Talk:English breakfast

Not '"beans", surely, but rather the unpalatable tinned concoction known as "baked beans" (Navy beans?). Are they really baked? Or just boiled in sauce? Aleta Curry 19:37, 29 July 2007 (CDT)

Almost certainly they are slowly baked in the sauce. At least Boston baked beans are, and I've looked at some Brit. recipes, and they seem more or less the same except for the seasonings. "Baking" them in the sauce is essentially the same as "boiling" them in the sauce, except they're simmering slowly instead of boiling rapidly. Hayford Peirce 20:45, 29 July 2007 (CDT)

What happened to the traditional fried bread? And sausages are really quite normal for a British breakfast. Is there a standard definition of this meal, or are you making it up?

THe "baked beans" I know from Arab and Greek cookery, although in those cuisines they are considerably nicer and healthier. The large beans [as opposed to the mangy things that Heinz use] are partially boiled in salted water, then a sauce is prepared by frying chopped onion in olive oil, then adding chopped tomato, garlic, water, a few herbs... and slowly baking the beans. IN greek these are called Gigantes [Large] lol.--Martin Baldwin-Edwards 22:24, 29 July 2007 (CDT)

(a ghost from the past whispers): no I'm not 'making it up' -- sausages are less common than bacon in these breakfasts (see Bangers and mash instead); CZ will be hard put to equal the exhaustive (and exhausting!) Wikipedia entry here. Russell Potter 22:55, 29 July 2007 (CDT)

I lived in London for 8 months in 1968 and my own recollection is that bacon and sausages were about evenly divided. The sausages, compared to Jones Little Links, however, were universally excruciatingly bad. Mostly composed of sawdust, I would say. Hayford Peirce 23:25, 29 July 2007 (CDT)

Oh. I hadn't noticed that this was your contribution, Russell! Well, my feeling is that the ingredients of this breakfast are quite arbitrary [as indeed are the contents of British sausages -- you should be so lucky to have only sawdust, Hayford], but it is possible that some sort of standardization has occurred since I stopped consuming unhealthy food about 25 years ago. So, I will defer to more recent victims of the phenomenon:-) --Martin Baldwin-Edwards 06:01, 30 July 2007 (CDT)

Name

This is always called a "full English breakfast" in the UK. I think this name is far more common; in fact I'd never heard of "British breakfast" until I read this article, and presume this is the North American name for a UK meal. Never heard of "full breakfast" either, except in the meaning of having a substantial meal to start the day. I advise renaming this Full English breakfast. John Stephenson 00:44, 30 July 2007 (CDT)

Actually, I mean Full breakfast, given that on further inquiry I've found various names for this. Argh. John Stephenson 01:27, 30 July 2007 (CDT)

Make the beans optional and add mandatory sausages, and you've got a Full Irish breakfast :-) It may well be best on this artcle to follow the WP example, go for a broad, inclusive title, and then use the article to go into the regional variations - an Ulster Fry, for example, is pretty much the same except it'll include potato bread and soda farls. Anton Sweeney 09:55, 1 August 2007 (CDT)

Breakfast tea

I know that tea buffs use this term; is it American? As a Brit, I have never used such a term and neither does anyone else I know. Perhaps this is because we don't just drink tea for breakfast. :-) John Stephenson 04:58, 2 August 2007 (CDT)

A coffee drinker here - with or without my Full Irish - but yes, I've heard the term used and seen "breakfast tea" blends on sale. [1] [2] and

[3] (the latter perversely says their Irish Breakfast Tea blend is the perfect afternoon tea. Though, on reflection, early afternoon *is* a good time for breakfast... ;-) ) Anton Sweeney 05:42, 2 August 2007 (CDT)