Monday, September 11, 2006

To continue where I left off.

Context - I can't help but look at this bread for what it is, a very primitive bread. That said, if one looks at it from the historical perspective of an early bread, a sprouted bread must have been a breakthrough. Sweeter, and more importantly, easier to grind than dry wheat berries, it probably made breadmaking alot less work. Whether people making this bread long ago knew it was very nutritional would be difficult to know....
I wonder what came first, sprouted unleavened bread or ground flour unleavened bread?

Comments: I like the taste of this bread. But I don't think it is quite right as a flat bread. I think it needs to be made in a different shape for a number of reasons. First, my kids won't eat it the way it looks now. I don't blame them. To solve this I will be making the next batch in a deeper pan, perhaps getting it to a three inch depth, and baking it longer. Second, I want the bread to have a higher ratio of creamy chewy interior to the thin crunchy crust. Perhaps this is difficult to achieve and I just don't know it because I am only in the early stages of testing. I think if the bread was thicker, you could retain the nutritional value of the sprouted grain in the interior of the loaf, while making a more substantial crust by increasing the oven temperature. You may lose some of the nutritional value, but since the loaf is thick, you could monitor the interior temperaure of the loaf and pull it out at its optimum temperature.
I should note that I did not use a non-stick pan. I prefer to use parchment paper. It worked just fine, so long as I dusted it with a little bit of unbleached flour.

I am off to start another batch of wheat berries, and to look for more information online.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home