Pemmican: It Wasn’t Just for Native Americans

Tags

Image_20090908_147_600

I love the idea of any food that is billed as coming from the wilds of North America.  Pemmican was just such a survival food.  “The word is from Cree pĭmĭkân, manufactured grease”, or one who makes grease.  “The word is cognate with Abnaki pĕmĭkân.   It was made from whatever meat was the most abundant in a particular region.  In the northernmost areas reindeer was used, in milder climates buffalo was usually specified as being prevalent although deer and other animals were used.

The process was pretty much the same regardless of the type of meat used. After removing fat and gristle the meat was sliced, hung to dry, perhaps smoked as it dried, and then pounded to a powder.  The meat powder was mixed with fat, many accounts specify the fat came from marrow in the bones of the animal, and dried fruit was sometimes incorporated.  Once well mixed the mass was packed into skin bags and the bags sewn shut.  It kept several years as long as it was stored away from excess moisture.  Natives also stored it away in woven baskets.

Making-Pemmican

An account published in 1860 stated that the pemmican was packed tightly into tin canisters leaving a little space at the top, and allowed to cool after which the tin was filled to the brim with hot melted lard.  A lid was then soldered onto the canister sealing in the pemmican.  – The Household Monthly.  March 1860.

Any berries that were available were probably added to sweeten the pemmican, but a few of the fruits I was able to document as an ingredient included June Berry (also called pemmican berry because it was frequently used in that manner), choke cherry, Saskatoon, Service berries, cranberries, Manzanita, blueberries, Juniper berries, currants, etc.

“Sweet pemmican is a superior kind of pemmican in which the fat used is obtained from marrow by boiling broken bones in water.  Fish pemmican is a pemmican made by the Indians of the remote regions of the N. W. by pounding dried fish and mixing the product with sturgeon oil.  The Eskimo of Alaska make a pemmican by mixing chewed deer meat with deer suet and seal-oil.”

Pemmican was made into soup by hunters, trappers, arctic explorers, etc. called Robbiboe, or by the Canadian French rababou.  To make it the pemmican was mixed with a little flour and water and boiled.

Sir Alexander Mackenzie can be consulted for an idea of the weight of the packs of pemmican.  For a journey from Montreal south on the St. Lawrence River he noted the party carried four bags and a half of pemmican, weighing from eighty-five to ninety pounds each in addition to other supplies.  – Mackenzie, Alexander, Sir.  Voyages from Montreal, on the River St. Laurence Through the Continent of North America, to the Frozen and Pacific Oceans in the Years 1789 and 1793.  1814.  New York.

Robert Huish wrote of a party that carried along an amazing sixty bags each weighing ninety pounds.  Gould tells us that, “one bison cow in good condition furnished dried meat and fat enough to make a bag of pemmican weighing ninety pounds”.  Given that, it becomes clear how much less the meat weighed after processing having removed the bones, skin, etc. and through evaporation in the drying process.

A Narrative of the Voyages and Travels of Captain Beechey:  To the Pacific and Behring’s Straits and The Travels of Capt. Back, R. N. to the Great Fish River and Arctic Seas.  1836.  London.  Gould, Augustus Addison.  The Naturalist’s Library:  Containing Scientific and Popular Descriptions of Natural History.  1833.  Massachusetts.

Hamilton reckoned one pound of pemmican was equal to five pounds of meat.  – Hamilton, William.  My Sixty Years on the Plains.  1905.  NY.

The following recipe came from Frances Owens’s book, Mrs. Owens’ Cook Book, 1903“Pemmican is made of the lean portions of venison, buffalo, etc.  The Indian method is to remove the fat from the lean, dry the lean in the sun; then make a bag of the skin of the animal, and put the lean pieces in loosely.  To this must be added the fat of the animal, rendered into tallow, and poured in quite hot.  This will cause the spaces to be filled.  When cold, put away for future use.  In civilized life, a jar can be used in place of the bag.  Pemmican may be cooked same as sausage, or eaten as dried beef.  It is invaluable in long land explorations, and is of great use in sea voyages.”

For those who prefer more of an actual recipe than a method summary, Mrs. Saray Tyson Rorer offered one, although it varied in method.  ¼ pound of lean beef put twice through a meat chopper, ¼ pound of marrow from the leg or shin bone of an ox.

Chop the marrow with a silver knife and remove the fibre.  Mix the beef and marrow thoroughly, a half saltspoonful of salt and stand at once in a cold place.  – Mrs. Rorer’s Diet for the Sick.  1914.

Blissful meals, yall.  – thehistoricfoodie.wordpress.com©

See:  Hodge, Frederick Webb.  Handbook of American Indians North of Mexico.  Washington Government Printing Office.  1912.

Witch Hazel, a True North American Plant

5815

“Witch hazel is a shrub that everybody in New England, who goes into the woodland, knows by sight.  Its botanical term is Hamamelis Virginica, given it many years ago in honor of the early settlers of Virginia, who, before ascertaining the medical worth of the leaves and bark, used the twigs with success as divining rods”.  Witch hazel was described as growing from eight to fifteen feet by the age of five or six years.   It was not to be confused with a much shorter shrub (rarely more than five feet tall) by the name of hazel – the latter was the nut-bearing hazelnut.  The two are not related although witch hazel seeds/nuts are also edible.

Hamamelis_virginiana_-_Köhler–s_Medizinal-Pflanzen-070

The plant goes by several other names including spotted alder, striped alder, tobacco-wood, winter-bloom, snapping-hazel, and, of course, Southern witch-hazel.

The latter was not thought to possess any of the qualities of the true witch hazel though that writer noted that unscrupulous gatherers of the witch-hazel leaves and bark did often try to pass of the one for the other.  “…the fraud is detected at once by the taste.  There is a similarity in appearance of the leaves and bark, but the flavor is almost as different as chalk from cheese.”

About November witch hazel trees have tiny yellow flowers emerge that expand throughout winter.  There are “nubbins”, one might refer to as nuts or seeds, which are interspersed amongst the blooms.

Witch hazel has a rather unusual way of dispersing its seed.   The seeds are kept over winter and ripen them the next fall when its flowers are expanding… “when the pod bursts open, snapping them several feet away.  If the branches are gathered before the seeds are scattered the pods will open in the house and throw their seeds across the room.”  Most sources noted seeds being flung 10 to 20 feet, but Gibson claimed he’d seen them thrown up to 45 feet away from the host shrub.  – Dowd, Mary Alice.  Our Common Wild Flowers at Springtime and Autumn.  1906.  Boston.

bdd9a713eb468584373bc93c7ab76005

After an encounter with it William Hamilton Gibson said of witch hazel:  “I had been attracted by a bush which showed an unusual profusion of bloom and while standing close beside it in admiration I was suddenly stung on the cheek by some missile and the next instant shot in the eye by another, the mysterious marksman having apparently let go both barrels of his little gun directly in my face.  I soon discovered him, an army of them,–in fact a saucy legion, all grinning with open mouths and white teeth exposed and their double-barreled guns loaded to the muzzle ready to shoot whenever the whim should take them”.  – The Nature Study Review.  Nov. 1919.

images

“Medicinally, witch hazel is an astringent.  Both bark and leaves contain tannic acid in large quantities, but the greater percentage is in the bark.”  The bark was stripped off and distilled for its oil.  It was used for treating acute derangements of the stomach.  How often was it taken?  “People do not buy it by the four or eight-ounce bottle now, but by the quart or gallon, and every medicine chest is not properly equipped unless it has a liberal supply…”.  – Good Housekeeping.  Aug. 1894.

OldDesignShop_LabelBacornViolet

North American witch hazel was named for its resemblance to the English and Scottish Witch or Wych elm which produced a rather large, though seldom straight tree.  The Witch elm was used for bent-wood work, boat frames, etc.  The wych-elm or Eurasian elm Ulmus glabra, has large rough leaves, grows primarily in woodlands or near flowing water.   It has clusters of flowers and winged fruits.  The old English prefix wych, or witch meant “bend”)so named because the tree had pliant branches.

There are accounts of hazel and witch hazel being used for fishing rods or poles, and it is difficult to know from many accounts whether the writer meant the hazel [hazelnut], the witch hazel, or the wych-elm that was used in olden times in England.  While witch hazel is native to North America (with versions also native to Japan and China) it put in an appearance across the pond early on.

Hamamelis virginiana was one of the first New World plants to be adopted for ornamental use by European horticulturists. As early as the mid-17th century, the plant was growing in private botanical collections in London. And it’s been a perennial favorite ever since.”  – The Brooklyn Botanic Garden website.  http://www.bbg.org/gardening/article/winsome_witch-hazel.

The Positive Medicine web site in the UK noted a collaborative effort between John Bartram  and an English gardener to distribute witch hazel in England.  Peter Collinson, an English cloth trader and avid gardener bought various plants and seeds from America and distributed them to English botanical gardens.

“The Father of Fishing, Izaac Walton, can be consulted for an account of making rods.  By Walton’s time  hazel as in hazelnut, witch hazel, and the wych elm for which the North American witch hazel is named were all growing in England.

An account of rod-making in England from April 22, 1870 may be of interest.  “I have been told, very good fly rods may be made of mountain ash, also of wych elm and of hazel…”.  – English Mechanic and Mirror of Science.

An American writer thought witch hazel wasn’t of much interest to the professional rod maker or fisherman, but that, “many a witch hazel fish-pole has augmented the truant boy’s strong of forbidden fruit down the creek bank in the first warm days of spring.  Down South where witch hazel is scarce and scrubby, its cousin, the famous red gum, is cut short in its career and lifts fish from the ‘Swanee’ river and other southern streams famous in song and story.”  – Hardwood Record.  June 10, 1917.

Another American wrote, “He had a witch-hazel pole which he had cut in the winter and from which he had scraped the bark, to make it look nice.  He kept it on the rafters of the woodshed…”.  Munn, Charles Clark.  Boyhood Days on the Farm:  A Story for Young and Old Boys.  1907.  Boston.

Because the forked branches were thought to possess magical powers of pointing to hidden streams or veins of metal [gold, silver, coal] they were used as divining rods by well diggers and would-be miners.  It was sometimes referred to as the witch of the woods because it bloomed out of cycle with most other plants and shrubs.

By the turn of the century infusions of witch hazel were being combined with alcohol to make an astringent lotion for external inflammations.  An advertisement in the Index of Diseases and Remedies claimed it was the best preparation for use in sprains, bruises, prevention of ecchymosis, leucorrhea, etc.  “It [miscible with water] may be used internally in the same doses as the fluid extract.”

Native Americans, “put great faith in it as a sedative and application to external hurts and inflammations.  They still the leaves and bark, and bathe sprained joints and muscles.  They apply it for all their burns, bruises, and aches.  It quickly takes out the smart and sting and allays the inflammation, lessening the swelling and restoring the hurt to a normal condition.  Likewise I have seen them use it for weak and sore eyes, sores in the ear, nose, throat, or mouth, and for sore throat too.  As a relief to the bites of insects most of us are familiar with it, while many of us have used it with good results for our lame backs and rheumatism…”.  The penner of those lines noted Indian women mixed it with oil and used it as a beauty product for the skin.  – Life and Health Magazine.  April 1912.

The following description may help interested parties to find the bush in the wild or to know when purchasing if they are indeed purchasing true witch hazel.  “The witch hazel leaf is nearly as broad as it is long, bluntly pointed at its tip, with a stem generally less than one-half inch in length.  The sides are unequal in size and shape and the edges are roughly scalloped.”.

Witch hazel tea may be purchased as can the dried leaves.  Leaves can be gathered from nature and stored away to make tea and poultices as needed.  It’s hard to beat a plant that can supply you with medicine, fishing poles, and winter blooms.  Blissful meals yall, – thehistoricfoodie©

What Surprises are Lurking in the Milk in Your Fridge?

Tags

,

 portland-press-herald_3520744

Have you ever considered there could be anything other than fresh natural milk in the milk product you offer your children?

In 1994 artificial growth hormones made their way into our milk supply and with the exception of some organic milk hormone-laced milk became pretty much standard within 2 or 3 years.  How can this be and more importantly WHY?

It seems that cows injected with recombinant bovine somatropine (rBST) and recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH) tend to produce approximately one gallon per day more milk than cows not treated with it – at least for a while.  If we were a starving third world nation boosting quantity might take precedence over health concerns but as we’ll see, using it seems to benefit only one faction – the company that produces the hormones.

First, from a farmer’s perspective, a little research shows that the hormones aren’t good for the cows and they certainly aren’t good for people.  Cows have more problems with cystic ovaries and uterine disorders, lower birth weight and shorter periods of gestation, and a greater risk of clinical mastitis (an udder infection) that requires antibiotics.

What does such an inflammation mean for our milk supply?  “The most obvious symptoms of clinical mastitis are abnormalities in:  The udder such as swelling, heat, hardness, redness, or pain; and the milk such as a watery appearance, flakes, clots, or pus”.  Yum.

Treated cows may begin to have reduced milk yield, increased body temperature, lack of appetite, sunken eyes, diarrhea and dehydration, and reduction in mobility due to pain in the udder or lethargy.  The UK study from which this information came says also that while the overall protein content in the milk may be unaffected, changes in the types of protein present may be affected by the leaching of low-quality blood serum proteins into the milk.  Casein, an important protein, can be significantly reduced and casein is closely linked to calcium levels in the milk.

Milk with pus in it sure sounds tasty on my cereal or in the ice cream we go through by the gallon.  Think it doesn’t make it into your Turtle Tracks?  Then why did Breyer’s Ice Cream recently announce that it is going to stop making ice cream from milk impregnated with growth hormones due to consumer demand?

Canada, the European Union (some 27 countries), Japan, Australia, and New Zealand have had bans in place on rBGH, yet the U.S. has no restrictions and Monsanto, the producer of the hormones, filed a lawsuit against a dairy that advertised their milk contained no growth hormones. It seems pointing out that a brand of milk comes from hormone-free cows causes consumers to wonder what is in other brands then start to wonder how consumption of it affects them.

The potential for health endangerment from these dairy products varies greatly from one source to another, and like many situations it comes down to the consumer making an educated decision on whether or not they’re willing to chance it.

The www.cancer.org website downplays the risk of increased Insulin-like Growth Factor 1 (IGF-1) levels in milk produced by cows that have received growth hormone but concludes its report with, “The evidence for potential harm to humans is inconclusive.”  They also conclude that the increased use of antibiotics necessary to clear up rBGH induced mastitis in cows does promote the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, but the extent of harm in humans is unclear.  Really?  We’re being told not to over-use antibiotics because it may have the same affect, but it’s OK to pass on antibiotics to our children through the milk they drink?

What is IGF-1?  “An elevated content of IGF-1 has been suggested to have adverse implications for human health and cancer frequency”.

Milk from rBGH-treated cows does have much higher levels of IGF-1 according to www.responsibletechnology.org, and puts consumers at, “a high risk factor for breast, prostate, colon, lung, and other cancers.”  They feel that levels of IGF-1 can be up to 10% higher than in milk from un-treated cows.  Their studies indicated that milk from rBGH-treated cows with increased IGF-1 levels may increase the rate of fraternal twin births in humans.  In the U.S. the number of fraternal twins was said to have grown at twice the rate as the UK where rBGH is banned.

Is the danger being downplayed for economic reasons?  The Responsible Technology website, notes that after being sued by Monsanto in 2003 Maine’s Oakhurst Dairy’s farmers’ pledge, “No Artificial Growth Hormones”, had a sentence appended which stated that according to the FDA no significant difference has been shown between milk derived from treated and untreated cows.

Responsible Technology says the studies showed milk from treated cows did contain increased IGF-1 levels and, “higher amounts of pus and antibiotic residues”, and claim further that the additional wording added to the Oakhurst label was written by the FDA’s deputy commissioner of policy, Michael Taylor, previously Monsanto’s outside attorney who, after running policy at the FDA, became vice president of Monsanto.

How do these situations come about?  Perhaps because consumers have been too complacent and let big business decide what goes into our food.  Doesn’t some agency control the safety of food additives?  Let’s look at both sides of that coin.

Oct. 25, 1998, Phil Angell, Director of Corporate Communications for Monsanto was quoted by the New York Times Magazine saying, “Monsanto should not have to vouchsafe the safety of biotech food…Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible.  Assuring its safety is the FDA’s job”.  The FDA, however, issued this statement, Federal Register, Vol. 57, No. 104 (1992):  “Ultimately, it is the food producer who is responsible for assuring safety”.  It would appear that no one is on watch.

Concerned consumers should definitely read the entire Responsibility Technology report for themselves found at http://www.responsibletechnology.org/gmo-dangers/gm-hormones-in-dairy.  Be sure to follow the links to fact sheets on rBGH, and to reports from such credible sources as the Oregon Chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility.

Certified organic milk is supposed to be free of rBGH residues.   It is hard to compile a list of non-organic brands which claim to be rBGH free because the list changes as companies such as Breyers agree to use milk from untreated cows.  Read labels and do the online research, beginning with these brands:  Alda Dena, Albertson’s, Alpenrose, Andersen, Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream, Breyers Ice Cream (recent change), Brown Cow Farm, Crowley Cheese of Vermont, Dannon, Darigold, Eberhard’s, Franklin County Cheese, Fred Meyer/Mountain Dairy, Grafton Village Cheese, Great Value, Great Hill Dairy, Horizon, Kirkland, LACTAID, Lifetime Dairy, Lochmead, Mallories, Market of Choice, New Seasons, Noris, Pacific Village, Safeway, Stonyfield Farms, Stremick’s Heritage, Sunshine, Trader Joe’s, Umpqua, and Yoplait yogurts.

RBGH free regional brands include:  (West coast) Alpenrose Dairy, Berkeley Farms, Clover Stornetta Farms, Joseph Farms Cheese, Sunshine Dairy Foods, Tillamook cheese (cheese only, they do not make all their products – for example their butter is made by Land O’ Lakes and packaged by Tillamook), Western Family, and Wilcox Family Farms.  (Midwest) Chippewa Valley Cheese, Erivan Dairy Yogurt, Promised Land Dairy, Westby Cooperative Creamery.  (East coast) Blythedale Farm Cheese, Crescent Creamery, Derle Farms (only products bearing a ‘no rbST label), Erivan Dairy Yogurt, Farmland Dairies, Oakhurst Dairy, Wilcox Dairy (only products with labels indicating rbST-free).

Stores carrying these brands can be found online but well-known ones include Trader Joe’s, Whole Foods, Walmart, Sam’s Club, Costco, Albertson’s, etc.  Most stores carry Lactaid brand.  Be aware that while a brand of milk may be hormone-free, other products bearing the same brand name such as butter, ice cream, cheese, or yogurt may not be, as in the case of Tillamook.

See:  www.dairyco.org.uk

HANNAH GLASSE: Stolen Identity During the Eighteenth Century ©

300px-GlasseCookery1747

How could the authoress of one of history’s best known cookery books not only have stories spread that she was not the author of the work, but that she’d never existed at all?  Such was the case with Hannah Glasse.  The rumors that she was not a real person and that her book, The Art of Cookery was penned by a scoundrel named John Hill seems to have been the work of publisher, Edward Dilly.

Whatever would prompt someone to discredit one’s authorship to the extent of trying to erase their very existence?  Greed most likely played a large role and the fact that later Mrs. Glasse, then a widow, suffered such financial setbacks that she declared bankruptcy, sold the rights to her ever-popular book to try and rectify her situation, and still ended up in debtor’s prison probably made it easy for Dilly to discredit her and be believed.

I became acquainted with what Paul Harvey would call the rest of Hannah’s story by reading an article by Charles Cooper in Table Talk, April 1914.  The rumor started when Dilly remarked at a party that Mrs. Glasse’s Cookery was written by Dr. John Hill and that, “Half the trade knows this.”  Fortunately for Mrs. Glasse none other than the writer and dictionary author, Dr. Samuel Johnson and Boswell, his partner, were present and Johnson would have none of it.  He countered the claim by saying he’d looked at the book himself and found it impossible to believe that a doctor would have written as though salt petre and sal prunella were different substances when in fact the latter was just salt petre burnt on charcoal.   “Hill could not be ignorant of this”, but he allowed as how the error could have been one of transcription.

Johnson

Johnson

By way of explanation for those non-historians reading these notes, not attaching her own name to the book and instead saying it was written by, “A Lady”, made it possible for others to claim her work, though doing so was fairly common in a time when women were expected to remain in the background and men were the movers and shakers.  Perhaps Mrs. Glasse suffered the indignity of having her work and life discredited because her book was such a phenomenal success and there were those willing to go to great lengths to profit from it.

It wasn’t until a subsequent edition that Glasse attached her name to the book.  Again, unfortunately for Mrs. Glass, whether at her wish or the actions of others, later editions of the book reverted to listing the author by the simple appellation, A Lady, making it easy for unscrupulous people to claim it as their own work.   Her full name was again given as author only after her death.

Cooper described Dr. Hill as having much ability, more impudence, and no principle and outlined his many efforts in business, none of which were very successful and all of which were somewhat shady in circumstance.   His character and career can be summarized by saying his life’s goal of being received into the Royal Society was never realized and he received at least one public horsewhipping from a gentleman he’d insulted.

Another who championed the cause for Glasse was George Augustus Sala who carried on a lively debate acknowledging her presence in the London press just before the turn of the century.

When Cooper wrote his article for Table Talk in 1914 he still did not know if Hannah Glasse was an actual person or a pen name and debated the pros and cons of the matter in the article.  It wasn’t until 1938 that it was finally proven that Mrs. Glasse was indeed real and the circumstances of her life were revealed.

Perhaps the best evidence that Glasse was indeed real was the 68 page attack on her that was penned by Ann Cook who published a book, Professed Cookery, in 1760.  Cook claimed Hannah Glasse’s half-brother Lancelot Algood, tried to ruin the reputations of she and her husband and lashed out at Algood through a poison-pen account of Glasse and her book.

Glasse’s story isn’t a particularly happy one.  She was the illegitimate daughter of Isaac Algood who brought her up in his household with his legitimate children and with his wife who apparently raised Hannah as her own.  Hannah’s birth mother was described in very unflattering terms by Hannah in extant letters.  After his death, Hannah’s mother was involved in a lawsuit over Isaac Algood’s property which was not resolved until Hannah’s half-brother, Lancelot Algood (later Sir Lancelot Algood), settled the case in 1740.  The annual allotment Hanna was to receive from her father’s estate wasn’t received by her until the settlement was reached.

Hannah married at age 16 and had three sons and five daughers, some of whom died in infancy.  At least three of the daughters worked with Glasse in a shop which was named in the fourth edition of The Art of Cookery.   Hannah identified herself as “Habit Maker to Her Royal Highness the Princess of Wales, in Tavistock Street, Covent Garden”.  Her success was short-lived, however, and Glasse was declared bankrupt on May 27, 1754.  Later that year (Oct. 29) she sold the copyright to The Art of Cookery to Andrew Miller and partners so that she could pay the debt.  She was discharged from the bankruptcy on January 11, 1755 only to continue her downward spiral by being sent to debtor’s prison on June 22, 1757.  She was released later that year.

Fleet Prison

Fleet Prison

Marshalcea Prison

Marshalcea Prison

Glasse wrote two more books, The Servants Directory [1757] and The Compleat Confectioner [1760] which probably brought in enough money to keep the wolves from the door, but neither was anywhere near as successful as that first book.  Hannah Glasse died on September 1, 1770.  She was 62 years of age.  A death notice was published in the London Gazette and picked up for copy in the Newcastle Currant in which she was referred to as the sister of Lancelot Allgood.

134538OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

Not much is known about Hannah and John Glasse’s children other than Isaac moved to Bombay and died there in 1754; George served in the Royal Navy and drowned off Pondicherry [India] in 1761 when his ship, the HMS Sunderland sank in a storm.  Isaac was associated with the East India Company and, as such, signed as witness to a document on the ship Edgecote in 1756.  Margaret, Hannah, and Catherine were the daughters who worked with their mother in the dress shop.  Margaret, the eldest child, died sometime in the 1760’s in Jamaica.  Catherine supposedly married a Mr. Hart, and nothing further was found on Hannah.  Of the children, Lancelot, Isaac, George, Eliza, and Elizabeth Mary are known to have been christened in St. Andrews Church, Holborn, London (1736, 1738, 1740, 1741, and 1743 respectively].

– Thehistoricfoodie.wordpress.com  ©

For further reading:

Dictonary of National Biography.  Pages 420, 421.  1890.  London.

Cooper, Charles.  Some Old Cookbooks and their Authors, published in Table Talk.  April 1914.

Pennell, Elizabeth Robins.  My Cookery Books.  The Atlantic.  Aug. 1902.

www.Encyclopedia.com

http://lawlibrary.wm.edu/wythepedia/index.php/Art_of_Cookery

Dodds, Madeline Hope.  Archaeologia Aeliana.  Vol. 15.  “The Rival Cooks:  Hannah Glasse and Ann Cook”.

Familysearch.org

The Independent.  Sat. June 24, 2006.

Various editions of The Art of Cookery.

Gravy Boat or Chamber Pot?©

Auktionshaus Bergmann

We constantly research items and customs and have seen some pretty strange situations where someone has bought an item or is trying to sell an item and has absolutely no idea what it is.  The owner of an antiques store I used to frequent told me she was selling chamber pots like gangbusters because “upwardly mobile” women caught up in the antiques movement thought they were soup tureens.  When I asked if she told them what they were she said no, their money was green and when they left the store she didn’t care what they used them for.  I still laugh every time I see one and the “one-handled soup tureen” is a running joke with us as we shop.

Equally bizarre was an antique store proprietress who had a Victorian body basket (coffin) in her shop for sale labeled as a vegetable basket.  A 6-foot-long vegetable basket with handles down each side?  Even after I explained to her what it was she went on to tell us she puts it on her dining room table at Easter with flowers, Easter eggs, and pastries in it, but that’s fodder for another post.

Riding the same train of thought as the chamber pot-soup tureen we recently wondered how many 18th century female urinals are locked away in china cabinets or gracing holiday tables under the guise of a gravy boat.  The urinals were used in days when there were no public toilets, read here, “no rooms designated just for relieving one’s self”.  Women would lift the layers of petticoats, work around panniers or other foundation support, and let go, perhaps in a dark corner or behind a screen, the thought of which makes me shudder today.

The urinals were made of faience or porcelain, silver, glass, pottery, creamware, leather, or earthenware and were priced for sale according to their quality and extravagance.  They were made in English factories and also in China for export.  Often they came with box or a leather case for carrying and storage.  Increasing the likelihood that they may be thought gravy boats is the fact that they sometimes came in the same patterns as dinnerware.

he urinals were known by other names such as coach pot, carriage pot, slipper, traveling chamber pot, and multiple spellings of bordaloo (bordalou, Bourdaloue, etc.) or in France pots de chambre.  Legend has it the vessels were called a bordaloo because ladies attending the long-winded sermons of Bourdeloue often needed to relieve themselves before the end of services.

They have a ring handle on one end, the other end open, they may or may not have had a lid, and in many cases with antiques the lids may have been broken at some point in the piece’s history.  The open end is usually slightly, sometimes very slightly, in-turned at the tip rather than turned outward more like a pouring spout.

The pieces were used throughout the 18th and into the 19th century.  I leave you with a smile and a gentle reminder that a little research goes a long way.  Good day, all.  – Thehistoricfoodie.wordpress.com.  ©

a-rare-meissen-bourdalou-with-figures-of-the-commedia-dellarte-after-lancret

bordaloos, English auction site

bordalou (1)

Bourdaloue

Christies auction

d5279834l

decorative pot de chambre

pots de chambre

Sworders auctions, uk, bordalou

gilt bordaloo

FRUITS AND VEGETABLES: Pretty isn’t always better.

apples_yarlington_mill

Several years ago I was ushered into an area in back of Sam’s club to wait for an item I’d purchased to be disassembled.  I saw buggy after buggy of food put into the incinerator.  The amount of it was unbelievable and that was just from one day at one store.  They destroyed hundreds of pounds of perfectly good food on a weekly basis without donating it to a shelter, needy families, or even a farmer that could have fed it to poultry, pigs, etc.

There was milk, potatoes, onions, carrots, celery, apples, bananas, and other produce, sinful amounts of bread and baked goods, cartons of eggs, etc.  Anything stamped with an approaching date was destroyed.

When I asked about it they gave me the customary answer that if they donated it and someone got sick they could be sued, but I recently discovered that is absolutely not true.  In 1996, Bill Clinton signed the federal Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act which protects a donor or recipient agency against liability, except in cases of gross negligence or malicious misconduct.  Gross negligence is defined as:  “voluntary and conscious conduct (including a failure to act) by a person with knowledge (at the time of conduct) that the conduct is likely to be harmful to the health or well-being of another person.”

Over 14 billion [billion with a B] pounds of food end up in landfills annually when that food could be provided to shelters and needy Americans reducing the burden placed on the American taxpayer to feed underprivileged citizens, and the old “fearful of a lawsuit” response doesn’t hold water.

A few years ago I worked an event in Florida and stayed over for a few weeks to visit with friends.  While there, her friend who is a strawberry farmer near Plant City, gave her permission to pick strawberries from his field.  He said the first and largest of the berries had been picked and it would no longer be profitable for him to have the berries picked and taken to market.

We picked only a quarter of two rows and had her van completely filled with boxes and crates of strawberries.  When you consider that this field covered several acres we’re talking about a massive amount of fresh strawberries that were going to be plowed up because the owner said American shoppers would only buy the largest and prettiest of the berries.  I was appalled.  What about the hundreds of jars of jam that could have been made from that many berries?  I spent 3 days making jam which my friend and I split (over 50 quarts) from just a fraction of two rows of berries.

The world can sustain only so many people and as the number rises, so does the danger of food shortages.  We can no longer afford such wastefulness.  We don’t have to grow more, we just have to waste less.

Multiply the strawberry scenario by thousands of fields of fruits, berries, and vegetables and one can begin to comprehend the level of negligence in destroying such nourishing food.  Most Americans have grown up with hybrid produce that was grown to look pretty, no matter how badly the flavor suffered in the process, and refuse to buy anything but perfectly shaped and colored fruit.

When I was a kid my grandparents had an apple tree which produced lots of apples but in drying them we sometimes needed to discard a small portion of an apple because of a blemish.  The rest of the apple was perfectly good as I can attest having eaten more than my fair share of fried apple pies.  The same is true of tomatoes, beans, peas, etc. that we canned or froze for winter use.

Why do we think a piece of fruit has to be flawless in appearance or identical in size to the others in the basket to be consumed?  I like to think that most farm families know that once it is peeled, dried or made into a pie a spot on the peel doesn’t matter one bit.  Hopefully large growers will come to the same realization.

ROASTIT BUBBLY JOCK©

Tags

, ,

146957_Christmas-Wallpapers-Thanksgiving-Roasted-Turkey_1280x1024

For those who haven’t studied historic foods, a bubbly-jock is a turkey – that traditional bird of the holiday table. To be precise, it is a turkey-cock, and it has been found on Scottish tables since the 17th century, and probably before. A meal served in the presence of King James I while on his way to Scotland included roast turkey in 1617. In the Calendar of State Papers as related to Scotland and Mary Queen of Scotts, is found mention of “turkey cockis”.

References are found in early Scottish publications to a person acting as a bubbly-jock. Such is to ridicule someone whose behavior resembles the strutting and noisy displays of a male turkey. For those who have seen a male turkey drop his wings, fan out his tail, ruffle his feathers, and make his drumming sound, the reference will be abundantly clear.

The term bubbly-jock dates from at least as early as the 1700’s. Earlier references from the Scottish Historical Review talk about a “twrkie” [1671] or “turkie cock” [1688], therefore, Outlander fans may wisely choose to serve a, “roastit bubbly-jock” for Christmas dinner this year.

For an idea what was served with the roastit bubbly-jock we look to Susanna MacIver [1789]. She operated a cooking school from her home in Edinburgh during the 18th century. Her “Cookery and Pastry” as taught and practiced by Mrs. MacIver was first published in 1773. She claimed to have frequently made every dish in the book. Not much else is known about her except Florence White said in “Good Things in England” that her father was an impoverished Highland laird. She sold the book from her home for use by the middle and upper classes. The Bills of Fare were added after the first edition at the request of her students and were mere suggestions of what one might find in a dinner served in courses.

In one Bill of Fare she suggested boiled pork, roast turkey, greens, soup, and pease pudding. For a more elaborate dinner with roast turkey she advised potatoes, pickles, and stewed celery along with jugged hare, saddle of mutton, and a variety of tarts and puddings.

Vegetables she included in her Bills of Fare with other meats, and which many a maid or housewife may have served up with turkey as well, included kidney beans, broccoli, spinach, peas, carrots, salad, cauliflower, mushrooms, stewed lettuce and peas, asparagus, artichokes, and sorrel with poached eggs. In her list of garden fare she listed additionally coleworts, sprouts, cardoons, parsnips, turnips, endive, leeks, cresses, mustard, onions, beets, salsify, scorzonera, Jerusalem artichokes, purslane, radishes, cucumbers, cabbages, skirrets, “all sorts of small salad”, and a long list of pot herbs.

Before one might enjoy, “a bubbly-jock garnished with links of sausages”, the cook might boldly ask, “have ye killed the auld bubbly-jock, as ye threatened this morning?” Once the bird has been dispatched and cleaned it would have been prepared as follows or it was often boiled, especially if the turkey was older and tougher than might be desired.

Mary Eaton instructed her readers to stuff the turkey with sausage meat unless sausages were to be served separately in a dish in which case it could be stuffed with bread stuffing. “As this makes a large addition to the size of the fowl, observe that the heat of the fire is constantly to that part for the breast is often not done enough. A little strip of paper should be put on the bone, to prevent its being scorched while the other parts are roasting. Baste it well…serve with gravy in the dish and plenty of bread sauce in a sauce tureen. Add a few crumbs and a beaten egg to the stuffing of sausage meat.”

TO ROAST TURKEY POU[L]TS. Mary Smith. “The Complete House-keeper”. 1772. Newcastle.
Take young turkeys, rather larger than a half-grown fowl, scald and draw them clean, skewer them with their heads down to their sides, spit them, and lay them down to a clear fire for twenty minutes; baste them well with butter, and dust them with flour, let them be plump, and of a nice brown, lay them in a dish, with some brown gravy under them, and serve them up hot for a second course, with some bread sauce in a boat.

For the BREAD SAUCE.
Put the crumbs of a halfpenny roll into a sauce-pan with some water and some peppercorns, one onion cut in slices, two ounces of butter, let it boil ‘till the bread is soft, beat it up, and add three spoonfuls of thick cream to make it white, let it just simmer, pour it in a boat, and serve it up. This is a proper sauce for roast turkey, pheasant, or partridge.

Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, & may God Bless.
– TheHistoricFoodie is a copyrighted site.©

See:
Galt, John. “The Last of the Laird”. 1826. Edinburgh.
“Tait’s Edinburgh Matazine. Oct. 1834.
Whittle, Peter. “A Topographical, Statistical, & Historical Account of the Borough of Preston”. 1821. Preston.
Eaton, Mary. “The Cook and Housekeeper’s Complete and Universal Dictionary”. 1822. Bungay.
MacIver, Susannah. “Cookery and Pastry”. 1789. London.

Lord Bacon’s essay on plantations in the New World©

Tags

, ,

The following is Lord Bacon’s essay on plantations. I found it to be remarkably insightful as to what was important for the earliest colonists when coming to America. One can tell from his comments that knowledge has been gained from prior failures at colonization and efforts were being made to avoid those mistakes again. Now, for your reading pleasure:

PLANTATIONS are amongst ancient, primitive, and heroical works. When the world was young it begat more children; but now it is old it begets fewer: for I may justly account new plantations to be the children of former kingdoms. I like a plantation in a pure soil; that is, where people are not displanted to the end to plant in others. For else it is rather an extirpation than a plantation. Planting of countries is like planting of woods; for you must make account to leese almost twenty years’ profit, and expect your recompense in the end. For the principal thing that hath been the destruction of most plantations, hath been the base and hasty drawing of profit in the first years. It is true, speedy profit is not to be neglected, as far as may stand with the good of the plantation, but no further. It is a shameful and unblessed thing to take the scum of people, and wicked condemned men, to be the people with whom you plant; and not only so, but it spoileth the plantation; for they will ever live like rogues, and not fall to work, but be lazy, and do mischief, and spend victuals, and be quickly weary, and then certify over to their country to the discredit of the plantation. The people wherewith you plant ought to be gardeners, ploughmen, laborers, smiths, carpenters, joiners, fishermen, fowlers, with some few apothecaries, surgeons, cooks, and bakers. In a country of plantation, first look about what kind of victual the country yields of itself to hand; as chestnuts, walnuts, pineapples, olives, dates, plums, cherries, wild honey, and the like; and make use of them. Then consider what victual or esculent things there are, which grow speedily, and within the year; as parsnips, carrots, turnips, onions, radish, artichokes of Hierusalem, maize, and the like. For wheat, barley, and oats, they ask too much labor; but with pease and beans you may begin, both because they ask less labor, and because they serve for meat as well as for bread. And of rice likewise cometh a great increase, and it is a kind of meat. Above all, there ought to be brought store of biscuit, oat-meal, flour, meal, and the like, in the beginning, till bread may be had. For beasts, or birds, take chiefly such as are least subject to diseases, and multiply fastest; as swine, goats, cocks, hens, turkeys, geese, housedoves, and the like. The victual in plantations ought to be expended almost as in a besieged town; that is, with certain allowance. And let the main part of the ground employed to gardens or corn, be to a common stock; and to be laid in, and stored up, and then delivered out in proportion; besides some spots of ground that any particular person will manure for his own private. Consider likewise what commodities the soil where the plantation is doth naturally yield, that they may some way help to defray the charge of the plantation (so it be not, as was said, to the untimely prejudice of the main business), as it hath fared with tobacco in Virginia. Wood commonly aboundeth but too much; and therefore timber is fit to be one. If there be iron ore, and streams whereupon to set the mills, iron is a brave commodity where wood aboundeth. Making of bay-salt, if the climate be proper for it, would be put in experience. Growing silk likewise, if any be, is a likely commodity. Pitch and tar, where store of firs and pines are, will not fail. So drugs and sweet woods, where they are, cannot but yield great profit. Soap-ashes likewise, and other things that may be thought of. But moil not too much under ground; for the hope of mines is very uncertain, and useth to make the planters lazy in other things. For government, let it be in the hands of one, assisted with some counsel; and let them have commission to exercise martial laws, with some limitations. And above all, let men make that profit of being in the wilderness, as they have God always, and his service, before their eyes. Let not the government of the plantation depend upon too many counsellors and undertakers in the country that planteth, but upon a temperate number; and let those be rather noblemen and gentlemen, than merchants; for they look ever to the present gain. Let there be freedom from custom, till the plantation be of strength; and not only freedom from custom, but freedom to carry their commodities where they may make their best of them, except there be some special cause of caution. Cram not in people, by sending too fast company after company; but rather harken how they waste, and send supplies proportionably; but so as the number may live well in the plantation, and not by surcharge be in penury. It hath been a great endangering to the health of some plantations, that they have built along the sea and rivers, in marish and unwholesome grounds. Therefore, though you begin there, to avoid carriage and other like discommodities, yet built still rather upwards from the streams than along. It concerneth likewise the health of the plantation that they have good store of salt with them, that they may use it in their victuals, when it shall be necessary. If you plant where savages are, do not only entertain them with trifles and gingles, but use them justly and graciously, with sufficient guard nevertheless; and do not win their favor by helping them to invade their enemies, but for their defence it is not amiss; and send oft of them over to the country that plants, that they may see a better condition than their own, and commend it when they return. When the plantation grows to strength, then it is time to plant with women as well as with men; that the plantation may spread into generations, and not be ever pieced from without. It is the sinfullest thing in the world to forsake or destitute a plantation once in forwardness; for besides the dishonor, it is the guiltiness of blood of many commiserable persons.

The Historic Foodie is a copyrighted site.©

Ameracaunas: Tracking the Path of the Chilean Chicken©

Tags

,

009fig012    Prof Salvador Castello Carreras

I was drawn to the “Ameracauna” because of the colored eggs they lay and because of a family connection to Chile where chickens used to breed the blue egg layers originated.   Tracing them is somewhat like solving a puzzle, not at all like the piece I did on the Orpingtons.

Truthfully, much of what is found in print on the breeds is at least partially myth if we are to believe archaeologists and such respected sources as the Ameracauna Breeders Club.  Some sources claim the Ameracauna was created from the Araucana although there is a mere 8 years between when the breeds were officially recognized, all agreed, however, that they both descend from South America, and Chile in particular.

The debate about the evolution of this breed stems from a great deal of research to determine whether chickens are native to America or whether they were brought over with the earliest explorers.  The Araucanas and Ameracaunas are not considered an ancient breed but they were created from chickens known to inhabit parts of South America by at least as early as about 1500.

Some 83 ancient chicken bones have been unearthed near the central Chilean coast (about 530 Km south of Santiago and 100 Km south of Concepcion and claims are that they have been radiocarbon dated from 1321 to 1407 AD.

Did the chickens travel from Europe to South America?  “Maybe. The earliest recorded introduction of Chickens to the Americas was in 1500, when Pedro Álvares Cabral gave a single hen to a Brazilian Indian.  But whether her offspring could have been carried to Argentina, where they were reported by 1515 or to Peru by 1532, when Pizarro arrived and they were already supposed ‘an integral part of Incan economy and culture,’ seems unlikely.”  – Anthropologist Jim Stewart.

DNA testing suggested a Polynesian route to South America, however, most have disregarded that theory.

Jesuit Father José de Acosta wrote in 1590 that there were some hens in the Indies before the Spanish came.

The Portuguese explorer, Magellan, has been credited with describing poultry similar to Araucanas on the west coast of South America in 1519 as did the Spanish naturalist and general, Cabot, in 1526.  Cabot noted the blue eggs.

Clemente Onelli (1864-1924) said, “Without any doubt the blue egg chickens originated in a region between South America Pacific and the Andes, location 37⁰ to 43⁰.  Missioners and historians living from 1560 to the 17th century always stated that the Araucana Indians knew and tamed these chickens before the arrival of the European breeds.”

“Some would say that it is “America’s NEWEST breed”, emphasizing its most recent developments; but that description overlooks and would deny the long history of the bearded, muffed, tailed, blue egg layers that existed long before adoption of the ABA and APA Standards for “AMERAUCANAS”, when such birds were being raised and shown as one type of “ARAUCANA”, going back to imports from southern Chile in the 1930’s.”  – Richard A. Orr, Eastern District Director, Monroe, CT.  1998.

The Araucana got its name from a poem written in 1556 by Alonso de Ercilla.  He praised the Mapuche Indians for their bravery when attacked by the Spanish and the name Araucana from the title of the poem “La Araucana”, came to refer to the Mapuche.  “The name derives from the Gulf of Arauco, near Concepcion, Chile”.  – Orr.  1998.

Most published information indicates the Ameraucanas were bred from the Chilean Araucana, a rumpless chicken that came in various sizes, shapes, and descriptions.  The one unifying factor was the laying of blue eggs.  The Ameracauna Breeders Club, however, says both the Araucanas and the Ameraucanas were bred from mongrel (mixed breed) chickens.  The first was recognized as a breed in 1976, and the latter in 1984.

Dr. Rueben Bustos, recognized as a chicken expert in Chile, developed a strain of chickens which he described in 1914.  The breeds didn’t become well recognized outside Chile until Professor Salvador Castello, another poultry expert, photographed the chickens being exhibited in Santiago in 1914.  Later the birds were described in a paper to the First World’s Poultry Congress held in the Hague in 1921.

Mr. Orr places the confusion regarding Araucanas at the feet of Prof. Castello who unknowingly said in his paper that the Araucana was a breed of chicken, but instead it was actually the outcome of several years of cross-breeding done by Dr. Bustos.  Prof. Castello corrected his paper in 1924 but the damage was done as the information in his original 1921 paper had already been circulated far and wide, and remains in print and is still in circulation today.

The chickens were not called Araucana in Chile, but Gallina Mapuche.  In 1924, Professor Castello established the following types of Chilean chickens, each of which probably mixed to form what we know as Aracauna and Ameracaunas:

  • The common Chilean chicken, similar to ordinary European chickens, some lines laying blue eggs. The size, crest, and colour of plumage depend on the parents.
  • A considerably smaller and rumpless, thus missing the tail, and more common than the other two types. They are called Collonca or   They all lay blue eggs.
  • The “normal” chicken with a rump/tail, tufted, and commonly called Some of these laid blue eggs.

According to the Ameraucana Breeders Club, Dr. Bustos used a “composite of breeds” to breed the original Araucana.  Whether a single variety of South American chicken or a combination of breeds of South American chickens were bred to create the variety, the fact is that they all originated in South America, Chile to be precise.  The contention regarding the history of the breeds seems to be a difference between muffs and tufts both of which could be found in native South American breeds.

“An Araucana chicken has ear tufts (not the same as muffs) and is rumpless, meaning it doesn’t have a tail.  An Ameraucana has muffs and a tail.  Both breeds have pea combs and lay blue eggs, but have just as many differences as similarities or common traits according to the Standard”.  – John W. Blehm, as found in the June/July 2007 issue of Backyard Poultry. 

The first American to publish a description of the Araucana was John Robinson in the “Reliable Poultry Journal” in 1923.

In Britain, the standards for the Araucana breed came from chickens that escaped after a shipwreck of a Chilean freighter in the Western Isles of Scotland, coincidentally where my ancestors are from.

Mr. Blehm said in his article that there are only two true colors of eggs – blue and white.  The gene for blue egg shells is dominant over the white.  He says brown eggs are really white eggs with a brown tint or coating and green eggs are really blue with a brown tint or coating.  “You can tell if an egg is truly white or blue when the inside egg shell color matches the outside”.

Dissecting the gene pools of these chickens is much like separating out my own DNA.  I am the sum total of generations of intermarriage and as such my make-up is unique to me, yet my children have my total DNA as well as that of their father.  I am not a “pure bred” Scot although the majority of my ancestry is Scottish.  I have a couple of English ancestors, but technically, aside from their political differences, Brits and Scots hail from the same island.   Full-blood Native Americans like to consider people like me with some, but not all, Native American ancestry inferior, much as some like to do when arguing about the ancestry of the Araucana/Ameraucanas.   They’ll point out that So and So used an Orpington or a Rhode Island Red somewhere in the cross-breeding process, much the same as I can find a couple of German and a French ancestor when I dig deep enough and dig even farther back and there are quite a few Scandinavian ancestors.  None of that changes the person that I am.  Granted I am not “full-blood” Scott or Native but I am true blue American.

According to the Ameraucana Breeders Club a full 99% of chicks sold in this country by commercial hatcheries are mixed breeds, or what they term mongrels.  This can be traced to the original fervor for the breeds when hatcheries began crossing the Araucanas or Ameracaunas with other breeds in order to crank out blue egg laying chicks as fast as possible.  Chickens that lay blue eggs but do not meet the physical traits for true Ameraucanas are often called Easter Eggers.  If purchasing chickens to show, do diligent research and make sure the chicks you buy are pure and possess the necessary traits for judging, otherwise choose what you like.

For my interest, whether you call it an Ameracauna or an Easter Egger or a mongrel chicken, my chickens lay claim to a South American/Chilean blood line and lay blue eggs.  I don’t really care to dissect their DNA further than that.

The Ameracauna/Easter Egger has a tail, is muffed and bearded, has a pea comb and white skin.  Wattles are small or absent.  Earlobes, comb, and wattles are red.  The shanks are slate-blue color which is closer to black in the dark or black color of the chicken.  They begin laying when 5 or 6 months old and lay somewhere around 250 eggs annually in shades of blue.

Those in my flock have legs and feet that are a dark bluish-green-black color.  My first three are muffed and are the lovely blue wheaten color as shown on the Ameracauna Breeder’s Club photo page.  It is too soon to tell what the four chicks that hatched just a few days ago (from eggs of a different source) are going to look like except that they will be darker in color with more markings on the wings.

For clarity’s sake:  A muff is usually associated with a beard – they are tufts of feathers sticking out from the chicken’s cheeks.  Beards are feathers that stick out underneath the chicken’s beak.  Think of them as chicken whiskers.

Recognized colors for true Ameraucanas include black, blue, blue wheaten, brown red, silver, wheaten, and white.

ADDENDUM.

Prof. Salvador Castelló Carreras (photo above) was born 21 Aug., 1863 at Arenys De Mar, Spain.  He studied Natural History at the University of Barcelona and Agriculture at Madrid and Gembloux, Belgium.  He started a Poultry Breeding School in Spain and the title “Royal” was bestowed on it by His Majesty, King of Spain.  The government granted it an annual subsidy and it was dubbed the Official Government-Institution.  In 1914 when he photographed the chickens of Dr. Bustos, he was teaching in Chili and the Argentine.  He created the first National Poultry Society in Spain in 1897.  He planned an agricultural show at Madrid in 1902.

Dr. Rueben Bustos, a veterinarian of the Army of Chile, claimed to have encountered the chickens while a Chilean military officer in the jungles of Araucania, during the Pacific War (1879-1883).  He stated he encountered chickens without tails and when he asked about them the chief explained that foxes grabbed chickens by the tail and if the chicken had no tail it could more easily escape.  In his writings, Bustos said he lived for 10 months in Chile and knew the chickens throughout Chile and Santiago.

Clemente Onelli (photo below) was the Director of the Buenos Aires Zoo from 1904 to 1924.  In a letter written by Senõr José Cantilo, Onelli was referred to as the founder and director of the Zoological Gardens.  “This wonderful garden has been the life-work of Senõr Onelli, and to him the people of Buenos Aires owe an inestimable debt of gratitude.”  He edited the zoo’s Journal in which he contributed 64 articles on animal behavior between 1905 and 1922.  He worked as a border surveyor before accepting the position at the zoo.

Clemente_Onelli

TheHistoricFoodie is a copyrighted site.©

See:  Browman, David L.  “Advances in Andean Archaeology”.  1978.

Jones, Storey, Matisoo-Smith, Ramirez-Aliaga.  “Polynesians in America:  Pre-Columbian Contacts with the New World.  2011.

Martin, Franklin Henry.  “South America from a Surgeon’s Point of View”.  1922.

gallinasmapuches.jimdo.com/historia/

http://eatingchile.blogspot.com/2012/04/blue-egg-mapuche-chickens.html

Storey, A. A., et al.  “Radiocarbon and DNA evidence for a pre-Columbian Introduction of Polynesian Chickens to Chile”.  Ntl. Academy of Sciences, USA.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 357 other followers