Lasagna is British not Italian !

Maciamo

Veteran member
Admin
Messages
10,106
Reaction score
3,552
Points
113
Location
Lothier
Ethnic group
Italo-celto-germanic
BBC News :Britain lays claim to lasagne

Lasagne is British.

It's so British the court of Richard II was making it in the 14th Century and most likely serving it up to ravenous knights in oak-panelled banqueting halls.

The claim has been made by researchers who found the world's oldest cookery book, The Forme of Cury, in the British Museum.

A spokesman for the Berkeley Castle medieval festival, with whom the experts were working, said: "I defy anyone to disprove it because it appeared in the first cookery book ever written."

That's where the problem lies. If there had been an older Italian book, would it have made a difference ? It's not because nothing is written that it did not exist. Pointless discussion.

The recipe book does not mention meat - a staple of a good lasagne.

And such an early use of tomatoes in food would have had medieval cooks spluttering into their espressos.

But it does describe making a base of pasta and laying cheese over the top.

It calls this "loseyns", which is apparently pronounced "lasan", although it fails to mention whether it should be followed with a sweet tiramasu and a glass of Amaretto.

Tomatoes came from America, so technically tomato lasagna as we know it now could not be made before the 16th century.
I also thought that pasta was a wheat adaptation of Chinese rice noodles brought back through th Silk Road or Marco Polo in the late middle ages. If so, Chinese could also take the claim.

But the Italian embassy in London reportedly responded: "Whatever this old dish was called, it was not lasagne as we make it."

That is certain. But nevertheless interesting that Brits ate lasagna before potatoes. I'd always been wondering what starches Europeans ate apart from bread before 1492.

In May it finally beat off a challenge by UK supermarket Asda, which had been selling Parma ham that had been sliced and pre-packed in Britain.

European judges ruled the ham must be packed and sliced in Parma itself to be marketed under its name of origin.

And last year Parmesan producers won protection from European rivals that had been using their name.

Authentic Parmesan must come from the banks of the Po.

I agree about the denomination. I am appalled when I see Japanese, Australian, New Zeland, Canadian or American version of Parmean, Mozzarella or other cheeses than don't tatse anything near the original ones. There are thousands of sorts of cheese in Europe with a unique name for each of them (usually the village, abbey or region where it is made). Why don't they use their own names rather than steal the well-established ones. At best they could write "Parmesan-like XXX cheese". Then, there is not just Parmesan that goes with pasta. Belgians for instance usually use grated Gruyere or Emmenthal on Bolognese sauce and that's also great (if not better).
 
So lasagna is British? Oh well, I am still crazy for it, lol.

As for parma ham: there will certainly be more brawl between the WTO and the EU in regard to geographical indications:

At the final press conference Commissioner Franz Fischler said the EU was going to fight at the WTO to find an acceptable solution to the problem of the illegal use of geographical indications by certain companies. After explaining that during the negotiations over the Doha Development Round, the EU had pulled out the stops to ensure EU wines, spirits and other high quality products were not barred from the market by trademark protection scams, he went on to say: ?We are pressing very hard to ensure that our quality wines, spirits and other products are not denied access to markets by trademark protection tricks. It is simply unacceptable for geographical descriptions, for example, to be used as trade marks and thus products named after their true origin to be excluded from the market. For example, Parma ham can be registered as a trade mark in Canada and real Parma ham can then no longer be sold under its real name. The use of geographical indications by unauthorised persons or entities is also detrimental to consumers and legitimate producers.

Source: http://www.economia-bruselas.gob.mx/english/lonuevo/not_det.aspx?Id=22

More info

=> http://europa.eu.int/comm/agriculture/external/wto/officdoc/geogr_en.htm
 
BBC News :Britain lays claim to lasagne
That's where the problem lies. If there had been an older Italian book, would it have made a difference ? It's not because nothing is written that it did not exist. Pointless discussion.
Tomatoes came from America, so technically tomato lasagna as we know it now could not be made before the 16th century.
I also thought that pasta was a wheat adaptation of Chinese rice noodles brought back through th Silk Road or Marco Polo in the late middle ages. If so, Chinese could also take the claim.
That is certain. But nevertheless interesting that Brits ate lasagna before potatoes. I'd always been wondering what starches Europeans ate apart from bread before 1492.
I agree about the denomination. I am appalled when I see Japanese, Australian, New Zeland, Canadian or American version of Parmean, Mozzarella or other cheeses than don't tatse anything near the original ones. There are thousands of sorts of cheese in Europe with a unique name for each of them (usually the village, abbey or region where it is made). Why don't they use their own names rather than steal the well-established ones. At best they could write "Parmesan-like XXX cheese". Then, there is not just Parmesan that goes with pasta. Belgians for instance usually use grated Gruyere or Emmenthal on Bolognese sauce and that's also great (if not better).

Pasta is not from China. What evidence is there for it? Food historians consider pasta in Italy to be an independent invention and many also believe noodles were independently invented in Persia as well.
 
First of all,lasagne as traditionally made in Italy didn't contain any tomato product. Even today, the most traditional version of lasagne, that made in Bologna, uses besciamella as the sauce with a meat ragout. So all of that discussion is irrelevant.

Plus, Apicius already made a version of lasagne during the Roman empire:

"Patina Apiciana[FONT=&quot]"The Apician dish is made thus: take small pieces of cooked sow's belly [with the paps on it] pieces of fish, pieces of chicken, the breasts of figpeckers or of thrushes [slightly] cooked, [and] whichever is best. Mince all this very carefully, particularly the figpeckers [the meat of which is very tender]. Dissolve in oil strictly fresh eggs; crush pepper and lovage, pour over some broth and raisin wine, put it in a saucepan to heat and bind with roux. After you have cut all in regular pieces, let it come to the boiling point. When done, retire [from the fire] with its juice of which you put some in another deep pan with whole pepper and pignolia nuts. Spead [the ragout] out in single layers with thin pancakes in between; put in as many pancakes and layers of meat as is required to fill the dish; put a final cover of pancake on top and sprinkle with pepper after those eggs have been added [which serve] to tie the dish. Now put this [mould or dish] in a boiler [steamer, hot water bath, allow to congeal] and dish it out [by unmoulding it]. An expensive silver platter would enhance the appearance of this dish materially."[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The next version recorded is from the 14th century Liber de Coquina. Here, pasta dough is rolled out, sliced into small squares, boiled, then served topped with the grated cheese and spices (namely cardamon, nutmeg, ground pepper, and cinnamon). A variation of that recipe calls on the cook to top the pasta with cheese and spices, layer with another row of pasta, then more cheese and spices, and so on and so forth. Sound familiar? ""

The same holds true, I'm afraid, for the Hamburger steak. Can't find that thread.

https://museumcrush.org/the-1500-year-old-recipe-that-shows-how-romans-invented-the-beef-burger/[/FONT]
 
A common version:
Lasagna-bolognese.jpg


I prefer a bit more tomato in my ragu and more besciamella so it's creamier.

maxresdefault.jpg
 
That looks delicious.

But I agree with the Roman origins. People are always trying to find exotic origins for European foods for some reason. I did find a reliable book which stated a lot of the chefs in Roman kitchens were slaves from Greece and Anatolia though. That makes sense though.

I'm not sure about hamburger steak. Its clear the Romans had a version of it but I'm not sure the German version is a direct descendant. But the theory of Mongol origins is wrong. The idea that Mongols placed meat under their saddles and ate it is wrong. Chinese sources don't mention them doing this. And on top of that most agree the meat would have been contaminated with sweat and inedible. Same thing with steak tartare (which I love). Its probably related to the fact that it was served with tartare sauce (which was named after the Tartars due to the rough, coarse nature of the two not because it was invented by Turko-Mongols).
 
These examples are applicable to other examples related to any other country.

They are measuring sticks that can be used for any country on the old continent, right?

Si, sí, sí, sí, sí...

Yes, yes
 
Last edited:
I think it's time for such an obvious t-roll to go bye-bye.
 

This thread has been viewed 15033 times.

Back
Top