Post by Chuck Burrows on Jul 8, 2010 21:50:06 GMT -7
Mike I'm not real up on types of kettles in the RMFT, but there are a lot of kettles on the various trade lists and many if no most came from England. On the other hand especially if you're doing the real early years of the RMFT than I see no reason why an earlier kettle couldn't be used.
Nothing wrong with that kettle. From what I understand, the thicker rim is indicative of French manufacture, but I also have been given to understand that the French continued to manufacture kettles for the North American trade well after the conquest.
There's a thin line between having a hobby or having a mental illness. I am unsure as to which side of that line I fall.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you in trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.
You cook in it? I thought I saw him wearing it as a helmet??
The kettle appears to be fine.
Prior to 1851, kettles were pounded to shape by water-powered trip hammers. A water wheel turned a shaft that had cams on it that lifted and dropped a number of hammers. Or hand hammered pounded to shape. From there, the brass or copper kettles were sold "as is," or the finer ones were water-powered lathe turned.
I forget his name wthout looking it up, but some Connecticut man in 1851 patented the machinery for lathe spinning a kettle, and afterwards kettles made for the Indian trade as well as White trade were thinner spun ones. Because they were thinner they wore out faster, and it is not unusual to find them patched with pieces of the older hand or trip hammer made ones.
They are archeologically found in many sites, such as "nesting sets" recovered from rapid sites where trade canoes were overturned.
Somewhere in my boxed library... I have ledgers that talk about tin, brass, and copper kettles in the Indian Trade. What struck my Modern Self odd, is that the tin ones were more highly prized and often appear on the goods going to chiefs (where we might would think to place tinned iron last after copper then brass?)