Chile con carne

[Laurence Horn]

At 12:03 PM -0800 12/24/02, A. Maberry wrote:
>I agree with Larry that the 1820 quote is not related to what is
>usually meant by "chile con carne" but I don't think that beans are a
>required ingredient.
>
>allen
>maberry at u.washington.edu
>
I agree.  In fact the "authentic" versions I've seen recipes for are
a bit closer to one kind of meat-with-chile, consisting of braised
stew beef in small chunks (but not ground beef) cooked with various
spices and with neither beans nor tomatoes (including paste or puree)
added.  Still, that's definitely the minority version served in this
country, and you won't find it in cans.  I suspect that those who
cook it in the "authentic" style tend not to call it chile con carne,
if only because of guilt by association; "chile" or "chili" tout
court is used instead.  Some of you have no doubt been to more chile
cookoffs than I have, and can speak from more authority.

L