<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">In a message dated 6/19/2003 4:02:26 PM Eastern Standard Time, doc@medievalcookery.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">>I<BR>
>don't want to bid if it's not a good source.<BR>
><BR>
>http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/ <BR>
>eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3527409310&category=11108<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>From the list archives:<BR>
<BR>
>Traveling Dysshes review </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
OH, it's for Traveling Dyshes! I read this offline and hadn't yet gotten a chance to go back on and check the link.<BR>
<BR>
Traveling Dishes in a bit inconsistent, in my opinion. The beginning stuff about period/nonperiod foodstuffs and so forth, is pretty good, while the recipes themselves are a bit of a mishmosh (not surprising, as they are submitted by a variety of cooks) - some very good, some taken from originals but highly adapted, and some with no obvious medieval forebears. I know, for example, in my copy that there is one recipe which claims to be a simplification of one from the Miscellany. When I actually looked up the recipe of that name in the Miscellany, it's not the same one; the one in Traveling Dyshes is for chicken and the one in the Miscellany with the same name is for fish or crab, as I recall! I eventually found the one they were working off of, and "simplification" is quite accurate, as in dropping a number of steps and ingredients, and probably coming up with something that really doesn't resemble the original. It's good, though :-)<BR>
Now, I should mention that I have a first edition. I have not looked closely at the second edition and it may or may not be better.<BR>
<BR>
Brangwayna<BR>
</FONT></HTML>