"ViLco" wrote :

John John wrote:

>>> Have you tried wiener schnitzel? If you have, did you find it very
>>> similar? My understanding is that wiener schnitzel may have the
>>> roots in Italy.

>> Not in Wien?

> There's a debate going on, obviously everybody wants the paternity of that
> dish.

No debate. The paternity is in Vienna.

> There are some differences too, the Shcnitzel is made from a boneless veal
> slice while the Milanese is from a veal chop with the bone.

Most Milanese I've had were pork.

> A documented Schnitzel exuisted before the first documented apparition of
> the Milanese, but it was not breaded: just floured.

Yes, but that't the name of the cut. "Schnitz" means "cut, slice",
"Schnitzel"
is the diminuitive "little slice".

> Then there's a report from general Radetzky, who J. Strauss tributed with
> a famous march, who had a cutlet in Milan which was washed in beaten eggs
> and "differently from the Austrian Schnitzel" was breaded.

With a mixture of egg and grated Parmiggiano.

>Then there's a document from 1148, quoted bu teh historian Pietro Verri,
>where is described a solemn lunch where the third course was "lombos ***
>panitio" aka breaded veal chops. This would set

Which also could mean veal chops with small rolls. Medieval Latin and
Italian
is rather diffuse.

> the title to Milan but a quoted source isn't certain as a concrete source.
> So the debate goes one, while historians search for sources and people eat
> cutlets

Not cutlets, Schnitzel ;-)

Cheers,

Michael Kuettner