The American South is a unique region that is culturally rich. In this part of the United States the individuality found in the food, music, dialect, hospitality, and day-to-day living separate and make the region stand out. Many people often think of the South as a uniform area with no regional variation, when in actuality, it is quite diverse, and each region provides something unique in terms of food. These unique regions were heavily influenced by the home country of the people that relocated there from all over the world.

According to archaeologist Vin Steponaitis, the South has long been a place that is recognizably different from Northern and Western tribes (Ferris 2014, 9). Within the South, there has always been a rich physical landscape and diverse cultural history. As a result, Southern cuisine has a unique and complex background. Many voyagers of the seventeenth century South had detailed reports and illustrations of how Southern food bridged foreign cultures and distant worlds (Ferris 2014, 12). While there is undoubtedly a uniqueness to Southern culture and cuisine, there has long been a history of racial injustice at its core. Much of what is known and accepted as part of the South today is often clouded by a past of social hierarchy and silencing of African American narratives.

Christopher Kostrzewa asks the question, “How has the narrative of Southern hospitality changed?” Southern hospitality is a concept that is widely known and accepted by many people today and is a staple to many regions throughout the South. However, upon further analysis, there is an underlying myth to this concept that is well known and practiced by many – it has ties to slavery. While it has long been a practice in which one is typically invited into a home and overloaded with politeness, during the time of slavery, this practice was a sign of power for white mistresses (Ferris 2014, 19). Because many African American voices were silenced in a world dominated by the words of white slaveholders, it was not until the end of the nineteenth century we finally hear the slave narrative of Southern hospitality (Ferris 2014, 72). This analysis seeks to understand the narrative of Southern hospitality from the white slaveholder perspective and the African American slave perspective. Ultimately, because of what Southern hospitality is today – welcoming, polite, and kind (Darrisaw 2017) – many people miss the underlying narrative of slavery and attention must be brought to this.

Owen Donovan analyzes the differences in the 19th century cookbooks. These cookbooks varied considerably regarding the types of recipes based on the author. Cookbooks published by wealthy white slaveholding women revealed the power differential held in the South before the emancipation of slaves and often had recipes that had English roots. Conversely, cookbooks published by African American authors and former slaves often showed their lack of power and resourcefulness they often had to possess. After the Civil War and the liberation of slaves, the cookbooks shifted focus and pivoted from extravagant wealth and complicated recipes to a more moderate lifestyle reflecting the change in responsibilities around the household. Ultimately, a closer read of the cookbooks revealed yet another example of the power dynamic in the American South in the 19th century and beyond.

Brittany Coffman recounts the origins and evolution of barbecue sauce in the American South. Barbecue sauce has always been an important component to Southern cuisine, people all around the world adore the sweet tanginess it adds to any dish. This sauce of many varieties in differing places around the American South, which is explored through research asking, “why does each region of the South in the United States contain a different variety of barbecue sauce?” Beginning by analyzing the first traces of barbecue sauce in the Middle Ages and during the arrival of Columbus (Maclin 2011). Then as settlers and ingredients were discovered different flavor palates and tangy delightful sauces came together to form the sauces of these regions (Miller 2014). Understanding the reasoning for these differences allows for appreciation of creations and the different cooking styles that should ever be remembered for future foods and remembrance.

Beckman Hollis discusses both the diverse cultural history and physical environment of southern Louisiana have produced the unique cuisine of the City of New Orleans. The origins of New Orleans’ cuisine are poorly understood within American society today, significantly because the city’s most prominent dishes have been modified to fit within a modern commercial system and comply with popular representations of the “Cajun” identity. As a result, common understandings of New Orleans cuisine often lose sight of the various cultural influences that have shaped the city’s food over time. This process is also affected by the efforts of the City of New Orleans to capitalize on its rich history and attract visitors. The food of New Orleans has been shaped by several cultural and environmental influences in a process known as “creolization.” The city’s cuisine is continuously shifting as new cultural influences are introduced to the city.

References

Darrisaw, Michelle. “These Are the 6 Qualities That Really Define Southern Hospitality.” Southern Living, March 9, 2017. https://www.southernliving.com/culture/southern-hospitality.

Ferris, Marcie Cohen. Essay. In The Edible South: the Power of Food and the Making of an American Region, 18–75. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 2016.

Miller, Tim. 2014. Barbecue: A History. United Kingdom: Rowman & Littlefield.

The American South in the Plantation Era

By Owen Donovan

Introduction

            The American South during the plantation era was a complex region full of contradictions. There was immense wealth and abject poverty. There was hospitality and hostility handed out in the same breath. These contradictions were perhaps most obvious when it came to food. There were extravagant feasts, and there was unnecessary starvation. The enslaved population that grew the food often saw very little of it. The food was often prepared and served by slaves, but the planter family often did not allow the slaves to eat the same meals.

The first regional American cookbook was published in 1824. It is also considered the earliest published southern cookbook (Ferris 25). In the South, Cookbooks or receipt books were initially handed down from white families that had a formal education and were able to read and write. Cookbooks were most often held by the women of the house in the slaveholding American South. Slaves were told what to cook and how much of each ingredient to use but did not have the ability to write down their own recipes themselves, and instead passed them down by word of mouth. After the emancipation, former slaves were finally able to write and publish their own books and recipes, often with help from rich, educated, white patrons.

The three broad groupings created of cookbooks published in the 19th century south are those written by white women before the Civil War, cookbooks written by white women after the Civil War, and cookbooks written by Black authors. This paper explores the similarities and differences between these types of cookbooks. Cookbooks published by white women in the antebellum period expose the immense power disparity and erased African American contributions, cookbooks published by white women after the Civil War show the transition of responsibilities and resulting expectations of the Reconstruction Era South, and cookbooks published by Black authors evince the otherwise overlooked contributions African Americans made to Southern foodways.

Literature Analysis

Cookbooks written by white women before the Civil War

Cookbooks written by white women in the American South before the Civil War often revealed the wealth, excess, and power held by white landowners. Receipt books or cookbooks were originally held by the matriarch of the white slaveholder family. Kitchen slaves were not generally taught to read or write, so they were told what to cook by the mistress who had all the recipes. The first known American regional cookbook published was The Virginia Housewife: or Methodical Cook. The Virginia Housewife was originally published in 1824 by Mary Randolph who was part of a very wealthy family and owned slaves. The introduction to The Virginia Housewife reveals much about the upper class in Virginia at the time. Randolph explains the role that a mistress must play in the cooking process. She warns that

The mistress must tax her own memory with all this: we have no right to expect slaves to be more attentive to our interest than we ourselves are: they will never recollect these little articles until they are going to use them; the mistress must then be called out, and thus have the horrible drudgery of keeping house all day, when one hour devoted to it in the morning, would release her from trouble until the next day. When the mistress gives out every thing, there is no waste; but if temptation be thrown in the way of subordinates, not many will have power to resist it. (xii).

This warning shows that the mistress of the house would have to pre-portion food for the cooks because they were afraid that they would steal the food for themselves or their family. Randolph is complaining about the hard work she must do of giving out the food to be cooked in the kitchens throughout the whole day when one hour could accomplish all of it. Ironically, if Randolph taught her slaves to read or trusted them with the food to portion out themselves, her work would be a lot easier. The recipes included in The Virginia Housewife indicates the social class in which Randolph grew up. There are 16 types of alcohol listed, 40 types of cakes, and the types of meat listed are good cuts of meat like beef, veal, lamb, and mutton (Randolph 1824). These recipes have a heavy European influence, and there are not any recipes for dishes with African or influence.

Published next was The Kentucky Housewife by Lettice Bryan in 1839. This cookbook was influenced by The Virginia Housewife and struck a similar tone in the distrust of slaves, “Examine frequently your cupboard and other household furniture, kitchen, smoke-house, and cellar, to see that every thing is in its proper place, and used in the right manner, that nothing be lost or wasted by the neglect of hirelings or servants” (Bryan 1839, vii). Both cookbooks exhibit the author’s mistrust of slaves and the desire to keep them away from the plantation owners’ food. These warnings show the deep paranoia felt by the slaveholders in the middle of the nineteenth century. The recipes in this cookbook still had the deep European roots, but also started to show some more African inspired dishes such as gumbo, and turtle soup (Bryan 1839).

Finally, Sarah Rutledge published The Carolina Housewife in 1847 (Rutledge 1847). This cookbook was another book that was not written by cooks for cooks, but a book written for slave mistresses. Similar to Randolph and Bryan, Rutledge also said racist things like “French or English Cookery Books are to be found in every bookstore; but these are for French or English servants, and almost always require an apparatus either beyond our reach or too complicated for our native cooks” (Rutledge 1847, 4). Those French or English servants were probably taught more in their trade and were almost certainly treated better. The assumed inferiority of the “native cooks” connects all these books, and even continues in cookbooks after the Civil War.

All three of these cookbooks published by slave owners with other slave owners in mind showed how all the power was maintained by the plantation owners. Many contributions to Southern foodways by enslaved cooks were either ignored because they were not considered high class enough, or else they were used without any credit being given. Up until the 1940s, “Black cooking was, like black culture, considered nonexistent or stereotyped as Southern by many whites” (Theophano 2002, 53). This misconception was not an accident, but a result of decades of minimizing Black contributions by the elite white class.

Cookbooks written by white Women After the Civil War

After the emancipation of the slaves, some slaves stayed on as paid cooks, but many more left the kitchen to pursue new opportunities. As a result, cookbooks published after the Civil War often focused on teaching white women how to cook and run the household in the way that slaves used to run it; these books were now published by seasoned cooks for less experienced cooks. One of the most famous examples of a postbellum cookbook is Housekeeping in Old Virginia published in 1877 by Marion Cabell Tyree (Tyree 1877). Tyree consolidated recipes from over 250 women in and around Virginia to publish this book of recipes (Tyree 1877). The tone of this cookbook is very instructional because many in the intended audience did not have a lot of experience doing the cooking in the house. Tyree wrote “I would say to housewives, be not daunted by one failure, nor by twenty. Resolve that you will have good bread, and never cease striving after this result till you have effected it. If persons without brains can accomplish this, why cannot you?” (Tyree 1877, 19). This comforting voice is very jarring especially compared to the tone that is used by previous authors particularly Randolph and Bryan, who called slaves lazy and wasteful. The difference in these tones are due to the circumstances that these books were published. Tyree had an incentive to sell more books to white women leading households, so it was good practice for the book to be patient and comforting. Randolph’s and Bryan’s books were tailored more towards the overseers of slaves or servants, so if something went wrong in the kitchen, the laborers could be punished instead of the blame being on the matriarch. While the comment about the Black women’s lack of brains is obviously very racist, it also is hypocritical. Black women were legendary for their knowledge and skills around the kitchen because they were forced to be by the same white women that were now having to enter the kitchen themselves. Another cookbook published by a white woman after the Civil War was Common Sense in the Household a Manual of Practical Housewifery (Harland 1871). Published in 1871 by Marion Harland, the shifting expectations of the new normal post-Civil War is evident just by the title. Phrases like “Common Sense” and “Practical Housewifery” is clearly meant to lower expectations. When slavery still existed, and a great deal of wealth was concentrated among the ruling class, there was no need to be practical or use common sense, when the slaves could prepare opulent feasts and wait tables for the large dinner parties held in the South.

Cookbooks written by Black authors.

While there were undoubtably countless recipes orally passed down from generation to generation, only four cookbooks written by African American authors in the nineteenth century are known to exist today (Russell 1866). Part of the reason for this scarcity of knowledge, is the lack of education that many Black cooks had leading up to and after the Civil War. Even one of cookbooks published by a Black woman in the 19th century was published before the author could read or write; What Mrs. Fisher Knows about Old Southern Cooking, Soups, Pickles, Preserves, Etc. was first published in 1881 by a former slave named Abby Fisher (Fisher 1881). The cookbook opens with an apology from Fisher stating, “Not being able to read or write myself… caused me to doubt whether I could present a work that would give perfect satisfaction” (Fisher 1881, 8). Originally growing up as a slave in Orangeburg, South Carolina, and Mobile, Alabama, Abby Fisher was a house slave who learned how to cook from a young age but did not receive an education. After receiving her emancipation, Fisher moved west to San Francisco where she quickly gained acclaim for her cooking skills (Fisher 1881). If not for her success as a cook in San Francisco, her cookbook would never have been published, and Fisher would have been another skilled Black cook whose recipes were lost. Looking at the types of recipes listed in the cookbook reveals the combination of European and African foods prepared by Black chefs. There are thirteen types of cakes and another twelve types of pies, as well as ten types of puddings which represents the European cuisine, but sprinkled among the more typical European dishes are recipes for gumbo, turtle, fried chicken, Creole chow chow, and Creole jumberlie which was part of a more common diet for the enslaved community (Fisher 1881). Fisher’s book was thought to be the oldest cookbook published by a Black woman in the United States until the rediscovery of A Domestic Cook Book: Containing a Careful Selection of Useful Receipts for the Kitchen in 2000 (Russell 1866). This cookbook was originally published in 1866 by Malinda Russell who was born a free Black woman in Tennessee. Russell was taught to cook using The Virginia Housewife, and the types of recipes listed in her cookbook reflects this fact. Russell worked as a pastry chef to provide for her son after her husband died (Russell 1866). Due to the fact that Malinda Russell learned to cook using a cookbook written by a white slaveholding woman and her job as a pastry chef, Russell’s recipes were very unique compared to the other Black published cookbooks. Recipes such as cold iceing [sic], strawberry short cake, wines, and cordials were not commonly found in other cookbooks published by Black or even middle class women during that time.

While What Mrs. Fisher Knows about Old Southern Cooking and A Domestic Cookbook are the only two pure cookbooks published in the nineteenth century by African Americans, there are two housekeeping guidebooks written by Black servants that also include some recipes. First is The House Servants Directory which was written by Robert Roberts in 1827 Roberts (1827). Although Roberts lived in Massachusetts, this guide is still very insightful to the mindset of a servant who served a wealthy family. His tips such as “an hour before the family rises is worth more to you than two after they are up” (Roberts 1827, 9) and “There is not any part of a servant’s business that requires greater attention and systematical neatness, then setting out his dinner table, and managing for a party of sixteen or eighteen people” (Roberts 1827, 44) indicates the importance that food held in the high society of the nineteenth century and how the servants worked long hours to get everything done. Hosting extravagant parties was a status symbol, and it was expected go off without a hitch because of the servants or slaves. The recipes reflect the parties held by his employers because most of the recipes are just alcohol related. Even though this guidebook was published in the North, descriptions of the tasks are similar to responsibilities that slaves had in the Southern United States. If slaves were educated and wrote housekeeping guides, the lists of daily activities would probably be the same.

The other guide book published by a Black man in the nineteenth century was Hotel keepers, Head Waiters, and Housekeeper’s Guide by Tunis G. Campbell in 1848. Again, this source is from Massachusetts, but the lack of Black written cookbooks and guidebooks from the South means that this is still informative. The difference between a housekeeper’s guide from a servant and a slave is the purpose behind the action. In Campbell’s book, he asserts that, “There can be nothing of more importance to a family than the careful attention of faithful servants, in whom confidence can be placed, with the assurance that to the utmost of their ability… they will work for your benefit” (Campbell 1848, 5-6). While the respect is echoed in both guidebooks written by servants, in slavery, the actions of a slave were more likely to be out of fear than respect. This difference comes from the discrepancy in the way that servants and the enslaved community were treated. While there were not as many recipes regarding alcohol in Campbell’s book, many of the recipes were dessert and higher quality types of meat which reflects the way the wealthy ate regardless of North or South (Campbell, 1848).

Discussion

Based on the above literature analysis, certain patterns regarding the tone and content of the cookbooks emerged from them determined by the author . A cookbook written by a white wealthy woman before the Civil War most likely contains many complicated recipes in preparation for hosting extravagant parties and has instructions about how a mistress should act and treat their slaves in the kitchen. The author of these receipt books were often slaveholders or Northern governesses working in the South. The audience for these first type of cookbooks was white slaveholding women who lived on plantations.

After the emancipation of slaves, many newly freed men and women left the kitchens in order to find employment elsewhere. Due to this shortage in labor, oftentimes the woman of the household had to start running the household in a completely new manner: they had to do the cooking and cleaning themselves for the first time in their lives. In general, cookbooks written by a white woman after the Civil War experienced a significant tonal shift which reflected the new responsibilities thrust upon the matriarch of the family. The cookbooks preached patience and acknowledged that food would be burnt or wasted in the first attempts. Instead of fancy feasts, the recipes published in these cookbooks were much more practical and tailored for a family. Alongside food recipes, there were often recipes for cleaning solutions and traditional home remedies for minor illnesses.

The cookbooks published by Black authors were often very different from the ones written by white women regardless of the publication date. Many former slaves were never taught how to read or write by their slaveholders. The very few known cookbooks published by African Americans during the 19th century often had recipes that were not as fancy or seen as high quality as the cookbooks published by white authors. Many of the recipes reflected that the enslaved community often had to eat the worst cuts of meat, grow food on the least fertile parcels of land, or hunt animals such as turtles for their food because they were often not fed enough by their slaveholders. The target audience for these books were often white women because they could read, and they were still trying to learn how to run a household and provide for their families. Because the audience was most often white women, the tone of these cookbooks was most often instructional and respectful.

These findings are important because it is important to know the context in which these cookbooks were written. Simply knowing a few facts about the author and the year that a certain cookbook was published means that it is possible to make accurate predictions about the cookbook. It is critical to look beyond the printed text and ask why these recipes are listed here and the origins of those recipes. Most of the recipes written by white authors come from Europe but especially after the Civil War and the Emancipation Proclamation, dishes with more African influence sneak their way into white published cookbooks. It is vital to understand the exploitation of African Americans that continued even after they officially gained their freedom. White women were taking advantage of Black cooks’ lack of formal education by publishing recipes that had been passed down by African Americans but could not be written or published by them.

Future research that could be done is an expansion of the study area or an expansion of the time frame. I only looked at cookbooks published in the South in the 19th century with a few exceptions. Studying this topic at a different geographic scale could yield different results and patterns. An increase in the temporal range could also provide different results. The cookbooks used are the only known surviving cookbooks written by African Americans from the 19th century. If the analysis is repeated with a later end date, when there are more Black-authored cookbooks to study, it is possible that the tone and the recipes listed in the books are much different a generation removed from slavery.

Conclusion

Ultimately, these cookbooks varied quite predictably both in content and tone based on the race, class, time period, and intended audience. Those that were published by white women before the Civil War were often intended for slaveholding women to use. As a result, they often had recipes for extravagant parties and included instructions on how to carefully watch over slaves in the kitchen. On the other extreme, cookbooks published by former slaves often included recipes that were looked down upon by the wealthy elite such as poorer cuts of meat or turtle soup.

Cookbooks can often reveal much more information to a careful reader than just how to prepare certain recipes. The inclusion of some recipes and the exclusion of others can tell a lot about the author or authors of the cookbook. It is often possible to discern the class and heritage of the author based on the types of food listed in the cookbook. If there is an introduction written by the same author, the tone of that section often shows prejudices they hold.

Works Cited

Bryan, Lettice. 1839. The Kentucky Housewife, Containing Nearly Thirteen Hundred Full Receipts and Many More Comprised in Similar Receipts. Cincinnati: Shepard and Stearns. Accessed at https://www.loc.gov/item/08016076/

Campbell, Tunis, Gulic. 1848. Hotel keepers, Head Waiters, and Housekeeper’s Guide. Boston: Coolidge and Wiley. Accessed at https://d.lib.msu.edu/fa/42#page/1/mode/2up

Ferris, Marcie Cohen. 2013. “The Edible South: The Power of Food and the Making of an American Region” Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press

Fisher, Abby. 1881. What Mrs. Fisher knows about Old Southern Cooking, soups, pickles, preserves, etc. San Francisco: Women’s Co-operative Printing Office. Accessed at https://www.loc.gov/item/08023680/

Harland, Marion. 1871 Common Sense in the Household: A Manual of Practical Housewifery. New York: Charles Scribner & Co. Accessed at https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/011203363

Randolph, Mary. 1824. The Virginia Housewife: Or, Methodical Cook. Washington D.C.: Davis and Force. Accessed at https://www.loc.gov/item/73217897/

Roberts, Robert. 1827. The House Servant’s Directory or A Monitor For Private Families. Boston: Munroe and Francis. Accessed at https://d.lib.msu.edu/fa/43#page/1/mode/2up

Russell, Malinda. 1866. A Domestic Cookbook: Containing a Careful Selection of Useful Receipts for the Kitchen. Self published. Printed in Paw Paw: T.O. Ward. Accessed at https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015073926647&view=1up&seq=1

Rutledge, Sarah. 1847. House and Home; or, The Carolina Housewife. Charleston: S.C., J. Russell. Accessed at https://www.loc.gov/item/07028873/

Theophano, Janet. 2002. Eat My Words: Reading Women’s Lives Through the Cookbooks They Wrote. New York: Palgrave Macmillan

Tyree, Marion Cabell. 1878, Housekeeping in Old Virginia. Louisville: J. P. Morton & co. Accessed at https://d.lib.msu.edu/fa/56#page/1/mode/2up

Southern Hospitality: How the Concept Changes When Comparing the White Mistress Narrative to the African American Slave Narrative

By Christopher Kostrzewa

Introduction

Southern hospitality is a concept that many have been aware of since the Antebellum Era. It is a concept that describes the South as welcoming, polite, and kind (Darrisaw 2017), and was often shown through dinner parties hosted by white Southern mistresses. Lavish gatherings would be organized, and guests were often bombarded with a variety of foods signature to the South. On the outside, the practice itself appeared very entertaining and generous, so much so that guests often felt overwhelmed by the generosity shown toward them. Even today, Southern hospitality is still widely known and practiced.  However, there appears to be a myth that lies behind Southern hospitality. Upon comparing the narratives of Southern white women and African American slaves, it is easy to discover the underlying narrative of Southern hospitality. While Southern hospitality is a term that has been widely known and accepted since the Antebellum Era, a deeper analysis of narratives between slaves and slave-owners reveals that the notion of Southern hospitality is, in actuality, a myth.

Slavery and the Antebellum Era

Slaves played vital roles within the kitchen and many scholars agree they had a significant behind-the-scenes role in Southern hospitality. Unfortunately, many people are unaware of this. Though slavery did not begin at the time of the Antebellum Era, this is the time period when it reached its climax.

During the time of the Antebellum Era, citizens could not agree that slavery should be outlawed or if it was immoral, and there was often a debate on the benefits or disadvantages on the subject matter (Copeland, 109). Because of the agrarian lifestyle of the South, slavery was well promoted, and as a result, landowners of the South were far more resistant to the freeing of slaves than the North (Copeland, 109). Slaves not only worked in fields but were a vital role within the kitchen which ultimately led to the success of a dinner party by a Southern mistress, for example.

Southern Hospitality

Southern hospitality is a term that is widely used and accepted among people of the South. Many people believe in the warmth and politeness embedded within this term, but there are also many scholars who believe there are many wrongdoings tied to Southern hospitality and expose the roots of Southern hospitality. According to Marcie Cohen Ferris, “The ‘big eating’ frequently included in the descriptions of southern meals was a central aspect of the social practices of white southerners referred to as ‘southern hospitality’” (2014, 18). It has long been a practice known by many where one is typically invited into a home and overloaded with politeness and cuisine that is significant to the South. Historian Edmund Morgan noted Southern hospitality to be a “fine art” (Ferris 2014, 19). Within the South people are often deemed more relational, friendlier, and welcoming, regardless of one’s whereabouts – the home, the street, or a business. Southern mistress Rogene Scott said, “The Southerner feels differently; if he has plenty to eat and drink and wear he scarcely thinks of anything else; I have fallen greatly in love with my style of living because it is so simple and wholesome and I so perfectly satisfied with it” (Ferris 2014, 47). At a minimum, a Southerner will say “yes sir” and “yes ma’am” and “thank you” and “you’re welcome” (Martin 2012). They will hold the door for you, say hello, and wave from across the street regardless of who you are (Martin 2012). However, it is a form of politeness that can often be overwhelming for some. Swedish traveler Fredrika Bremer found the performance of Southern hospitality to be overbearing and tedious at the table and became frustrated that a guest could not simply get what they asked for; it was often more (Ferris 2014, 19). Though the overall practice of Southern hospitality seems positive, there appears to be an underlying narrative presented by many scholars of which many people are not fully aware.

In the late eighteenth century, during the time of the Antebellum Era, many Southern planters would entertain their guests quite lavishly, and those with the nicest gatherings and best food were often deemed the most powerful. According to Ferris, “aspiring and well-to-do white women of the South expressed this longing for gentility through the hierarchy and ritual of domestic hospitality” (2014, 19). Many Northern mistresses observed the culinary extravagance of white elites through Southern hospitality (Ferris 2014, 36). It is particularly interesting to note that these mistresses credited the culinary extravagance to the white elites when in reality it was their African American slaves who were creating these extravagant dishes. Many of their letters written home would include pages about the variety of Southern foods but failed to acknowledge and give credit to the slaves who were the cooks behind those meals. Anthony Szczesiul, author of The Southern Hospitality Myth says, “The role slavery played in the emergence of ‘southern hospitality’ cannot be underestimated… slave labor made possible the social habits that came to be known in the 1830s as ‘southern hospitality’” (48).

Throughout many of the written works by white plantation owners, readers are able to understand the diverse food groups that were often served such as: rice cakes, turtle soup, shrimp, and pork (Ferris 2014, 26). Though, there are few written works that include the abuse that was given to their slaves. While the guests of white plantation owners were well taken care of and experienced the hospitality known by many, slaves suffered extreme abuse within the kitchen.

African American Narrative of Southern Hospitality

Because African American voices were silenced in a world dominated by the words of white slaveholders, it was not until later in the nineteenth century when we finally hear the slave narrative of Southern hospitality (Ferris 2014, 72). American novelist Flannery O’ Connor believed that the manners and performance tied to Southern hospitality were the “foul underbelly” of violence that are coded within Southern hospitality (Lawson 2020, 51). With the release of autobiographies by individuals such as Frederick Douglass and Harriet Jacobs, we are given the underside of “Southern hospitality” (Ferris 2014, 72). African Americans were often related to and treated like animals by white plantation owners (Ferris 2014, 74). There are a number of accounts in which African Americans would eat from a barrel or large wooden trough. Frederick Douglass states, “’Like so many pigs they would come and devour the mush; some with oyster-shells, others with pieces of shingle, some with naked hands, and none with spoons. He that ate fastest got most; he that was strongest secured the best place; and few left the trough satisfied’” (Douglass 2018, 27). To add a supporting point by Harriet Jacobs (2017):

If dinner was not served at the exact time on that particular Sunday, she [the mistress] would station herself in the kitchen, and wait till it was dished, and the spit in all the kettles and pans had had been used for cooking. She did this to prevent the cooks and her children from eking out their meagre fare with the remains of the gravy and other scrapings (22).

While there are other testaments similar to these, there is belief that a great number of slaves kept silent due to the fear of persecution from former masters (Ferris 2014, 75). To protect themselves, ex-slaves would speak of kind masters who would provide abundant food for their “white and black families” (Ferris 2014, 75). In contrast, authors Herbert Covey and Dwight Eisnach of What the Slaves Ate, believe slave cooks had a different experience. While they do acknowledge some abuse, this is not their overall argument. They say, “Slave cooks, especially good ones, were highly valued on the plantation. An exceptional cook reflected well on the planter and represented high social status in southern society. Planters viewed slave cooks as a cut above field slaves, and the cooks were mostly well treated, but many cooks were also under a lot of pressure, and some were abused” (Covey & Eisnach 2009, 54). They even go on to say some of the cooks benefited by the close proximities to their white slave owners (Covey & Eisnach 2009, 54).

Among the aforementioned authors and other research, it seems most scholars agree there was undoubtedly abuse within Southern hospitality and it was ultimately a performance put on by white female homeowners as a way of displaying power.

Slavery After the Emancipation and Southern Hospitality Today

Though the Emancipation Proclamation was declared in 1863 and the Thirteenth Amendment was passed in 1865, slavery was not over for many African Americans, and the end of African American abuse within the kitchen and links to Southern hospitality were far from over. With no resources, many slaves had no places to go and lived in rural poverty across the South (Life After Slavery for African Americans). Douglas Blackman, author of Slavery by Another Name says:

At the beginning of the Civil War, more than nineteen thousand enslaved blacks – the twelfth-largest population of slaves in one place in the country – lived on 1,100 farms in Lowndes County… By 1900, even as the white population dwindled further, the landholders who remained reforged an almost impenetrable jurisdiction into which no outside authority could extend its reach. By then more than thirty thousand blacks worked the rich flat cotton fields, no longer called slaves but living under an absolute power of whites nearly indistinguishable from the forced labor of a half century earlier.

In respect to Southern hospitality today, interviews conducted by South Alabama University reveal that many people still believe in the practice of Southern hospitality. However, many also recognized there are still issues of racial injustice within the South. One interviewee says, “We’ve gotten better, but we have a long way to go.” Additionally, a response from a survey conducted by Southern Living says, “I was raised to believe that hospitality isn’t a choice. It’s more of an institution in my household, where we abide by Southern rituals and customs beyond swinging on the front porch, sipping on sweet tea, and gathering on Sunday for a sit-down supper.” Further, African Americans today are still dealing with stereotypes of not being able to cook quality meals even though many of them are the same as fellow white chefs.

Discussion

This analysis of literature sought to answer the question: “How has the narrative of Southern hospitality changed?” By looking at the slave-owner narrative, it is clear that this narrative was really about display of power through the best representation of hospitality. The more lavish the gathering, the more powerful one was considered. Though the culinary extravagance was credited to the white mistresses of the home, the African American slaves were the true creators of these extravagant dishes. With these types of displays seen by guests, it was difficult to see the actual abuse that was happening to slaves behind-the-scenes. The concept of Southern hospitality from the point of view of the slave-owner is what many are aware of today – big meals, ‘kindness,’ and ‘welcoming.’ While there are less sources that discuss the behind-the-scenes of Southern hospitality, it is clear these scholars agree there is an underside to Southern hospitality. That being said, when we delve into the slave narrative, we are able to truly understand this underside of Southern hospitality. Slaves were often treated similarly to animals, were fed unsubstantially, and were silenced due to a world dominated by white slaveholders. As stated in my analysis, it was not until the voices of Frederick Douglass and Harriet Jacobs that we begin to understand the contrasting narrative of Southern hospitality.

Based on the analysis, a new conclusion that can be made is many are not aware of the underlying narrative of Southern hospitality. If one is to search ‘southern hospitality,’ information on the stereotypical welcoming, polite, and kind is typically what one will find. The problem with this is people are unaware of the connections to slavery and racial injustice. Because of the popular and well-known notion of welcoming, polite, and kind, the myth of Southern hospitality is easily overlooked. Should one do more in-depth research, they could easily discover the behind-the-scenes of Southern hospitality. To quote Anthony Szczesiul, “The role of slavery played in the emergence of ‘southern hospitality’ cannot be underestimated… slave labor made possible the social habits that came to be known in the 1830s as ‘southern hospitality’” (Szczesiul, 48).

Moving forward, what is key in remembering the notion of Southern hospitality is slaves played a vital role, and their work and cooking – though it be forced – should not go unrecognized.  Further, there is also a stigma that black cooks are less capable of white cooks and this is simply not true. While the food cooked by black cooks is often of the same quality of white cooks, there is unfortunately a stigma of lesser quality because of this underlying racial injustice. Finally, the Southern hospitality that is still known today, whether it be through an individual or organization, a cookbook, or an online source, ultimately has connections to slavery and a desire for power by white slave-owners.

Conclusion

In closing, upon comparing the narratives of Southern white women to African American slaves, one is easily able to understand the notion of Southern hospitality as a myth. To white mistresses, Southern hospitality was about social hierarchy. Whoever had the most lavish party with the best quality food was considered to be the best. In this case scenario, food was power. As previously mentioned, because guests were so overwhelmed by the extravagance of Southern hospitality, it was easy to miss what was actually happening behind-the-scenes. Slaves were constantly abused in and out of the kitchen, often being related to or treated similarly to animals. Slaves were fed insubstantially, had poor living conditions, and were given no credit for the work they were doing. While the white mistress may have appeared to prepare the meals, the reality is the African American slaves were the creators behind many of these foods. Many of which are still significant to the South today.

Unfortunately, circumstances are not much different today in terms of African Americans in the kitchen. While African Americans are cooking meals that are almost identical to those being cooked by white chefs, they are often not given the credit simply because of their background. Moving forward, bringing about an awareness of the myth of Southern hospitality will allow people to understand the true history of African American cooks and their ties to slavery. People ought to be aware of the racial injustices that are still happening within kitchens to African Americans today, and give credit where the credit is due.

References

Blackmon, Douglas A. Slavery by Another Name: The Re-enslavement of Black Americans from the Civil War to World War Two. United Kingdom: Icon Books Limited, 2012.

Covey, Herbert C., and Dwight Eisnach. Essay. In What the Slaves Ate: Recollections of African American Foods and Foodways from the Slave Narratives, 54. Santa Barbara, CA: Greenwood Press, 2009.

Darrisaw, Michelle. “These Are the 6 Qualities That Really Define Southern Hospitality.” Southern Living, March 9, 2017. https://www.southernliving.com/culture/southern-hospitality.

Deetz, Kelley Fanto. Bound to the Fire: How Virginia’s Enslaved Cooks Helped Invent     American Cuisine, 2. United States: University Press of Kentucky, 2017.

Douglass, Frederick. Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave, 27. United States: Madison and Adams, 2018.

Ferris, Marcie Cohen. Essay. In The Edible South: the Power of Food and the Making of an American Region, 18–75. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 2016.

Jacobs, Harriet. INCIDENTS IN THE LIFE OF A SLAVE GIRL: A Painful Memoir That   Uncovered the Despicable Sexual, Emotional & Psychological Abuse of a Slave Women, Her Determination to Escape as Well as Her Sacrifices in the Process,            22. Germany: Musaicum Books, 2017.

Lawson, Anna Elizabeth. The Performance of Southern Hospitality Within Flannery O’Connor. United States: Abilene Christian University, 2020.

Martin, James. “Is Southern Hospitality a Myth?” A Southerner in San Francisco, January 29,      2012. http://james-a-martin.blogspot.com/2012/01/is-southern-hospitality-myth.html

Szczesiul, Anthony. Essay. In The Southern Hospitality Myth: Ethics, Politics, Race, and American Memory, 48. Athens, GA: The University of Georgia Press, 2019.

Ward, Andrew. The Slaves’ War: The Civil War in the Words of Former Slaves, xi. United States: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2009.

Barbecue Sauce Variations in the American South

By Brittany Coffman

Introduction

As a product that markets as a two billion dollar industry in the United States of America alone, barbecue sauce truly made an economic market for itself across the globe. In fact, the industry is expected to gain more popularity as the US economy grows and stabilizes (miller 2014). Barbecue sauce or BBQ sauce has been given a glorious reputation in kitchens across the globe. These sweet and tangy flavor enhancers bring out the good in not only meats, but the tastes of fruits and vegetables too. Both dry and liquid variations of this seasoning along with the many variations and cooking styles are possibly some of the biggest reasons for the exploding popularity. Also, these things protect the economic growth of this industry.

Curiously, the variations of these different styles of barbecue sauce range differently across the regions across the globe; though, the sauces originally projected origins in the southern areas of the United States are even more perplexing. Intriguingly as one steps into a new region of the South the foods might remain similar as the general sense of cuisines do with the basics. Stretching from the basics however, the palates of flavorings within those new regions transform. In this paper, the reasonings to the formation of these distinct flavors of barbecue sauces in contrasting regions in the south. There are a number of key influences, such as people and the cultures they carry with them, the land provided, as well as the discovery of new resources, which have caused the variety of barbecue sauce that make up the regions of the South in the United States of America.

Exploring the mysteries behind each of the sauces brings importance to the understanding of the pieces that came together in order to create such tastes. Providing the knowledge allows future generations to create and be inspired by cooking styles and cultures of the past. A growing industry is ever changing, obtaining the knowledge about the places and people different ingredients and flavors originated from gives the power to further explore, enhance, and appreciate the combinations that have been offered. Remembering the connections made by different peoples and land sources also allows precious traditions to remain alive, with further uses going forward.

Analysis of Literature

Barbecue has been a popular food topic for ages and there are millions of recipes and histories that come with the cooking style and its tangy sauces. However, these barbecue sauces receive less documentation, research, and preservation of its history than one may seem to think.  Therefore, the research found will be primarily from historians Veteto and Maclin (2011), who wrote a book about the culture of barbecue in the American South; Moss (2010), who speaks about the general institution of the history of barbecue in America; Deutsch and Eilas (2014), who have written about the global history of barbecue; and Miller (2014), who describes the influences of people on barbecue over time. These sources, along with others, create a taste of the origins of barbecue sauce, the variations of barbecue sauce within four primary regions, and the influences that were had on the creation of different variations of barbecue sauces in the United States of American South.

Origin of BBQ Sauce

For decades, people believed that Barbecue sauce originated in the southern regions of the United States of America. While perfections and newly enhanced flavors have been added to Barbecue sauce name to create the condiment we know today, the history is much more interesting than ingredients being thrown in a pot. Fingers can easily be pointed toward the regions of the south, as many cookbooks and writings support this argument. However, new evidence has been lifted out of the woodworks found in several older books and other forms of literature that talk of sauces described similarly to those of barbecue sauce.

As early as the European medieval era, cookbooks included descriptions of a sweet and sour or even tangy like sauce that would be put on spit roasts (Deutsch and Eilas 2014; Veteto and Maclin 2011). In their book, Veteto and Maclin (2011) speak of a similar occurrence of a flavor blend  that is as similar as precedence to a modern style of sauce. Some of the contents that made this early style of “meat sauce,” dating back to the 1430s, vinegar, the sour juice of unripe grapes, and spices including powdered black pepper, ginger, and cinnamon (Veteto and Maclin 2011). This has been speckled throughout other literatures as examples of similar types of sauces which are presented as complimentary items to the barbecue-style seasoning, specifically noted throughout the works of English, French, and German literature which recall these kinds of dish preparations.

Evidence shows that the early origins of barbecue sauces dates back to the return of Columbus, from the first voyage to the Americas. Evidence shows that the earliest use of the term “barbecue” in European cooking dates back to the return of Columbus from the first voyage to the Americas. An ancient sauce from Hispaniola based on lamb, was brought to Europe. Along with this sauce also came the knowledge of “barbecue” to the European people. (Miller 2014; Cappiello 2020) both agree as they inform that “Barbecola a Native American word for a wooden rack used for cooking food,”  more specifically by Cappiello’s definition source is used for smoking meats (Cappiello 2020). In Miller’s book, he continues to discuss the impact that barbecue had on the Europeans after this voyage of Columbus. The introduction to the idea of this typically tomato-based sweet and tangy flavors, as well as the spice from chili peppers from the New World combined with meats like pork and beef of the Old World, ignited the beginning of a large variety of what individuals think of traditional barbecue in the present culture (Miller 2014).

Influences of BBQ sauce history within the regions

“One of the great differentiators in barbecue style today is the sauce.” (Moss 2010) commented in his works about the history of barbecue in America. Both expert and amateur foodies take notice of these varying different styles of barbecue sauces as one moves across the regions of the American south (Moss 2010; Houck 2016, Veteto and Maclin 2011). The influences of different people, cultures, events, land, and supplies create some of the many factors of the varying regions. Several sources point to these types of influences for creating the very separate and distinct regions of barbecue sauce (Mattison 2020; Houck 2016; Riches 2019; Veteto and Maclin 2011; Moss 2010; Goldwyn 2015).

These writers, in their respective works, name endless amounts of differing southern barbecue regions. Nonetheless, the Smithsonian researchers (Geiling 2013) recognize four distinct regional styles of barbecue sauce that have become the basis for the numerous other variations that have been found within the southern United States.  These four regional styles  contain the most popular picks of barbecue sauce, which could be why these regions easily stick out to researchers rather than other areas throughout the United States. Furthermore, by taking a thorough and deeper glance into the history and the influences from these four regions, the origins of reason can be revealed. The different styles are classified and named by the region from which they originate. These regions are Eastern North Carolina,  Western Carolina, South Carolina, and Kansas City.

Eastern North Carolina

Possibly the simplest of the five major variations, The Eastern North Carolina barbecue sauce is believed to be one of the first created upon entering the New World. The staple components of this sauce contain three basic ingredients: vinegar, chili pepper flakes, and black pepper flakes.  Still, Vetero and Macline provide further explanation of the ingredients combined together to create this tangy concoction in their 2011 book. The sauce has been perfected to focus on bringing out the flavor from the fat, skin, and bones from hogs (Veteto and Maclin 2011; Moss 2010; Arnett 2018; Goldwyn 2015; Whole Hog 2020). Though the simplicities of this sauce hold a greater story and influence than just focusing on flavor.

There are disagreements between researchers of the precise time period for the exact creation of this sauce. Some researchers believe that “Englishman John White traveled to what is now the Carolinas and Virginia in the 1580s as part of an expedition” and “[John White] painted an image of two large fish cooking on a wooden rack over an open fire” (Miller 2014). White goes on to explain the details of the sauces that were being concocted, leading Miller’s claim of the experimentation of barbecue sauce to be around the 1580s or earlier. Most historians debate the establishment to be around the 1600s (Moss 2010; Whole Hog 2020) and others the 1700s (Veteto and Maclin 2011), the time periods which the colonists were establishing and settling in the New World.

The influences of food were as simple as ingredients that were naturally produced from the land such as apples, chili peppers, animal milk, ginger, shallots, mace, and lemons (Veteto and Maclin 2011; Whole Hog 2020; Arnett 2018). These resources were the most readily available that were proven to be safe and edible at the time of settlement (Whole Hog 2020; Miller 2014). The idea of adding tomatoes had not even come up, for tomatoes were believed to be poisonous. Instead, the base of the sauce to keep the thick texture was butter (Miller 2014; Moss 2010; Whole Hog 2020; Veteto and Maclin 2011). Many people and events also influenced the creation of this style of barbecue sauce. Early settlers to this region primarily came from English backgrounds (Goldfield 2005). With them, they had brought resources such as domesticated animals and knowledge about some natural foods learned from the Native Americans. It wasn’t until the arrival of the African American slaves around the 1730s that created the true flavors of the sauce. African Americans had knowledge about agriculture and the use of spices. The combination of different cultures of people arriving together on a newly discovered land were all major factors to the creation of the Eastern North American barbecue sauce people have come to know today (Houck 2016; Goldfield 2005; Moss 2010; Miller 2014).

Western Carolina

A slightly sweeter and thicker version of the original tanginess of the Eastern North Carolina variation, the Western Carolina barbecue sauce or the Piedmont-style/Lexington Dip is believed to be created sometime later, in the early to mid-1800s (Goldfield 2005; Houck 2016). During the time between the creation of these two styles, many additional influencers and knowledge were provided to those who cook in the Carolina region in general. One of these being the discovery that tomatoes are edible; which led to the introduction of Heinz ketchup in 1876, marking a major turning point in the history of barbecue sauce nationwide. In addition to this, the introduction of molasses and brown sugar to the New World were also crucial components to the traditional vinegar, chili pepper, and black pepper base. Cooks residing in the western North Carolina and Piedmont regions were ecstatic to add these sweet flavors to the original tangy Eastern North Carolina barbecue sauce (Veteto and Maclin 2011; Houck 2016; Whole Hog 2020; Spiceography 2020).

German settlers, who began in the North-Eastern parts of North Carolina and eventually migrated to the South-Western regions of North Carolina and into Tennessee, were amongst the other crucial pieces to the Western Carolina regional barbecue flavor (Goldfield 2005; Veteto and Maclin 2011; Houck 2016). As the major attributions to the first recorded variation of this style were developed by five Men of German descent. Their practices of cooking originated from Bavarian styles, knowledge from Native Americans of the Piedmont region, and experimentation with sweet ingredients such as sugars and tomato-based products (Veteto and Maclin 2011; Houck 2016; Moss 2010; Whole Hog 2020; Spiceography 2020; Cappiello 2020). The resulting barbecue sauce, which is typically complemented with pork shoulder, is close to the variations seen today with some additions of different spices added on by African slaves over the decades (Goldfield 2005; Whole Hog 2020; Veteto and Maclin 2011).

South Carolina

Stirring away from the tomato-based barbecue sauces of the rest of the regions, the South Carolina variation of barbecue sauce has a mustard and vinegar base. As it is known for its tangy flavorings, just as the Eastern North Carolina and the Western Carolina varieties, the South Carolina dark yellow mustard-based sauce is enjoyed for its mild degree of spiciness mixed in (Veteto and Maclin 2011; Houck 2016). These spices were of many different variations, but the most notable one was the discovery of the use of cayenne pepper from South America. The other ingredients added were brown sugar and honey to keep the sweetness along with the new kick given by the sauce.

The largest influencer is primarily due to a large number of German settlers that populated the region in the 1800s. Historians Veteto and Maclin, along with the support of information written in (Goldfield 2005), had found that the migration of Germans to the Western parts of North Carolina took place in the same years as migration south into South Carolina and Georgia. The creation of this sauce also called “Carolina Gold” took place around the mid-1800s through the true year can not be agreed upon by any of the historians as the documentation has not been discovered by any factual sources yet (Veteto and Maclin 2011; Moss 2010; Spiceography 2020; Toni’s BBQ Sauce Journey 2011; Miller 2014; Houck 2016). Germans brought many things along with them to the Americas, but their love and knowledge of mustard contributed to the artistic creation of this edgy sauce. As explained by historian (High 2013) in his book about the history of South Carolina barbecue it is stated, “This light tomato sauce, a vinegar-and-pepper sauce with a bit of ketchup, was already in use in other areas of both North and South Carolina, so they were not its inventor, but they were some of the first practitioners of using that light, slightly sweet sauce.”. This statement, along with additional information from various sources, attribute the hardworking and resourcefulness of German migrants to the creation of a barbecue sauce that stood out to the crowd (Veteto and Maclin 2011; Houck 2016; Toni’s BBQ Sauce Journey 2011; High, Jr. 2020; High 2013). In fact, this variation of barbecue sauce is the one that has evolved the least among the four sauce styles (Veteto and Maclin 2011; Spiceography 2020; Houck 2016; High 2013; High, Jr. 2020).

Kansas City

“Kansas City barbecue is the one that really seems to blend all of the types,” (Cappiello 2020) explained when describing the sauce of Kansas City. Incredibly, this variation is the newest, yet the most successful of the four variations. When Americans think of barbecue sauce the sweet and tangy flavors of style would most certainly come to mind. Along with Cappiello, many others have agreed on the history of this barbecue sauce, which had been born in the early 1900s. It began when the “Barbecue King” or originally known as Henry Perry, who appreciated different aspects of the existing three sauces from the other regions. The base of his sauce is similar to that of the two vinegar-based, chili pepper, and black pepper sauces of Eastern North Carolina and Western Carolina. The tomato base along with sweeteners such as brown sugar and molasses were added in along with spices for flavor. Then to a step all of his own, the incorporated sauces were simmered down into thickened goodness for all who would come to Perry’s old trolley barn and around city spots for ribs cooked with this sauce (Carter 2019; Houck 2016; Mckenzie 2016; Diaz-Camacho 2018; Deutsch and Eilas 2014; Miller 2014). As of today this style of sauce is sold at fast-food restaurants and on grocery store shelves as traditional Barbecue Sauce all over the country and even across the globe.

Discussion

Very common factors that make-up the four different styles of barbecue sauces from different regions. These similarities range from the uses of ingredients, the settlement of peoples,  and other discoveries that conclude the reasoning for different regional styles of cooking sauces. As, from this research it is clear that the cultures of the peoples originating in these places are of great importance to the founding of new flavor profiles.

When peeking into the alterations made to the classic vinegary tang of the Eastern Carolina variety of sauce it is easy to notice the differences in ingredients. The most notable being the inclusion of different bases to create thicker bastes. Namely the education of the safety and usage of the tomato cultivated the biggest impact of barbecue sauce success. As this is the base for most varieties, including the more famous Kansas style sauce that had brought the best of all the regional flavors into this one sauce. Sweeteners are another big impact to the flavor profile to these sauces and largely contribute to the differences of the different regions. With the introduction of molasses and brown sugar to the New World these sweeteners allowed for more followers of the original Eastern Carolina sauce to favor the sweeter version being the West Carolina sauce. Proceeding father south where the climate is naturally warmer for longer periods of time had the access to bees which produce honey. This fresh honey is reflected in the barbecue sauce of Georgia. Since the New World was recently discovered it showed how to access the certain ingredients that shaped the things that went into their foods. However, access to ingredients was less of a stress when the creation of the Kansas style sauce was taking place. This is because the United States was a much more developed civilization making all of the resources much more accessible from any part of the land (Miller 2014; Moss 2010; Veteto and Maclin 2011).

People of culture pride themselves on the flavors and ways of cooking. Founding America brought many different peoples of different lands together not only to create civilization but also the experimentation and collaboration of cooking foods. As this melting pot of cultures changed and educated each other, so did the change and blending of these flavors. For example the Carolinas contained settlers from Englishmen. Their foods being quite simple is due to the limited ingredients of their Eastern Carolina sauce. Though the chilis came from the influence of African Americans with their use of chilli spices. The Presence of African Americans brought flavors, spicy flavors to the sauces seen. The Europenans brought their own knowledge and pallets for certain tastes. The best example is the settlement of Germans in Georgia. Germans were told to obsess over the flavors brought by the mustard seed. A big influence as this was the replacement to the traditional tomato sauce base. These same Germans also did not favor sweetness and preferred an extra kick  of spice and flavor in their hearty meals. Together with the African Americans and Native Americans took the basic English designed sauce and added new hints of spicy flavors making this barbecue sauce their own special regional barbecue sauce. Influences of peoples and cultures to these different regions were rather important to the flavors of the different southern barbecue sauces (Miller 2014; Carter 2019; Moss 2010).

Conclusion

All food delicacies entail a story of their origins and the evolution of their flavor profile changes. Simply roots of the differences of barbecue sauce among the separate regions in the South of the United States of America. Influences traced back to times of Europe before Christopher Columbus’s first voyage to the Americas. When coming to America people and cultures during their settlements were the largest of the influences, for these individuals of different nationalities created a melting pot of flavors. The basics of the English bastes, the spices and strong flavors of the African Americans, bolder more hearty tastes of the Germans, and more came together to create, adapt, and evolve the palates of the staples of the southern palate. Other influences came from the land and resources introduced to the communities.

Importantly southern regions contain different styles of barbecue sauce to meet the tastes and the trending flavors to those peoples in these distinctly different places. Understanding the reasoning for varying flavors of barbecue sauce provides knowledge and the power to create and explore the tastes of the future. Providing the power of creation through the reminders of the ingredients and inspirations of its combinations originally. Additionally, the connections between different groups to build-up a new nation through these barbecue sauces is to recognize the foundations and traditional styles back in the day and the continued addition and evolution of sauce as the cultures and tastes did as well.

Further insights into the research of barbecue sauce opened up to the more general topic of barbecue in the South. Sauces add to the flavor of a main entree. Peaking into these entrees, more specifically meats and other proteins, would be interesting to the responding for varying flavors of barbecue sauce. Since each culture has a palate for taste their combined knowledge and access to the protein for these sauces seemingly would kindle major influences on the preparation of barbecue sauces. Ultimately, the knowledge about food and flavors creates the power to discover, expand, and add.

Bibliography

Arnett, Dan. 2018. “North Carolina is divided by two barbecue styles – but this is the best one.” Matador Network. https://matadornetwork.com/read/north-carolina-barbecue-styles/.

Cappiello, Emily. 2020. “A Brief History of BBQ.” Chow Hound. https://www.chowhound.com/food-news/228179/history-of-bbq-when-and-where-was-barbecue-invented/.

Carter, Christina. 2019. “Mastering Kansas City Style Barbecue Sauce.” Daily Mom Military. https://military.dailymom.com/home/mastering-kansas-city-style-barbecue-sauce/.

Deutsch, Jonathan, and Megan J. Eilas. 2014. Barbecue: A global history. United Kingdom: Reaktion Books.

Diaz-Camacho, Vicky. 2018. “List Extra: The History of Q in KC.” Kansas City Business Journal. https://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/news/2018/07/13/barbecue-kansas-city-history.html.

Geiling, Natasha. 2013. “The Evolution of American Barbecue.” Smithsonian. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/the-evolution-of-american-barbecue-13770775/.

Goldfield, David. 2005. “Early Settlement.” NCpedia. https://www.ncpedia.org/history/colonial/early-settlement.

Goldwyn, Meathead. 2015. “Barbecue Sauce History.” Amazing Ribs. https://amazingribs.com/barbecue-history-and-culture/barbecue-sauce-history.

High, Lake E. 2013. A History of South Carolina Barbeque. Charleston, South Carolina: American Palate.

High, Jr., Lake E. 2020. “A very brief history of the four types of barbeque found in the USA.” South Carolina Barbeque Association. https://www.scbarbeque.com/index.php/links/2014-01-26-09-56-40.

Houck, Brenna. 2016. “Regional Barbecue Sauce Styles, Explained.” Eater. https://www.eater.com/2016/6/18/11966056/barbecue-sauce-styles.

Lyuba. 2020. “Carolina Mustard BBQ Sauce.” Grilling Smoking Living. https://grillingsmokingliving.com/carolina-mustard-bbq-sauce/.

Mattison, Lindsay D. 2020. “12 Regional Barbecue Sauce Styles All Grill Masters Should Know.” Taste of Home. https://www.tasteofhome.com/collection/regional-barbecue-sauce/.

Mckenzie, Mike. 2016. “The History of BBQ in Kansas City.” Learning Backyard BBQ with Mike Tee. https://learnbbq.com/the-history-of-kansas-city-bbq/.

Miller, Tim. 2014. Barbecue: A History. United Kingdom: Rowman & Littlefield.

Moss, Robert F. 2010. Barbecue: The history of an American institution. Tuscaloosa, Alabama: The University of Alabama Press.

Riches, Derrick. 2019. “True Barbecue.” The Spruce Eats. https://www.thespruceeats.com/what-is-true-barbecue-333604.

Spiceography. 2020. “Barbecue sauce: An American source for a Native American cooking style.” Spiceopraphy. https://www.spiceography.com/barbecue-sauce/.

Toni’s BBQ Sauce Journey. 2011. “The history and origin of BBQ sauce.” Toni’s Barbecue Sauce Journey! https://tonibbqsauce.wordpress.com/2011/07/26/the-history-and-origin-of-bbq-sauce/.

Vaughn, Daniel. 2014. “All about the sauce.” Texas Monthly. https://www.texasmonthly.com/bbq/all-about-the-sauce/.

Veteto, James R., and Edward M. Maclin. 2011. The Slaw the Slow Cooked: Culture and Barbecue in the Mid-South. Nashville, Tennessee: Vanderbilt University Press.

Whole Hog. 2020. “History.” Whole Hog Barbecue Series. https://wholehogbarbecue.com/history/whole-hog/.

Geographic Influences of the New Orleans Foodways

By Beckman Hollis

Introduction

            New Orleans, Louisiana (NOLA) is a unique American city with a unique history. The city is known throughout the world for its cosmopolitan culture and its distinctive food. The city is often praised as a great place to eat, and the local government pushes this idea in the way the city markets itself (Passidomo 2018). Elements of Creole culture, especially the food, are on prominent display to anyone who visits the city, so much so that dishes like gumbo and jambalaya have become analogous to New Orleans. Yet, the cultural influences that created the city’s famous cuisine over time have largely been overshadowed due to commercialization during the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. New Orleans’ food today looks drastically different than it did three centuries ago, as new people groups arrived over time and brought with them a new piece to contribute to the culinary tapestry. The overall food culture remains prominent today, but the influences and the background of the culture are often forgotten and overlooked.

Physical Geography

The food of New Orleans cannot be adequately understood without the context of the region’s unique physical geography in which the city is situated. New Orleans’s cultural history is heavily influenced by the diverse people groups who have come to call the area home. In an article about the physical and cultural associations of the Louisiana Coast, Geographer Herbert Padgett (1969) describes the relationship between these cultures and the physical landscape: “no matter how much a society may cling to the old established ways, new environments require adjustments and present new opportunities and challenges” (Padgett 1969, 481). Indeed, culture is shaped by the situation and circumstances in which it physically exists.

The most significant physical geographic feature of New Orleans is undoubtedly the Mississippi River. French colonists established the city of New Orleans in 1718 to control the mouth of the river that bifurcates the North American Continent, running from the Canadian border in the north to the Gulf of Mexico in the south. (Eble 2008).  The Mississippi River is vitally important to transportation and commerce in the interior of the country. During the American Civil War, Union General William Tecumseh Sherman morbidly articulated the consequential importance of the river when he said, “. . . to secure the safety of the navigation of the Mississippi River I would slay millions. On that point I am not only insane, but mad” (Sherman 1890). For hundreds of years, the river was a highway for Native American trappers; then for the European trappers; then for American barges and later steamboats carrying goods to market. As the area developed, the Mississippi’s role in regional commerce developed with it. The thousands of boats that traversed the Mississippi confluent did not just carry passengers, but also food. The crops of the Midwest were readily available in New Orleans. Being situated so close to the Gulf of Mexico compounded the trade benefits of the river by providing a port for international trade as well (Williams 2013).

The longest river in the United States finds its terminus in the Gulf of Mexico, a few miles from the city. The river meanders quite a bit on its way to the gulf, leaving flood plains onto which the river regularly deposits silt and sediments. The result of thousands of years of alluvial accumulation is an incredibly fertile land with a limitless agricultural potential (Williams 2013). The low-lying delta also featured many marshes and wetlands. These bayous are synonymous with the popular image of New Orleans and southern Louisiana.  The abundant waterways and concurrent abundance in fish, shellfish, and other aquatic resources are a frequent feature in the region’s cuisine (Estaville Jr. 1986).

New Orleans has a climate typical of the Deep South. The region’s subtropical weather contributes to ample wildlife and vegetation. Additionally, the city’s position on the Mississippi’s banks, with Lake Pontchartrain to the north and with bayou swamps to the east and west, ensures that a high relative humidity often accompanies the hot temperatures. The warm climate and temperature stabilization by the water and warm winds from the Gulf of Mexico allow for a longer growing period for crops and allow the area to support tropical plantings like bananas, figs, and citrus (Williams 2013). The geographical location and climate of the region produced a plethora of resources that form the essential structure of the region’s foodways.

Early Influences: Cajuns and Creoles

            New Orleans would not be New Orleans without the physical characteristics of its situation. Equally so, the city is shaped by its unique cultural history. That influence can be seen in both Creole and Cajun foodways, which have been synonymous with New Orleans for more than 100 years (Ferris, “The Deepest Reality of Life”: Southern Sociology, the WPA, and Food in the New South 2012). What is the difference between Cajun and Creole? If one were to pose this question to modern New Orleanians, especially those born after 1970, their answers would not be concise (Williams 2013). Even NewOrleans.com, a website maintained by the city’s tourism bureau, acknowledges that the topic is highly debated (New Orleans Convention and Visitors Bureau 2020).

There is little question as to what these words mean, generally. Cajuns originate from French people living in the Acadia region of Canada who were deported by the British in the mid-eighteenth century. The name “Cajun” itself is a corruption of “Acadian.” They settled in Louisiana in the area south and west of New Orleans, an area that would become known as Acadiana (Brasseaux 1992). They considered themselves French long after their French-born ancestors were dead and spoke French long after Louisiana became a state. The term “Cajun” was regarded as a pejorative used by English-speaking Louisianans until the mid-twentieth century. Cajun culture spilled over into the nearby New Orleans over time, which had been well established for forty years before any Arcadians migrated there  (Williams 2013).

In contrast, Creoles, in the context of southern Louisiana, are the population born to European settlers in French colonial Louisiana, as well as native-born people of African descent, both enslaved and free people of color. This includes people with Spanish, French, African, Italian, German, Caribbean, Native American, and other ancestries (Passidomo 2018). Generally, “creole” refers to “genetic and cultural mixing,” an applicable definition to both Creole and Cajun cultures and food more specifically (Edwards 2011). Like everywhere in the New World before colonization, the area that would become New Orleans was inhabited by Native Americans. Native Americans were readily willing to share their knowledge about living in the region with Europeans and many of them intermingled – one of the first instances of creolization of the regions people. Similarly, many people who would call themselves “Creoles” in New Orleans today also claim African ancestry (Trépanier 1991). The cultural traditions and cuisine that their ancestors brought would heavily influence the foodways of New Orleans (Ferris, “The Deepest Reality of Life”: Southern Sociology, the WPA, and Food in the New South 2012).

Creole and Cajun cuisines share many similarities, having heavily influenced each other after centuries of proximity. Both groups draw influence from French colonials. Cécyle Trépanier, a Quebecois Geographer, describes how significant and long-lasting this influence is:

Southern Louisiana is the only effective remnant of the French presence in the Mississippi River Valley during the eighteenth century. Despite political Americanization in the early nineteenth century, rural French Louisiana continued to grow as a distinctively French region.

He explains that the “1980 US Census evaluates the population of Louisiana having some French ancestry as almost one million (954237). What this number hides, however, is the diversity of origins of the French population” (Trépanier 1991). As mentioned before, many other groups mixed with the majority French population. The francization of the varied cultures is evident in a transition of surnames: the German “Weiss” became “Le Blanc,” the Italian “Cimino” became “Simoneaux,” and the English “Mallinson” became “Melanson.” While these people lost their ethnic identity, the Louisiana French culture retained their contributions to its food (Williams 2013). Having a prominent port allowed the city to maintain a connection to the French mainland and culture long after colonial ties were severed (Eble 2008).

Both Cajun and Creole cooking rely heavily on what was locally available, and thanks to many factors of physical geography, there was plenty. Jambalaya and Gumbo, a prominent feature of both conventions, make ample use of the multitude of locally available ingredients. Other foods use the crabs, shrimp, crawfish, seafood, beans, rice, fowl, and vegetables grown in the region. Onions, celery, and green peppers are so crucial in NOLA cooking that they have earned the moniker “the Trinity.” One broad distinction between the two menus is that Cajun meals typically consist of one-pot meals. On the other hand, Creole cooking prepares meat separately from vegetables and frequently incorporates sauces in dishes (Williams 2013). Cajuns and Creoles have both had a long-lasting and significant impact on New Orleans, so much so that many people will often interchange the two. Their long-lasting coexistence has led the two groups to exchange ideas and practices frequently, but they remain distinct from each other.

Modern NOLA: New Immigrants and Commercialization

            While the cultural roots of New Orleans remain strong, the cultures of new waves of immigrants would be creolized. Italians immigrating to the city during the early 20th century are among the largest groups of new immigrants with a manifest impact on the NOLA foodways (Nystrom 2018). Coming from such a food-rich culture themselves, many Italians ate their traditional foods adapted for New Orleans ingredients. One example is red gravy, a modern staple of Creole cooking, which originated from Italian slow-cooked tomato sauce (Williams 2013). Another Creole staple, the muffuletta, is a sandwich lifted directly from Italian cooking. Italian immigrant laborers originally ate it, and it spread to the larger Creole population because “it was a good sandwich” (Ferris, The Edible South: The Power of Food and the Making of an American Region 2014). Italian immigrants changed the way New Orleanian Creoles thought about food (Williams 2013).

After the Vietnam War, New Orleans saw a large influx of Vietnamese immigrants coming as refugees from South Vietnam. Catholic charities catalyzed the resettlement as both Vietnam and New Orleans share a prominent French connection, Catholic Church, and fishing culture. Culinary similarities allowed easy assimilation of many elements of Vietnamese food into the Creole cookbook. Many dishes are adopted in whole with a new name, like the Vietnamese “yaka mein” becoming the Creole “old sober.” The exchange goes both ways, too, as Cajun Crawfish Boils have spread to Vietnamese communities outside of New Orleans as well (Williams 2013).

The New Orleans foodways of the late-twentieth and twenty-first centuries experience influences separate from new people and cultural groups. The commercialization and homogenization of the American food system have affected New Orleans in the same way as it has everywhere else in the United States. The same brands and prepackaged food are being sold in NOLA as in stores all over the country (Williams 2013). The city is home to 155 fast-food chain restaurants. Inexpensive, high-calorie food is as ubiquitous in New Orleans as it is in the rest of the country (Block, Scribner and DeSalvo 2004). What some people see as traditional cuisine being supplanted by quick, dirty, cheap, and generic food, others see it as an infusion of more diverse types of food. Despite the influx of fast-food chains, with a good deal of credit due to the tourism industry, the food traditions of New Orleans are still robust (Williams 2013).

Discussion

To many Americans, New Orleans, Louisiana, is synonymous with food. The city has a unique cultural history, which is reflected in its unique cuisine. Over the course of three centuries, new people with new cultures came to the city and brought their typical fares with them. New Orleans has genuinely cosmopolitan foodways; the cuisine is continually adapting and frequently incorporates new influences.

Many cities in the United States have had different waves of immigrants come to call those cities home. In almost every other instance, new immigrants remain in their enclaves and open individual ethnic restaurants. For example, many cities like New York and San Francisco have a flourishing China Town with many Chinese restaurants. This is not the case in New Orleans. While the city did have a China Town for a few decades, the enclave was Creolized into the greater New Orleans culture (Temple 2000).

The Creolization processed is described by Williams thusly: “Within New Orleans today we can find many influences and dishes that can be identified as having been creolized because they migrated into Creole food after creole food was established and can be recognized as distinct from the baseline of 1895” (Williams 2013). As the Creole repertoire has been well documented for over 100 years, each people group’s influence can be clearly seen. The Creole food of New Orleans is unique in that it has been dramatically expanded by many groups from whom it did not necessarily originate.

These foodways have created one of the most easily recognizable American menu genres. The unique history and varied influences of Creole fares have left New Orleans with a valuable asset. Creole culture has become packaged and sold to tourists for a net of $10 billion every year (New Orleans Convention and Visitors Bureau 2020). The rapid rate of assimilation and pressure from the tourism industry to maintain the city’s appearance has led to a homogenization of New Orleans. Often, the influences are forgotten and the people groups who contributed with them. Food in New Orleans is considered unique and different, and the involvement of other peoples is often uncredited.

Conclusion

            Of all the different subgenres of American cuisine, none is more recognizable than the food of New Orleans. Po’boys, Jambalaya, and Gumbo are the unique hallmarks of unique foodways. The unique physical setting of the city combined with a unique cultural history of the area has created a unique menu that has become synonymous with New Orleans. The readiness of the New Orleans’ Creoles to readily adopt the culinary customs of newcomers is not something found anywhere else. The Creole menu of 1835 is markedly different from the menu of 2020. Even so, New Orleans is the only city in the United States that actively retains its French colonial heritage. This heritage and the Creole culture itself are used as a marketing point to fuel the city’s tourism industry; however, the efforts to make NOLA food seem distinct and attractive to tourists have inadvertently oversimplified the influences and history that can be found within. Nevertheless, with an investigation beyond the tourist façade, the food of New Orleans will still reveal the story of the city’s past.

Bibliography

Bilger, Burkhard. 2011. True Grits. The New Yorker. October 24. Accessed September 2020. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/10/31/true-grits.

Block, Jason P, Richard A Scribner, and Karen B DeSalvo. 2004. “Fast Food, Race/Ethnicity, and Income A Geographic Analysis.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine (Elsevier Inc.) 27 (3): 211-217. Accessed September 2020.

Bonner, James C. 1945. “The Plantation Overseer and Southern Nationalism: As Revealed in the Career of.” Agricultural History (Agricultural History Society) 19 (1): 1-11. Accessed October 2020. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3739692.

Brasseaux, Carl A. 1992. Acadian to Cajun: Transformation of a People, 1803-1877. 2nd Edition. Jackson, Mississippi: University Press of House Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary. Accessed September 2020.

Eble, Connie. 2008. “Creole in Louisiana.” South Atlantic Review (South Atlantic Modern Language Association) 73 (2): 39-53. Accessed September 2020. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27784777.

Edge, John T. 2017. The Potlikker Papers: A Food History of the Modern South. New York, New York: Penguin Random House LLC. Accessed September 2020.

Edwards, Megan E. 2011. “Virginia Ham: The Local and Global of Colonial Foodways.” Food and Foodways (Taylor & Francis Group, LLC) 19: 56-73. Accessed October 2020.

Estaville Jr., Lawrence E. 1986. “Mapping the Louisiana French.” Southeastern Geographer (University of North Carolina Press) 26 (2): 90-113. Accessed September 2020. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44370796.

Ferris, Marcie Cohen. 2012. ““The Deepest Reality of Life”: Southern Sociology, the WPA, and Food in the New South.” Southern Cultures (University of North Carolina Press) 18 (2): 6-31. Accessed September 2020. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/26217378.

—. 2014. The Edible South: The Power of Food and the Making of an American Region. University of North Carolina Press.

New Orleans Convention and Visitors Bureau. 2020. Cajun or Creole: What’s the Difference? New Orleans Convention and Visitors Bureau. Accessed September 2020. www.neworleans.com/restaurants/where-to-eat/cajun-or-creole/.

Nystrom, Justin A. 2018. Creole Italian: Sicilian Immigrants and the Shaping of New Orleans Food. Athens, Georgia: University of Georgia Press. Accessed September 2020.

Padgett, Herbert R. 1969. “Physical and Cultural Associations on the Louisiana Coast.” Annals of the Association of American Geographers (Taylor & Francis, Ltd.) 59 (3): 481-493. Accessed September 2020. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2561727.

Passidomo, Catarina. 2018. “Continuing Creolization in New Orleans Foodways.” AAG Newsletter. https://news.aag.org/2018/03/continuing-creolization-in-new-orleans-foodways/.

Sherman, William T. 1890. Correspondence of William Tecumseh Sherman to John A. Logan, December 21, 1863, Nashville, Tennessee. Vol. 31, in The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, by the United States War Department, 459-460. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. Accessed October 2020.

Temple, Shaie-Mei. 2000. December. Accessed October 2020. https://apasnola.com/page-1353228.

Trépanier, Cécyle. 1991. “The Cajunization of French Louisiana: Forging a Regional Identity.” The Geographical Journal (The Royal Geographical Society) 157 (2): 161-171. Accessed September 2020. https://www.jstor.org/stable/635273.

Williams, Elizabeth M. 2013. New Orleans: A Food Biography. Plymouth: AltaMira Press. Accessed September 2020.