History of Thanksgiving dishes

[Robin Garr]

This article from from Mental Floss is a lot of fun, and includes a few factoids about Thanksgiving dinner dishes that I didn't know. Enjoy!

The Not-So-Ancient History of 10 Thanksgiving Dishes.

Robin, Hi...

I do most sincerely wish all Americans a joyousThanksgiving. Unfortunately, the article in question is riddled with lies, damned lies and even statistics. I was going to save a mini-essay on Thanksgiving for next week but, perhaps to set the record just bit in order, have posted today.

See the article (at your own risk) at viewtopic.php?f=30&t=35906

Best
Rogov

[David M. Bueker]

Regardless of the real history (if htere can even be such a thing), for me Thanksgiving dishes have a history of "we had this last year, so we will have it this year." This tradition goes on year after year until any change in the menu is almost distasteful regardless of the quality of the food.

We did add a new dish last year, with Salil joining us for Thanksgiving. It worked well, and it will be part of this year's feast as well sincechange is not allowed except by necessity!

[Robin Garr]

I do most sincerely wish all Americans a joyousThanksgiving. Unfortunately, the article in question is riddled with lies, damned lies and even statistics. I was going to save a mini-essay on Thanksgiving for next week but, perhaps to set the record just bit in order, have posted today.

See the article (at your own risk) at viewtopic.php?f=30&t=35906

Rogov, that's a splendid article. I enjoyed it, and I trust in its authenticity.

I'm puzzled, though, about your comments on the Mental Floss article, which only peripherally refers to "the original Pilgrims’ feast in 1621" by way of pointing out that the Pilgrims did NOT eat turkey and mashed potatoes and dressing. It then goes on to an offbeat survey of dishes largely added to the tradition during the 19th and 20th centuries.

Could you clarify for me where you find the lies "riddling" the article? Or are we indulging in a bit of the old "grab 'em with the lede" rule of journalism?

From your hopefully favorite myth-buster.

"…most of the Thanksgiving dishes we enjoy today weren’t at the original Pilgrims’ feast in 1621"

The Pilgrims did not feast in 1621. They were too busy dropping dead from famine, frostbite and vitamin deficiency caused diseases.

… Sweet potatoes are native to the Americas and their consumption goes back about 5,000 years, so it is no wonder they are associated with the American holiday, even though the Pilgrims didn’t have them in Massachusetts.

The "sweet potatoes" referred to are most probably yams as the sweet potato as we know it today traces back to Peru as recently as 2,200 years ago

… By 1895, recipes for sweetened sweet potatoes as a dinner side dish were showing

Sweet potatoes enriched with either beet sugar or molasses were popular with both Thomas Jefferson and George Washington. Abraham Lincoln enjoyed his sweet potatoes mashed together with butter and sugar.

… Cranberries were probably a part of the original Thanksgiving feast

Only one problem here. The Pilgrims may have found cranberries in the natural bogs in which they then grew but did not realize that to be edible they had to be cooked. In fact, they were warned off eating these under any circumstances as the berries were considered poisonous well until the late 17th century.

… it is not known when the first actual apple cider was produced, but the invading Romans discovered it in use in the village of Kent when they invaded England in 55BCE.

The Romans knew about apple cider long before 55 BCE. Apples were among the first fruits known to be intentionally fermented, and that by the Egyptians as long ago as the reign of Pharoah Menes who lived some 3000 years before the birth of Christ. As an interesting side note apple cider and watermelon wine were served in roadside stands outside of Alexandria, those stands opened largely by freed slaves. As an also interesting side note, cider was popular among the members of the Parisi tribe, those noble people for whom the city of Paris was eventually named.

… The first recorded pumpkin pie recipe was published in France in 1653

I cannot vouch for the first recipe but pumpkin pie became quite popular in Spain and Italy starting not too many years after the return of Columbus from the "new world". Recipes have survived from the writings of the Isaac ben Judah Abrabanel, those composed during his stay in Venice in 1506.

Best
Rogov

"The Pilgrims did not feast in 1621.

http://www.pilgrimhall.org/1stthnks.htm

The "sweet potatoes" referred to are most probably yams as the sweet potato as we know it today traces back to Peru as recently as 2,200 years ago

I thought yams were native to Africa?

The Pilgrims may have found cranberries in the natural bogs in which they then grew but did not realize that to be edible they had to be cooked. In fact, they were warned off eating these under any circumstances as the berries were considered poisonous well until the late 17th century.

http://tinyurl.com/2bzlpzu

I do most sincerely wish all Americans a joyousThanksgiving. Unfortunately, the article in question is riddled with lies, damned lies and even statistics. I was going to save a mini-essay on Thanksgiving for next week but, perhaps to set the record just bit in order, have posted today.

See the article (at your own risk) at viewtopic.php?f=30&t=35906

Just read your article at your Culinary Corner. "It took almost six years until the Pilgrims finally came to realize that the vegetable riches of the new world were enormous.Cocoa, cassava (manioc), many types of beans, corn, papaya, sweet potatoes, avocado and the members of the pumpkin family were available in abundance"

Cocoa? Manioc? Papaya? Avocado? In New England?

[Robin Garr]

Cocoa? Manioc? Papaya? Avocado? In New England?

17th century Costco?

Cocoa? Manioc? Papaya? Avocado? In New England?

Not in New England, Dale but in Virginia. There was a great deal of trade and/or barter between tribes of Native Americans and cocoa, manioc and papaya were brought there from Mexico, South America or the Caribbean. The avocado made its way from the Caribbean via Mexico and then to what are now Texas and Florida and was a well established crop of several trribes by what some estimate as early as 1580.


Rogov

Not in New England, Dale but in Virginia. There was a great deal of trade and/or barter between tribes of Native Americans and cocoa, manioc and papaya were brought there from Mexico, South America or the Caribbean. The avocado made its way from the Caribbean via Mexico and then to what are now Texas and Florida and was a well established crop of several trribes by what some estimate as early as 1580.

What does Virginia have to do with the Pilgrims? Plymouth colony was roughly 600 miles NE (when 600 miles was a serious distance)
Forgetting that (really major) detail, can you please cite one source re the abundance (or even the presence) of cocoa, manioc and papaya in Virginia (even though there were no Pilgrims there)?
Can you name a source for the idea of trade in produce between native Americans in South/Central America and Virgina?
Can you name a source for the claim that avocados were a crop in Florida in 1626 (the six years you cite, much less 1580 - of course, even if true, that would not be Virgina, much less MA where Pilgrims were)? Can you name a source that avocadoes were even a known food in any English speaking colony in first half of 17th century?
You call the author of the Mental Floss article a liar, but your short article has far more demonstratively false "facts" than anything there.

Dale, Hello....

I can understand disagreement but I'm not quite sure why you're expressing such anger. In my original article I did refer to the colonies at both Jamestown and Plymouth. More than that, I did not accuse the author of the original article to which a link was provided of being a liar. It should be clear that my reference to "lies, damned lies and statistics" was nothing more than a metaphorical (and agreed, dramatic) way of saying "innaccuracies". A literary conceit perhaps but one that is allowable when posing non-academic issues or questions.

It is possible, by the way, that you and I are perceiving history through different pairs of glasses. You seem to be taking the American point of view that generally takes the "Pilgrims" to be those who settled at Plymouth. Mine is more a European historical view that also defines as "Pilgrims" those who settled Jamestown some decade or so earlier than those who arrived in Plymouth.

As to providing references, I do that comfortably when writing for academic journals but this piece was written for the popular press. I will, however provide one general reference for you, that being the books and articles of historian Reay Tannehill.

Best
Rogov

[Jenise]

There's a deliciously en pointe (to the title of this thread) cartoon in this month's New Yorker (page 125, should you have a copy). A bunch of Pilgrims are sitting around a dinner table and one comments, "I hate theme dinners."

Jenise,
funnily Betsy pointed that out to me last night.

Daniel,
I'm not angry, I just believe that inaccurate information should not be unchallenged. That is especially true when the inaccurate information is presented as correcting inaccuracies, "myth-busting", exposing "out and out lies," etc. Frankly, the article that seems full of inaccuracies (to me) is yours.

I've never heard of this European view of the Pilgrims as any English settler. The common noun is generally used to describe those who travel for religious reasons, and the proper noun to the Puritans of the Plymouth Colony. I see in your article you refer to the Jamestown settlers as Puritans, which is simply and totally untrue no matter your point of view. The Jamestown Settlement was totally economically driven ("the Virginia company") - not a Puritan in sight. That's a non-debatable inaccuracy, far greater than anything in the Mental Floss article.

It is of course true that the Pilgrims (in Plymouth) had a grim first winter. But any bright American schoolkid could tell you that- it's a big part of the story. They could also tell you that the first winter was 1620-1621, and that the first Thankgiving was 1621, celebrating the (comparative) bounty after a season of farming, gathering, hunting.

But in any case I've never heard any evidence that these tropical foods were abundantly available in any of the English speaking settlements, but just placed a hold on Tannahill's "food in History" to see if I can be enlightened (I enjoyed "Sex in History"). But for now I'm more than sceptical, I'm disbelieving. As a tween/teen I was fascinated by Native Americans (especially the Creek nations who were dominant in the Southeast where I lived), and know of their trading practices. Most of the tribes met and exchanged goods. But generally hard goods, with neigboring tribes. Cocoa, manioc, avocados, and papaya grow in regions two to three thousand miles from Virginia, passing through dozens of separate societies (and deserts, swamps, and mountains). I find it strains belief to think that foodstuffs were carried (no pack animals, no oceangoing vessels- and rivers that don't follow much of the route) for 3 months (minimum) to Virginia. Personally, I don't think I'd want that avocado or papaya!

While I don't think Wikipedia or the internet in general are definitive or scholarly sources, I'd take the widespread story of avocados (multiple references in one half-second search) being introduced to Florida in 1833 (and Texas and California in latter 19th century) to be the case until I see some actual evidence of it being a "well established crop" in the 16th century.

If one is presenting oneself as setting the record straight in the pursuit of truth and mythbusting, I think one should be prepared to back up one's statements.

I'm quite enjoying "Food in History." Understandably with such a huge topic, it is not exactly linear nor "complete," but it is well-written and has lots of interesting vignettes.

I started with the chapter covering the Americas from European "discovery" (and the civilizations already extant) through the 18th century. Several mentions of manioc and avocado in the discussion of South and Central America, but no mentions of manioc, avocado, cocoa, or papaya in North America. It says Jamestown had lots of game and edible berries, but settlers would have starved except for Indians. The "Pilgrim Fathers who landed at Plymouth Rock" were more successful, learning to grow corn/maize when rye and wheat didn't do well. It states East coast settlers primarily lived on game, seafood, maize and beans. Interesting subchapter on the abundance of turkeys, and how the name confusion with guinea hens spread across Europe. Good book.