Talk:Croissant

Origin, yet again

I just reverted an edit that changed the place of origin from France to Austria, but now I'm second guessing myself. After looking at this talk page and googling a bit, I'm now wondering if place of origin should be removed from the infobox altogether, since there will never be a consensus on the question. Leschnei (talk) 12:01, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Why removed from the icon picture

I don't know why you remove the picture of crossiant and coffee , because this picture is have the crossiant Geoffreyrabbit (talk) 13:39, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

No mention of the Croissant in Mexico?

I was reading the article and I'm a bit saddened by the complete lack of mention of the Mexican version of the Croissant. Zero. Zip. I was wondering if any of the people who wrote here have stumbled on anything about Mexico and Croissants in their research. There is more history on the Croissant out there, and it likely happens around the 1860s (same time period as US Civil War).

I was raised in Mexico and knew (as common knowledge) that the sugar-glazed version of the Croissant is part of a repertoire of pastries imported into Mexican cuisine, likely between the two French Interventions (invasions) in the 19th. C (both happening after Mexico's independence from Spain in 1821). Other pastry examples which were imported and adapted to Mexican cuisine are the Vol-au-vent (known as "Bolovan" in Mexico), and the Palmieres (known as "Orejas"), both involving puff pastry. According to the very few foodie websites (mostly Mexican) that I've seen talk about it, these pastries were definitely present in Mexico before 1870 if not earlier. By the way, since you mention it, "Continental Breakfast" is also considered typical-Mexican and similarly attributed to be a French cultural import.

The "Cuernos" (horns) as the Mexicans call the Croissant, is popularly assumed to have been brought by Prince Maximilian of Austria a/k/a Emperor Maximilian I and his wife Carlota of Belgium, during the 2nd French Intervention in Mexico of 1861-67 (multiple articles for all of these subjects are found in Wiki). Whether French or Austrian in origin, I guess it probably doesn't matter, because Emperor Maximilian was Austrian, Carlota was Belgian, plus the invading force was French - so you have three "vectors" for the pastry to come into Mexico, so to speak.

Most importantly, Empress Carlota was famous for bringing in teams of French and Hungarian chefs to "modernize" Mexican cuisine at the time - this is the part of French food legacy in Mexico that is actually written in history text books you study at school.

According to at least one website, it's also possible these pastries came during peacetime sometime between 1821 and 1867, just like pancake Crepes did ("Crepas"), as a wave of Europeans - mostly Italians (pastries) and French plus a few Germans (beer)- immigrated to Mexico looking to establish business ventures and new fortunes.

Unfortunately, finding sources for this material, while not impossible, is a bit hard, because the sources on the period tend to be written in Mexican foodie websites (i.e. non-academic), and usually history text books (the easy sources you can find) don't talk about specific food dishes, so before I could even dare to write anything concrete on French-Mex puff pastries, I have to go out and hunt for my sources to back up the information I've known since I was a child. Perhaps find some Mexican cookbooks of the period?

Hence I'm just writing this entry to raise awareness of the issue, and to perhaps see if any one here wants to contribute and pick on the subject (some erudite foodie history buff out there among you?).

Thanks in advance,

JW

2605:6000:EF4D:2100:8B6:BD62:A4A:D8F3 (talk) 09:10, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

"Spanish"?

There is a section simply named "Spanish", as opposed to all of the related subsections, which contain country names. This is presumably a typo? Should this be changed to "Spain", or "Spanish-speaking countries"? Thanks.

Kiril kovachev (talk) 16:49, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Ingredient functionality during processing

I'm all for sharing and increasing the sum of human knowledge but this section seems to be excessively detailed. Do any other bread/pastry pages go into this level of detail? There is something faintly comical that this section on its own is almost as long as the complete history of the croissant and its regional variants. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.138.180.194 (talk) 11:42, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

sometimes sections are better-developed than others. This is the way an open-source encyclopedia works. It shouldn't be viewed as "comical", just an artefact of different Wikipedia volunteers having different areas of interest. - Julietdeltalima (talk) 20:34, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

I certainly agree that different sections may develop at different rates.

However, in this particular case, I rather agree with the commentator. There is too much detail, much of it not specific to croissants. We should slim down this section. --Macrakis (talk) 21:42, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Removed commercial brand and non pertinent info

I removed: The croissanterie was explicitly a French response to American-style fast food, and as of 2008 30–40% of the croissants sold in French bakeries and patisseries were baked from frozen dough.

You explained this removal with "'La Croissanterie' is a brand, and it has no place in a non commercial article."

Actually, there is no prohibition at all on mentioning notable companies and brands in WP. In fact, it would be a gross omission to not mention, e.g., McDonald's in the hamburger article. In any case, the point was about French fast-food croissant bakeries in general, which have become an important part of croissant production and consumption in France. The particular chain just exemplifies that; I have slightly reworded the article to make that clearer.

At the same time, you removed the information about the current state of croissant baking in France, with no explanation at all. --Macrakis (talk) 20:32, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Croassant frantuZesc

? 2A02:A58:8646:FF00:A457:93C0:E041:F8BF (talk) 11:38, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Austria

The origin is only France. The article states that the croissant was born in France when the brioche dough of the Austrian kipferl was changed to a croissant dough. 213.208.157.120 (talk) 13:29, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello Woodlandscaley,

Could you explain your point of view ?

I read the following in the article:

"The modern croissant was developed in the early 20th century when French bakers replaced the brioche dough of the kipferl with a yeast-leavened laminated dough.

The birth of the croissant itself...can be dated to at least 1839 (some say 1838) ... in Paris.

The French version of the kipferl was named for its crescent (croissant) shape."

This clearly states that the Croissant is from France, born in Paris. 213.208.157.121 (talk) 14:27, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

I don't think anybody is arguing that the Croissant is French.

However, its origin is in Austria - which is why editors take umbrage when that significant part of its heritage is removed from the 'infobox'. Woodlandscaley (talk) 18:12, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply:)

There is no Austrian origin but a pastry created in France copying the shape of an Austrian product. The infobox should reflect that.

There is already a separate article for the Kipferl, and this article is about croissant (The birth of the croissant can be dated to...1839...in Paris")

The creation of the croissant happened in Paris as said in the article. 213.208.157.54 (talk) 08:02, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Until 1900 it was the same as kipfler in shape and consistence

So the double origin is right 79.41.217.183 (talk) 20:22, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Before 1900 the Croissant did not exist. Only the kipferl existed. Kipferl= brioche dough; Croissant= puff pastry. This innovation happened in Paris, then kipferl=Austria ; Croissant= France. 213.208.157.55 (talk) 14:24, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

I also agree that he kipferl is a different thing. The current article make confusion between the two products (kipferl and Croissant). If there is a separate article for the kipferl, this article should focus on croissant.

Then, the origin is not Austria. Paris is the place of birth of the croissant. As you said the Croissant is characterized for its puff pastry which is something that was created in Paris. 83.64.26.78 (talk) 11:51, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

I bring some elements from the Oxford Companion to food, which state that the croissant is French and that the Austrian origin is a myth:

"The bending of a little roll into a crescent shape, as probably happened in various parts of the world at various times, does not constitute the invention of the familiar, puffy, buttery croissant. There is more to the croissant than shape."

"In fact, the croissant in its present form does not have a long history. See culinary mythology for the erroneous idea that it came into being in Vienna in the 17th century"

"The earliest French reference to the croissant seems to be in Payen's book Des substances alimentaires published in 1853."

"Yet no trace of a recipe for croissants can be found earlier than that given by Favre in his Dictionnaire universel de cuisine (c.1905), and his recipe bears no resemblance to the modern puff pastry concoction; it is rather an oriental pastry made of pounded almonds and sugar. Only in 1906, in Colombié's Nouvelle Encyclopédie culinaire, did a true croissant recipe appear."

"This story seems to owe its origin, or at least its wide diffusion, to Alfred Gottschalk, who wrote about the croissant for the first edition of the Larousse gastronomique (1938)."

"In fact, the world-famous croissant of Paris (and France) cannot be traced back beyond the latter half of the 19th century, at the very earliest. The first relevant mention in any dictionary definition of the word was in 1863, the first recipe under the name 'croissant' (but describing an oriental pastry) in c.1905, and the earliest recipe which corresponds to the modern croissant in 1906." Goralero (talk) 22:14, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

References

@Woodlandscaley what are your arguments to say croissant is Austrian ?

I see that some points are already discussed here. The croissant is French, the Austrian origin is a kind of legend. The name viennoiserie doesn't mean Viennese, they are also a French invention. Like Chinoiserie are not Chinese but European. The connection with Austria comes from the influence of Zang who introduced the kipferl to France. But the creation of the croissant took place in Paris.

Users (213.208.157.120, @Macrakis, @Goralero) I see that you have been talking about this question. I think the Austrian origin should be removed from the info box especially after consulting the Oxford companion to food that explains that the origin is France and how the Austrian origin constitutes a legend published first in Larousse gastronomique. 179.49.5.218 (talk) 16:24, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

I have no arguments to say the croissant is Austrian. It's French.

However, it's origin is Austrian.

Yes, you've cherry-picked a source to support your argument. But the vast majority of sources on-line state Austria as the origin.

This has been argued to death over the years - with a compromise of including both France and Austria as countries of origin.

Although loaded with bias, simply google "croissant origin Austria" - and I think you'd agree that it's disingenuous to suggest that there's no Austrian influence in the creation of the croissant. Woodlandscaley (talk) 17:10, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Paris is not in Austria and the creation of the croissant happened in Paris. Kipferl is Austrian and it is distinct enough to the croissant to have its own page, so there is no reason to let Austria as an origin. Influence is not origin. Otherwise you can put that tacos al pastor is from Arabic countries and not from Mexico. There are a lot of examples like this. And the Oxford companion to food is not a random source, it's one of the most serious reference for culinary History and they have debunked this story of Austrian origin. 45.70.56.229 (talk) 23:25, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

All sources agree that the kipferl contributed to the history of the croissant. But it is not a croissant. So the question is how to interpret the term "place of origin". I don't think there's a clear line. For some reason, pot pie gives its origin as England, although pies of meat in pastry certainly existed before that elsewhere. A compromise might be something like "Place of Origin: France (with Austrian antecedents)" or something. --Macrakis (talk) 16:22, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you @Macrakis for contributing. All the dishes have antecedents, I gave the example of Tacos al pastor which is Mexican but with antecedents in Arabic cuisine. We can also think about Italian Ragù which comes from the French Ragoût, even the name is the same but the place of origin is marked as Italy.

The croissant and the Kipferl are two separated things, otherwise we would have only one article in Wikipedia. And the croissant is clearly a Parisian creation. The shape comes from the Austrian kipferl but how it is written in the Oxford companion to food "there is more to the croissant than shape". Even the contribution of Zang happened in Paris. Austria is the place of origin of the Kipferl but not the croissant. 45.70.56.229 (talk) 18:00, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

I wish "otherwise we would have only one article in Wikipedia" were true, but sadly because of national pride etc., we often have multiple articles about fundamentally the same dish. I tend to be a "lumper", so in my judgement, döner kebab, shwarma, and gyros are variants of the same dish and really belong in the same article. The real "splitters" might even have different articles for döner kebab in Turkey and döner kebab in Germany.... --Macrakis (talk) 18:51, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

@Macrakis I totally agree that Gyros, Kebab and Shawarma should be grouped in one single article. But for the croissant and kipferl, the recipes are different. One is laminated (croissant), the other is not. Actually kipferl is closer to a brioche and except for the shape, it has little to do with the croissant.

I found quite clear the explanation of Oxford companion to food and think we should take it as the reference. They explain that viennoiseries in general are French and that the myths around the croissant are not true (sometimes created by the ottomans or to celebrate a victory against them, sometimes in Hungary, Austria or Poland, brought to France by Maria Antoinette... and so on). The only facts that we have is that the first recipes of what we call a croissant appeared in France in the late 19th or beginning of the 20th century.

That's why I ask to consider serious sources instead of sticking to popular legends and change the origin in info box for only France. 45.70.56.229 (talk) 19:57, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

We agree. --Macrakis (talk) 20:36, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you @Macrakis 45.70.56.229 (talk) 21:01, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

The Austrian Kipferl is no doubt significant and influential, but in reading the article it seems pretty clear that the creation of the Croissant occurred in France. The fact that the ingredients are different also suggest that while the two are similar, they not the same thing. Otherwise every food baked from dough and flour should acknowledge its origins in Mesopotamia or earlier civilisations. The place of origin is, unusually for a food, documented and known. Paris, France, around 1840s. And the infobox should say that. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 17:27, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

I totally agree with you @Escape Orbit, every dish has antecedents but as itself the croissant was created in Paris. I make the change. 157.100.142.132 (talk) 20:11, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

The source is clearly: the kipfler aas created in 1300 and directly inspired croissant 79.54.217.132 (talk) 00:33, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

And there is already a separate article for the Kipferl. Here it's the article for croissant. 2800:430:1384:A210:1B:F0FF:FEB5:3CB1 (talk) 00:50, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

croissant is just a french world for crescent 79.54.217.132 (talk) 00:55, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

This article is not about the word, it's about the pastry. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 12:06, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Which was the same as the kipfler until 1900.

By the way, that reasoning should be applied to other products similar to kipfler then? 79.54.217.132 (talk) 12:00, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

The consensus here is clearly that the croissant is a French variant of the kipferl, so its place of origin is France. You need to stop citing consensus in your edit summaries when your edits go against it. HansVonStuttgart (talk) 09:29, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

I don't think it's origin is as important as the undisputable fact that it is a French pastry. Cornsimpel (talk) 09:46, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Ha. I wasted my time looking at and copying the Oxford Companion to Food. Legends need to be mentioned of course, but origin is French. Doug Weller talk 11:51, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Is it? The source mention the name in 1853 when it was still similar to kipfler, which by the way existed since 1300 79.54.217.132 (talk) 12:45, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Add English pronunciation

Can somebody add English (US/British if they are different) pronunciation? this is English language Wikipedia. I can’t figure out how to make the text look the same as for the French pronunciation. 78.115.148.30 (talk) 14:47, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Done. This information was in a previous version of the article, but a single-edit anon removed it and somehow this was never undone. --Macrakis (talk) 22:17, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

2800:430:1384:A210:1DF:3D5E:E406:953 (

This user is interpreting sources instead of using them and did it in other articles too The sources clearly state the "croissant" is a name from crescent appearing in 1853, that it started with the same pastry as the kipfler, changing only in 1900. It's not enough to eliminate references to Austria 79.54.217.132 (talk) 11:59, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I'm 100% with you.

User 2800:430:1384:A210:70CD:6FF:FE33:9661 seems to have an 'agenda'!

Also uses different IP addresses to evade 'edit warring' and after starting with Croissant, has moved-on to different targets.

Viennoiserie is the latest article to have Austria scrubbed from history - which will come as a shock to many established culinary writers and historians the world over!!

Loves to cite the Oxford companion of Food as if it's gospel and the only 'source' in the public domain, riding roughshod over other sources which don't fit his/her narrative.

As for a consensus on the Croissant talk page...this guy's commented numerous times under different aliases, swinging the count in their favour!

2800:430:1384:A210:70CD:6FF:FE33:9661

45.70.56.229

179.49.5.218

157.100.142.132

2800:430:1384:A210:1B:F0FF:FEB5:3CB1

2800:BF0:16D:C1A:B406:CF89:72B9:13A7

2800:BF0:16D:C1A:1DF:3D5E:E406:953

All with an IP address in Quito, Ecuador.

It all seems a bit suspect. Woodlandscaley (talk) 13:43, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Exactly. I don't understand how someone can take him(her?) seriously when he/she uses only the part of the sources that confirm his bias but ignore the rest, which I pointed out in the comment above

I'm not even saying the infobox should only have Austria, having both France and Austria was perfectly in line with the informations in the article (before he started to change it)

Also, he changed it BEFORE reaching a consensus, which I assumed was a big no no 79.54.217.132 (talk) 15:14, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

The Oxford Companion to Food is an excellent source, although I agree that it should be complemented by other sources. And it is not "in the public domain"! --Macrakis (talk) 15:41, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Sure, but you cannot extrapolate only the part that interest you. Goes for any sources of course

And yes, there are other sources in the page I think are worth consideration 79.54.217.132 (talk) 16:13, 10 February 2024 (UTC)