I prefer it to wheat on ideological grounds given that it is a more
ancient form but I don't really see why people are pushing it on
nutritional grounds; it has a comparitively negligible increase in
protein, negligible decrease in fat and still contains gluten so isn't
suitable for people with coeliac disease.

On the other hand, the fact that my ancestors ate it makes it a better
choice. I have decided to pursue an Anglo Saxon diet but without fish,
meat or dairy. Spaghetti is allowed on the basis that spelt and
tomatoes were known and I always substitute lentils for minced beef.

I don't want people to think I am copying the palaeolithic fad with my
vegan Anglo Saxon diet; we live in a sedentary society and I don't see
the point in pretending otherwise.

On 1/23/2014 11:43 AM, White Spirit wrote:

> On the other hand, the fact that my ancestors ate it makes it a better
> choice. I have decided to pursue an Anglo Saxon diet but without fish,
> meat or dairy. Spaghetti is allowed on the basis that spelt and
> tomatoes were known and I always substitute lentils for minced beef.
>
What are the approximate dates of your 'Anglo-Saxon' diet?

On 23/01/2014 16:54, S Viemeister wrote:

> On 1/23/2014 11:43 AM, White Spirit wrote:

>> On the other hand, the fact that my ancestors ate it makes it a better
>> choice. I have decided to pursue an Anglo Saxon diet but without fish,
>> meat or dairy. Spaghetti is allowed on the basis that spelt and
>> tomatoes were known and I always substitute lentils for minced beef.

> What are the approximate dates of your 'Anglo-Saxon' diet?

400CE to 1066CE.

In article >,
says...

I have decided to pursue an Anglo Saxon diet but without fish,
> meat or dairy. Spaghetti is allowed on the basis that spelt and
> tomatoes were known

Nope. Tomatoes didn't reach Europe until several centuries after the
end of the Anglo Saxon period.

Janet UK

"White Spirit" > wrote in message
news
> On 23/01/2014 16:54, S Viemeister wrote:
>
>> On 1/23/2014 11:43 AM, White Spirit wrote:
>
>>> On the other hand, the fact that my ancestors ate it makes it a better
>>> choice. I have decided to pursue an Anglo Saxon diet but without fish,
>>> meat or dairy. Spaghetti is allowed on the basis that spelt and
>>> tomatoes were known and I always substitute lentils for minced beef.
>
>> What are the approximate dates of your 'Anglo-Saxon' diet?
>
> 400CE to 1066CE.

nix the tomatoes, then.

of course, if you are leaving out fish, meat and dairy, you might as well
toss in the tomatoes.

On 23/01/2014 17:13, Pico Rico wrote:

> "White Spirit" > wrote in message
> news

>> On 23/01/2014 16:54, S Viemeister wrote:

>>> On 1/23/2014 11:43 AM, White Spirit wrote:

>>>> On the other hand, the fact that my ancestors ate it makes it a better
>>>> choice. I have decided to pursue an Anglo Saxon diet but without fish,
>>>> meat or dairy. Spaghetti is allowed on the basis that spelt and
>>>> tomatoes were known and I always substitute lentils for minced beef.

>>> What are the approximate dates of your 'Anglo-Saxon' diet?

>> 400CE to 1066CE.

> nix the tomatoes, then.

> of course, if you are leaving out fish, meat and dairy, you might as well
> toss in the tomatoes.

Leaving things out is still authentic; adding things that aren't is not
allowed.

"White Spirit" > wrote in message
...
> On 23/01/2014 17:13, Pico Rico wrote:
>
>> "White Spirit" > wrote in message
>> news
>
>>> On 23/01/2014 16:54, S Viemeister wrote:
>
>>>> On 1/23/2014 11:43 AM, White Spirit wrote:
>
>>>>> On the other hand, the fact that my ancestors ate it makes it a better
>>>>> choice. I have decided to pursue an Anglo Saxon diet but without
>>>>> fish,
>>>>> meat or dairy. Spaghetti is allowed on the basis that spelt and
>>>>> tomatoes were known and I always substitute lentils for minced beef.
>
>>>> What are the approximate dates of your 'Anglo-Saxon' diet?
>
>>> 400CE to 1066CE.
>
>> nix the tomatoes, then.
>
>> of course, if you are leaving out fish, meat and dairy, you might as well
>> toss in the tomatoes.
>
> Leaving things out is still authentic; adding things that aren't is not
> allowed.

not really, but its your fetish.

On 1/23/2014 12:05 PM, White Spirit wrote:
> On 23/01/2014 16:54, S Viemeister wrote:
>
>> On 1/23/2014 11:43 AM, White Spirit wrote:
>
>>> On the other hand, the fact that my ancestors ate it makes it a better
>>> choice. I have decided to pursue an Anglo Saxon diet but without fish,
>>> meat or dairy. Spaghetti is allowed on the basis that spelt and
>>> tomatoes were known and I always substitute lentils for minced beef.
>
>> What are the approximate dates of your 'Anglo-Saxon' diet?
>
> 400CE to 1066CE.
>
No tomatoes, then.

In article >,
White Spirit > wrote:
>I prefer it to wheat on ideological grounds given that it is a more
>ancient form but I don't really see why people are pushing it on
>nutritional grounds; it has a comparitively negligible increase in
>protein, negligible decrease in fat and still contains gluten so isn't
>suitable for people with coeliac disease.
>
>On the other hand, the fact that my ancestors ate it makes it a better
>choice. I have decided to pursue an Anglo Saxon diet but without fish,
>meat or dairy. Spaghetti is allowed on the basis that spelt and
>tomatoes were known and I always substitute lentils for minced beef.

Are you talking about the Angles and the Saxons? Tomatoes were
unknown to them.

Cindy Hamilton
--

On Thursday, January 23, 2014 10:43:28 AM UTC-6, White Spirit wrote:
> I prefer it to wheat on ideological grounds given that it is a more
>
> ancient form but I don't really see why people are pushing it on
>
> nutritional grounds; it has a comparitively negligible increase in
>
> protein, negligible decrease in fat and still contains gluten so isn't
>
> suitable for people with coeliac disease.
>
>
>
> On the other hand, the fact that my ancestors ate it makes it a better
>
> choice. I have decided to pursue an Anglo Saxon diet but without fish,
>
> meat or dairy. Spaghetti is allowed on the basis that spelt and
>
> tomatoes were known and I always substitute lentils for minced beef.
>
>
>
> I don't want people to think I am copying the palaeolithic fad with my
>
> vegan Anglo Saxon diet; we live in a sedentary society and I don't see
>
> the point in pretending otherwise.

You should try a Viking funeral instead.

On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 16:43:28 +0000, White Spirit
> wrote:

>I prefer it to wheat on ideological grounds given that it is a more
>ancient form

Then you should look into Kamut (even older than Spelt)... I find it a
little too crude a form of wheat though.

>but I don't really see why people are pushing it on
>nutritional grounds; it has a comparitively negligible increase in
>protein, negligible decrease in fat

Who cares about fat in grain, and why?

>and still contains gluten so isn't
>suitable for people with coeliac disease.

I have a wheat intolerance (not coeliac) and Spelt is much easier on
me compared to wheat.

>On the other hand, the fact that my ancestors ate it makes it a better
>choice. I have decided to pursue an Anglo Saxon diet but without fish,
>meat or dairy. Spaghetti is allowed on the basis that spelt and
>tomatoes were known and I always substitute lentils for minced beef.
>
>I don't want people to think I am copying the palaeolithic fad with my
>vegan Anglo Saxon diet; we live in a sedentary society and I don't see
>the point in pretending otherwise.

Well, in your society perhaps. But yes, most live a sedentary
lifestyle these days.

> wrote in message
...
> On Thursday, January 23, 2014 10:43:28 AM UTC-6, White Spirit wrote:
>> I prefer it to wheat on ideological grounds given that it is a more
>>
>> ancient form but I don't really see why people are pushing it on
>>
>> nutritional grounds; it has a comparitively negligible increase in
>>
>> protein, negligible decrease in fat and still contains gluten so isn't
>>
>> suitable for people with coeliac disease.
>>
>>
>>
>> On the other hand, the fact that my ancestors ate it makes it a better
>>
>> choice. I have decided to pursue an Anglo Saxon diet but without fish,
>>
>> meat or dairy. Spaghetti is allowed on the basis that spelt and
>>
>> tomatoes were known and I always substitute lentils for minced beef.
>>
>>
>>
>> I don't want people to think I am copying the palaeolithic fad with my
>>
>> vegan Anglo Saxon diet; we live in a sedentary society and I don't see
>>
>> the point in pretending otherwise.
>
> You should try a Viking funeral instead.
Hear, Hear!

On 1/23/2014 11:54 AM, S Viemeister wrote:
> On 1/23/2014 11:43 AM, White Spirit wrote:
>
>> On the other hand, the fact that my ancestors ate it makes it a better
>> choice. I have decided to pursue an Anglo Saxon diet but without fish,
>> meat or dairy. Spaghetti is allowed on the basis that spelt and
>> tomatoes were known and I always substitute lentils for minced beef.
>>
> What are the approximate dates of your 'Anglo-Saxon' diet?
>
>
[crossposting snipped]

Oh, dear. Are we still treating this poster as if it's not a troll?!

Jill

On 1/23/2014 10:43 AM, White Spirit wrote:
> I prefer it to wheat on ideological grounds given that it is a more
> ancient form but I don't really see why people are pushing it on
> nutritional grounds; it has a comparitively negligible increase in
> protein, negligible decrease in fat and still contains gluten so isn't
> suitable for people with coeliac disease.
>
> On the other hand, the fact that my ancestors ate it makes it a better
> choice. I have decided to pursue an Anglo Saxon diet but without
> fish, meat or dairy. Spaghetti is allowed on the basis that spelt and
> tomatoes were known and I always substitute lentils for minced beef.
>
> I don't want people to think I am copying the palaeolithic fad with my
> vegan Anglo Saxon diet; we live in a sedentary society and I don't see
> the point in pretending otherwise.

But pretending is the whole POINT! Cover yourself with woad and head
off to do battle with the Romans or the current EU bureaucracy. The
Romans were just its more ancient form, after all.

Then, after all that exertion, you can feast on whatever you want.
It's all good!

On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 16:43:28 +0000, White Spirit
> wrote:

>I prefer it to wheat on ideological grounds given that it is a more
>ancient form but I don't really see why people are pushing it on
>nutritional grounds; it has a comparitively negligible increase in
>protein, negligible decrease in fat and still contains gluten so isn't
>suitable for people with coeliac disease.
>
>On the other hand, the fact that my ancestors ate it makes it a better
>choice. I have decided to pursue an Anglo Saxon diet but without fish,
>meat or dairy. Spaghetti is allowed on the basis that spelt and
>tomatoes were known and I always substitute lentils for minced beef.
>
>I don't want people to think I am copying the palaeolithic fad with my
>vegan Anglo Saxon diet; we live in a sedentary society and I don't see
>the point in pretending otherwise.

Tomatoes were a New World fruit. What dates are you using?
Janet US

"White Spirit" > wrote in message
...
>I prefer it to wheat on ideological grounds given that it is a more ancient
>form but I don't really see why people are pushing it on nutritional
>grounds; it has a comparitively negligible increase in protein, negligible
>decrease in fat and still contains gluten so isn't suitable for people with
>coeliac disease.
>
> On the other hand, the fact that my ancestors ate it makes it a better
> choice. I have decided to pursue an Anglo Saxon diet but without fish,
> meat or dairy. Spaghetti is allowed on the basis that spelt and tomatoes
> were known and I always substitute lentils for minced beef.
>
> I don't want people to think I am copying the palaeolithic fad with my
> vegan Anglo Saxon diet; we live in a sedentary society and I don't see the
> point in pretending otherwise.

Spelt is a form of wheat.

On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 15:38:55 -0500, jmcquown >
wrote:

> On 1/23/2014 11:54 AM, S Viemeister wrote:
> > On 1/23/2014 11:43 AM, White Spirit wrote:
> >
> >> On the other hand, the fact that my ancestors ate it makes it a better
> >> choice. I have decided to pursue an Anglo Saxon diet but without fish,
> >> meat or dairy. Spaghetti is allowed on the basis that spelt and
> >> tomatoes were known and I always substitute lentils for minced beef.
> >>
> > What are the approximate dates of your 'Anglo-Saxon' diet?
> >
> >
> [crossposting snipped]
>
> Oh, dear. Are we still treating this poster as if it's not a troll?!
>
We have White S** and Yellow... is that a "coinkidink" or the same
troll trying to make us think it's two separate posters?

--
I take life with a grain of salt, a slice of lemon and a shot of tequila

On 23/01/2014 20:43, Jeßus wrote:

> I gave it the benefit of the doubt over the 'vegan Anglo Saxon diet'
> remark, maybe I shouldn't have...

I can show you a photo of my drinking horn if you don't believe me.

On 23/01/2014 19:58, Jeßus wrote:

> On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 16:43:28 +0000, White Spirit
> > wrote:

>> I prefer it to wheat on ideological grounds given that it is a more
>> ancient form

> Then you should look into Kamut (even older than Spelt)... I find it a
> little too crude a form of wheat though.

I will look it up. I am becoming quite interested in ancient grains.

>> but I don't really see why people are pushing it on
>> nutritional grounds; it has a comparitively negligible increase in
>> protein, negligible decrease in fat

> Who cares about fat in grain, and why?

I have no idea. It seems strange to me that people hail spelt as being
much more nutrional than wheat when, nutrionally, they are close to
identical. This does, of course, refer to the wholegrain varieties.

>> and still contains gluten so isn't
>> suitable for people with coeliac disease.

> I have a wheat intolerance (not coeliac) and Spelt is much easier on
> me compared to wheat.

I have a friend with the same problem; it causes her indigestion. I
will ask her whether she has tried spelt.

On 23/01/2014 21:05, Moe DeLoughan wrote:

> On 1/23/2014 10:43 AM, White Spirit wrote:

> But pretending is the whole POINT! Cover yourself with woad and head off
> to do battle with the Romans or the current EU bureaucracy. The Romans
> were just its more ancient form, after all.

Woad was used by the Celts. Otherwise, I like the suggestion.

> Then, after all that exertion, you can feast on whatever you want. It's
> all good!

That's a fair point.

On 23/01/2014 21:51, Janet Bostwick wrote:

> Tomatoes were a New World fruit. What dates are you using?
> Janet US

400CE to 1066CE. Tomatoes are out of the question.

On 23/01/2014 23:12, Julie Bove wrote:

> Spelt is a form of wheat.

It is but people generally differentiate it from wheat when comparing
spelt with the more modern variety.