[Sca-cooks] Redacting another Jewish dish (fwd)

[Alex Clark]

I would be interested to know what the exact context was, which might 
indicate whether this is supposed to be the preferred preparation method, 
how knowledgeable the writer was about cookery, and also how interested the 
writer was in the clarity of the description.

In the original, the article is used the second time that the veggies go 
into oil, but not the first. I don't know Spanish so I can't tell, but I 
wonder if this indicates that the oil used the second time was the exact 
same oil, or perhaps that it was the same type of oil.

Literally, ahogadas could mean drowned. This might mean that the oil used 
this time is rather deep, at least relative to the amount that goes into it 
together at one time. The different word choices (ahogadas-drowned and 
rehervir-boiled, with agitation by heat indicated) might mean that the 
second time the oil is hotter. One thing that this suggests to me is a 
possibility that the first time the oil was used to coat and thus to 
separate (both to separate solid pieces from each other and to separate 
them from the residual water), not to cook. This seems like a way to 
control the splattering of the hot oil.

Based the information that I have so far, I would interpret this 
recipe/description as having four described phases, as follows: parboil 
separately from onions, dunk in oil, fry in oil (possibly the same oil), 
cook with remaining ingredients until thick. If the same oil is used for 
steps 2 and 3, I expect that it should be decanted from the water (and 
perhaps some solid residues). I might prefer to decant only some of the 
oil, thus using less for step 3, where the oil will remain in the finished 
dish, or else to do step 2 in several batches.

Another possibility, since this seems to describe a specific act of 
cooking, is that the water, spices, and thickeners turned out to be 
unready, and the veggies had to be taken out of the hot oil to prevent 
overcooking. But this would not explain the difference in the words that 
describe the first and second times in the oil.

Henry of Maldon/Alex Clark

At 04:11 PM 9/23/2003 -0400, Pani Jadwiga Zajaczkowa wrote:

>Among the stuff in _A Drizzle of Honey_, there is one account from an
>Inquisition record that looks very much like a period recipe. The quoted
>text from the report appears to have been:
>
>"Los viernes fasta . . su ama acelgas sancohadas en agua e despues
>ahogadas en aseyte e con cebollas, e alli, en el azeyte, reheruir; e
>despues echana alli su agua e pan rallado e especias y yemas de hueuos; e
>cozia fasta que se para muy espeso." (Accent notes: the c's in acelgas,
>cebollas and especias have the down-hook on the bottom; the i's in alli,
>fasia, and cozia, and the second e's in despues are all accented.)
>
>The authors of _Drizzle of Honey_ translate this:
>
>"... Swiss chard, parboiling it in water and then frying it with onions in
>oil, and then boiling it again in the oil. And then she threw in water and
>grated bread crumbs and spices and egg yolks; and she cooked it until it
>got very thick."
>
>I'm a) wondering about 'boiling it again in oil' and also whether this
>should be treated as a variant on the de Nola-type recipes where you
>parboil the vegetable, sautee in oil, and then thicken the result...?
>
>-- Pani Jadwiga Zajaczkowa, Knowledge Pika jenne at fiedlerfamily.net
>  "in verbis et in herbis, et in lapidibus sunt virtutes"
>(In words, and in plants, and in stones, there is power.)
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Sca-cooks mailing list
>Sca-cooks at ansteorra.org
>http://www.ansteorra.org/mailman/listinfo/sca-cooks