Hello all,

I have been transcribing some old recipes and see a few mentions
of Boston Yeast Powder. At first, I thought this was a dry yeast,
but now I am wondering whether it was actually baking powder. I
don't suppose anyone here knows what it was?
--
Jean B.

"Jean B." wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> I have been transcribing some old recipes and see a few mentions
> of Boston Yeast Powder. At first, I thought this was a dry yeast,
> but now I am wondering whether it was actually baking powder. I
> don't suppose anyone here knows what it was?
> --
> Jean B.

The 'Oxford Companion to American Food and Drink' says this:

'For the last half of the nineteenth century, cookbooks called for both
baking soda and cream of tartar in baking and by the 1850s, occasionally
referred to "yeast powders" (baking soda and cream of tartar wrapped
separately but sold together), an early form of bakig powder.'

So it's a form of baking powder. Makes sense, cos baker's yeast was
normally in a fresh form back then, rather than a dried powder.

Arri London wrote:
>
> "Jean B." wrote:
>> Hello all,
>>
>> I have been transcribing some old recipes and see a few mentions
>> of Boston Yeast Powder. At first, I thought this was a dry yeast,
>> but now I am wondering whether it was actually baking powder. I
>> don't suppose anyone here knows what it was?
>> --
>> Jean B.
>
> The 'Oxford Companion to American Food and Drink' says this:
>
> 'For the last half of the nineteenth century, cookbooks called for both
> baking soda and cream of tartar in baking and by the 1850s, occasionally
> referred to "yeast powders" (baking soda and cream of tartar wrapped
> separately but sold together), an early form of bakig powder.'
>
> So it's a form of baking powder. Makes sense, cos baker's yeast was
> normally in a fresh form back then, rather than a dried powder.

Thanks, Arri! Gee, I thought about looking in that and then
thought it was too obscure. That will teach me!

--
Jean B.

"Jean B." wrote:
>
> Arri London wrote:
> >
> > "Jean B." wrote:
> >> Hello all,
> >>
> >> I have been transcribing some old recipes and see a few mentions
> >> of Boston Yeast Powder. At first, I thought this was a dry yeast,
> >> but now I am wondering whether it was actually baking powder. I
> >> don't suppose anyone here knows what it was?
> >> --
> >> Jean B.
> >
> > The 'Oxford Companion to American Food and Drink' says this:
> >
> > 'For the last half of the nineteenth century, cookbooks called for both
> > baking soda and cream of tartar in baking and by the 1850s, occasionally
> > referred to "yeast powders" (baking soda and cream of tartar wrapped
> > separately but sold together), an early form of baking powder.'
> >
> > So it's a form of baking powder. Makes sense, cos baker's yeast was
> > normally in a fresh form back then, rather than a dried powder.
>
> Thanks, Arri! Gee, I thought about looking in that and then
> thought it was too obscure. That will teach me!
>
> --
> Jean B.

YVW...it is indeed obscure at times but still full of useful
information. I should know...have some articles in there But Oxford
only gave us the 'concise' version for free :P

Arri London wrote:
>
> "Jean B." wrote:
>> Arri London wrote:
>>> "Jean B." wrote:
>>>> Hello all,
>>>>
>>>> I have been transcribing some old recipes and see a few mentions
>>>> of Boston Yeast Powder. At first, I thought this was a dry yeast,
>>>> but now I am wondering whether it was actually baking powder. I
>>>> don't suppose anyone here knows what it was?
>>>> --
>>>> Jean B.
>>> The 'Oxford Companion to American Food and Drink' says this:
>>>
>>> 'For the last half of the nineteenth century, cookbooks called for both
>>> baking soda and cream of tartar in baking and by the 1850s, occasionally
>>> referred to "yeast powders" (baking soda and cream of tartar wrapped
>>> separately but sold together), an early form of baking powder.'
>>>
>>> So it's a form of baking powder. Makes sense, cos baker's yeast was
>>> normally in a fresh form back then, rather than a dried powder.
>> Thanks, Arri! Gee, I thought about looking in that and then
>> thought it was too obscure. That will teach me!
>>
>> --
>> Jean B.
>
> YVW...it is indeed obscure at times but still full of useful
> information. I should know...have some articles in there But Oxford
> only gave us the 'concise' version for free :P

I have the whole thing. I am wondering, again, who you are....

--
Jean B.

"Jean B." wrote:
>
> Arri London wrote:
> >
> > "Jean B." wrote:
> >> Arri London wrote:
> >>> "Jean B." wrote:
> >>>> Hello all,
> >>>>
> >>>> I have been transcribing some old recipes and see a few mentions
> >>>> of Boston Yeast Powder. At first, I thought this was a dry yeast,
> >>>> but now I am wondering whether it was actually baking powder. I
> >>>> don't suppose anyone here knows what it was?
> >>>> --
> >>>> Jean B.
> >>> The 'Oxford Companion to American Food and Drink' says this:
> >>>
> >>> 'For the last half of the nineteenth century, cookbooks called for both
> >>> baking soda and cream of tartar in baking and by the 1850s, occasionally
> >>> referred to "yeast powders" (baking soda and cream of tartar wrapped
> >>> separately but sold together), an early form of baking powder.'
> >>>
> >>> So it's a form of baking powder. Makes sense, cos baker's yeast was
> >>> normally in a fresh form back then, rather than a dried powder.
> >> Thanks, Arri! Gee, I thought about looking in that and then
> >> thought it was too obscure. That will teach me!
> >>
> >> --
> >> Jean B.
> >
> > YVW...it is indeed obscure at times but still full of useful
> > information. I should know...have some articles in there But Oxford
> > only gave us the 'concise' version for free :P
>
> I have the whole thing. I am wondering, again, who you are....
>
> --
> Jean B.

Lucky you!

LOL that is a state secret! If I told you, there would be dire
consequences...

Arri London wrote:
>
> "Jean B." wrote:
>> Arri London wrote:
>>> "Jean B." wrote:
>>>> Arri London wrote:
>>>>> "Jean B." wrote:
>>>>>> Hello all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have been transcribing some old recipes and see a few mentions
>>>>>> of Boston Yeast Powder. At first, I thought this was a dry yeast,
>>>>>> but now I am wondering whether it was actually baking powder. I
>>>>>> don't suppose anyone here knows what it was?
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Jean B.
>>>>> The 'Oxford Companion to American Food and Drink' says this:
>>>>>
>>>>> 'For the last half of the nineteenth century, cookbooks called for both
>>>>> baking soda and cream of tartar in baking and by the 1850s, occasionally
>>>>> referred to "yeast powders" (baking soda and cream of tartar wrapped
>>>>> separately but sold together), an early form of baking powder.'
>>>>>
>>>>> So it's a form of baking powder. Makes sense, cos baker's yeast was
>>>>> normally in a fresh form back then, rather than a dried powder.
>>>> Thanks, Arri! Gee, I thought about looking in that and then
>>>> thought it was too obscure. That will teach me!
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Jean B.
>>> YVW...it is indeed obscure at times but still full of useful
>>> information. I should know...have some articles in there But Oxford
>>> only gave us the 'concise' version for free :P
>> I have the whole thing. I am wondering, again, who you are....
>>
>> --
>> Jean B.
>
> Lucky you!
>
> LOL that is a state secret! If I told you, there would be dire
> consequences...

You'd have to kill me! Shall I compile a list of every single author?

--
Jean B.

"Jean B." > writes:

>Arri London wrote:
>>
>> "Jean B." wrote:
>>> Arri London wrote:
>>>>> Jean B.
>>>> YVW...it is indeed obscure at times but still full of useful
>>>> information. I should know...have some articles in there But Oxford
>>>> only gave us the 'concise' version for free :P
>>> I have the whole thing. I am wondering, again, who you are....
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jean B.
>>
>> Lucky you!
>>
>> LOL that is a state secret! If I told you, there would be dire
>> consequences...
>
>You'd have to kill me! Shall I compile a list of every single author?

You need only compile a list of authors who have "some articles"
(idiomatically, that would surely mean no fewer than three).
Of course, doing that *might* require compiling a list of all
authors, then pruning it; but it might not.

Out Arri!

Lee Rudolph

Hello "Jean B." & all;

Although I've been a dyed-in-the-wool sourdough baker for a long, long
time; I do "stray" occasionally and use baking powder. Sourdough cornbread
just doesn't do it for me...(;-o)!

To that end, when I was researching for ways to avoid the aluminum salts so
commonly used in commercial baking powders, I seem to recall stumbling
across a recipe for baking powder. IIRC; they called it: "Boston Yeast".

Making your own baking powder, or "Boston Yeast", is both simple and easy.
I use:
1-part Saleratus (the old fashioned name for plain, old baking soda), the
active gas producing ingredient

2-parts cream of tartar, the acid for the gas-producing reaction

2-parts arrowroot starch, a starch filler to provide volume so that 1:1
measurement consistency is maintained to "modern" baking powder recipes.
(you could use ordinary corn starch as well...it just doesn't "finish" as
well)

You can read about it he
http://www.innerlodge.com/Recipes/Ti...kingPowder.htm

It's so dreadfully easy to make and use, that I haven't bought any baking
powder in years.

HTH,
Dusty da baker
** NB: You can now buy commercial baking powders that no longer have
aluminum in them.

Jean B. wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I have been transcribing some old recipes and see a few mentions
> of Boston Yeast Powder. At first, I thought this was a dry yeast,
> but now I am wondering whether it was actually baking powder. I
> don't suppose anyone here knows what it was?

--
So long as the people do not care to exercise their freedom, those who
wish to tyrannize will do so; for tyrants are active and ardent, and
will devote themselves in the name of any number of gods, religious and
otherwise, to put shackles upon sleeping men - Voltaire

Lee Rudolph wrote:
>
> "Jean B." > writes:
>
> >Arri London wrote:
> >>
> >> "Jean B." wrote:
> >>> Arri London wrote:
> >>>>> Jean B.
> >>>> YVW...it is indeed obscure at times but still full of useful
> >>>> information. I should know...have some articles in there But Oxford
> >>>> only gave us the 'concise' version for free :P
> >>> I have the whole thing. I am wondering, again, who you are....
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Jean B.
> >>
> >> Lucky you!
> >>
> >> LOL that is a state secret! If I told you, there would be dire
> >> consequences...
> >
> >You'd have to kill me! Shall I compile a list of every single author?
>
> You need only compile a list of authors who have "some articles"
> (idiomatically, that would surely mean no fewer than three).
> Of course, doing that *might* require compiling a list of all
> authors, then pruning it; but it might not.
>
> Out Arri!
>
> Lee Rudolph


LOL. Be my guest ;P

BakerBoy wrote:
> Hello "Jean B." & all;
>
> Although I've been a dyed-in-the-wool sourdough baker for a long, long
> time; I do "stray" occasionally and use baking powder. Sourdough cornbread
> just doesn't do it for me...(;-o)!
>
> To that end, when I was researching for ways to avoid the aluminum salts so
> commonly used in commercial baking powders, I seem to recall stumbling
> across a recipe for baking powder. IIRC; they called it: "Boston Yeast".
>
> Making your own baking powder, or "Boston Yeast", is both simple and easy.
> I use:
> 1-part Saleratus (the old fashioned name for plain, old baking soda), the
> active gas producing ingredient
>
> 2-parts cream of tartar, the acid for the gas-producing reaction
>
> 2-parts arrowroot starch, a starch filler to provide volume so that 1:1
> measurement consistency is maintained to "modern" baking powder recipes.
> (you could use ordinary corn starch as well...it just doesn't "finish" as
> well)
>
> You can read about it he
> http://www.innerlodge.com/Recipes/Ti...kingPowder.htm
>
> It's so dreadfully easy to make and use, that I haven't bought any baking
> powder in years.
>
> HTH,
> Dusty da baker
> ** NB: You can now buy commercial baking powders that no longer have
> aluminum in them.

Thank you, Dusty. I'll save that for future experimentation!
--
Jean B.

Arri London wrote:
>
> Lee Rudolph wrote:
>> "Jean B." > writes:
>>
>>> Arri London wrote:
>>>> "Jean B." wrote:
>>>>> Arri London wrote:
>>>>>>> Jean B.
>>>>>> YVW...it is indeed obscure at times but still full of useful
>>>>>> information. I should know...have some articles in there But Oxford
>>>>>> only gave us the 'concise' version for free :P
>>>>> I have the whole thing. I am wondering, again, who you are....
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jean B.
>>>> Lucky you!
>>>>
>>>> LOL that is a state secret! If I told you, there would be dire
>>>> consequences...
>>> You'd have to kill me! Shall I compile a list of every single author?
>> You need only compile a list of authors who have "some articles"
>> (idiomatically, that would surely mean no fewer than three).
>> Of course, doing that *might* require compiling a list of all
>> authors, then pruning it; but it might not.
>>
>> Out Arri!
>>
>> Lee Rudolph
>
>
> LOL. Be my guest ;P

Are you really going to make me drag that tome out?...

--
Jean B.

Arri London wrote:
>
> Lee Rudolph wrote:
>> "Jean B." > writes:
>>
>>> Arri London wrote:
>>>> "Jean B." wrote:
>>>>> Arri London wrote:
>>>>>>> Jean B.
>>>>>> YVW...it is indeed obscure at times but still full of useful
>>>>>> information. I should know...have some articles in there But Oxford
>>>>>> only gave us the 'concise' version for free :P
>>>>> I have the whole thing. I am wondering, again, who you are....
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jean B.
>>>> Lucky you!
>>>>
>>>> LOL that is a state secret! If I told you, there would be dire
>>>> consequences...
>>> You'd have to kill me! Shall I compile a list of every single author?
>> You need only compile a list of authors who have "some articles"
>> (idiomatically, that would surely mean no fewer than three).
>> Of course, doing that *might* require compiling a list of all
>> authors, then pruning it; but it might not.
>>
>> Out Arri!
>>
>> Lee Rudolph
>
>
> LOL. Be my guest ;P

I have one guess, although I think you said articleS.

--
Jean B.

"Jean B." wrote:
>
> Arri London wrote:
> >
> > Lee Rudolph wrote:
> >> "Jean B." > writes:
> >>
> >>> Arri London wrote:
> >>>> "Jean B." wrote:
> >>>>> Arri London wrote:
> >>>>>>> Jean B.
> >>>>>> YVW...it is indeed obscure at times but still full of useful
> >>>>>> information. I should know...have some articles in there But Oxford
> >>>>>> only gave us the 'concise' version for free :P
> >>>>> I have the whole thing. I am wondering, again, who you are....
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Jean B.
> >>>> Lucky you!
> >>>>
> >>>> LOL that is a state secret! If I told you, there would be dire
> >>>> consequences...
> >>> You'd have to kill me! Shall I compile a list of every single author?
> >> You need only compile a list of authors who have "some articles"
> >> (idiomatically, that would surely mean no fewer than three).
> >> Of course, doing that *might* require compiling a list of all
> >> authors, then pruning it; but it might not.
> >>
> >> Out Arri!
> >>
> >> Lee Rudolph
> >
> >
> > LOL. Be my guest ;P
>
> Are you really going to make me drag that tome out?...
>
> --
> Jean B.

LOL Whyever would it be important to you anyway?

"Jean B." wrote:
>
> Arri London wrote:
> >
> > Lee Rudolph wrote:
> >> "Jean B." > writes:
> >>
> >>> Arri London wrote:
> >>>> "Jean B." wrote:
> >>>>> Arri London wrote:
> >>>>>>> Jean B.
> >>>>>> YVW...it is indeed obscure at times but still full of useful
> >>>>>> information. I should know...have some articles in there But Oxford
> >>>>>> only gave us the 'concise' version for free :P
> >>>>> I have the whole thing. I am wondering, again, who you are....
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Jean B.
> >>>> Lucky you!
> >>>>
> >>>> LOL that is a state secret! If I told you, there would be dire
> >>>> consequences...
> >>> You'd have to kill me! Shall I compile a list of every single author?
> >> You need only compile a list of authors who have "some articles"
> >> (idiomatically, that would surely mean no fewer than three).
> >> Of course, doing that *might* require compiling a list of all
> >> authors, then pruning it; but it might not.
> >>
> >> Out Arri!
> >>
> >> Lee Rudolph
> >
> >
> > LOL. Be my guest ;P
>
> Are you really going to make me drag that tome out?...
>
> --
> Jean B.


Why is it important to you? I never worry about 'who' people on RFC
are...

"Jean B." wrote:
>
> Arri London wrote:
> >
> > Lee Rudolph wrote:
> >> "Jean B." > writes:
> >>
> >>> Arri London wrote:
> >>>> "Jean B." wrote:
> >>>>> Arri London wrote:
> >>>>>>> Jean B.
> >>>>>> YVW...it is indeed obscure at times but still full of useful
> >>>>>> information. I should know...have some articles in there But Oxford
> >>>>>> only gave us the 'concise' version for free :P
> >>>>> I have the whole thing. I am wondering, again, who you are....
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Jean B.
> >>>> Lucky you!
> >>>>
> >>>> LOL that is a state secret! If I told you, there would be dire
> >>>> consequences...
> >>> You'd have to kill me! Shall I compile a list of every single author?
> >> You need only compile a list of authors who have "some articles"
> >> (idiomatically, that would surely mean no fewer than three).
> >> Of course, doing that *might* require compiling a list of all
> >> authors, then pruning it; but it might not.
> >>
> >> Out Arri!
> >>
> >> Lee Rudolph
> >
> >
> > LOL. Be my guest ;P
>
> I have one guess, although I think you said articleS.
>
> --
> Jean B.

That's true. More than one, and on unrelated topics. There was a list
and we got to choose, based on the editor's recommendations.

Arri London wrote:
>
> "Jean B." wrote:
>> Arri London wrote:
>>> Lee Rudolph wrote:
>>>> "Jean B." > writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Arri London wrote:
>>>>>> "Jean B." wrote:
>>>>>>> Arri London wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Jean B.
>>>>>>>> YVW...it is indeed obscure at times but still full of useful
>>>>>>>> information. I should know...have some articles in there But Oxford
>>>>>>>> only gave us the 'concise' version for free :P
>>>>>>> I have the whole thing. I am wondering, again, who you are....
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Jean B.
>>>>>> Lucky you!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> LOL that is a state secret! If I told you, there would be dire
>>>>>> consequences...
>>>>> You'd have to kill me! Shall I compile a list of every single author?
>>>> You need only compile a list of authors who have "some articles"
>>>> (idiomatically, that would surely mean no fewer than three).
>>>> Of course, doing that *might* require compiling a list of all
>>>> authors, then pruning it; but it might not.
>>>>
>>>> Out Arri!
>>>>
>>>> Lee Rudolph
>>>
>>> LOL. Be my guest ;P
>> Are you really going to make me drag that tome out?...
>>
>> --
>> Jean B.
>
> LOL Whyever would it be important to you anyway?

I like the challenge--and you make it such a mystery.

No, it started because I am very interested in food history and
wonder whether you are someone whose name I have run across.

--
Jean B.

Arri London wrote:
>
> "Jean B." wrote:
>> Arri London wrote:
>>> Lee Rudolph wrote:
>>>> "Jean B." > writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Arri London wrote:
>>>>>> "Jean B." wrote:
>>>>>>> Arri London wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Jean B.
>>>>>>>> YVW...it is indeed obscure at times but still full of useful
>>>>>>>> information. I should know...have some articles in there But Oxford
>>>>>>>> only gave us the 'concise' version for free :P
>>>>>>> I have the whole thing. I am wondering, again, who you are....
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Jean B.
>>>>>> Lucky you!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> LOL that is a state secret! If I told you, there would be dire
>>>>>> consequences...
>>>>> You'd have to kill me! Shall I compile a list of every single author?
>>>> You need only compile a list of authors who have "some articles"
>>>> (idiomatically, that would surely mean no fewer than three).
>>>> Of course, doing that *might* require compiling a list of all
>>>> authors, then pruning it; but it might not.
>>>>
>>>> Out Arri!
>>>>
>>>> Lee Rudolph
>>>
>>> LOL. Be my guest ;P
>> Are you really going to make me drag that tome out?...
>>
>> --
>> Jean B.
>
>
> Why is it important to you? I never worry about 'who' people on RFC
> are...

Yes, but you have mentioned working of the tome several times, and
I am interested in such things.

--
Jean B.

Arri London wrote:
>
> "Jean B." wrote:
>> Arri London wrote:
>>> Lee Rudolph wrote:
>>>> "Jean B." > writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Arri London wrote:
>>>>>> "Jean B." wrote:
>>>>>>> Arri London wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Jean B.
>>>>>>>> YVW...it is indeed obscure at times but still full of useful
>>>>>>>> information. I should know...have some articles in there But Oxford
>>>>>>>> only gave us the 'concise' version for free :P
>>>>>>> I have the whole thing. I am wondering, again, who you are....
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Jean B.
>>>>>> Lucky you!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> LOL that is a state secret! If I told you, there would be dire
>>>>>> consequences...
>>>>> You'd have to kill me! Shall I compile a list of every single author?
>>>> You need only compile a list of authors who have "some articles"
>>>> (idiomatically, that would surely mean no fewer than three).
>>>> Of course, doing that *might* require compiling a list of all
>>>> authors, then pruning it; but it might not.
>>>>
>>>> Out Arri!
>>>>
>>>> Lee Rudolph
>>>
>>> LOL. Be my guest ;P
>> I have one guess, although I think you said articleS.
>>
>> --
>> Jean B.
>
> That's true. More than one, and on unrelated topics. There was a list
> and we got to choose, based on the editor's recommendations.

Then my best guess is probably wrong, and therefore you will be
pleased. You will also be pleased to know that my lack of time
outweighs my curiosity.

--
Jean B.

"Jean B." wrote:
>
> Arri London wrote:
> >
> > "Jean B." wrote:
> >> Arri London wrote:
> >>> Lee Rudolph wrote:
> >>>> "Jean B." > writes:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Arri London wrote:
> >>>>>> "Jean B." wrote:
> >>>>>>> Arri London wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Jean B.
> >>>>>>>> YVW...it is indeed obscure at times but still full of useful
> >>>>>>>> information. I should know...have some articles in there But Oxford
> >>>>>>>> only gave us the 'concise' version for free :P
> >>>>>>> I have the whole thing. I am wondering, again, who you are....
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> Jean B.
> >>>>>> Lucky you!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> LOL that is a state secret! If I told you, there would be dire
> >>>>>> consequences...
> >>>>> You'd have to kill me! Shall I compile a list of every single author?
> >>>> You need only compile a list of authors who have "some articles"
> >>>> (idiomatically, that would surely mean no fewer than three).
> >>>> Of course, doing that *might* require compiling a list of all
> >>>> authors, then pruning it; but it might not.
> >>>>
> >>>> Out Arri!
> >>>>
> >>>> Lee Rudolph
> >>>
> >>> LOL. Be my guest ;P
> >> I have one guess, although I think you said articleS.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Jean B.
> >
> > That's true. More than one, and on unrelated topics. There was a list
> > and we got to choose, based on the editor's recommendations.
>
> Then my best guess is probably wrong, and therefore you will be
> pleased. You will also be pleased to know that my lack of time
> outweighs my curiosity.
>
> --
> Jean B.

There ya go! Best solution over all.