Ye Pleasant Mount: 1989 1990 Excavations - Open site which ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Analysis of butchering patterns on domestic and wild animal bones is one contribution of this faunal assemblage. The results of this analysis suggest that the historic occupants consumed primarily beef, deer, and pork portions, some of which were hacked into roast-sized cuts before preparation by roasting, stewing, frying, or baking for the table. There is no evidence for cutting ofmeat into steaks, or smaller portions, although this may have been done after bones were removed from the portions, leaving no cut marks on the bones themselves. Birds were probably prepared whole, as only one of the preserved elements exhibits cut marks. With fowl, portions can be separated by breakage of the joints by hand, thereby showing no evidence of cut marks. Fish and small game were probably prepared whole, perhaps after filleting. To aid in an interpretation of butchering patterns and meat cuts, an eighteenthcentury text, The British Housewife, or, The Cook, Housekeeper's, and Gardiner's Companion (Bradley 1755), describing the portions of beef found in the contemporary London market and recipes for middle to upper class English cooking, was consulted. The beef portions and cuts described by Bradley in 1755 correlate closely with those described and illustrated in The Book of the Meat Trade, a twentieth-century description of meat cuts and portions for London and the Home Counties in England (Gerrard 1949). While it is difficult to determine whether meat is portioned the same way in both texts, the similarity is rather convincing, as there is a basic pattern to how animals are cut up. The actual location where portioning cuts are made may change slightly or vary regionally, but they are generally made to produce the same portions of meat (i. e., hindquarters, forequarters, mid-section, removal of head and lower legs). Probably the greatest variation occurs in how the trimming of these larger portions into smaller ones is done, and what is considered "proper" for the table. This can range from no further portioning at all to very small, thin portions such as steaks and ribs. The type of meat cuts that result are certainly influenced by socioeconomic status, individual preferences, and regional/cultural variation. Bradley (1755:20-21) describes the portioning of a beef carcass for the London market of 1755 as follows: "The Quarters are two, the fore and the Hind ; in the fore Quarter there is the Haunch; this is a large Piece, and includes what may be called four Joints; these are the Clod, the Marrow bone, the Shin, and the Sticking-piece. Next to the Haunch comes....the Leg of Mutton Piece; this has part of the Blade Bone. Then there are these four, the Chuck-piece, the Brisket, the fore Ribs, and the Middle Rib. This last is what is called the Chuck Rib. These pieces compose the fore Quarter. In the Hind Quarter there are fewer, but they are much finer pieces; there are the Sirloin, the Rump, the Thick Flank, the Thin Flank, the Veiny Piece, the Chuck Bone, the Buttock, and the Leg:' Apparently, in 1755, cuts from the hindquarter were considered of better quality than cuts from the forequarter, a trend that continues into the twentieth century (Aldrich 1922; Gerrard 1949). 7
Cut and hack marks on cow bone in the sample suggest portioning or trimming of portions. Cuts were located on a vertebra, ribs, and a pelvis fragment, and probably represent the process of cutting the carcass into smaller portions. The cut vertebra and rib could have been part of a "chuck and blade", "sticking piece", "fore rib" or "middle rib" cut, while the pelvis could have been part of a "rump" or "buttock", as described in The British Housewife (Bradley 1755). More modem English terminology identifies this as an"aitchbone" cut (Gerrard. 1949). Unfortunately, cookbooks that provide such detailed accounts of beef portioning provide few details on the butchering ofpork. Bradley (1755:25) lists only five cuts in a pork carcass found in the London market of the eighteenth century. The forequarter contained the "Fore-Loin and Spring" and the "Spearrib", the hindquarter just "Leg and Loin". These terms for pork portions also appear in Martha Washington's Booke of Cookery (Hess 1981:57, 62), suggesting that this method of portioning pork was also practiced in colonial America. However, a cut through the distal humerus of a pig from the Mt. Pleasant site probably resulted during butchering or trimming of the lower leg from the upper, meatier portion of the shoulder ("fore-loin and spring"). In modem terminology this is a "shankless shoulder" (Aldrich 1922). Ifnot butchered on site, perhaps meat was procured anellor stored in quarters, or even halves, of carcasses. However, the presence of predominantly head, shin, and feet elements suggests that butchering and processing of pigs and cattle was conducted on the site. Entire legs or quarters may have occasionally been boned, or trimmed of lower legs and feet before or after transport to the kitchen. The lower leg cuts removed from animals may then have also been used for pickling or glue making (Bradley 1755; Hess 1981; Hooker 1984), before they were discarded in the general midden. 8
Page 1 and 2:
Ye Pleasant Mount: 1989 & 1990 Exca
Page 3 and 4:
Chapter 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Table of
Page 5 and 6:
Figure List ofFigures, continued 31
Page 7 and 8:
Acknowledgements The author is inde
Page 10 and 11:
is not known, it may have been sett
Page 12 and 13:
Laboratory Methods All artifacts we
Page 14 and 15:
Chapter 2. History of Mount Pleasan
Page 16 and 17:
visited by Bartram was located in 1
Page 18 and 19:
Ebenezer, he purposed to quit the w
Page 20 and 21:
Uchee Creek in Columbia County, wit
Page 22 and 23:
was: "supplying some Creek Indians
Page 24 and 25:
He [Oglethorpe] stationed small gar
Page 26 and 27:
Thomas Wiggin was dead by 1756, and
Page 28:
continued to live near Mount Pleasa
Page 31 and 32:
Table 2, Continued. Artifact Summar
Page 33 and 34:
--- Area C Area D Level bluff top M
Page 35 and 36:
Table 3. Area C, Test Unit Summary.
Page 37 and 38:
Chapter 4. Excavations at Trader Po
Page 39 and 40:
Table 4. Artifact Summary, Midden,
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 46 and 47:
G ·' ;:. ,: ,': .:' . : ..... A B
Page 49:
Figure 11. Pewter .p001l8 ad iron k
Page 53 and 54:
Table 6. Ceramic Summary, Midden, c
Page 55 and 56:
Tobie 7. Ceramic SU111DUIIY. FeaIUr
Page 57 and 58:
Table 8. Minimum Vessel Estimate, N
Page 59 and 60:
y the addition of a notched/pinched
Page 61 and 62:
century, further confirming the age
Page 66 and 67:
Table 10. Button Attributes. Levell
Page 68 and 69:
Table 11, Continued. Glass Bead Typ
Page 70:
while Mount Pleasant had fewer than
Page 74:
It B Fi ur 23 En isb E em J
Page 77:
Type G, which is associated with Br
Page 82 and 83:
o CIII 2 Fi ure 28. Bottle lass too
Page 84:
581N SOOE 10 YR 5/4 Y.Uowish Brown
Page 92:
10 YR S/3 Brown Sand 10 YR 3/1 Very
Page 96 and 97:
Feature 1. Feature 1 was a circular
Page 98 and 99:
x 28 cm north-south and it was 19 c
Page 100 and 101:
own sand. The feature contained onl
Page 102 and 103:
Table 13. Mean Ceramic Dale Calcula
Page 104 and 105:
documented period (1735 to 1757) wh
Page 106 and 107:
In Table 16, the Trader Point midde
Page 108:
Period pottery. The paucity of Chat
Page 111 and 112:
with it. Since we know that Schremp
Page 113 and 114: Table 19, Continued. Summary of Eur
Page 115 and 116: Table 19, Continued. Summary of Eur
Page 119 and 120: Hemperley, Marion 1974 English Crow
Page 121 and 122: Kelly, A. R. and R. S. Neitzel 1961
Page 123 and 124: Smith, Marvin T. 1990 Historic Peri
Page 125 and 126: Appendix I. Glass Beads from Mount
Page 127 and 128: value for comparative purposes, and
Page 129 and 130: There is no Kidd designation for th
Page 131 and 132: Ontario. Kidd, Kenneth E. 1979 Glas
Page 133 and 134: ZOOARCHAEOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE M
Page 136 and 137: specimens that have been studied by
Page 138 and 139: The next largest taxon category by
Page 140 and 141: The domestic animals, pig, cow, chi
Page 142 and 143: Fort Michilimackinac fit well with
Page 144 and 145: REFERENCES CITED Anderson, Jay Alle
Page 146 and 147: Schmid, Elizabeth F. 1972 Atlas of
Page 150 and 151: Table 4. Species List, The Mt. Plea
Page 152 and 153: Table 7. Bone Measurements' (in mil
Page 154 and 155: Table 10. Element Distribution of M
Page 156 and 157: Table 12. Element Fusion Data, Mt.
Page 158 and 159: INTRODUCTION ZOOARCHAEOLOGICALANALY
Page 160 and 161: Mollusca A total of 46 fragments of
Page 162 and 163: These data allow us to draw some co
Page 166 and 167: REI ...ERENCES Aldrich, Paul I. (ed
Page 170: Table 3. Fauna from Mt. Pleasant, F
show all

Ye Pleasant Mount: 1989 1990 Excavations - Open site which ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?