so if you sit one over the fire, the french kettle would have been more ideal for things like braising. and oftentimes these kettles did also have lids. these round bellied kettles would have been very, very good for boiling. so we can learn a little bit about how process of cooking was undertaken using different vessels. unfortunately, this photo was not the best, but you can also see that the foot on this kettle is just straight, unadorned and is also sticking out at a little more of an angle. this pot here, the feet are a little bit more straight up and down, so these pots what we can learn is that there were a multitude of cultures here bringing with them their own cooking infrastructure. well, we have hundreds of these feet in the collection, the belonged to perhaps one pot, three or four to each pot. but again, we know that there was quite a quantity of these available here and being used

here. i next went on from metal fragments into pottery fragments. and so this multicultural and globalized sensibility is reflected in a much more decorative form as well. so i've included here a selection of, my favorite pieces of some of the ceramics that i worked with. and i want to do a bri of what i found in this specific collection, whh not inclusive of other items within the fort ticonderoga collection, i encountered 2161 pieces of stoneware shards, 4109 pieces of tin glazedlft fragments. 1265 fragments of chinese export porcelain, 1340 stoneware shards and about 600 fragntof tin glazed earthenware. now, counting is a little bit of an imperfect science here because not every item was originally of the same

dimensions. not every item broke into the same number of pieces. so, you know, if i had a one bowl and broke it, i might have five pieces, another bowl might break and i'd have 20. but again we can kind of start to understand the scale, diversity of consumption that present here at fort ticonderoga. what these pieces demonstrate to us is that there was some semblance commonality of items that could have been found and used fort ticonderoga and perhaps more importantly, that these items intentionally carried to this place from all across the world. ou can seeere in the center we have a piece of glazed red ware, fairly utilitarian. we have some chinese export porcelain, blue and white colorways. one of my favorite whave some poly chrome porcelain right here. and then this ion this whole slide. my favorite, we have a perhaps the top of a teapot, ainl on a teapot in stylized floral

pattern. so when we think of a military installation and when you think of the british, french or american military here at fort ticonderoga, do you think of them using like this? because did not. but this is here. this was found in earth here. so we know that at least a portion, the population that was here did fact use these items. here's another sampling of the items that i found and again, show more diversity. we have a powder purpleinh and this photo does not truly capture how vibrant. the purple shade on this is we have some scratch blue porcelain that is actually scratched in and then glazeov more ue and white. and my piece of all time that i found here and there are multipleieces on this. and if look closely it resembles

a caufler. it is the top of a teapot or a sugar bowl. it's a staffordshire cream wears top teapot stylized into the shape of a cauliflower and. when i found this i was just struck by the fact that likely an officer had, a cauliflower teapot sitting on his table. that is just absolutely incredible to me to think about. and again, because we are thinking of a military framework and in what we consider today to be a fairly rural place with this teapot, quite a nice teapot brought from britain and then to fort ticonderoga ogun, it really struck me, what also struck me as i continue to keep pulling these fragments from their boxes and from their envelopes, was how colorful and how absolutely whimsical they were. the culinary of for world of fort ticonderoga was, not drab. each fragment shown here hasat

on a dining table here at fort ticonderoga soomeone here held this teacup in their hands and someone here drank this saucer. not only the porcelain was remarkably colorful, though the glassware you can see here are fragments from a french bottle from its 18th century. and they're also incredibly this piece here, especially can truly see how iridescent and vibrant glass is. and these two pieces i like to compare like to put them in juxtaposition with one another because they tell us something about the archaeal archive. this piece is quite vibrant. it is shiny. and this piece on the left is is comparison quite dull? the color still quite vibrant, but it's not quite as or iridescent. and so that us it forced me to ask question, well, why is one shiny and why is one not?

and there are two options. this piece may have been abraded when it was in the it might have had some friction applied it which kind of made it dull or it may have been exposed to some sort of trauma during its usable life here at the fort, we know that there were multiple fires and explosions here at the fore and it is possible it was exposed to postproduction heating that caused some discolored reaction, some upbraid men of that glass. so this is one of those things that sometimes you're working with a written archive. you don't necessarily to think about. but this is a very unique opportunity that we have within the archival archive or the archeological archive rather, to begin exploring new, new opportunities scholarship. i have this this is an item that i did not personally research, but it is context for these pieces. i, as i mentioned, went through

a few thousand of stone there, many of which were plate rims. so this is the full plate. you can see the rim here, very decorative. there are multiple dfent patterns around the whole rim and these are the rim fragment parts. and if you look quite at each of these pieces, whai'm showing you is discolored in some way. you can see that there are on theses. and again, we are with kind of twthoughts about what these pieces might be. the first thought is, again, perhaps these pieceser exposed to some sort of post-production stress. peaps they were exposed to heat fire, but alternatively and more interestingly, think it's possible that these were exposed to ash in the calendar, their curing process, these the gray kind of modeling in particular is quite consistent with what happens when you stoneware in a

kiln and. ash from the fire gets into that glaze. so it is possible that these were damaged from the get go and sold at a lower price. and so someone who was not quite as well-to-do may have purchased these for a price and was able to use them and it really speaks how that how different individuals here at fort had access to used a multiple multitude of items. and the reason that we have to all of these material ills is because of the ruins of fort ticonderoga seen here so quite lae within the new american psyche following the american war fort ticonderoga has really remained a bulwark, american mery and identity since then, as early 1783, tourists were coming to see the ruins of this once fort and george washington himself toured these grounds

numbers of interested parties only increased into the 19th century. voters would bring picnics and scale the embankments and crumbling stone walls to enjoy the view until the property was purchased by the powell family and restoration efforts began. and as we heard this morning are still currently underay the modern museum that is 40 konduga i many a 20th century recreation that seeks to comme a historical narrative. one of the best things that i found in the collection were 19th century bottles of picnickers, who had scaled these embankments and, left their own mark on the archeological record, and these collections as a whole can inform the story of fort ticonderoga in a very tangible. for example, this way one of my happiest days of research. i must say, was when i was looking through boxes of

uncategorized metal pieces, and i found the items pictured here. these were all listed as iron agments, but it is evident to a cuna historian that these are in fact culinary items that indicate a level of sophistication in cooking at fort ticonderoga. if anyone here done any sort of open hearth cooking, you may be faliar with this item. it's a half portion, a trammel hook that wod ve been used on a crane over a fire. it would you to raise or lower a pot to become closer or further from a fire. so what this tells us is there was some sort of cooking infrastructure here. we're not sure where. but somewhere on this museum campus, there was some sort of sophisticated kitchen infrastructure here that is also bolstered by the presence of these two items here. this item is a spit you can see this is the handle this long

which actually we have part of it missing was a portion of the spit and it had little holes in it which you could insert these skewers through. so we know that there was some sort of a cooking hearth here in some capacity and that in some capacity folks were roasting fresh meat, be it beef, sheep, ramyeon, pork, chicken, anything like that. so these items demonstrate that to us in ways that i was not able to find in a written record. oftentimes these of mundane everyday items such as cooking go overlooked and written archives. but the archeological archive speaks quite eloquently to the fact that we have some elaborate cooking mechanisms happening here. and so what i did as public historian is i took this research that i had done. i took these materials that i found, and i came to fort ticonderoga last november, and i

helped to recreate an officer's meal, an officer's mid-day meal on this hearth. and so if you lookt this arth here, you can see it does not really have any of cooking infrastructure there. it is a heating heth, there is no crane. it's not particularlyreat for cooking. th's okay. we may do. and a friend and i prepared a mid-day meal and you see we have some fort ticonderoga staff interpreting, consuming that meal. and so if you seevorite teapot, i able to find a reproduction of this teapot that i use in my public prog. this is a program that i did at the sarattional historical park talking about british military foodways, and i cannot you the number of people who were astounded the fact that

table talking about british military foodways in the 18th ce it was too funny. it was too funny to think about a cauliflower teatting on a table. but again, we have the context right here at fort troga. i also was able to find a reproduction polychrome pit or a jug again very very similar tohard here and were very many of the pieces of this type of polychrome pitcher excavated here. so again, we have this just really beautiful floral piece here and you can see these fe edged creamier plates again excavated right here at fort ticonderoga. and so unfortunately, we don't have all day to talk about culinary foodways and material culture. but what i want to close with is that while the written record is important and while i do use the written record in my research, the material record which is

oftentimes overlooked equally, if not more important, it presents its own challenges. it can be a bit scattered, it can be a bit jumbled. but what i believe it really does is it gives us a bit of a chaotic image of the past, but that is all right. the past itself was a bit chaotic. the collections here at fort fort ticonderoga roca demonstrate that this was a place of color of of humor and whimsy and beauty in ways that a journal might not capture. and it also tells us that there are always new ways to approach the past both scholarly an academic setting, but also within a public setting. so. one day i will roasted chicken on hearth or perhaps we can restore a fireplace to have cooking infrastructure, which would be amazing, but it is just one of those opportunities for

continued and continued public programing. the fort ticonderoga is already doing, but which we can all continue to go to, continue to do and continue to expand on as part of this scholarly community, as of that scholarship and also museum attendees as consumers of that scholarship, it's so i'm out of time. so i will end here, but i think we have some time questions and. thank you for. know just. thank you sarah. anybody have questions? sarah? we have one on the line at least.

yes, we have a question that's come from our online audience, which is asking carbon dating or other methods been used to confirm that the colorful pottery fragments and similar artifacts were not brought to the location from the 19th or 20th century. picnickers, people who had white access to the location. you did mention 19th century bottles. yeah. so for these items that i have shown you here, they are very documented to the 18th century. so we know that they are not 19th century or 20th century pieces without kind of any sort of carbon dating. so there are a couple different ways that you can tell that these are, in fact, 18th century pieces. one of them is by the archeological record, other sites. so this type of color, flower or vegetal, whole china where porcelain has been excavated at other 18th century military sites in new york and beyond. we also can take a look at this, just like the quality of the porcelain.

so reproduction ends and porcelain. so the 19th and 20th century have a different weight to them. they have a different composition to the actual material that they are made of and they fired in different ways. so there are kind of sensory and material ways to analyze these pieces to date them to the 18th century without kind of needing to go into something as elaborate as carbon dating. i not a scientist, so i am not sure how carbon dating of stoneware or porcelain would go. but we do know for a fact these are from the 18th century, that 19th century bottles that i reference. the reason we know it is a 19th century bottle is because of the glass is quite different. it's not a blown glass bottle, not a ponto mark on the bottom or a glowing mark. the glass is thicker and is a quite different shape as well. so we are able to date that in other ways without kind of needing to go into that really scientific group.

so the table setting that you put together at the fort last year, just based on how much do you think that would have that off serve back in terms of cost. i'm not money person i so i am much interested in the lever expertise like the bottle knowledge it takes to prepare if we go like this item. so that is not really part of my research. the officer can figure out his own finances. i'm more interested in the people that these foods and how they how to cook them and why they cooked them. so i'm sorry that i don't have a better answer. you were showing some stuff laced or. yeah, salt delaware.

is there anything that you found in the process of making the salt glaze that led to that ashy coloring on it? because that that would also explain it to. f so you're referencing one. yeah. so the best of my knowledge, the only similar of discoloration or inclusions that i found have been when there's been an ash issue in the kiln, it's that there was another issue with the glaze but i haven't found that yet. so my best educated guess that this was something that happened after the fact, after it was produced or that it was kind an ash inclusion. but that is absolutely ongoing. the more learn, the more that changes and i've been working with some some some potters essentially who recreate kind of work to see how this might happen. and so it.

is your company, for god's sake, you see here she asks if i've to the state museum in albany because i'm at the university at albany, yes, i have yeah. i want to ask you, you get a chuckle out of the thought, the cauliflower pot being an officer's desk. but i was wondering, are their families living at the fort? could it have belonged to the wife of an officer. absolutely it very well may have and we do have documents notion that there were many and many families who lived here. we so yeah, it is quite possible that that was something that was on a table as well. good morning. i really enjoyed your presentation. were there any are there any places of evidence for, large scale cooking operations here. the fort? yes. so that is something that i really get into in this talk. but absolutely, we have we know

that there was large scale cooking as far as like soldiers enlisted men go. so we know that were masses also the prevalence of those french parts. it speaks to large kind of like mass style cooking. there were also quite a few pieces, other types of iron pots, tin kettles from the british period as well that tell us that there was large scale kind of group cooking happening here. that is not as pretty is also a little bit harder to document through the archeological record only because things like tin tend to corrode much more quickly and tend to degrade. so there were some items like tin fragments that could have been from a kettle could have been evidence of this kind of large scale group cooking or they may have been part of like what we would call a reflector or like a big oven, something

like that. but unfortunately they were just too degraded to be able to tell certain. so there is evidence that absolutely. can we have time for one last question, which we have online? yes. and before that, just want to offer one comment about the cost. we do have an for what captain william delap lost, the 26 foot owned and a set of yellow wear, which is a type of cream where was valued at five pounds sterling, which incidentally was the same value as his lot of kitchen furniture in quotes. so for some, for context there and the comment we have, it's a bit of a comment, but maybe you can you can expound on how this relates to your work. is the art historical record would also be helpful to date and or dating of objects found on the site. teapots plates cross-referencing objects with paintings, etc. with proof you useful. so i don't know if that's also been a part of your research methodology as well. absolutely is a fantastic point and it kind of goes to this idea that to i think to study the

culinary, to study food history, your work has be inherently interdisciplinary. you have think about anthropology. you have to think art history. you have to think about the archeological record, which we didn't even get into. but no, absolutely the art historical record, again, point us to times at which these items were used. one of the things that i think is really interesting about, the art historical record, which we don't get into with an archeological record, is that we have images of actual historical food items, which is another of idea that i research and i'll be presenting on next spring, the, the gardening symposium that's going be here. so that will kind of be talking about how we can look at the historical record. kind of combine that with ideas of historical genetic modification of food items to kind of get a sensory idea of what the culinary past was. so that is my favorite way to use our historical record is to

absolutely the material culture, but also just that that those food items that are absolutely lost that we don't have access to. i would be remiss if i didn't include this question question now that you're all salivating over know, pottery and food to, visit our pottery. pigeon and pork exhibit on the second floor of the soldiers barracks, which has a selection. by no means all, as you've seen here, but a selection of some of these pieces that were recovered from fort. and that does that exhibit does also include pieces of these old archeological record which i didn't even get into in this. and i would also suggest you go to the second floor kind of next of that exhibit, because there is a fast example of a bayonet that has been to be used as a like a like a fluid lifter or a pot lifter. and again, it kind of speaks to the the ways in which these people adapting to the items they had around them to replicate domestic culinary spaces. thank you, sarah.

we will take a seven minute break and start again at 10:00. thank you. thank you, rich. and to the rest of the team at fort ticonderoga for organizing this conference for we're not hearing you in just this. try again okay. can you see me. yes we can see and hear you now. okay, great. so thank you, rich, for

organizing this conference with the rest of the team at fort ticonderoga and allowing me to participate. even though my injury is kept me from being there in person as i just gave away on my second slide here. this is a very special place for me. i grew up in upstate new york and my family camping in the iron ore index in, the summers and along the way my parents indulged me by bringing me to almost every fortification and battlefield including this one and one who knows me. and they will tell you that i attribute my interest in history now my career as a historian to those summers and the combination of education and excitement that was possible only at a place like fort ticonderoga. and then recently my career brought me to a university ora and we have some fortifications, but there are little different. this is evident if we zoom in on the image i just showed you of

the castillo, the marcos in, the little spanish watchtowers at the castillo, which indicated to me florida doesn't really fit neatly into that progression from frontier colony is to revolutionary states, a nation of the united to the nation of the united states, to trans continental empire. so i recently launched a new research project and i'll share some of my preliminary thoughts with you this morning and hope to get some from all of you. so some basics. florida. under spanish rule, lasted for 200 years and. then after the seven years war in 1763, great britain acquired the region from spain and established the british colonies of east and west florida. this lasted from 1763 to 1784,

with the american. though britain ceded back to spain by 1784. this is 20 years after british rule the colony was transformed. a sparsely populated military outpost to, a nation plantation export colony of 4000 people, most of whom were enslaved. the war of independence interrupted that transformation and turned to st augustine into a refugee camp for loyalists. the number of people ballooned from the 4000 locals to 10,000 people by 1778, and then 17,000 after the evacuation of charleston and savannah in 1782. well, during the war of independence, spain, like france, had entered the conflict against great britain to try to weaken its european rival. and during the peace of paris in

1782, in 1783, spain to trade for gibraltar. they had stacked up a lot of places that they conquered and occupied the bahamas and mobile and pensacola. but britain was not willing give up. gibraltar and spain had be satisfied with reclaiming the gulf of mexico and, keeping what came was now known as west florida, with mobile and pensacola, east florida, including the town of st augustine and its fortress, which guarded importantly the shipping lane from havana through the channel with the bahamas into the atlantic ocean to. so because 17,000 british subjects lived in east in 1783, the spanish treaty protected their property rights and, allowed them at least 18 months to depart. this gave them time to sell their property and to look for a

new places to settle primarily across the channel in the bahamas. if they experienced property losses. they could petition the crown for reimbursement. now the loyalist diaspora to canada, the caribbean and sierra leone gets a lot of attention. but it's also notable that british subjects who wanted to stay in even under spanish rule could, if they changed their allegiance to the spanish king and about 500 to 1000 people ended up doing the transition from british spanish rule began. 1784 and july. the spanish governor, the santa manuel the suspicious arrived in st augustine and there's no portrait of him. unfortunately but there was a flower named after him in memory of how he authorized a botanist to collect specimens. so that's the best i can do in to show you what he looked like. the outgoing british