[Sca-cooks] Waffres(long)

[johnna holloway]

This seems to be a troubling question that
appears every once and awhile whenever someone
does wafer articles. It is as they say "a mystery"...
Unless the "wombe of a luce" somehow works with a
runny cheese to make a firmer mixture. Now whether
or not that is incorporated between two wafers or
added to the wafer mix...? {Given our wafer irons
in use today, either krumkake or pizzelle, I can't
see that the wombe is necessary for the batter. Why
would you need what as essentially thought of today
as a gelling agent in this recipe? }
And fish eggs or caviar wouldn't really come through,
unless the batter is modified to include them at the
last minute prior to baking. (Is caviar really baked
into things such as crackers?// omelet dishes yes, but
baked goods without losing the fish egg shape.)
Is this in fact a thicker batter that would be better
baked in a waffle iron?

The other possibility arises is that it was used as a
clarifying agent, as suggested by the definitions under
isinglass in the glossary provided by the Prospect
Book site. http://www.kal69.dial.pipex.com/glossi.htm
But what is being clarified?

ISINGLASS: a pure form of commercial gelatine
obtained from the swimming bladder or sound
of several species of fish, notably the sturgeon.
It is well described by Elizabeth David in her
glossary to John Nott. The usual manner of its
sale, she asserts, was in fine shreds, easily
dissolved in water. She suggests that an ounce of
isinglass will make a pint and a quarter of water
a ‘tremulous jelly’. In Receipt 194 its virtues
are combined with those of hartshorn, and the
compiler notes that Venice isinglass should be
obtained. The Encyclopaedia Britannica(11th edn.)
has a useful article detailing the varieties
available at the end of the last century (which
did not include‘Venice isinglass’). Isinglass
is used today in fining wine. (John Evelyn, Cook, C17)

Combined with hartshorn, would it have been a rising
agent?

Or is it a mistake, a phrase that was miscopied and remains
to bother us hundreds of years later?

 Johnnae llyn Lewis   Johnna Holloway




Cindy Renfrow suggested the following:(from florilegium file on wafers)
I find the method somewhat confusing, unless we're being instructed to
make
2 mixtures, i.e., a thick one with the fish & cheese, & another mixture
with flour, eggwhite, sugar & ginger. Le Menagier (Goodman, p. 306)
gives
instructions for cheese wafers that don't leak, in which the paste is
spread out, filled with strips of cheese, & then the ends of the paste
are
folded into the middle, & the whole thing transferred to the waffle iron
&
cooked. I think that's what is happening here.
     (<SHRIEK!> Pocket sandwiches are period! ;D <laughing>)
Stirring up trouble,   Cindy Renfrow/Sincgiefu



Philip & Susan Troy wrote: SNIPPED
 You know, this is interesting because I can't figure
 out why the fish
"womb" is there at all. Usually you can get at least
 some idea, but this seems a little strange, since it
 doesn't seem to be Lenten (in which case there would
 be no cheese). Perhaps it's for an out-of-Lent fish day.
 Omitting the "womb" entirely might serve as a control,
 but then of course you're recreating conditions clearly
 outside the parameters of the recipe. It might serve to
 help determine what each variant does, and perhaps how,
 but I wouldn't consider it a viable option in recreating
 this recipe.> Adamantius
>