Furbyz said:
Fair enough, while fudge may have been made independently, it certainly wasn't the first to heat sugar, milk, and butter (or any combination of the three) to the soft ball stage. Although, I do need to comment that fudge is not a general term for similar confections, but a rather specific one. Tablet and fudge simply aren't the same thing, as the signature characteristic of fudge is its smooth, creamy texture.
Urgh, sorry for the slow reply, hellish day.
I think it may be a regional difference, but the fudge in Ireland is decidedly crumbly and not as smooth. I think this may be one of the differences between U.S. fudge and European fudge. Not that you can't find smooth fudge in Europe, just that its normally in big shops like Fudge Factory, while the stuff you find in smaller confectioners is normally more buttery and grainy. Personally I prefer the grainy type. I also like the Brazilian dolce de lecte, which is their take on fudge... although they sometime mix coconut or peanut into it, which I don't like. In Japan the only fudge I can get is the Brazalian variety (unless I go all the way to Tokyo... in which case I'm normally more focused on finding a jammy dougnut at Crispy Creme).
Furbyz said:
I also love culinary history. The history of beer is particularly interesting, some people going so far as to believe it may be the entire reason for the creation of civilization and the Agricultural Revolution. I find it fascinating because food so closely ties into the culture that made and cultivated it. Which says horrible things about my home because the Texas State Fair is responsible for both corn dogs and Fried Coke (well, fried coke is really just coke flavored beignets BUT STILL). It's a weird place, the State Fair, where wondrous, terrible things happen.
I remember reading some stuff about the impact of beer on ancient Babylonian culture. For the Irish it was Whiskey (which translates as "The Water of Life")... although don't start a discussion between an Irishman and a Scotsman about who came up with whiskey first, and which is superior, Irish or Scots, because that'll just lead to an ungodly row.
Furbyz said:
Thank you for telling me about Tablet and Barfi, I hadn't heard of them until now, and as I said I do love history. Actually, I think I'll try my hand at making Tablet today as I have most of the basic ingredients on hand. It seems easy enough as the basic gist of it is "make fudge but don't whip it." EDIT: The previous sentence is very wrong and was formulated before I actually looked up recipes and was going on my perception of the chemistry involved (less whipping = longer sugar crystals = grainy).
Ironically enough my science teacher at school taught me to make fudge, and gave a very interesting lecture on crystalline bonding as illustrated by 3 different varieties of fudge he made. Sadly most of the lesson is forgotten, but the fudge wasn't!
Furbyz said:
On a note unrelated to food, you mentioned earlier in this thread that your family held a grudge against the Stuarts. Well, oddly enough, I am descended from Irish Stuarts. I was wondering what they had done specifically. Or did you mean the royal family, which I have not established a direct line to yet?
Well it's a long story, but I've heard it told old MacIan, head of the MacDonald clan at the time, and about 70 years old around 400 years ago, which was pretty much like being a 100 years old today, went down to hand in his oath of allegiance. He was sent from pillar to post, forced to ride about a 80 miles across Scotland before he could find the chap who was authorised to witness the oath. He signed it in front of the chap, a Campbell, and thought it was all fine.
Behind his back the Campbell put a line through the signature and said the document wasn't legal, so MacDonald hadn't given his oath. The Stuarts jumped on the lie (even though the document was obviously bloody signed in MacIans hand!), seeing a chance to gain territory and prestige, and made sure the King never saw the document and got only the distorted version of things.
The real betrayal though was that the Campbell commander, while gathering his men, claimed guest rights with the MacDonalds (he was related by marriage to the MacDonald clan, and had the right), and then attacked while still covered by guest rights. More than half the MacDonald clan were killed as a result in the Massacre of Glencoe, under the command of a Campbell.
The truth came out in the end, but the Campbells were too influential, and even though compensation was ordered it was never paid by the Stuarts or the Campbells.
.. so not only did they attack and kill MacDonalds under guest right, but even worse they didn't pay the blood debt! Fecking wankers the lot of them. I wouldn't trust a Stuart or a Campbell with a used half-penny stamp!
I reckon with compound interest and the rising value of gold the blood debt should be a couple of trillion dollars by now... care to pay up ye welching Stuart?
