Talk:Pastirma/Archive 1

Archive 1

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

concensus is to not merge --JFH (talk) 20:25, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

---

isn't pastirma same as pastrami? is there a subtle difference i am missing here?Infestor (talk) 14:33, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

That would be the Levantine name probably.--Rafy talk 17:49, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

well, although they both link to separate pages, i strongly believe that they are the same. also turkish-english dictionary translates pastirma to pastrami. Infestor (talk) 01:49, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

I think they are one and the same --عبد المؤمن (talk) 01:04, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, pastrami comes from pastırma. Ex oriente lux. --E4024 (talk) 15:32, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Clearly both the name and the dish pastrami come from pastırma. The question is whether the dishes have diverged enough to warrant two articles. I can see both sides of the argument. I generally think closely related foods (even if not identical) should be treated together, but the wisdom of my fellow-editors on Wikipedia seems to disagree, thus we have doner kebab, shwarma, and gyros as three articles for very similar articles of food, with each article being "defended" by the corresponding nationality.

If the articles were to be merged, the name of the article would, under Wikipedia policy, of course have to be Pastrami, since that is by far the more common name in English. Somehow I suspect that the partisans of pastirma would not be happy about this. --Macrakis (talk) 23:25, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Pasturmas/Pastirma/Pasturma is definitely not the same as pastrami. My family has been making pasturma for generations and I have been making pastrami or eating it everywhere I could find it since 1980. The only thing they have in common (Pasturma and Pastrami that is) is that they both contain a piece of meat. The process of preparing them, and the way to eat them are completely different. Therefore, the two entries should not be merged, solely because some claim that the names suggest commonality Acstamos (talk) 16:55, 6 January 2013 (UTC).

Absolutely not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.108.13.94 (talk) 20:31, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Turkish

I am creating this discussion section for future reference and for those editors who are interested in reverting vandalism which is constantly being practiced here by Turkish (or Azeri) oriented nationalist rhetoric.

Just because 'Pastirma' is a Turkish word, it does not mean it is of Turkish origin. And while we are on this subject matter,

PASTIRMA IS MOST DEFINITELY NOT FROM CENTRAL ASIA NOR HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH PUTTING MEAT UNDER YOUR SADDLE.

In fact, putting meat under your saddle probably creates the opposite effect of what pastirma is. Turkish fairy tales about how "Turkish warriors placed meat under their saddles then went to battle then returned and miraculously discovered kebab meat and pastirma and sujuk" etc have no place in this page. Pastirma is a special process of curing meat, and in the Ottoman empire these, along with sujuk and other sausages were known to be Armenian specialties. As for references, it is difficult to find sources since I am not aware of any scholars who have done exhaustive research on Armenian food. However, Turkish oriented pages constantly use the (Islamo-centric) book "A Taste of Thyme" to "prove" with the Charles Perry article how Baklava originated in Central Asia. Although I find this book to be on the biased side due to the convenient ignoring of Armenian, and Greek food origins, I would like to point out that even in this book it is admitted by the author on page 35:

Armenians enjoy a reputation throughout the region as distinguished cooks, both in domestic food and in professional catering. They are particularly renowned for their pastry cooking [boerek, baklava] and for fine basturma"

and again on page 39:

Armenians are widely admired as cooks, especially for their pastries [boerek, baklava] and sausages [sujuk], notably pasturma.

This reference is also an appropriate reference for sujuk, and boerek, and baklava. As my library of books expands, I will also be searching for other sources, but for now this is what I have found.Thinkfood (talk) 20:23, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

User macrakis is one such person who is editing this page in such a way as to hide the Armenian origin of pastirma and inserting weasel terminology to insinuate pastirma is of Turkish origin. As can be seen in the history section:

• Claims he did not say pastirma is Turkish yet changes "pastirma is usually considered Armenian" to "pastirma is usually considered Turkish", and without sources.
• Re-inserts Turkish fairy tale about a "legend" how pastirma is placed under saddles in Central Asia, without scholarly sources.
• Removes Armenian Basturma picture which is the best clear depiction of pastirma, and replaces with a substandard picture of pastirma in Istanbul.

Apparently this person is not a neutral or truthful wikipedia editor and must be watched closely.Thinkfood (talk) 22:29, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Dear Thinkfood, there is no need for such nastiness.

I did not add the claim that basturma is of Turkish origin, I simply restored the text to what it was before your edits. Actually, I made this edit some time ago:

Wind-dried beef has been made in this region for centuries. Andrew Dalby mentions its use in Byzantium. ((ref)) Andrew Dalby, Siren Feasts as cited in Regional Cuisines of Medieval Europe: A Book of Essays, Melitta Weiss Adamson, p. 11 ((/ref)) Pastırma itself is usually considered a Turkish or Armenian dish. ((ref)) Leslie Chamberlain, The Food and Cooking of Eastern Europe as quoted in Davidson ((/ref))

You will see that (a) this is well-sourced and (b) it says that pastirma is "usually considered a Turkish or Armenian dish". Someone other than me removed the "or Armenian" part and the source. I will restore the text and the source. Note that it still says "is usually considered" -- the weasel words are in the source!

I agree that the story (characterized in the text as a "legend") about the meat under the saddle is ridiculous, and I've tagged it with ((dubious)) because even a legend needs sources.

I actually thought I moved the Armenian photo to the Armenian section -- this was a mistake, and I'll fix it.

So all in all, I think you'll see that we agree more than we disagree. Attacking me is not only against WP policy, it's poor tactics since we should be supporting each other on many points. --Macrakis (talk) 23:01, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

On other topics, I am surprised by your characterization of A Taste of Thyme as "Islamo-centric". Sami Zubaida himself is an Iraqi Jew, Claudia Roden (who wrote the foreword and a chapter on Jewish food in the Middle East) is an Egyptian Jew, and most of the contributors to the volume are not Muslim. If you know of any better research on the origin of baklava, sujuk, and pastirma, then the best thing to do is to add references to it in the article, not to complain that you don't like what the article says based on this source (among others).

As for "Just because 'Pastirma' is a Turkish word, it does not mean it is of Turkish origin." -- I never said that, and the article doesn't say that.

I am all for finding more and better sources for all this, but culinary history is hard because much culinary practice is simply not recorded. --Macrakis (talk) 23:27, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Ok, well the book is both "Islamo-centric" as well as "Judeo-centric" because it has an entire section for Jewish food as I remember it, my point being that you cannot write such a book on "Middle Eastern Food" without Armenian and Greek food origins (which this book completely and seemingly intentionally ignores, only mentioning these cultures for development purposes). This is the reason that as a legitimate source is concerned, I view this book with some reservations. In fact this book is downright hostile sometimes towards Armenian and Greek history, which is the reason that Perry wrote the dubious and unlikely origin of baklava being "Central Asian Turkic". Perry mocks the Greek version of baklava history supposedly refuting cited sources, then claims it is Central Asian without any proof claiming "it is quite possible Turks invented layered bread" (p 89). Does anyone in their right mind believe that this is a legitimate source? Yet the nationalistic Turks of wikipedia have taken this article and run amuck with it, applying it to everything they can think of which involves phyllo dough. Perry is neither a scholar nor an expert in history, as is quite evident when he next claims the "Azeris are the missing link". (More on this later). I have not visited the baklava section yet, but Perry fails to realize that the crude baklava made by nomads of Central Asia is perhaps a failed imitation of the actual baklava. I have more to say of this and will put my ideas in the baklava section later. Now as far as pastirma, and many other foods shared by Turks, Greeks and Armenians, apparently if left unchecked everything comes from Asia. Yet, all the said foods in question are no where to be found in Central Asia (give or take one or two items) - go figure. Sometimes, a rudimentary understanding of the subject matter is enough to separate fact from fiction despite the fact that sources have not been found.

Also, yes my reaction may have been harsh, but consider your drastic initial edit, which I found to be hostile and seemingly with a hidden agenda. I am not here to make enemies (I'd rather make friends than enemies). I am interested in truthful, productive discussions regarding the cultural history of Asia Minor, especially with those also interested in the same. Unfortunately whenever I read articles related thereof, I feel I am wasting my time on wikipedia because the damage I see makes me feel overwhelmed.

So I am all for starting anew here and developing a good article with your input. But please understand that reverting and thereby deleting my contributions here entirely to me is the same thing as telling me that I've wasted my time, and my efforts were worthless. I'm just saying, please improve what I wrote if you feel you can improve it, rather than cause a deletion and negating my efforts.

And also thank you for pointing out the Petrosian/Underwood book, I have actually been meaning to purchase the book. And I read a little about the pastirma section, and I felt that it stated what I wanted to state actually, that pastirma is a claim by the Turks of Central Asia, and is more fantasy than fact, the attraction to it being that it offers an "exotic" explanation. However I was pleased to see that the book also explores the idea that pastirma is not appropriate to place under saddles, since it must be as cool and dry as possible, whereas under the saddle it attracts heat and moisture. I will give it some more thought with this book in mind to see how the article can be improved, because in it's current form I feel it is not complete. Until next time...Thinkfood (talk) 03:25, 10 October 2011 (UTC)