Yes there are theories that the habaneros evolved from peppers brought from Havana, but every pepper came from somewhere. However its in the Yucitan Peninsula in Mexico, where they have been grown for decades, where they became the landrace orange habaneros we know of.
-
Do you need help identifying a 🌶?
Is your plant suffering from an unknown issue? 🤧
Then ask in Identification and Diagnosis.
Caribbean Red chile facts
- Thread starter djsketchie
- Start date
Yes there are theories that the habaneros evolved from peppers brought from Havana, but every pepper came from somewhere. However its in the Yucitan Peninsula in Mexico, where they have been grown for decades, where they became the landrace orange habaneros we know of.
AlabamaJack
eXtreme
it seems to me that I read somewhere that all domesticated varieties of peppers come from the lowly tepin originally from the Yucatan peninsula...anyone else read that?
as far as the debate on the CRs go...IMO, Caribbean Red...or Caribbean Red Habanero is your choice...calling it a Caribbean Red is like calling it by it's first name...
as far as the debate on the CRs go...IMO, Caribbean Red...or Caribbean Red Habanero is your choice...calling it a Caribbean Red is like calling it by it's first name...
C. pubescens has been there for at least eight thousand years. C. annuum var. glabriusculum is likely to exist in its current form for less time. can you really say a species came from a younger species?
It is believed the C. annuum var. annuum chiles came from the C. annuum var. glabriusculum.
... as for the name, I think we already summed it up.
I agree with McDerrmott, great info especially because I have 10 very healthy young Carib Reds almost ready for plant out!
First off, I'm not a pro yet at quoting multiple things from a single post, so I'll take a stab at it the best I can...
1. I'm not sure why my comment about Scotch Bonnets vs. Habaneros bothered you since I made no claims or statements whatsoever regarding that. It was really just a throw away sentence and an attempt to diffuse the argument and get back on the topic of the original post. That clearly failed. It is making it difficult to have a clearly defined debate when you stray off topic.
2. "what I meant to say they are also red C. chinense like all other red C. chinense, no matter what they're called. so yes, the Caribbean Red is a red colored C. chinense. C. chinense's go by many names, not just Habanero." --- I think you are trying to agree with me without actually being explicit about it here. You are stating facts that weave in and out of what I am trying to get at, and it is starting to look like it is boiling down to symantics. I bet you would give Bill Clinton a run for his money on equivocation, but I'm not really that interested in defining "what the meaning of the word is, is," as our former President so famously said. The Caribbean Red Habanero is a red colored C. chinense, and is also called a Habanero. C. chinense's also go by many names, not just Habanero, but that is not the case for the Caribbean Red Habanero, which is the current chile pepper under discussion. It seems to me that we agree, but you are over clarifying points that don't affect the argument.
3. "The geographic issue didn't bother me. as far as I know, there is a different terminology in Mexico and the Caribbean islands. the presence of certain species (not varieties) is also different. therefor I always consider both as different sources, especially when it comes to chiles. the fact Mexico is near the Caribbean sea makes no difference. I am aware of how this might look on your end and I'm not arguing, just explain myself. chiles from Mexico are an entire group by itself and are not usually related to the Caribbean chiles." --- You are pretty much admitting that this is merely an opinion of yours and nothing else, as evident by your use of the first person pronoun multiple times. I am actually okay with that as long as you realize that the Yucatan is in the Caribbean, and since the origin of the Caribbean Red Habanero is the Yucatan, it is therefore geographically from the Caribbean. The Yucatan is also not "near the Caribbean." It is actually on the Caribbean, and shares hundreds of miles of coast line with it. Take a vacation to Cancun sometime and you'll see first hand what I am talking about. There are other areas of Mexico, with vastly different ecosystems, ie. Tijuana, but you are more likely to pick up an STD than a chile pepper there.
I can tell that this debate is on path toward an event horizon that I am not willing cross, so I will reiterate my main points and feel satisfied that they have held up to scrutiny. If anyone else would like to object, by all means...
1. CRH is a C. Chinense, and a Habanero, and red. Therefore it is one of many red varieties of Habanero. I make no further associations or claims beyond this, and I really do think you agree with me without actually saying it.
2. It's origin is the Yucatan Peninsula, which is both in Mexico and the Caribbean. Therefore it is both from Mexico and the Caribbean.
For the record, I spent most of my summers as a teenager in the Caribbean with my aunt and uncle who ran a live aboard dive boat, so I am very familiar with the region. If it sticks out of the water, and it's in the Caribbean, I've probably stepped foot on it. This really has no impact on the debate, other than clarifying why I feel like I can be authoritative about what constitutes part of the Caribbean.
Now, if only there was an emoticon that expressed what I think we should do now...hmmm...oh wait, there is!
Cheers, Omri
1. I'm not sure why my comment about Scotch Bonnets vs. Habaneros bothered you since I made no claims or statements whatsoever regarding that. It was really just a throw away sentence and an attempt to diffuse the argument and get back on the topic of the original post. That clearly failed. It is making it difficult to have a clearly defined debate when you stray off topic.
2. "what I meant to say they are also red C. chinense like all other red C. chinense, no matter what they're called. so yes, the Caribbean Red is a red colored C. chinense. C. chinense's go by many names, not just Habanero." --- I think you are trying to agree with me without actually being explicit about it here. You are stating facts that weave in and out of what I am trying to get at, and it is starting to look like it is boiling down to symantics. I bet you would give Bill Clinton a run for his money on equivocation, but I'm not really that interested in defining "what the meaning of the word is, is," as our former President so famously said. The Caribbean Red Habanero is a red colored C. chinense, and is also called a Habanero. C. chinense's also go by many names, not just Habanero, but that is not the case for the Caribbean Red Habanero, which is the current chile pepper under discussion. It seems to me that we agree, but you are over clarifying points that don't affect the argument.
3. "The geographic issue didn't bother me. as far as I know, there is a different terminology in Mexico and the Caribbean islands. the presence of certain species (not varieties) is also different. therefor I always consider both as different sources, especially when it comes to chiles. the fact Mexico is near the Caribbean sea makes no difference. I am aware of how this might look on your end and I'm not arguing, just explain myself. chiles from Mexico are an entire group by itself and are not usually related to the Caribbean chiles." --- You are pretty much admitting that this is merely an opinion of yours and nothing else, as evident by your use of the first person pronoun multiple times. I am actually okay with that as long as you realize that the Yucatan is in the Caribbean, and since the origin of the Caribbean Red Habanero is the Yucatan, it is therefore geographically from the Caribbean. The Yucatan is also not "near the Caribbean." It is actually on the Caribbean, and shares hundreds of miles of coast line with it. Take a vacation to Cancun sometime and you'll see first hand what I am talking about. There are other areas of Mexico, with vastly different ecosystems, ie. Tijuana, but you are more likely to pick up an STD than a chile pepper there.
I can tell that this debate is on path toward an event horizon that I am not willing cross, so I will reiterate my main points and feel satisfied that they have held up to scrutiny. If anyone else would like to object, by all means...
1. CRH is a C. Chinense, and a Habanero, and red. Therefore it is one of many red varieties of Habanero. I make no further associations or claims beyond this, and I really do think you agree with me without actually saying it.
2. It's origin is the Yucatan Peninsula, which is both in Mexico and the Caribbean. Therefore it is both from Mexico and the Caribbean.
For the record, I spent most of my summers as a teenager in the Caribbean with my aunt and uncle who ran a live aboard dive boat, so I am very familiar with the region. If it sticks out of the water, and it's in the Caribbean, I've probably stepped foot on it. This really has no impact on the debate, other than clarifying why I feel like I can be authoritative about what constitutes part of the Caribbean.
Now, if only there was an emoticon that expressed what I think we should do now...hmmm...oh wait, there is!
Cheers, Omri
The origin of the habaneros is the Yucatan peninsula in Mexico, not the Caribbean part. Caribbean chinenses are usually quite different in shape and even seed placement. I don't know the whole history of the Caribbean red other than its origin in Mexico. This at least gives it the proper origin and shape, but it could still have been crossed with other red non-hab chiles(possibly a Caribbean type). I think the red and other colored "habs" are actually a fairly recent development and most are not real habs which are a very unique C. chinense variety
I'm sorry you feel that way Omri, but I'm afraid I don't see how I made it personal. Racking my brain here...If saying you could hold court with Bill Clinton was disparaging, it wasn't my intent, considering he is one of the most well respected figures in the United States (unless you are Republican, of course). The only other thing I can think of would be the STD comment, but that was actually an indictment on Tijuana, and had nothing at all to do with you personally. I also thought my bong hitting emoticon at the end was pretty light hearted and a clear sign that I enjoyed debating with you, but would much rather be doing something else!
In any case, best wishes, and I'll see you around the THP boards.
In any case, best wishes, and I'll see you around the THP boards.
I don't understand the bolded part. Do you mean it's from Yucatan STATE? In which case you could make an argument that the state is on the GOM, and therefore not Caribbean.
Quintana Roo is the only state on the peninsula that is REALLY on the Sea, and not the Gulf. It's hard to argue that Campeche is on the Caribbean. Yucatan, maybe. Quintana Roo. Absolutely.
My assumption, which is always dangerous, is that the CR was grown on the Caribbean side of the peninsula first? That could be the reason for the common name? Or it could've been a marketing name, or god only knows.
But there's no reason that the Yucatan PENINSULA and the Caribbean Sea are mutually exclusive. In fact, it's quite the opposite.
I'm writing NMSU, dammit! lol.
I guess I don't really understand what you're saying, still. As Caribbean is not necessarily a misnomer here, even if it isn't used with the specificity that say, a Tobago Seasoning Pepper would be, as it designates a more well-defined geographic area.
Shrug. Anyway. Back to our regularly scheduled programming...
I don't consider Mexico to really be Caribbean but I'm no Geography expert. Is this statement wrong?
"Mexico is geographically in North America, along with Canada and the United States.
However you should know that a small part of Mexico, specifically the Yucatán Peninsula, is bathed by the Caribbean Sea. So that area is sometimes referred to as "the Mexican caribbean", although not really in the geographical"
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_mexico_in_the_caribbean
"Mexico is geographically in North America, along with Canada and the United States.
However you should know that a small part of Mexico, specifically the Yucatán Peninsula, is bathed by the Caribbean Sea. So that area is sometimes referred to as "the Mexican caribbean", although not really in the geographical"
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_mexico_in_the_caribbean
I have read the same thing AJ, that all of them originated from the Tepin. Dunno if that is true or not.
ALL of Mexico is most certainly not on the Caribbean. But that's like saying that an Arctic Fox is not native to Canada because Canada is not 'Arctic'. Or that the Texas Whooping Crane is not from Texas, but from the United States. Both are technically true, but the common names are used to isolate species or sub-species to more specific geographic regions within a larger land mass. The eastern portion of the Yucatan Peninsula is most certainly bordered by the Caribbean sea, and the naming of the CR *could* therefore be a logical and not incorrect labeling. Thus the confusion.
All my sources indicate that real habaneros, and even the Caribbean red, are specifically from geographical south-east Mexico. As I said before, a hab could have been crossed with a red colored Caribbean(Geographical) type pepper to make a red "hab" but then it would only really be a half-hab in my opinion, and maybe it is. I'm quite sure this is a fairly new pepper, and my guess is that it is a stable cross and not a mutant, but thats just an educated guess. You'll notice that habaneros are the only Mexican C. chinenses and they are not that popular at all in most of Mexico, its only in the Peninsula area that you'll usually see them at all
I think I finally understand.
In your opinion, this pepper is not a 'true' habanero because it was likely developed by crossing with another type of pepper not found in the Yucatan peninsula and that it may therefore derive its common name from that secondary pepper parent. Is that right?
I guess I thought it was developed in Mexico and named for it's location close to the Caribbean Sea.
Perhaps we are both correct.
Also, can you share some of those sources? In particular I'd like to hear about the popularity of the habanero in Mexico, as I've seen them in every supermercado I've ever been in there, from Quintana Roo, to Aguascalientes, to Jalisco, to Baja.
I haven't travelled a lot through Mexico but I've never seen habaneros in any markets I did visit. I know Willard and others have the same opinion as me
Mexican food is not really that picante with a few exceptions.
This picture is from an open mercado in Guanajuato state and has poblanos, dried arboles, manzanos, Xalapas and serranos. With chipotles, these are the chiles used most in the cuisine.
The super hots are what the Mexicans call "machismo" and I've never seen them in a market.
I think I finally understand.
In your opinion, this pepper is not a 'true' habanero because it was likely developed by crossing with another type of pepper not found in the Yucatan peninsula and that it may therefore derive its common name from that secondary pepper parent. Is that right?
I guess I thought it was developed in Mexico and named for it's location close to the Caribbean Sea.
Perhaps we are both correct.
In Boland and DeWitt's first book they note that habaneros were indeed found in Cuba hence the name Habenero ie. from Havana.