Good question about heaviness, for copper or brass. It may also depend on from where the kettle came and when. I have a heavy 19th c. kettle from Mexico that is copper or looks like copper. It's lugs are not like those we find east of the Mississippi, so given where it came from I am assuming it was Mexican or Spanish made. I've seen 19th c. American-made brass "pails" that are "fairly" or "somewhat" light. Stamping was patented in England in 1769 (see David Eveleigh's Brass and Brassware, Shire Album 311) for items of sheet brass. The spinning and turning process was patented in 1851 by H. W. Haydn, according to Kauffman in Early American Copper, Tin and Brass. So there is a change over time in production process, as well as more brass showing up in the 18th c. As I recall, copper was it for the earliest trade kettles. Physical form appears to be related to time period, and to some degree nationality, and for the lugs, place of manufacture. As you know, we don't have a lot of intact, complete kettles, to say if a certain form correlates with copper or copper-appearing or brass in the 18th c. This might actually be a something that needs further study. I'm not going out on a limb here. It is interesting, I think, that according to Day (see reference below) historically the term copper referred to both "yellow copper" (brass) and red copper.
So maybe I've only muddied the picture. You don't have to throw out your heavy cast brass picture. Just add to it. After all, if you are talking trade copper and brass, it was valued, among other things, for being relatively light and portable. If you're talking apple butter cauldrons, heavy is probably okay. Also, to muddy things more, Wes Andrews told me that stashing kettles for maple syrup production was apparently not uncommon at least for Odawa. I don't know how far back that pattern extends, and if it just applies to the 19th/20th c., but if you are stashing it, weight becomes less of an issue.
Day, Joan. 1990. Brass and Zinc in Europe from the Middle Ages Until the 19th Century. In 2000 Years of Zinc and Brass, edited by P. T. Craddock. British Museum Occasional Paper No. 50. British Museum, London.
Misty
On Sep 9, 2013, at 11:01 AM, Branstner, Mark C wrote:
> Thanks Misty!
>
> So ... It is your position that "copper kettles" and "brass kettles" would
> essentially follow the same physical form, I.e., thin, hand-hammered or
> perhaps machine-hammered metal - probably with some sort of riveted, lug
> handle. The only real difference would be the physical composition of the
> metal, reddish copper or yellowish brass.
>
> Basically, I should throw out my mental picture of heavy, cast brass
> kettles?
>
> Mark
>
> ___________________________________
>
> Mark C. Branstner, RPA, AARP
> Senior Historical Archaeologist
>
> Illinois State Archaeological Survey
> Prairie Research Institute
> University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
> 209 Nuclear Physics Lab, MC-571
> 23 East Stadium Drive
> Champaign, IL 61820
>
> Phone: 217.244.0892
> Fax: 217.244.7458
> Cell: 217.549.6990
> [log in to unmask]
>
> "The difference between genius and idiocy? Genius has its limits." --
> Albert Einstein
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 9/9/13 9:53 AM, "Misty Jackson" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Mark,
>>
>> Copper kettles were made of copper, and brass kettles were made of brass,
>> generally speaking. Copper was the common material prior to the 18th c.,
>> but given that it was more expensive, zinc was added more commonly in the
>> 18th c. to reduce the cost, thus making brass. Depending on how much zinc
>> you add, the material can still look very copper-like, which was probably
>> something traders wanted to retain so their clients would buy it.
>> Therefore you canıt necessarily tell by looking whether you have pure
>> copper kettles (reddish) or one that looks that way but had some zinc
>> added to make it less expensive. When more zinc is added, then you
>> achieve the gold appearance associated with brass. The Montreal merchants
>> sometimes specified whether they were selling copper or brass kettles.
>> They may not have known themselves whether the copper-looking ones had
>> some zinc in them, though the price may have been an indicator.
>>
>> So there is a shift over time in what to expect in material, rather than
>> any shift in lug form being linked with the material. The square ³dog
>> eared² French lugs show up in the 17th and 18th c. and arenıt linked
>> specifically with true copper vs. copper-looking vs. brass. Holland
>> kettles, if made in England (in the 18th c. England had Dutch tradesmen
>> come over to make kettles for them) also have the same issue since the
>> lugs tend to be iron but would have experienced the same general shift
>> through time in the material used for the body. The bodies of the older
>> kettles (16th c., early 17th c.?) from what Iıve observed are often
>> rounded, but I saw a straight sided, flat bottomed one in a museum in The
>> Netherlands, too. The designs of the bodies appeared to be linked to time
>> period and nationality, rather than materials, too.
>>
>> You can use a scratch test, though some may frown on this. I tried it on
>> a scrap that looked like copper. The scratch reveals golden color if the
>> material is actually brass.
>>
>> I covered this in my dissertaion, specifically in one of the appendices
>> under the entry for kettles. Itıs titled :CLASSIFICATIONS BY HISTORICAL
>> ARCHAEOLOGISTS AND EIGHTEENTH CENTURY MONTREAL MERCHANTS AND MILITARY
>> PERSONNEL IN NEW FRANCE: EMIC AND ETIC APPROACHES. And of course you can
>> look at the bib for my sources.
>>
>> Misty
>>
>>
>> Misty Jackson, Ph.D., RPA
>> Arbre Croche Cultural Resources
>> 214 South Main Street
>> Leslie, Michigan 49251
>>
>>
>> On Sep 9, 2013, at 10:08 AM, Branstner, Mark C wrote:
>>
>>> Ok, question of the day People refer in a very off-hand way about
>>> copper kettles or brass kettles, and use the terms interchangeably
>>>
>>> But is there is fact a difference? I understand copper pots made of
>>> very thin copper stock with riveted bail lugs that were often
>>> secondarily cut-up for tinkling cones, etc.
>>>
>>> On the other hand, when I think of brass kettles, I think of something
>>> heavier, probably cast, and certainly less portable from a weight
>>> perspective.
>>>
>>> So Are copper kettles different than brass kettles, or are they
>>> essentially identical but made different materials, or are some folks
>>> just incorrectly describing copper kettles as being made of brass?
>>>
>>> Probably all of the above, but I would love to hear some opinions, or
>>> handy links.
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance,
>>>
>>> mark
>>>
>>> ___________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>> Mark C. Branstner, RPA, AARP
>>>
>>> Senior Historical Archaeologist
>>>
>>>
>>> Illinois State Archaeological Survey
>>>
>>> Prairie Research Institute
>>>
>>> University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
>>>
>>> 209 Nuclear Physics Lab, MC-571
>>>
>>> 23 East Stadium Drive
>>>
>>> Champaign, IL 61820
>>>
>>>
>>> Phone: 217.244.0892
>>>
>>> Fax: 217.244.7458
>>>
>>> Cell: 217.549.6990
>>>
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>
>>>
>>> "The difference between genius and idiocy? Genius has its limits." --
>>> Albert Einstein
>>>
>
|
