[Sca-cooks] things to put on bread?

[chirhart_1 at netzero.net]

Thank you Huette . I'v read  some frustrating things on the Good Cookery
List lately, Quote " They had all the ingredients and just because it is not
written anyware dose not mean it could not have been done. "Coulda
,Shouda,-did not Wright it down "
The people whom don't know the difference between crap and credibility drive
me nuts!!

( I'm from Mo. Show Me )           PS M'Lady  Ignia I'm not poking at you
,welcome to this List of Incredibly
                                                          Knowledgeable
people . Chirhart

----- Original Message -----
From: "Huette von Ahrens" <ahrenshav at yahoo.com>
To: "Cooks within the SCA" <sca-cooks at ansteorra.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2004 6:31 AM
Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] things to put on bread?


>
> --- Liz Courts <lizcourts at bendcable.com> wrote:
> > I can't imagine why not - I know I like a
> > healthy chunk of bread with
> > balsamic, olive oil and a generous smear of
> > minced garlic on some bread.
> > The "bread-dipping" craze of recent years can't
> > be new.
> >
> > Ignia il Nomade
>
> It probably isn't new, but that doesn't say
> anything as to whether it was done in period.
> The person asked if there was any documentation
> as to whether oil and vinegar were used on bread
> during SCA period.  Do you have any documentation
> for this?  If yes, you should tell us where to
> find it.  It doesn't have to be a recipe.  It
> could be found as a mention in a letter or diary.
> It could be an illusion in a poem where the poet
> compares his lovers kiss to the taste of bread
> soaked in oil and vinegar.  Something like that.
>
> If no, then you are being as helpful as
> a modern recipe that has the notation that it is
> a "traditional" recipe, or that it is "centuries
> old".  Neither can be used as documentation
> because neither says anything about how old the
> "tradition" is.  Fifty years?  One hundred years?
> Two hundred years?  That would certainly tell us
> that it was old, even centuries old, but
> certainly not old enough to fit the definition of
> medieval or renaissance.
>
> But to say that is had to be period because you
> like it that way is really incredible and very
> unhelpful.
>
> There was a big shift in how people cooked during
> the mid-seventeenth century.  Recipes changed and
> new ones were created.  One example is
> blancmange.
> During period, blancmange was a dish of chicken,
> rice, almonds and other ingredients.  You can
> find blancmange in modern cookbooks, but it isn't
> the same recipe anymore.  Today's blancmange is a
> gelatin dessert flavored with milk or almond milk
> and other ingredients, but the chicken and rice
> are no longer in evidence.  To make a modern
> blancmange and serve it as a period dish would be
> wrong bacause the name may be the same, but the
> dish isn't.
>
> So please don't just say, "It had to be period
> because I like it that way" or "It is such a
> simple concept, it had to be period."  Say
> instead, "I would like to know that too.  I will
> research this and let everyone know what I find
> or don't find." Or "While reading [fill in the
> blank], I found a mention of someone eating bread
> with oil and vinegar.  You can find this
> reference here [fill in the blank]."  That would
> be helpful.
>
> Huette
>
>