Chili origins

[snopes]

Comment: I've seen a number of places that claimed that Chili (the stew-like dish
commonly added to hot-dogs) was originally prepared by American
Frontiersmen as a way to mask the flavor of meat that was going (or
already was) rancid.

Some pages claim that this is how chili, as a dish, originated, while
others simply claim that it was used for this purpose without making any
claims about the origins.

[Muck]

They say the same thing about Indian Curries. There may be a bit of truth to the story.

[Spamamander]

It wouldn't surprise me honestly- that is one reason spices were so highly valued in medieval times, some would help to preserve meats but others were strong enough to help mask the taste of meat that was starting to turn. I see it as likely more of a combination of things... beans were a dry commodity that could be carried in the chuck-wagons so were a common staple, and one-pot meals were much easier to prepare on a campfire. Adding in meat that was "questionable" would be a good way to make use of it as chili takes a while to cook and might make the meat a bit safer, less waste, and spicy foods were already popular in the region with the influx of Spanish and Native American cooking.

I always knew there was a reason why I couldn't stand chili!!! Yuck!

[Spam & Cookies-mmm]

Originally Posted by MissBethiepoo

I always knew there was a reason why I couldn't stand chili!!! Yuck!

Most chili cooks these days do not use the rotted meat.

[Simply Madeline]

Originally Posted by Spamamander

It wouldn't surprise me honestly- that is one reason spices were so highly valued in medieval times, some would help to preserve meats but others were strong enough to help mask the taste of meat that was starting to turn.

Actually, that's a UL.

(I thought there was a snopes page on this, but I couldn't find it.)

This made me laugh:

I've seen a number of places that claimed that Chili (the stew-like dish commonly added to hot-dogs)

"Commonly added to hot-dogs"? Isn't it much more common to eat chili on its own and not as a condiment?

[We'veBeenHad]

In my Food Almanac (from 1986) they claim that chili originated among cowboys in the American west, who often married (or consorted with) Mexican women. The chuck-wagon supposedly made something called "Son-of-a-bitch Stew" and the Mexican women began adding the cumin and chiles, and supposedly it grew out of that. They came to like it, and it has since been a very popular dish. I don't see why cattlemen would have had to use rotting meat though; they had plenty of fresh meat available. They seem least likely of all people to have been using meat that had gone over.

Now on the food network the origin of chili was a very different story, so I can't be sure how accurate the Food Almanac is, but it sure has some awesome pictures. Maybe tomorrow I'll scan a couple.

[bjohn13]

Originally Posted by Spamamander

beans were a dry commodity that could be carried in the chuck-wagons so were a common staple, .

Being that I live in The Bean State, my belief is that the two most important ingredients in chili are beans and peppers. Any kind of meat will suffice, and tomatoes are a rather controversial food, to say the least. I have debated with some southerners on this point, though, as many view it a sin to even think about putting a bean in their chili. What would be a curiosity to me is how this controversy started and why.

[Spamamander]

Originally Posted by Simply Madeline

Actually, that's a UL.

(I thought there was a snopes page on this, but I couldn't find it.)

Cool- that was one I needed debunked it seems . That one was passed on in school from about fourth grade on. Thanks!