbeques" I was invited to in > Australia a few months ago, where I watched in awe as Viscount Kane > "barbequed" a dozen eggs along with the sausages, prawns, beef and real > rashered bacon.) > > (By the way, have you noticed that in The South, barbeque is a noun but > everywhere else it's a verb?)> > Let's move on...> > Now about sauces. I would maintain that there is no medieval equivalent > of modern American BBQ sauce in all of its variations (which are > substantial). I suppose one could make a case that the vinegar and > mustard style BBQ sauces that you find in the Carolinas is are > descendents of the ubiquitous late Gothic cameline (variant: gamelyne) > sauces but there is one essential ingredient of all cameline sauces that > is absent from the modern American BBQ sauce line up, even it its huge > variety - and that is cinnamon/cassia. Depending on year and country, > your cameline sauces from the period sources can take or leave sugar, > clove, mustard seed or ginger. They can be sweet, tangy or both. Some > have a wine base, some have verjus and some use vinegar. But all of > them use bread crumbs and cinnamon. I really can't make a case that > cameline is equivalent to American BBQ sauces in any permutation. > Essentially, there is a distinct disconnect between the taste of sauces > used for meats, medieval vs. modern. The same can safely be said for > condiments and spices. Would you consider doing your pot roast at home > with a hard cheese, gallingale, ginger and cinnamon/cassia? A late > Gothic cook, however, would think that spice mix rather normal for a > medieval dish.> > Do I really need to say anything about the periodicity of outlaw chili?> > So, onwards and downwards...> > [[[ Outrageous Opinion Alert! Don't say I didn't warn you in advance! ]]]> > Consider for a moment what our founders were trying to do that May > afternoon so long ago now in 1966. They were trying their best to > experience the essence of the medieval romance of knight errantry, > championship and chivalry as embodied in the rite of the marshaled > tourney. By the year AS 2, they were including the medieval feast with > dancing and music in their efforts to reach out and explore the medieval > experience. The first laurel in the SCA was given for period consort > music. The second laurel, given a minute later, was for a man whose > entire "kit" was all handmade or handsewn using period material and > methods, all supported by scholar-level research. The SCA was all of a > year and a half old. Later in the year 2, Duke Henrik came to crown > tourney wearing the sprangenhelm and hand-riveted chain mail haulberk > that took him a year to make, the first to bring real armour onto the > list field. How many of us can claim to doing anything even close to > that in as short a time period?> > Given that a BBQ contest can be a lot of fun, and I'm certainly all in > favor of fun, I am still left wondering what in the world people are > thinking here. Why is it a BBQ contest is something that can be > preferable to a competition based on medieval foods? Is placating the > modern pallette more important than exploring the taste of period food? > What happened to attempting to explore the medieval experience of the > High to Late Gothic? Just where did the pursuit of the medieval romance > of knight errantry go that our founders were so keen on rediscovering? > Granted, the SCA is full of compromises and many of those are necessary > ones if we want to maintain the inclusive nature of the Society. It is > this inclusive culture in the SCA that makes us distinct and a > friendlier place to play than the narrowly-defined reenactment groups > trapped in just one little slice of historical time (I know this first > hand, having spent a fair bit of time in reenactment groups before I met > the SCA). So, yeah, sure, there's some plastic in my armour but not > where anyone could see it. Yes, there are compromises in most > everything we do in the SCA. We're not perfect historically and we will > never be perfect. But there is a flip side and it can be ugly in that > we lose sight of trying to pursue that medieval experience "as it should > have been."> > So, I ask you to take a minute to ponder the following question, not > because I think everyone is doing everything wrong, but because it is > good to give some thought, now and then, on how and why we play this SCA > game that we have made for ourselves. Here it is:> > Just where is the line between doing "living history" and being in a > live-action role-playing game?> > Mind you, this is all just my poor opinion - and let me take this > opportunity to point out that opinions are like sphincters - everybody's > got one... As always, YMMV! ;-)> > ttfn> Therasia's grumpy evil twin> > brief references:> Oxford English Dictionary> Oxford Companion to Food (Davidson, 1999)> Fast and Feast (Henisch, 1986)> www.medievalcookery.com> www.daviddfriedman.com/Medieval/Cookbooks> HL Sean Clierech's Medieval Food Database (2001-2008)> "There are No Scrolls" T. von Tux, TI 144 (2002)> history.westkingdom.org> > > ------------------------------> > Message: 3> Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 16:55:14 -0600> From: Chelsea Durham <baby_sis_83 at hotmail.com>> Subject: Re: [Ansteorra] BBQ? (a little on the long side...)> To: <ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org>> Message-ID: <BLU144-W40537714F5AE8980A62299B5FB0 at phx.gbl>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"> > > Or maybe BBQ was short for "medieval roasted on a spit pig and cow."?? =) The initial message about the competition was TLDR. OMGWTFBBQ, -Lady Grainne Kathleen NicPadraig MacDaniel> Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 15:19:32 -0600> From: cat at rocks4brains.com> To: ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org> Subject: [Ansteorra] BBQ? (a little on the long side...)> > I suppose that any arguments one might make as to the period-ness of BBQ > would depend on one's definition of BBQ. If BBQ were defined in the > strictest Southern Food sense, then no, BBQ is not at all period. The > OED has the origin of the word itself dating back to late 17th century > Haiti, a real hot bed of medieval culture (not!). My food history > sources indicate that Southern BBQ has its origins in the 18th southern > American colonies (what became the "The South" (tm)). You might argue > that spitted meat on a hearth or meat roasted in a medieval muffle oven > is sufficiently close to meat slow-smoked in a Southern-style B> BQ pit, > but personally I think they are quite different methods and result in > different textures and flavors. Spitted meat comes closest but to my > eyes, it still lacks the essential slow-smoked nature of true Southern > BBQ that takes the collogen in the meat and transforms it from gristle > to something chewable and tender. I did a brief review of medieval pork > and beef recipes during this all-too-short lunch break of mine and > really saw nothing that really fit the slow-smoked Southern method of > cooking barbeque. (Note that I am making a distinction here between > "barbeque" and meats grilled or roasted without the slow-smoking > technique. Also note that "BBQ" means different things in different > places as exemplified by the two "barbeques" I was invited to in > Australia a few months ago, where I watched in awe as Viscount Kane > "barbequed" a dozen eggs along with the sausages, prawns, beef and real > rashered bacon.) > > (By the way, have you noticed t> hat in The South, barbeque is a noun but > everywhere else it's a verb?)> > Let's move on...> > Now about sauces. I would maintain that there is no medieval equivalent > of modern American BBQ sauce in all of its variations (which are > substantial). I suppose one could make a case that the vinegar and > mustard style BBQ sauces that you find in the Carolinas is are > descendents of the ubiquitous late Gothic cameline (variant: gamelyne) > sauces but there is one essential ingredient of all cameline sauces that > is absent from the modern American BBQ sauce line up, even it its huge > variety - and that is cinnamon/cassia. Depending on year and country, > your cameline sauces from the period sources can take or leave sugar, > clove, mustard seed or ginger. They can be sweet, tangy or both. Some > have a wine base, some have verjus and some use vinegar. But all of > them use bread crumbs and cinnamon. I really can't make a case that > cameline is equivalent to American B> BQ sauces in any permutation. > Essentially, there is a distinct disconnect between the taste of sauces > used for meats, medieval vs. modern. The same can safely be said for > condiments and spices. Would you consider doing your pot roast at home > with a hard cheese, gallingale, ginger and cinnamon/cassia? A late > Gothic cook, however, would think that spice mix rather normal for a > medieval dish.> > Do I really need to say anything about the periodicity of outlaw chili?> > So, onwards and downwards...> > [[[ Outrageous Opinion Alert! Don't say I didn't warn you in advance! ]]]> > Consider for a moment what our founders were trying to do that May > afternoon so long ago now in 1966. They were trying their best to > experience the essence of the medieval romance of knight errantry, > championship and chivalry as embodied in the rite of the marshaled > tourney. By the year AS 2, they were including the medieval feast with > dancing and music in their efforts to reac> h out and explore the medieval > experience. The first laurel in the SCA was given for period consort > music. The second laurel, given a minute later, was for a man whose > entire "kit" was all handmade or handsewn using period material and > methods, all supported by scholar-level research. The SCA was all of a > year and a half old. Later in the year 2, Duke Henrik came to crown > tourney wearing the sprangenhelm and hand-riveted chain mail haulberk > that took him a year to make, the first to bring real armour onto the > list field. How many of us can claim to doing anything even close to > that in as short a time period?> > Given that a BBQ contest can be a lot of fun, and I'm certainly all in > favor of fun, I am still left wondering what in the world people are > thinking here. Why is it a BBQ contest is something that can be > preferable to a competition based on medieval foods? Is placating the > modern pallette more important than exploring the taste of period f> ood? > What happened to attempting to explore the medieval experience of the > High to Late Gothic? Just where did the pursuit of the medieval romance > of knight errantry go that our founders were so keen on rediscovering? > Granted, the SCA is full of compromises and many of those are necessary > ones if we want to maintain the inclusive nature of the Society. It is > this inclusive culture in the SCA that makes us distinct and a > friendlier place to play than the narrowly-defined reenactment groups > trapped in just one little slice of historical time (I know this first > hand, having spent a fair bit of time in reenactment groups before I met > the SCA). So, yeah, sure, there's some plastic in my armour but not > where anyone could see it. Yes, there are compromises in most > everything we do in the SCA. We're not perfect historically and we will > never be perfect. But there is a flip side and it can be ugly in that > we lose sight of trying to pursue that medi> eval experience "as it should > have been."> > So, I ask you to take a minute to ponder the following question, not > because I think everyone is doing everything wrong, but because it is > good to give some thought, now and then, on how and why we play this SCA > game that we have made for ourselves. Here it is:> > Just where is the line between doing "living history" and being in a > live-action role-playing game?> > Mind you, this is all just my poor opinion - and let me take this > opportunity to point out that opinions are like sphincters - everybody's > got one... As always, YMMV! ;-)> > ttfn> Therasia's grumpy evil twin> > brief references:> Oxford English Dictionary> Oxford Companion to Food (Davidson, 1999)> Fast and Feast (Henisch, 1986)> www.medievalcookery.com> www.daviddfriedman.com/Medieval/Cookbooks> HL Sean Clierech's Medieval Food Database (2001-2008)> "There are No Scrolls" T. von Tux, TI 144 (2002)> history.westkingdom.org> > > > 
_________________________________________________________________
Send e-mail faster without improving your typing skills.
http://windowslive.com/Explore/hotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_hotmail_acq_speed_122008