SC - Period Hummus-recipe and a added question

[Philip & Susan Troy]

LrdRas at aol.com wrote:
> 
> In a message dated 7/28/99 8:14:04 AM Eastern Daylight Time, troy at asan.com
> writes:
> 
> << Yup. There's _some_ evidence to suggest, but perhaps not conclusively,
>  that the tahini referred to in medieval Islamic texts is not the same
>  stuff. >>
> 
> Source please?

In the Charles Perry translation of the 15th century Kitab Al-Tibakhah
(See PPC #21), there is a general set of instructions for hulwa, with
specifics for the various types. It included the following somewhat
ambiguous line (bearing in mind that to me, black and white are
ambiguous): [General instructions for a candy not unlike nougat, kinda
like Swiss meringue on steroids, snipped] If you want almond candy [name
snipped] put in toasted almonds, etc., etc., simsimiyyah, toasted
sesame; tahiniyyah, flour (tahín).

> 
> <<In some cases (in particular the halwah recipes from period) it
>  appears to be less oily, and less of a smooth paste, at least from
>  recipe context.>>
> 
> Ok. I can see that. Tahini does separate though. And the oil can be poured
> off. :-) I am still interested in seeing where this theory that period tahini
> was 'different' comes from though. The recipe for White sals. Did not seem to
> suffer in using an oil based product. In fact the opposite was true. The
> again Halwah and sals are as different as bread and butter. :-)

It _seems_ as if Perry is translating "tahín" as "flour". Whether this
is a reference to some kind of sesame flour, based on text ordering,
which the context seems to make at least possible, or to something like
barley flour, is not clear. I note that in addition to Perry's implicit
claim that "tahín" = "flour", your AOL online dictionary says the first
use of "tahini" (or is that only in English usage?) is in 1950.

I guess what this boils down to is, what word do you think is being used
in the original Arabic recipe for white sals (which I assume is the name
supplied by the English translator), that is being translated as tahini?
If it's tahini, and we believe Perry, it could mean flour, and/or could
be at odds with the dictionary entry you quoted. If, on the other hand,
it's a sesame paste product that we'd now call tahini, what did they
call it then?

As I said, this is far from conclusive evidence that what is intended is
_not_ tahini in the modern usage, but the questions are there. Yes, the
dish could work very well using tahini, but the fact that it works well
with modern tahini doesn't preclude its working well with some other
ingredient, if that's what's intended. There may be a slight assumption
being made here (and one I'm generally in agreement with) that if it
tastes good to us it probably tasted good to them. The key word is
"probably", I'd say.

Adamantius
- -- 
Phil & Susan Troy

troy at asan.com
============================================================================

To be removed from the SCA-Cooks mailing list, please send a message to
Majordomo at Ansteorra.ORG with the message body of "unsubscribe SCA-Cooks".

============================================================================