Traditional to before any mass migration from the colonies I’d say.
Like the food the Brits made themselves. If they had these spices and used them that is fine. But claiming dishes that came in with immigration I would not count
You’re agreeing with me. You said that not having any natural spices lead to a culture not eating any spicy food. I said that having a lot immigration from countries with spicy food changes that, as proven in much of the western world.
You’re right, food in countries that had no spices at that time wasn’t spicy. I’m not sure that says anything very interesting though.
Yes but the food that comes in with inmigration is not the native culture’s food. It can get integrated but it is still not native food. If I am expressing this correctly.
Like is it tikka masala or something similar that comes from britain. But I would not call that british food. If you get what I mean.
You can draw an arbitrary line in the sand anywhere and say anything after it is not from that place. Are all the French influenced dishes in Britain not British? What about Saxon or Norse? Again, this doesn’t seem helpful framing.
The traditional foods of a country, to me, include what is eaten broadly over recent generations.
As for Tikka Masala, is tea drinking not British too?
Yeah well I am allowed to draw the line where I want aren’t I? And I will say traditional European (northern and eastern mostly) food is just not spicy since really spicy stuff does not grow there and people figured out different methods of preserving food.
Sure, draw the lines where it suits your argument I guess. If it helps you dictate to people what their traditions are then it’s all coming up Milhouse for you, eh?
The UK doesn’t have much naturally growing spicy things either, and spicy food is still pervasive here.
It’s what having virtually no immigration from the east or the med does to cuisine in a country.
Yes but is traditional british food spicy?
Not the food, but one of our most popular condiments - English Mustard - has a fair bit of kick to it. Not quite wasabi levels, but not too far off.
Traditional to when? We’ve had spices here for centuries And they were barely used in British food.
It was waves of Indian, Asian, and Afro-carribean migration that lead to changes in cuisine here.
Traditional to before any mass migration from the colonies I’d say.
Like the food the Brits made themselves. If they had these spices and used them that is fine. But claiming dishes that came in with immigration I would not count
You’re agreeing with me. You said that not having any natural spices lead to a culture not eating any spicy food. I said that having a lot immigration from countries with spicy food changes that, as proven in much of the western world.
You’re right, food in countries that had no spices at that time wasn’t spicy. I’m not sure that says anything very interesting though.
Yes but the food that comes in with inmigration is not the native culture’s food. It can get integrated but it is still not native food. If I am expressing this correctly.
Like is it tikka masala or something similar that comes from britain. But I would not call that british food. If you get what I mean.
You can draw an arbitrary line in the sand anywhere and say anything after it is not from that place. Are all the French influenced dishes in Britain not British? What about Saxon or Norse? Again, this doesn’t seem helpful framing.
The traditional foods of a country, to me, include what is eaten broadly over recent generations.
As for Tikka Masala, is tea drinking not British too?
Yeah well I am allowed to draw the line where I want aren’t I? And I will say traditional European (northern and eastern mostly) food is just not spicy since really spicy stuff does not grow there and people figured out different methods of preserving food.
Let’s just leave it at that.
Sure, draw the lines where it suits your argument I guess. If it helps you dictate to people what their traditions are then it’s all coming up Milhouse for you, eh?