Toptube Video Search Engine

Title:Чей бешбармак? Казахи, киргизы и узбеки, татары и башкиры, Дагестан, Чечня, Ингушетия, Азербайджан!

What is national cuisine? Most folk dishes are not national, but regional. Recipes and cooking technologies are distributed in territories where the necessary ingredients and conditions are available. As a result, the same dishes can be part of different national cuisines. But sometimes, when attributing a certain dish to some people, people have in mind the question of its origin. And this is a completely different matter. All attempts to establish the true origin of folk dishes can only be hypothetical and nothing more. All signs - from the etymology of the name to the distribution area of ​​the dish - are indirect, but not direct evidence of the invention of these dishes by representatives of one or another people. The origin of only a small part of the dishes is truly known and documented, and most of the current cooking technologies were invented by mankind long before the formation of living nationalities. It is possible that those who came up with some dishes and no longer have descendants. And if they did, then there are no less questions from this. For example, if the biblical Abraham invented some kind of dish, and both Jews and Arabs descended from him, then to whom would the dishes invented by Abraham now belong? On the other hand, sometimes you can trace the distribution of certain dishes across regions and even across the planet. For example, many dishes and technologies spread simultaneously with the spread of ingredients and spices. It is for this reason that the distribution of many technologies coincides with caravan and sea routes. Also, the distribution of certain dishes coincided with the resettlement of peoples and even ethnogenesis. After all, very often the same dishes with similar names are prepared by kindred peoples. Peoples can have strong and stable ties not only in terms of language, common ethnic roots, but also in terms of religion or common history. If one country was ruled by representatives of another country, then the culinary culture spread first in the same direction, and after the end of colonization - in the opposite direction. The example of Russia in this regard is typical - just now there is a spread of cooking in the opposite direction, from the former colonies to the metropolis. 50-60 years ago the same processes took place in Great Britain, even earlier - in Turkey, Byzantium, Persia and other empires of the past. What did Assyria and Mesopotamia give to the culinary world? What did Byzantium give? What did Rome give? Do you know how the Arabs influenced the cuisine of southern Italy? What about Valencia? And who influenced the Arabs? Who is in Persian? Who was influenced by the Poles and Russians? The development of national cuisines and, as a result, the formation of new dishes can go in two ways. The first is the improvement of cooking methods within a separate national cuisine, most often forced, associated with changes in conditions and places of existence. The second is the borrowing and transfer of technologies from one landscape to another, with the replacement of ingredients due to their absence or the emergence of new, previously unknown products. There is nothing shameful in the development of national cuisine at the expense of borrowing from neighbors - this is an absolutely normal process. For example, the way shish kebab is cooked today in Russia is not cooked in the supposed countries of its origin. Therefore, shish kebab can be called a Russian dish for two reasons at the same time: it is unique and it is widespread, rooted and cooked more often than some traditional Russian dishes. Therefore, it is possible to attribute a certain dish to a specific people in three cases: 1 When we want to say that this dish was created by representatives of this people. But this should be done as carefully as possible, only with documented information. 2 When we point out that this dish is not exclusively part of the national cuisine of a given people (that is, other peoples also cook it). 3 When we want to emphasize that this particular dish has exceptional cooking features that are not used by other peoples. But even in this case, it is more correct to talk about the regional features of the dish, as is the case, for example, with pilaf. Continued in the comments. ► - online store with my books


Download Server 1


Download Server 2


Alternative Download :