A Theory About Cinnamon and Recipes
It strikes me that most of the standard recipes come from the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, when the relative price of cinnamon was much higher than it is today. Thus it seems likely that most such inherited recipes economize on cinnamon to what is now an undue degree.
Proposal: triple the cinnamon in everything I cook for the next three months.
I will report back.









Modern cinnamon is less potent. Much of the oils are extracted and modern processing techniques add to the loss of potency.
Try buying spices from ethnic stores, India etc or organic spices.
There is a huge differnce
Posted by: Chessie | January 02, 2006 at 07:12 PM
Cinnamon also loses its flavor very fast after being ground. If you grind your own cinnamon, you may get satisfaction from the amounts generally called for in recipes.
Also realize that there is "true" cinnamon, from the bark of the Ceylon Cinnamon, while most of what is sold in the US is "bastard" cinnamon from the Cassia tree.
Couldn't link the page from the Penzey's catalog directly, but here's the link: http://www.penzeys.com/cgi-bin/penzeys/p-penzeyscinnamon.html
Never shopped online there, but my local store is great.
Posted by: NotThatMo | January 02, 2006 at 07:16 PM
Hmmm, I think I will take the opposite view wrt the :DeLong Historical Cinnamon Under-Use Thereom". My experience has been that the recipes are designed to optimise the flavor of the amount of cinnamon in use and that incremental adjustments positive or negative results in non-optimal use.
Posted by: Steve | January 02, 2006 at 07:16 PM
Try adding a bit of cinnamon to your chocolate--my mom insists that it makes chocolate better and smoother.
Posted by: lahke | January 02, 2006 at 07:18 PM
Beware pure cinnamon. Somewhere out on the net is a sophomoric video of a teen male eating a teaspoon on ground cinnamon. It turns out the dry powdered cinnamon is a pretty effective emetic. Thank goodness for young, selfless researchers like this.
Posted by: Some Clam | January 02, 2006 at 07:18 PM
I second adding cinammon to your chocolate. They do that in Mexico to hot cocoa, which added a nice dimension.
Posted by: mwg | January 02, 2006 at 07:36 PM
The utility-maximizing quantity of cinnamon in a unit of food varies, of course, from person to person (the first derivative of the utility WRT cinnamon quantity turns negative with basically all people, but at what quantity varies considerably). Ideally, we'd figure a way of writing cookbooks and testing tastes so that everyone would know their "K-coefficient," where "K" would be a specific condiment or minor ingredient which added flavor to the food in question (for example, there would be a cinnamon-coefficient or a rosemary-coefficient, but probably not a flour-coefficient, since flour is an essential building block of recipes, not a flavoring). Then you'd multiply the amount in the recipe by your K-coefficient of that ingredient, with the average person's taste for the ingredient standardized at 1.
Don't listen to me, though. I once proposed a cook book based on modular combinations of "units." (example: the "boil and fry" recipe, which would have a boiled module consisting of (pasta and (cauliflower or swiss chard) xor ((rice and lentils) and cumin) xor cous-cous, and a fried module of (olive oil or butter) and (olives and garlic and (red bell peppers or breadcrumbs). Or something like that.)
Posted by: Julian Elson | January 02, 2006 at 08:10 PM
Speziato al Tartufo: cinnamon-coated cheese.MMMMmmm.
Posted by: paulo | January 02, 2006 at 08:41 PM
I would suggest instead of an across the board three time increase in cinnamon, try an increase of cinnamon based on its importance in the recipe. If cinnamon is the main flavor giving ingredient then go with twice (or less) times increase. If it is a secondary ingredient and you like cinnamon, then go for three times increase.
Posted by: Arun Khanna | January 02, 2006 at 08:53 PM
If cinnamon acted as a signal of status, the amount used would exceed what was needed for taste reasons alone, and the best thing would be to cut back on the amount used.
We await the report back to confirm or deny your hypothesis. There are enough other pieces of [actually useful, and certainly odd] information in the comments that I am sure a theory could be made to fit whatever results you find. But then that's the way with a lot of economics isn't it?
Posted by: Tom | January 02, 2006 at 09:09 PM
Slightly OT, but as long as economists are discussing spices, did the French court in the seventeenth or eighteenth centuries (Louis XIV to XVI) eliminate heavy spices from the cuisine, thus creating "classic" French cooking, in order to cut into the British and Dutch East India Companies' profits?
Elite European cooking prior to that time was very heavily spiced.
Posted by: sara | January 02, 2006 at 10:05 PM
Most of these spicy additives alter the palate, so that the subtleties of unspiced food can no longer be appreciated. Many people now do not know what a plain no cinnamon apple pie tastes like, since they were never offered any in the first place, and now if they were to try some they would receive a wholly false impression of it.
Much the same applied to the spiciness of food in earlier eras, when that approach was in vogue because of the limited availability of high quality materials (particularly at all seasons). This also affected the amount of sugar and salt in foods, though those were added for the keeping qualities and the calorie boost in an undernourished age rather than to conceal the beginnings of off flavours. Cream and butter entered cooking styles in a similar way, also becoming part of what people were accustomed too so they didn't like foods so much without them - this applied at the luxury level.
If one were to keep to very plain and simple foods for some time, the subtleties of good materials might become accessible again - and then individuals could make their own personal tastes develop in a controlled and informed way. It's a matter of, if you emphasise everything you emphasise nothing. I have personally found that I like ginger, but no other hot spices. And I don't like cinnamon at all, but a touch of clove - only a tiny amount - does help.
I have a personal theory that the lack of an indigenous English cuisine stems from the fact that during recent centuries there wasn't the necessity to make the best of inferior materials; England was at peace internally, and there wasn't the same sustained level of penury in a fixed class system (the real hardships of the 16th and 18th century were over too soon for many dishes to develop). Continental cuisines also developed special dishes at this lower end, ones that didn't need the luxury additives and ingredients I mentioned above.
Posted by: P.M.Lawrence | January 02, 2006 at 10:38 PM
Triple the cinnamon?!?!? A liberal through and through...
Posted by: glenn | January 03, 2006 at 12:00 AM
It’s also true that relative to most prices all foods have become cheaper. Should we therefore be eating 3 times the calories of the 19th century?
(Contrary to popular opinion, no we don’t, despite the growth in obesity.)
Actually, this could be fun. Beer is vastly cheaper than it was so I should triple my consumption.
Posted by: Tim Worstall | January 03, 2006 at 03:12 AM
I could be happy
for the rest of my life
with my Cinnamon Girl.
Posted by: Neil Young | January 03, 2006 at 03:13 AM
Add cinnamon to the flour in your fried chicken. The best.
Posted by: Drew | January 03, 2006 at 04:22 AM
wouldn't this theory apply to sugar also? and caffeine.
Posted by: rob | January 03, 2006 at 04:45 AM
Actually I read in, I think it was Steingarten's book, that at least in apple pie cinammon is a relatively recent addition not found in 19th century American recipes. And he felt it overwhelmed the taste of the apples.
I like Julian's approach. I had an idea once that the physical world was kind of like this too: one kind of stuff, with different spices.
Posted by: larry birnbaum | January 03, 2006 at 05:11 AM
I britain the poorer people bought a form of "wild", cinnamon which was much cheaper than the cultivated product.
Posted by: eric bloodaxe | January 03, 2006 at 06:19 AM
Ah, it's Brad DeLong's "Cooking with Cinnamon!"
Seriously, try substituting cinnamon for sugar in oatmeal, squash, etc. - it sweetens things up nicely w/o adding calories and tooth decay.
Posted by: John Fulton | January 03, 2006 at 06:48 AM
When it comes to culinary economics, is there a better race of consumers than the British? Your cinnamon experiment reminds me of the way the British drink tea: the amount of milk one adds is inversely proportional to one's wealth as tea was more expensive than milk. Perhaps a side experiment to the tripling would be a reduction in the proportion of another rival ingredient, such as sugar, while keeping the cinnamon as called for in the recipe.
Posted by: jf | January 03, 2006 at 07:06 AM
Keep in mind that most rural Mexican cooks have been in the habit of gathering local cinnamon for free. (Marginal time costs for more cinnamon don't really kick in once you have found a cinnamon source.) Only recently has the price become positive. I have tried Mexican recipes with more cinnamon but it was a mistake. Note also that Indian and Mexican cinnamons are quite different.
Posted by: Tyler Cowen | January 03, 2006 at 07:18 AM
I like cinnamon but have a family member who dislikes it. This has made me aware that cinnamon is routinely thrown into just about everything, and that cinnamon sensitivities are becoming more commmon.
I recently found a very ordinary horse feed with cinnamon flavor added!
Posted by: sm | January 03, 2006 at 07:26 AM
Wow. I came up with that same theory the first time I did any significant baking after I paid off my student loans (say 1987?). Immediately tried it out. Result: lots of baked goods with too much cinnamon. There is a balance and going beyond it makes things bitter and unpleasant.
Preview: it IS possible to have too much vanilla.
Cranky
Posted by: Cranky Observer | January 03, 2006 at 07:38 AM
Salt. I'm tripling my salt intake.
Posted by: Anon | January 03, 2006 at 08:07 AM
I've discovered since coming to Texas that the best way to "juice up" anything sweet and spiced, especially with cinnamon or ginger, is to add a dash of picante -- cayenne. Too much cinnamon gets bitter in a hurry.
Posted by: dilys | January 03, 2006 at 08:11 AM
Possible test: cinnamon was very scarce in the USSR. Do recipes from this era seem too low on cinnamon?
Posted by: P O'Neill | January 03, 2006 at 08:47 AM
I have doubled cinnamon for years. Dont try this with cloves however.
Posted by: john eckstein | January 03, 2006 at 09:08 AM
How unscientific, Brad! :)
Make two batches, one with the normal amount of cinnamon and one with a triple dose.
I'm pretty sure that the latter will have its flavor overwhelmed by cinnamon.
Also: get a very cheap electric coffee grinder and use it to grind your own spices. And I second the notion of shopping at ethnic grocers; I have, no exaggeration, seen high-quality spices at one tenth the price by weight of the McCormick bottles in the supermarket.
Posted by: josephgrossberg | January 03, 2006 at 09:17 AM
And while you're at it, make sure you get a psychedelic dose of nutmeg in your nog...
Posted by: David Lloyd-Jones | January 03, 2006 at 09:19 AM
Cinnamon as "trivial" ingredient: In granola bars, especially those based in brown rice syrup, mild powdered cinnamon can be used in large enough quantities that it is becomes structural. I haven't found it emetic.
Structuralist/formulaic cooking (Julian Ellison): Czech out the recent MIT media lab project to upload the encyclopedic culinary and culinary-historical knowledge of Boston-area foodie Barbara Ketchum Wheaton. The goal was an artificial intelligence system able to improvise recipes based on rough substitutions.
http://web.media.mit.edu/~hugo/research/#hyperrecipes
Speaking of Mrs. Wheaton, she can answer all your questions about the evolution of elite French cooking. You might in particular examine "Savoring the Past: The French Kitchen and Table from 1300 to 1789."
Posted by: bodzin | January 03, 2006 at 09:20 AM
hey is this the video of the kid eating pure cinnamon? did he actually swallow it? i find the whole video a little confusing. i'm not sure this proves it has emetic properties.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7169592534338546908&q=cinnamon
Posted by: eric | January 03, 2006 at 09:25 AM
the link got cut off. here is the end part:
docid=7169592534338546908&q=cinnamon
Posted by: eric | January 03, 2006 at 09:27 AM
Julian-- somebody beat you to your cookbook blog-style.
http://www.cookingforengineers.com/
Posted by: AP | January 03, 2006 at 09:47 AM
Most American sweet recipes are already overspackled with cinnimon. I usually decrease the amount of cinnimon in any given dessert/baked good recipe and increase (or add) more nutmeg.
The real secret with cinnimon is how just a scrap of it adds a magical richness to all manner of savory dishes. From no-brainer combinations such as lamb and apricot with a dusting of cinnimon to just a quarter teaspoonfull in a big pot of chili just to give it that je ne sais quoi. Be very careful not to overdo it though, or your dish will start tasting like meaty apple pie filling, and that would be bad...
Posted by: Angelica Oung | January 03, 2006 at 10:09 AM
I like some cinnamon in chucken cacciatore.
Posted by: Fannie Farmer (Mrs.) | January 03, 2006 at 10:11 AM
greek-style: a dash or two of cinnamon to your tomato-based spaghetti meat sauce.
Posted by: whale shaman | January 03, 2006 at 11:00 AM
Two physiological effects of cinnamon -
1. It increases effectiveness of insulin or something, so is good for controlling blood sugar
2. Large quantities are carcinogenic.
And one admission - I am too lazy to google for links to back these statements up.
Posted by: Anna Haynes | January 03, 2006 at 12:21 PM
Keep all this cinnamonalia up and someone will advertise it as a cancer-curing anti-oxidant, and the price will rocket.
Posted by: paulo | January 03, 2006 at 12:33 PM
I question the use of British cuisine as the reference-point for an invidious comparison.
Posted by: John Emerson | January 03, 2006 at 12:49 PM
Whole Foods cinnamon apple sauce goes with absolutely everything, and conures cannot get enough of it.
Posted by: anne | January 03, 2006 at 01:01 PM
John Livesey:
I and many of my American friends don't consider British food to be bland. We consider it to be bad.
Crucial difference.
Posted by: tylerh | January 03, 2006 at 01:04 PM
This is a little off-topic but let me mention this anyway. No one in India who has eaten real tandoori chicken has seen the "bright orange baked chicken thing" that is passed off as tandoori chicken in the U.S.
Oddly enough the closest I have found to Indian tandoori chicken in the U.S. is in Pollo Tropicale, a fast food Cuban-Mexican chain in South Florida. Finally, cinnamon won't do in any tandoori dish but one could add it to Mango Kulfi (Kulfi is slow churned homemade icecream).
Posted by: Arun Khanna | January 03, 2006 at 01:58 PM
I'm not sure about cinnamon, but it is my experience that increasing the amount of nutmeg in a recipe -- even one that did not call for nutmeg! -- often improves it. Nutmeg is, for example, fantastic in macaroni and cheese, along with a little bit of hot mustard...
Posted by: Auros | January 03, 2006 at 02:42 PM
I second what Auros said -- just add nutmeg.
About English food -- Good british food does exist, but usually in the countryside. I've had some wonderful sausages when I visited the Lakes. But what's good about good English food is more in the quality of the ingredients and less about distinctive flavors, ingredients or techniques.
The English also makes excellent baked goods and their dairy products are light years ahead of what you can get here in the states. Why is all the cream in this country ultra pasturized when we sell it in the refridgerated aisles anyhow? That process renders even heavy cream pallid and lacking in real dairy flavor.
Posted by: Angelica Oung | January 03, 2006 at 03:23 PM
N0! Oh dear god, no.
I had a friend who was allergic to cinnamon visit me while I lived in the US. At which point I realised just how pervasive the damn stuff is. Much bad American baking (and I don't deny the existence of good American baking) seems to be a matter of disguising basic blandness with extra sugar and cinnamon. Can't get good tasty apples? Use tasteless ones and extra cinnamon...
Hey, there's great English food out there! Angelica is right that it's (traditionally) rural.
English cuisine was historically bad in the cities because England urbanised fast and hard in advance of good transport and good food storage - hence corned beef, pickled everything, and mushy tinned peas. After that it's a matter of lack-of-demand creating lack-of-supply - until recently. Multi-ethnic British cities are a fantastic place to find food these days (it ain't the 50s any more, folks).
Posted by: meno | January 03, 2006 at 04:37 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/05/dining/05lond.html?ex=1286164800&en=5a68bd93a388cd0a&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss
October 5, 2005
Prowling London for Perfect English
By R. W. APPLE Jr.
LONDON
EARLY in July Jacques Chirac, the French president, said that Britain has the worst food in Europe, except perhaps for Finland. But that stereotype is as stale as a year-old baguette, as dated as the Englishman's belief that his French cousins wear berets and reek of garlic.
Today London is one of the world's great eating towns, acknowledged as such by knowledgeable gastronomes everywhere, including France. But one problem remains. Where does a visiting New Yorker or Parisian - or for that matter a country squire in town for a night or two - turn for a first-class English meal? Amid the profusion of nigiri sushi and chicken masala, where to find an immaculately roasted rib of beef or flawlessly grilled Dover sole? There are answers to these questions, a few of which I'll enumerate shortly, but London sorely needs more deluxe showcases for British products, well-chosen, seasoned with flair and cooked according to classic precepts.
The best English food depends, more than most, on prime raw materials, simply prepared. The range is surprisingly broad, though some of those raw materials, especially game and offal, may offend squeamish foreign eaters. The style, reassuring rather than electrifying, seldom ventures near the cutting edge. But then, who wants to be plugged into the wall seven days a week?
"We have discovered French, Italian, Greek, Indian and Chinese food, so why not a British revival?" William Black asks in his new book, "The Land That Thyme Forgot" (Bantam Press). "Our heritage is ripe and ready for picking. The recipes still exist, and the raw materials are to hand."
It's not that interest in traditional English fare has dried up. Simon Hopkinson's 11-year-old "Roast Chicken and Other Stories," packed with homely native dishes, was recently voted the country's most useful cookbook of all time by a panel of 40 experts. Reprinted by its original publisher, Ebury Press, it vaulted to the top of the Amazon best-seller list for Britain, overtaking the latest Harry Potter volume. Negotiations have begun for a United States edition.
Philip Howard, who runs a much-praised Mayfair restaurant, the Square, entered a television cooking competition this summer with a succulent golden pie made from venison, rabbit, partridge, pheasant and other game birds, which he called "a wholesome, hospitable, humble and very English dish." But when I pressed him for dining tips, he responded, "English food in London restaurants is basically a minefield."
That's my experience, too....
Posted by: anne | January 03, 2006 at 05:11 PM
Buy Vietnamese cinnamon. Sprinkle some over your ground coffee before brewing. Way better than flavored coffee.
Cinnamon is supposed to prevent diabetes and help regulate blood sugar.
Posted by: J Bean | January 03, 2006 at 07:17 PM
Tom writes:
"Elite European cooking prior to that time was very heavily spiced."
I have often seen that assertion, but not much evidence to support it. Early cookbooks usually do not give quantities, so although one can see they used spices differently than we do, one cannot easily tell how much they used.
I have done two experiments on the subject, one accidental. I adjusted a late 14th century recipe (for hippocras--spiced wine) (which did give quantities) to suit my tastes. I then discovered that I had made a mistake--their quarts were substantially larger than ours. Fixing the mistake got the original just about to my "adjusted" amounts.
The other experiment involved a cookbook(_Du Fait de Cuisine_, on my web site) for a large feast which included a shopping list, making it possible to estimate the ratio of spices to meat averaged over the feast. It turned out to be similar to the ratio for dishes we had worked out to our taste.
Posted by: David Friedman | January 03, 2006 at 07:42 PM
P. O'Neill: Cinnamon wasn't all that scarce in the USSR, and just like everything else that was available, it was dirt cheap. What was scarce was awareness of the importance of healthy dietary habits, so my best cinnamon memories are from my pre-1988 fat-kid childhood.
Posted by: kaneel | January 03, 2006 at 10:52 PM
I propose the creation of of an Organisation of Cinnamon Exporting Countries (OCEC) comprising of countries such as Sri Lanka and India. We'll see how tough you Americans really are when cinnamon prices quadruple...
Posted by: Kunal | January 04, 2006 at 02:07 AM
The USDA has been looking into cassia cinnamon's ability to enhance insulin sensitivity (i.e. control blood sugar levels) for a couple of years now. The numbers that have come out of this research are quite dramatic. Here's a link to an abstract on the subject:
http://pubs.acs.org/cgi-bin/abstract.cgi/jafcau/2004/52/i01/abs/jf034916b.html
There is some concern that certain fat-soluble elements in cinnamon have carcinogenic properties; but considering how long people have been eating the stuff, I'm not losing any sleep over that. And anyway, it's the water-soluble elements that are supposed to be good for you.
The recommended "dosage" is between 1/4 to 1 teaspoon a day. An emetic? I've personally eaten up to half a teaspoon at a time without even the tiniest hint of any urge to hurl. Your mileage may vary.
Posted by: Buzz | January 04, 2006 at 02:21 AM
OUR quarts are a perfectly reasonable amount, remembering that they are two pints each and that there is a mnemonic "a pint of water weighs a pound and a quarter" (not to be confused with the factually false geaographical assertion from the USA that "a pint's a pound the world around" - it most definitely is NOT).
And the whole point I was bringing out about the "right" amount of seasoning for British food was that (a) there is no specific cuisine as such because of the lack of need and (b) correct amounts need to be by contrast, like the careful use of blank space in art.
There's no substance to the idea that urbanisation hurt the availability of fresh materials - consider Smithfield meat market and the tradition of cattle droving, even from Scotland - though immiseration and population increase did. But the repeal of the corn laws led to such things as land being turned over to cattle, e.g. in Ireland (hence more immiseration), so the demand was taken up. Storage issues applied evenly across both city and country, and corresponded to seasonal dishes (anyone for a Christmas goose? sorry, bad old joke).
Posted by: P.M.Lawrence | January 04, 2006 at 05:13 AM
Brad Delong! I know this thread is long since dead but you are such a cute and funny, funny man. Often times I come on here for some intellectual reading and find myself belly laughing at your observations and silliness. How sexy, cute and funny you are!!!!!!!
Posted by: Erica | January 04, 2006 at 07:08 AM
Any restaurant where the sausage gravy served on biscuits and on chicken fried steak tastes of cinnamon is to be avoided. Either the cook is using the wrong cookbook and no judgement, or stuff which should be made there is coming out of the cheap cans.
Posted by: triticale | January 05, 2006 at 09:46 PM
Thanks, Kunal. I type in that loooongg address and find I need to be a subscriber. You could have mentioned it.
Posted by: lee | March 13, 2006 at 08:04 PM
How funny a friend of mine was randomly talking about Cinnamon, and then I go and stumble on this.
Posted by: Lesley Price | November 20, 2006 at 11:45 AM