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?

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 10:50:44 -0500, 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?

Tomatoes are from the Americas. Like chilis, potatoes, and corn they
did not arrive in India until the 1500's. At to whether that qualifies
as Johnny-come-lately' depends on whether 500 years is a long time.

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

"Cookie Cutter" > wrote

> 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

Whereby a huge amount of confusion was caused by the use of
the word "pepper", the black peppercorn variety of which was
known in the West in Roman times.

--
Bob
Kanyak's Doghouse
http://www.kanyak.com

I certainly did not intend to infer that tomatoes were 'new' to Italy.
My question referred to the introduction of tomatoes after they had an
established cuisine. We often associate tomatoes or tomato sauces with
the popular dishes of Italy. The same is true of India. Indian cuisine
brings to mind thick, spicy tomato based currie sauces with a great deal
of heat. In the USA, we are accustomed to regular introductions of
exotic and not so exotic food items. We experiment with different
ethnicities and fusions, though none have so dramaticall changed our
eating habits Keeping in mind , of course, that our national diet is
the result of a grand melting pot.. However, it would seem that the
introduction of the tomato and pepper have made them staple ingredients
in these two cultures. Is this also the case in Thai, Mongolian and
other Asian cuisines who are soooo fond of the heat contributed by peppers?

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

The tomato was an integral part of the cuisine of the southern colonies
and later the American South.

The growing season for tomatoes is exceedingly short in New England,
and, coupled with the fact that there was great prejudice against the
tomato in England, little opportunity existed for the tomato to have
much impact in the north.

The tomato started moving into northern cookery in the later part of the
19th century, probably shipped in from warmer areas.

Cookie

Dennis Montey wrote:
> I certainly did not intend to infer that tomatoes were 'new' to Italy.
> My question referred to the introduction of tomatoes after they had an
> established cuisine. We often associate tomatoes or tomato sauces with
> the popular dishes of Italy. The same is true of India. Indian cuisine
> brings to mind thick, spicy tomato based currie sauces with a great deal
> of heat. In the USA, we are accustomed to regular introductions of
> exotic and not so exotic food items. We experiment with different
> ethnicities and fusions, though none have so dramaticall changed our
> eating habits Keeping in mind , of course, that our national diet is
> the result of a grand melting pot.. However, it would seem that the
> introduction of the tomato and pepper have made them staple ingredients
> in these two cultures. Is this also the case in Thai, Mongolian and
> other Asian cuisines who are soooo fond of the heat contributed by peppers?
>
> 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
>
>

Dennis Montey extrapolated from data available...


>>
>>> 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?
>>>

I don't think of the tomato as integral to are very important in Indian
cooking, at least not those foods with which I'm familiar.

Certainly, it would be a late addition, likely not available or used in any
quantity until 1800 or so.

On the other hand, another late comer, the potato, has become almost
ubiquitous in several "styles" of Indian cooking.

The world changes...

The other day I bought for 99 cents (bargain hunting at the "Big Lots") a
large jar of tiny dill pickles, the "cocktail" size. At home, I read the
label...from India, where "pickles" are important. These were very good.

TMO

Dennis Montey wrote:
>
> I certainly did not intend to infer that tomatoes were 'new' to Italy.
> My question referred to the introduction of tomatoes after they had an
> established cuisine. We often associate tomatoes or tomato sauces with
> the popular dishes of Italy. The same is true of India. Indian cuisine
> brings to mind thick, spicy tomato based currie sauces with a great deal
> of heat.


While that may be true in the US, it isn't true in India or Pakistan.
Tomatoes are used, but aren't the least bit integral.

In the USA, we are accustomed to regular introductions of
> exotic and not so exotic food items. We experiment with different
> ethnicities and fusions, though none have so dramaticall changed our
> eating habits


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.

>Keeping in mind , of course, that our national diet is
> the result of a grand melting pot.. However, it would seem that the
> introduction of the tomato and pepper have made them staple ingredients
> in these two cultures.

Tomatoes aren't staple ingredients in either culture. Every time I've
been to Italy, I ate extremely well and with a huge amount of variety
without needing to have tomatoes except in salad.

Pepper was used in Italy and India long before the colonisation of North
and South America.

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.

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.


> 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

Arri London wrote:

>
> Dennis Montey wrote:
>
>> I certainly did not intend to infer that tomatoes were 'new' to
>> Italy. My question referred to the introduction of tomatoes after
>> they had an established cuisine. We often associate tomatoes or
>> tomato sauces with the popular dishes of Italy. The same is
>> true of India. Indian cuisine brings to mind thick, spicy tomato
>> based currie sauces with a great deal of heat.
>
> While that may be true in the US, it isn't true in India or
> Pakistan. Tomatoes are used, but aren't the least bit integral.
>
>> In the USA, we are accustomed to regular introductions of exotic
>> and not so exotic food items. We experiment with different
>> ethnicities and fusions, though none have so dramaticall changed
>> our eating habits
>
> 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.

>> Keeping in mind , of course, that our national diet is the result
>> of a grand melting pot.. However, it would seem that the
>> introduction of the tomato and pepper have made them staple
>> ingredients in these two cultures.
>
> Tomatoes aren't staple ingredients in either culture. Every time
> I've been to Italy, I ate extremely well and with a huge amount of
> variety without needing to have tomatoes except in salad.

Needing? One person's experience details national dietary habits? It
sounds like you don't like tomatoes and would therefore be avoiding
them. 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.

> 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


>> 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

>
>The tomato started moving into northern cookery in the later part of the
>19th century, probably shipped in from warmer areas.

This is a myth. The tomato was grown in New England before 1800, and was
identified as the "queen" of vegetables by the 1830s.

Andy Smith

One very interesting fact about the tomato is its recent adoption into Chinese
cuisine, something quite unexpected for those of us who eat tomato-less Chinese
food outside of China. The Chinese have known about the tomato for centuries
(they call it the "foreign eggplant") and it never really became important.

However, for the past few years, the PRC has been the largest producer of
tomatoes in the world (surpassing the US which has been the largest producer
for years). Evidently, tomatoes are mainly eaten fresh like an apple-- just
bite into them and add a little salt. Actually, this is a good way to eat
tomatoes, provided...

Andy Smith

In article >, this one
> wrote:

> 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.

Sorry, this is just plain wrong. They aren't. I spend a fair amount of
each year in Italy (my wife is Italian). I agree with Arri London on
this. Also, he didn't say he doesn't like tomatoes. Indeed he said he
had them in salads.

Tomatoes are relatively common in the cuisine of Campania (where my
wife comes from) , but even there, there are far more, say, pasta
dishes commonly eaten without tomatoes than with.

I can't help someone is mixing up food called "Italian" in the uS with
food actually eaten in Italy. I'm glad to say that there's a
considerable difference between them.

Lazarus

--
Remover the rock from the email address

Could you give me where to find this information? I am very interested
in this subject.

Cookie

ASmith1946 wrote:

>>The tomato started moving into northern cookery in the later part of the
>>19th century, probably shipped in from warmer areas.
>
>
> This is a myth. The tomato was grown in New England before 1800, and was
> identified as the "queen" of vegetables by the 1830s.
>
> Andy Smith

Cookie Cutter wrote:

> Could you give me where to find this information? I am very interested
> in this subject.
>
> Cookie
>
> ASmith1946 wrote:
>
>>> The tomato started moving into northern cookery in the later part of
>>> the 19th century, probably shipped in from warmer areas.
>>
>>
>>
>> This is a myth. The tomato was grown in New England before 1800, and was
>> identified as the "queen" of vegetables by the 1830s.
>>
>> Andy Smith

Sorry about typo -- Could you tell me where to find this info. I know
tomatoes were grown in flower gardens before 1800 and surely a few brave
souls ate them but I did not think they were a common item on the table.
In my research they only begin being actively bought from seed
catalogs around 1830 and it was not until after the Civil War that they
became what you might call universal on American tables.

I am very interested in any reference source you can point me to that
shows information to the contrary. I am currently trying to write an
article on this subject.

Cookie

>
>Could you give me where to find this information? I am very interested
>in this subject.
>
>Cookie

Cookie:

I was hoping you'd ask. Here's two great tomato history books:

Smith, Andrew F. The Tomato in America: Early History, Culture and Cookery.
Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1994. A Mandarin version of this
work was published in July 2000 by Leviathan Publishing Company in Taibei,
Republic of China, and the University of Illinois Press issued a paperback
edition of this work in October 2001.

Smith, Andrew F. Souper Tomatoes: The Story of America's Favorite Food. New
Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 2000.


Andy Smith

I think it is the variety of uses that make them integral. That doesn't
mean they have to be in everything. Corn is integral to Mexican food
but you could certainly avoid it if you needed to.

Cookie

Lazarus Cooke wrote:

> In article >, this one
> > wrote:
>
>
>>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.
>
>
> Sorry, this is just plain wrong. They aren't. I spend a fair amount of
> each year in Italy (my wife is Italian). I agree with Arri London on
> this. Also, he didn't say he doesn't like tomatoes. Indeed he said he
> had them in salads.
>

Thank you. I will get my library to get them inter-library loan.

Cookie


ASmith1946 wrote:

>>Could you give me where to find this information? I am very interested
>>in this subject.
>>
>>Cookie
>
>
> Cookie:
>
> I was hoping you'd ask. Here's two great tomato history books:
>
> Smith, Andrew F. The Tomato in America: Early History, Culture and Cookery.
> Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1994. A Mandarin version of this
> work was published in July 2000 by Leviathan Publishing Company in Taibei,
> Republic of China, and the University of Illinois Press issued a paperback
> edition of this work in October 2001.
>
> Smith, Andrew F. Souper Tomatoes: The Story of America's Favorite Food. New
> Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 2000.
>
>
> Andy Smith
>

> In my research they only begin being actively bought from seed
>catalogs around 1830 and it was not until after the Civil War that they
>became what you might call universal on American tables.

The earliest seed "catalogue" with tomatoes listed (that I've located is
Lithen, John. "Catalogue of Garden Seeds... Philadelphia. c1800. In this
broadside, "Love Apples" are listed under "Seeds and Plants of Herbs," not
under flowers.

The notion that tomatoes were not commonly-consumed until after the Civil War
is pure culinary fakelore promoted by people (such as James Beard) who didn't
bother to look at primary sources, such as pre-Civil War cookbooks, gardening
books, newspapers, etc. To date I've located over 15,000 references to
tomatoes published or written in the US prior to the Civil War. In fact, it is
likely that tomatoes were grown and consumed in what is today the US prior to
the arrival of the English colonists at Jamestown in 1607 (specifically in St.
Augustine, Florida, and later in Santa Fe, New Mexico), although I have not
located primary sources that support this contention. However, tomatoes were
clearly grown and consumed in the American Southern colonies by the mid-18
century, as I have documented.

>
>I am very interested in any reference source you can point me to that
>shows information to the contrary. I am currently trying to write an
>article on this subject.
>
>Cookie
>

If you need any pithy quotes, just let me know. I'm good at pith...

Andy Smith

>>
>>>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.
>>
>>
>> Sorry, this is just plain wrong. They aren't. I spend a fair amount of
>> each year in Italy (my wife is Italian). I agree with Arri London on
>> this. Also, he didn't say he doesn't like tomatoes. Indeed he said he
>> had them in salads.
>>
>

I agree with Cookie. First, my own experience in southern Italy in the summer
agrees with Cookie's observation that Italians eat plenty of tomatoes in
various forms. Second, Italy is one of the top tomato producers in the world.
While many tomatoes are exported to other countries, the vast majority remain
in Italy for domestic use. I tend to think they eat them. Third, if you look at
any southern Italian (or Sicilian) cookbooks, you will find dozens of uses of
tomatoes in numerous dishes from soups, to sauces, to salads, to pizza, to
juice, etc. (and recipes with tomatoes have been in southern Italian cookbooks
since the late 17th century).

I doubt if you will find any other fruit or vegetable that is used in such
quantities or in so many different ways as tomatoes, but if others have
contrary evidence, let's see it.

Andy Smith

(ASmith1946) writes:

>Second, Italy is one of the top tomato producers in the world.
>While many tomatoes are exported to other countries, the vast majority remain
>in Italy for domestic use. I tend to think they eat them.

Is there an Italian tradition (as, if cartoons can be believed,
there is an American tradition) of throwing tomatoes at disprised
public speakers?

Lee Rudolph

>
>Is there an Italian tradition (as, if cartoons can be believed,
>there is an American tradition) of throwing tomatoes at disprised
>public speakers?

Good point. If there is such a tradition it Italy, then this could account for
the large tomato production, as Italian politicians aren't very well respected
in Italy (or anywhere else for that matter).

Andy Smith

PS I've found very few primary source examples of thrown tomatoes (except in
tomato throwing events), and I've always wondered why.

"Bob (this one)" wrote:
>
> Arri London wrote:
>
> >
> > Dennis Montey wrote:
> >
> >> I certainly did not intend to infer that tomatoes were 'new' to
> >> Italy. My question referred to the introduction of tomatoes after
> >> they had an established cuisine. We often associate tomatoes or
> >> tomato sauces with the popular dishes of Italy. The same is
> >> true of India. Indian cuisine brings to mind thick, spicy tomato
> >> based currie sauces with a great deal of heat.
> >
> > While that may be true in the US, it isn't true in India or
> > Pakistan. Tomatoes are used, but aren't the least bit integral.
> >
> >> In the USA, we are accustomed to regular introductions of exotic
> >> and not so exotic food items. We experiment with different
> >> ethnicities and fusions, though none have so dramaticall changed
> >> our eating habits
> >
> > 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'. Every food introduction that is
adopted changes eating habits by definition, but tomatoes are not
'essential' to Southern Italian cooking in Italy.

> >> Keeping in mind , of course, that our national diet is the result
> >> of a grand melting pot.. However, it would seem that the
> >> introduction of the tomato and pepper have made them staple
> >> ingredients in these two cultures.
> >
> > Tomatoes aren't staple ingredients in either culture. Every time
> > I've been to Italy, I ate extremely well and with a huge amount of
> > variety without needing to have tomatoes except in salad.
>
> Needing? One person's experience details national dietary habits? It
> sounds like you don't like tomatoes and would therefore be avoiding
> them.

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

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.

> > 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.




>
> >> 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

ASmith1946 wrote:
>
> >
> >Is there an Italian tradition (as, if cartoons can be believed,
> >there is an American tradition) of throwing tomatoes at disprised
> >public speakers?
>
> Good point. If there is such a tradition it Italy, then this could account for
> the large tomato production, as Italian politicians aren't very well respected
> in Italy (or anywhere else for that matter).
>
> Andy Smith
>
> PS I've found very few primary source examples of thrown tomatoes (except in
> tomato throwing events), and I've always wondered why.

LOL!

As far as I can remember from reading USDA reports from way back when,
something like half of Italy's tomato production is exported. There was
also some importation for re-exportation too.
Like the olive oil :0

ASmith1946 wrote:

>> In my research they only begin being actively bought from seed
>>catalogs around 1830 and it was not until after the Civil War that they
>>became what you might call universal on American tables.
>
>
> The earliest seed "catalogue" with tomatoes listed (that I've located is
> Lithen, John. "Catalogue of Garden Seeds... Philadelphia. c1800. In this
> broadside, "Love Apples" are listed under "Seeds and Plants of Herbs," not
> under flowers.
>
> The notion that tomatoes were not commonly-consumed until after the Civil War
> is pure culinary fakelore promoted by people (such as James Beard) who didn't
> bother to look at primary sources, such as pre-Civil War cookbooks, gardening
> books, newspapers, etc. To date I've located over 15,000 references to
> tomatoes published or written in the US prior to the Civil War. In fact, it is
> likely that tomatoes were grown and consumed in what is today the US prior to
> the arrival of the English colonists at Jamestown in 1607 (specifically in St.
> Augustine, Florida, and later in Santa Fe, New Mexico), although I have not
> located primary sources that support this contention. However, tomatoes were
> clearly grown and consumed in the American Southern colonies by the mid-18
> century, as I have documented.
>
>

Actually, I said in my post that I belive they were eaten in the South
very early. They appear in recipes in A Colonial Plantation
Cookbook-The Receipt Book of Harriott Pinckney Horry, 1770, The Virginia
Housewife, The Carolina Housewife, The Kentucky Housewife,etc., all
published before 1850. I haven't found any recipes or other indications
that there was any early use of tomatoes in the North and there is not
much variety to their use in traditional New England cooking, i.e. they
are added as a vegetable to soups and stews, they are baked, and they
are eaten raw. There is also tomato sauce made by mashing them and
thickening with crackers. In the South by contrast, there is a greater
depth to tomato usage such as tomato gravy, tomato dumplings, tomato
pie, tomato wine, sun dried tomatoes, and so on that lead me to believe
that there is a long history to their use.

I believe that people like James Beard reflect the northern history of
the tomato. My research had led me to conclude that it had limited use
in the North until after the Civil War but that it was extensively used
in the South, probably from the earliest times. I look forward to
getting and reading the books you recommended if they indicate differently.

>
>
> If you need any pithy quotes, just let me know. I'm good at pith...
>
> Andy Smith
>
>

Thank you Andy. I might need to call on you.

Cookie

I am a little late noticing ... but is Andy Smith the Andrew F Smith who
is the author of the two books below?

Cookie


ASmith1946 wrote:

>>Could you give me where to find this information? I am very interested
>>in this subject.
>>
>>Cookie
>
>
> Cookie:
>
> I was hoping you'd ask. Here's two great tomato history books:
>
> Smith, Andrew F. The Tomato in America: Early History, Culture and Cookery.
> Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1994. A Mandarin version of this
> work was published in July 2000 by Leviathan Publishing Company in Taibei,
> Republic of China, and the University of Illinois Press issued a paperback
> edition of this work in October 2001.
>
> Smith, Andrew F. Souper Tomatoes: The Story of America's Favorite Food. New
> Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 2000.
>
>
> Andy Smith
>

>
>I am a little late noticing ... but is Andy Smith the Andrew F Smith who
>is the author of the two books below?

Yes.

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

On Sun, 09 May 2004 15:27:29 GMT, Cookie Cutter wrote:

> The tomato was an integral part of the cuisine of the southern colonies
> and later the American South.
>
> The growing season for tomatoes is exceedingly short in New England,
> and, coupled with the fact that there was great prejudice against the
> tomato in England, little opportunity existed for the tomato to have
> much impact in the north.
>
> The tomato started moving into northern cookery in the later part of the
> 19th century, probably shipped in from warmer areas.
>
> Cookie
>

Tomato cultivation was well established in England by 1776 at least. In the
17th edition of The Gardeners Kalendar by Thomas Mawe published in that
year there are detailed instructions for their cultivation under the
kitchen garden section. Although I don't have access to the earlier
editions ATM I seem to remember reading about them in there as well.

--
Pete The Gardener
A room without books is like a body without a soul

In article >, ASmith1946
> wrote:

> >>
> >>>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.
> >>
> >>
> >> Sorry, this is just plain wrong. They aren't. I spend a fair amount of
> >> each year in Italy (my wife is Italian). I agree with Arri London on
> >> this. Also, he didn't say he doesn't like tomatoes. Indeed he said he
> >> had them in salads.
> >>
> >
>
> I agree with Cookie.

Perhaps the reason I reacted so fiercely is because it seemed to
continue a popular fallacy. Of course tomatoes are popular in Italy,
and very common in parts of Italy. There's a big difference between
that and saying that they're "virtually omnipresent" in Italy.

> First, my own experience in southern Italy in the summer
> agrees with Cookie's observation that Italians eat plenty of tomatoes in
> various forms.
> Second, Italy is one of the top tomato producers in the world.
> While many tomatoes are exported to other countries, the vast majority remain
> in Italy for domestic use. I tend to think they eat them. Third, if you look
> at
> any southern Italian (or Sicilian) cookbooks, you will find dozens of uses of
> tomatoes in numerous dishes from soups, to sauces, to salads, to pizza, to
> juice, etc. (and recipes with tomatoes have been in southern Italian cookbooks
> since the late 17th century).

Big qualifications here. "Southern Italy" is not "Italy". And summer
isn't all year round. If you go to Bavaria around now, everyone will be
eating asparagus. (this may be true all over Germany - I don't know).

As I said in my earler post, tomatoes are common in southern Italian
cooking - from Campania down. But there's a wild fallacy that southern
Italians put it in everything. This just ain't true. I've spent a lot
of time working with the food in Basilicata, traditionally a poor area,
with a wonderful simple cuisine. But have a look at this site on the
food of this area - right down in the south

http://www.bancadati.it/basilicata/b-ricette.html

You'll find tomatoes in a number of the recipes, but it's far from
ubiquitous - probably less common than parsley or chillies. and
remember, in southern Italian cooking the tomato is often used just
like parsley, in quite small quantities.

And the fact that it's popular in some parts of the south can't be made
to apply to the whole country. I spend a lot of time in Tuscany, and
there you'd hardly notice tomatoes. ..

Goose fat is very common in the South-West of France (and I'd imagine
that France is the leading producer and consumer of the stuff), but
that doesnt' make it "virtually omnipresent" in French cuisine.
Lettuce is eaten at virtually every meal in France - a far higher
proportion of meals than tomatoes are eaten with in Italy - but again,
that doesn't really make it a staple of French cuisine.

So. Tomatoes are common in the cooking of the south of Italy yes, but
"virtually omnipresent", no.

Lazarus

--
Remover the rock from the email address

In article >, Lazarus
Cooke > wrote:

Sorry - that basilicata link has changed to

http://www.basilicata.bancadati.it/b-gastronomia.html

Lazarus

--
Remover the rock from the email address

>
>As I said in my earler post, tomatoes are common in southern Italian
>cooking - from Campania down. But there's a wild fallacy that southern
>Italians put it in everything. This just ain't true. I've spent a lot
>of time working with the food in Basilicata, traditionally a poor area,
>with a wonderful simple cuisine. But have a look at this site on the
>food of this area - right down in the south
>
>http://www.bancadati.it/basilicata/b-ricette.html
>
>You'll find tomatoes in a number of the recipes, but it's far from
>ubiquitous - probably less common than parsley or chillies. and
>remember, in southern Italian cooking the tomato is often used just
>like parsley, in quite small quantities.
>
>And the fact that it's popular in some parts of the south can't be made
>to apply to the whole country. I spend a lot of time in Tuscany, and
>there you'd hardly notice tomatoes. ..
>
>

It seems to me that we have several interesting threads within this discussion.
First, there are empirical ones-- how many tomatoes do Italians eat? How does
this compare with others? I maintain that, pound for pound, Italians eat more
tomatoes than any other fruit or vegetable, including parsley or chillies. In
fact, parsely and chillies are not even close. In addition, Italians eat more
tomatoes on a per capita basis than do other Europeans.

Second, there are the culinary myths that you and others have raised-- not all
Italians eat gobs of tomatoes at every meal, and even in the south where tomato
consumption is highest, tomatoes are certainly not used in every dish. And
Italian-America food (based, incidently, largely on southern Italian
immigrants) is not the same as the food eaten in Italy today. These are indeed
myths, it seems to me.

Finally, we're back to what is a national cuisine. Do the Italians have one? Or
alternately, do Italians have a national cuisine and tomatoes are just not a
component?

Andy Smith

In article >, ASmith1946
> wrote:



> It seems to me that we have several interesting threads within this
> discussion.


This is a useful teasing apart of strands. There's not much here I'd
disagree with, although I'm not (yet!) convinced that they eat more
tomatoes than any other fruit of vegetable. Be interesting to find out,
though. Wheat??? Remember it's used , in the form of grain wheat, as a
vegetable in Tuscan soups, and as a key ingredient in a neapolitan
easter cake flavoured with orange flower water.
> First, there are empirical ones-- how many tomatoes do Italians eat? How does
> this compare with others? I maintain that, pound for pound, Italians eat more
> tomatoes than any other fruit or vegetable,

> including parsley or chillies.
Of course these are only eaten in tiny quantities.

> In
> fact, parsely and chillies are not even close. In addition, Italians eat more
> tomatoes on a per capita basis than do other Europeans.

At a guess I'm sure this is true.
>
> Second, there are the culinary myths that you and others have raised-- not all
> Italians eat gobs of tomatoes at every meal, and even in the south where
> tomato
> consumption is highest, tomatoes are certainly not used in every dish. And
> Italian-America food (based, incidently, largely on southern Italian
> immigrants) is not the same as the food eaten in Italy today. These are indeed
> myths, it seems to me.
>
> Finally, we're back to what is a national cuisine. Do the Italians have one?

I think they do - in the same way as the French do. It's a collection
of different regional cuisines, in the same way.
Lazarus

--
Remover the rock from the email address

>There's not much here I'd
>disagree with, although I'm not (yet!) convinced that they eat more
>tomatoes than any other fruit of vegetable. Be interesting to find out,
>though. Wheat??? Remember it's used , in the form of grain wheat, as a

I guess from a scientific standpoint wheat is a fruit, but it common parlance
it is usually not classed as such. I don't have the statistics at hand, but I
have no doubt that Italians eat more wheat pound for pound than they do
tomatoes. I don't know how to test your view that Italians possibly eat more
wheat when it is consumed as a vegetable than they do tomatoes. I'd find that
difficult to believe.

>>
>> Finally, we're back to what is a national cuisine. Do the Italians have
>one?
>
>I think they do - in the same way as the French do. It's a collection
>of different regional cuisines, in the same way.

We're back to this discussion -- which I found useful-- so let me try again.
Are there commonalities among regional Italian foods? If the answer is yes,
what are they? Does this include dishes with tomatoes as ingredients?

If the answer is no, then there doesn't seem to be an "Italian cuisine," only
local cusines-- or are there just individual preferences?

Andy Smith

Lazarus Cooke wrote:

> In article >,
> ASmith1946 > wrote:
>
>
>>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, this is just plain wrong. They aren't. I spend a fair
>>>> amount of each year in Italy (my wife is Italian). I agree
>>>> with Arri London on this. Also, he didn't say he doesn't like
>>>> tomatoes. Indeed he said he had them in salads.
>>>>
>>>
>> I agree with Cookie.
>
>
> Perhaps the reason I reacted so fiercely is because it seemed to
> continue a popular fallacy. Of course tomatoes are popular in
> Italy, and very common in parts of Italy. There's a big difference
> between that and saying that they're "virtually omnipresent" in
> Italy.

I will concede that it was a bit overstated.

>> First, my own experience in southern Italy in the summer agrees
>> with Cookie's observation that Italians eat plenty of tomatoes in
>> various forms. Second, Italy is one of the top tomato producers
>> in the world. While many tomatoes are exported to other
>> countries, the vast majority remain in Italy for domestic use. I
>> tend to think they eat them. Third, if you look at any southern
>> Italian (or Sicilian) cookbooks, you will find dozens of uses of
>> tomatoes in numerous dishes from soups, to sauces, to salads, to
>> pizza, to juice, etc. (and recipes with tomatoes have been in
>> southern Italian cookbooks since the late 17th century).
>
>
> Big qualifications here. "Southern Italy" is not "Italy". And
> summer isn't all year round. If you go to Bavaria around now,
> everyone will be eating asparagus. (this may be true all over
> Germany - I don't know).

And canned San Marzano (and others) are readily available. Tomato
paste in little squeeze tubes are everywhere available. Fresh
tomatoes, locally grown or not are available everywhere, all the time.

> As I said in my earler post, tomatoes are common in southern
> Italian cooking - from Campania down. But there's a wild fallacy
> that southern Italians put it in everything. This just ain't true.

Not only has no one said that, it was specifically discussed in terms
of being common, not omnipresent in all the foods.

> I've spent a lot of time working with the food in Basilicata,
> traditionally a poor area, with a wonderful simple cuisine. But
> have a look at this site on the food of this area - right down in
> the south
>
> <http://www.basilicata.bancadati.it/b-gastronomia.html>

This site talks about "la cucina Lucana" to distinguish it from other
regional cuisines. And this is fine, but look at a broader picture
than one web site. The books of the Hazans, Ada Boni's books (for a
more historical picture of the regional cuisines in the last century),
Bugialli, Middione, Lorenza de'Medici...

Look at the books of Carol Field, Anna Tasca Lanza, Mark Strausman,
Patricia Wells, Susan Herrmann Loomis, Wanda and Giovanna Tornabene.
Look at the translation of Artusi by Kyle Phillips.

> You'll find tomatoes in a number of the recipes, but it's far from
> ubiquitous - probably less common than parsley or chillies. and
> remember, in southern Italian cooking the tomato is often used
> just like parsley, in quite small quantities.

Why does this concept of being integral to a cuisine seem to be being
described as "in everything" rather than as a very common component of
the cooking of a region? It's almost as though the argument is that
since it's not in every meal in every dish, it's not "significant" in
the cuisine. It's ubiquitous in the sense that it's a common,
familiar, oft-used ingredient available in some form virtually
everywhere foods are sold.

> And the fact that it's popular in some parts of the south can't be
> made to apply to the whole country. I spend a lot of time in
> Tuscany, and there you'd hardly notice tomatoes. ..

There is no "Italian cuisine." There are Italian cuisines. An easy way
to define that notion is to look at preferred cooking fats. In the
south, it's olive oil; up north, it's butter. Polenta is virtually
unheard of in the south. Smoked ham in the north is foreign to
southern cuisines. Look at the pasta differences and preferences. Look
at the vast number of dishes with local names that have no real
parallel in other regions. Or the same dishes that have different
names every few miles.

Tuscany didn't much use tomatoes until after the second world war when
people came north to find work and brought their cuisines with them.

> Goose fat is very common in the South-West of France (and I'd
> imagine that France is the leading producer and consumer of the
> stuff), but that doesnt' make it "virtually omnipresent" in French
> cuisine.

There is no national cuisine in France. One can hardly talk about the
Alsace and Provence in the same breath. Burgundy and the Loire.

> Lettuce is eaten at virtually every meal in France - a far
> higher proportion of meals than tomatoes are eaten with in Italy -
> but again, that doesn't really make it a staple of French cuisine.

Of course it does. If it's eaten at virtually every meal, it is
exactly a staple. Like bread. But lettuce doesn't define any French
cuisine because it's considered more as an interlude, a break from the
real food. The cooked food.

> So. Tomatoes are common in the cooking of the south of Italy yes,
> but "virtually omnipresent", no.

Make the distinction between any given ingredient being available in
markets and being in dishes. Just because it's not in this dish
doesn't mean that it isn't consequential in the regional cuisine as a
whole.

Italy was a lot of small states until a century and a half ago.
Dialects change over very short distances. Sicilians don't easily
converse with Romans and Romans don't easily converse with Alpine
Italians. Different accents, sure, but different vocabularies as well.
That carries over to everything about daily life. Things grow near
Naples that don't grow near Venice. And vice versa. Different cuisines
result. The cuisines of the north use a lot of corn and milk products.
The cuisines of the south use lots of tomatoes and olive oil.

Pastorio

ASmith1946 extrapolated from data available...


>
> We're back to this discussion -- which I found useful-- so let me try
> again. Are there commonalities among regional Italian foods? If the
> answer is yes, what are they? Does this include dishes with tomatoes
> as ingredients?
>
> If the answer is no, then there doesn't seem to be an "Italian
> cuisine," only local cusines-- or are there just individual
> preferences?
>

My first trip to Italy, 1962 or so, had fortunately been preceded by 6
months in Brooklyn and Manhattan, Brooklyn certainly a locale where one
could safely classify the tomato as king. I know cannoli and clams
Oregenata (sp?)have no tomatoes, but beyond that, Brooklyn, Queens and the
great tomato growing plains of Long Island, a veritable insular Campagna,
are strongly pomidoculturalized.

For serving naval personnel, Italy was largely Southern, and for my ship to
venture North to Livorno or Genoa was as if we were visiting a new land,
after the Vesuvian Bay, Palermo, Taranto - a less tomato-ee cuisine,
Augusta Bay, Catania, Bari and the like including hops to Sigonella. On my
salary at the time, an Enswine's $222 + $47.88 less taxes and messbill
monthly, I and my kind dined modestly, and modest restaurant fare in
Southern Italy was pretty firmly tomato-based....although I did learn to
make a number of sauces, quick and slow, which has seved me well in life,
although trying to convey to my spouse and chirren the differences between
"Tomato Gravy", arrabiata, ameritrice', marinara, puttanesca, etc. can be a
daunting task, much less explaining that even "Cream of Tomato" must have
been an Italian thing invented by some butter gorged Bolognese farting
around with the ragu. Opportunities to eat in Italian homes (other than
the very hospitable poor and modest middle class to whom one brought gifts
in the form of foodstuffs cheap and available to me, expensive and hard
to find for them) in the South were few, although the Navy Officers Club in
Taranto featured a menu that was clearly "Northern", but then the officers
in the Italian navy at the time seemed overwhelmingly Northern in fact or
in pretense.

I'll forward the notion that Italian cuisine can be separated into two
"styles" on some mushy Southwest/Northeast hazy line of demarcation, but
that there are a number of such strongly identifiable regional and even
community cuisines which have an identity of their own...Bologna and
Florence qualify, Livorno's really a littoral region, and some would claim
that Rome even possesses neighborhood cuisines. Clearly, the Northeast
stands either alone or as a Transmontane cuisine. Then there's Venice.....

But even that's not sufficient, for except in small towns (and not always
there), much of Italian restaurant cuisine has become homogenized to fit
the owners' or the surroundings' profile of projected customers, too often
the sort of generic Italoturistico, "Continental, or "Business traveler".

TMO

> > Perhaps the reason I reacted so fiercely is because it seemed to
> > continue a popular fallacy. Of course tomatoes are popular in
> > Italy, and very common in parts of Italy. There's a big difference
> > between that and saying that they're "virtually omnipresent" in
> > Italy.
>
> I will concede that it was a bit overstated.

I don't really think we're disagreeing about much. That's really all I
was saying.

> > Big qualifications here. "Southern Italy" is not "Italy". And
> > summer isn't all year round. If you go to Bavaria around now,
> > everyone will be eating asparagus. (this may be true all over
> > Germany - I don't know).
>
> And canned San Marzano (and others) are readily available. Tomato
> paste in little squeeze tubes are everywhere available. Fresh
> tomatoes, locally grown or not are available everywhere, all the time.
You'll probably find the same with asparagus in Germany.


>
> > I've spent a lot of time working with the food in Basilicata,
> > traditionally a poor area, with a wonderful simple cuisine. But
> > have a look at this site on the food of this area - right down in
> > the south
> >
> > <http://www.basilicata.bancadati.it/b-gastronomia.html>
>
> This site talks about "la cucina Lucana" to distinguish it from other
> regional cuisines.
Sure. I agree. It's just one example which I like and use that's
available on the net.
> And this is fine, but look at a broader picture
> than one web site. The books of the Hazans, Ada Boni's books (for a
> more historical picture of the regional cuisines in the last century),
> Bugialli, Middione, Lorenza de'Medici...
>
> Look at the books of Carol Field, Anna Tasca Lanza, Mark Strausman,
> Patricia Wells, Susan Herrmann Loomis, Wanda and Giovanna Tornabene.
> Look at the translation of Artusi by Kyle Phillips.
I've been looking through some of these and others. They seem to
suggest that heavily tomatoe-based food sort of begins in Camapnia, and
gets heavier as you go down through Calabria towards Sicily - but
that's only a brief glance, and I certainly wouldn't stand over it.
>
> > You'll find tomatoes in a number of the recipes, but it's far from
> > ubiquitous - probably less common than parsley or chillies. and
> > remember, in southern Italian cooking the tomato is often used
> > just like parsley, in quite small quantities.
>
> Why does this concept of being integral to a cuisine seem to be being
> described as "in everything" rather than as a very common component of
> the cooking of a region?

> It's almost as though the argument is that
> since it's not in every meal in every dish, it's not "significant" in
> the cuisine.

I agree that it's a very significant element. But that's not what
"ubiquitous" means. It means precisely "everywhere" or "in everything.
>
> > And the fact that it's popular in some parts of the south can't be
> > made to apply to the whole country. I spend a lot of time in
> > Tuscany, and there you'd hardly notice tomatoes. ..
>
> There is no "Italian cuisine." There are Italian cuisines.

I agree
>
> There is no national cuisine in France. One can hardly talk about the
> Alsace and Provence in the same breath. Burgundy and the Loire.

I think you can, just about, but again I don't really think we're
disagreeing here. You could argue that certain shared notions - such
as the order of of a standard meal - constitute a national cuisine. But
it's an arugment I'd be happy to argue on either side.
>
> > Lettuce is eaten at virtually every meal in France - a far
> > higher proportion of meals than tomatoes are eaten with in Italy -
> > but again, that doesn't really make it a staple of French cuisine.
>
> Of course it does. If it's eaten at virtually every meal, it is
> exactly a staple. Like bread.
That's not how I understand a staple. For me bread is, lettuce isn't.
My dictionary's unsatisafactory on this.


(rest snipped because I agree with most of it!)

Lazarus

--
Remover the rock from the email address

quoting Arri London:
Dennis Montey wrote:
>>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.

However, ketchup is quite popular in Mongolia - a squirt on top of a
meat-filled dumpling (buuz). I don't believe tomatoes are grown there, as
the ketchup I saw was imported & expensive. I did see some experimental
farms in the northern Gobi where they grew tomatoes, melons & cucumbers -
all sliced for eating raw. Good healthy food is hard to come by sometimes
& new additions are welcome. My own assumption as to why northern
Europeans adopted the tomato, bell peppers, etc, was because they were SO
TIRED of cabbage ;-) Of course I have nothing to support this opinion.

In article >, ASmith1946
> wrote:

> We're back to this discussion -- which I found useful-- so let me try again.
> Are there commonalities among regional Italian foods? If the answer is yes,
> what are they? Does this include dishes with tomatoes as ingredients?
>
> If the answer is no, then there doesn't seem to be an "Italian cuisine," only
> local cusines-- or are there just individual preferences?
>

This is interesting - although again I think we'll be arguing about
definitions rather than what's on the ground. Of course you're right
about wheat, it's a tiny useage - but I've just noticed that "leaves
from our tuscan kitchen" 1899 lists macharroni (or whatever) as one
vegetable along with many others. And it's interesting to see how few
recipes there contain tomatoes.

There's a second point, which i think is interesting - the difference
between tomatoes as a food and as a relish, or seasoning, which the
italians havae brought to a fine art, although America and England
haven't done badly. (Which is ketchup? I assume it's indian in origin
and I think of it as being heinz par excellence but I think of England
as an East west conduit)

This is written in one hell of a rush, but when i have time i'll try to
address your point.

Bob, if you see this, sorry i didn't spot your new identity!

Best wishes

Tony

--
Remover the rock from the email address

In article >, Jodie Kain >
wrote:

> northern
> Europeans adopted the tomato, bell peppers, etc, was because they were SO
> TIRED of cabbage ;-)

I'll never tire of cabbage - particularly with pork and a few juniper
berries..... ;-)

--
Remover the rock from the email address

> (Which is ketchup? I assume it's indian in origin
>and I think of it as being heinz par excellence but I think of England
>as an East west conduit)



The word "ketchup" originated in China, but it is not likely from Mandarin--
but some southern dialect. Initially, it mean fermented or pickled fish. As the
word migrated through Southeast Asia, it shifted meanings. By the time it
reached Indonesia, it meant (and continues to mean) fermented soy and other
fermented products.

The British ran into it in their colony in what is today Indonesia, and brought
the concept back to England. Early ketchups were made from mushrooms,
anchovies, walnuts, etc. Eventually ketchup was made from every common
vegetable and fruit. Tomato came into existence about 1800 in the UK and US.
Tomato ketchup became dominant in the US after the Civil War, as a byproduct of
the tomato canning industry. The low price of tomato ketchup eventually drove
the other ketchups out of business in the US (by the 1930s) and in the UK by
the 1960s.

And before anyone asks, yes, I did write a book on this too -- Pure Ketchup: A
Social History of America's National Condiment (Columbia: The University of
South Carolina Press, 1996) and the paperback edition was released by the
Smithsonian Institution Press in April 2001.

See what a misspent research/writing life I've led?

Andy Smith