SC - Re: substitutions
CBlackwill at aol.com
CBlackwill at aol.com
Fri Apr 21 00:06:02 PDT 2000
In a message dated 4/20/00 8:09:47 PM Pacific Daylight Time, LrdRas at aol.com
writes:
>
> What you know is how medieval cooks made substitutions in this recipe
only.
> I
> still fail to see how this can be a blanket justification for
substitutions
> in any other recipe that does not specifically state that one is allowed.
>
Actually, there were quite a few recipes listed in the original post. I take
your meaning, though, don't get me wrong. I do have a touch of a problem
with the use of the term "allowed", to be honest. I am not yet convinced
that the authors of these recipes were as hard and fast as seems commonly
thought. Bear in mind, also, that I am not advocating a blind or random
substitution, but one which has been researched, cross referenced with
substitutions made in similar recipes and so on... Again I say the
substitution would have to be "available and appropriate to the recipe".
I've still got my nose in the books on this one.
Balthazar of Blackmoor
Such a strange fascination, as I wallow in waste
That such a trivial victory could put a smile on your face.
- Mark Burgess
More information about the Sca-cooks
mailing list