Arri London wrote:
>
> "Bob (this one)" wrote:
>
>>Arri London wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Tomatoes didn't dramatically change the eating habits of either
>>>India or Italy. They don't appear in the majority of dishes in
>>>either place.
>>
>>I beg to differ with regard to both criteria and results. My family
>>background is Italian, both north and south, and I've been to the
>>ancestral places. Tomatoes don't appear in the majority of dishes, of
>>course. Nothing appears in the majority of dishes and majority isn't
>>the issue. Tomatoes are essential to the cuisines of the south and
>>frequent additions to the cooking of the north, diminishing with
>>proximity to the alps. But to say that tomatoes didn't change the
>>habits in Italy is hard to fathom.
>
>
> You missed the word 'dramatically'.

Not at all. In fact, that was what I was using as my premise. The
cuisines of southern Italy and Sicily depend heavily on tomatoes. Of
course, it's entirely possible to eat there forever without eating a
single tomato, but that would be avoiding a significant part of what
the locals eat.

> Every food introduction that is
> adopted changes eating habits by definition, but tomatoes are not
> 'essential' to Southern Italian cooking in Italy.

Can't agree. Look at the books that come out of the region. Go to any
family meal. Read the menus.

> Not at all, but if an ingredient is essential in a cuisine by your
> defintion, it should be hard to avoid in some way shape or form. I love
> tomatoes but can eat a vast amount of different dishes in Italy without
> encountering them.

You can eat a vast number of dishes anywhere without encountering any
given ingredient. If you're in southern Italy and you're not eating
tomatoes, it's an exercise in avoidance rather than any sort of
sampling of the general fare.

> And of course my 'one person's experience' is equally as valid as yours.
> American Italian cooking is quite different.

I'm not basing it on just my experience. I've done rather extensive
research into the history and evolutions of the various Italian
cuisines. I've traveled with the eye of a food writer gathering
material. I've interviewed scores of knowledgeable people, both
professionals and general public.

> Tomatoes are ubiquitous in Italy. Between the myriad variants of
>>tomato sauces and the settings where tomatoes served fresh, are
>>pickled, dried and/or salted, they're virtually omnipresent.
>
> I never said they weren't common, just that they aren't essential.
> That's hardly the same thing.

It's splitting hairs. If it's common, it helps to define the cuisines.
If it's common, it's because many if not most of the people want it.
That's essential to the definition of the cuisine they're shaping.

>>>Pepper was used in Italy and India long before the colonisation of
>>> North and South America.
>>
>>I think it's a labeling reference. Peppers are what North Americans
>>call chiles.
>>
>>>>>>Is this also the case in Thai, Mongolian and other Asian cuisines
>>>> who are soooo fond of the heat contributed by peppers?
>>>
>>>
>>>Chiles don't play any role in Mongolian cooking, as far as I can
>>>find out. While used in some Asian cuisines, there are just as many
>>>dishes without chiles in them. Heat previously would have been
>>>supplied by pepper, and still is.
>>
>>"Just as many without" isn't the question. How common is a question.
>>Who uses them and how are questions. Peppers are easy to grow and
>>yield a good amount of food per unit of ground. They're common in
>>virtually all important cuisines. Chiles aren't only used for their
>>heat as many varieties don't contain significant amounts of capsaicin
>>and are very widely used.
>>
>>>It isn't all that long ago that so many Americans hadn't heard of
>>>habaneros or cascabels or chipotles. So, in fact, chiles have been
>>>a relatively recent introduction into 'white bread' American
>>>cooking. The people in the Southwest of course have been eating
>>>many varieties of chiles for centuries.
>>
>>Bell peppers are still chiles and are among the top few vegetables
>>used across the entire US. Hot chiles as widespread food item are a
>>different matter, but there have always been individuals, and cultural
>>and national enclaves that used them.
>>
>>Pastorio
>
>
> And you know how many people who call bell peppers chiles?
> But we are talking about how common an item is; hot peppers were and
> still aren't all that common across the US and still have a very long
> way to go to 'dramatically' change the eating habits of Americans.

Jeezus, Arri. Sweet chiles are still chiles. If hot peppers are what
you meant, say it. Lots of people call *all* peppers chiles.

Hot peppers are reasonably common fare in fast food shops, sandwich
operations and bars. Hell, we served them in both country clubs I ran.
How common is common?


>>>>Cookie Cutter wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Dennis Montey wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Have tomatoes always been available in India/Pakistan region
>>>>>> or are they johnny-come-latelies which have been
>>>>>>incorporated as has occurred in Italian cuisine? When and
>>>>>>how were they introduced?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Why do you think tomatoes are new to Italy? Cortes arrived in
>>>>>Mexico around 1519 where he found tomatoes and they are
>>>>>described in Italian herbals just a few years later. If you
>>>>>mean that tomatoes were not in Italy in the year 1000 A.D or
>>>>>weren't around in 500 B.C., then you are quite right. Cortes
>>>>>and Columbus also brought peppers to the new world and they
>>>>>made it ASAP to India/Pakistan, probably in the same crate with
>>>>> a tomato plant.
>>>>>
>>>>>Cookie