ASmith1946 wrote:

>>It was awful *and* it burned. We didn't know exactly how much pepper
>>to add. Extremely bitter, gritty, astringent and hot. The Aztecs had
>>no concentrated sweeteners according to him. We decided it was much
>>improved by the addition of a fair bit of Kahlua.
>
> Bob:
>
> I don't believe that Aztecs "drank" chocolate-- they consumed the "foam"
> produced by constantly pouring the mixture back and forth between containers.

I've read that, Andy.

Gary brought back a kind of whisk that he said was what was used to
make a hot water based beverage that was to be entirely consumed. He
got it in the back country somewhere and was told that it was the
"traditional" way. Could be a tradition that went all the way back to,
oh, last Wednesday. Quien sabe?

The whisk was a tree branch the end of which had been pounded (or
something) to break apart the fibers. It looked like Don King's hair.
Piece of chocolate in a mug, hot water (with or without finely minced
chile) and whisk away until your arm was the size of
Schwartzenegger's. It frothed. It's likely the predecessor of the
molinillo used in making modern Mexican-style hot chocolate.

It's, of course, entirely possible that there was either some fakelore
or mistaken understanding going on.

> And Aztecs did have sweeteners-- honey and vanilla, for instance, but there is
> no evidence that these were ingredients employed in their making chocolate
> froth.

I'll give you honey, but vanilla is a stretch for being a sweetener.

Pastorio