Ethnic groups and class in an emerging market economy


Material Information

Ethnic groups and class in an emerging market economy Spaniards and Minorcans in late colonial St. Augustine
Physical Description:
xv, 318 leaves : ill., photos ; 29 cm.
Cusick, James Gregory
Publication Date:


Subjects / Keywords:
Ethnology -- History -- Florida -- Saint Augustine   ( lcsh )
Social classes -- History -- Florida -- Saint Augustine   ( lcsh )
Material culture -- History -- Florida -- Saint Augustine   ( lcsh )
Antiquities -- Saint Augustine (Fla.)   ( lcsh )
History -- Saint Augustine (Fla.)   ( lcsh )
Anthropology thesis Ph. D
Dissertations, Academic -- Anthropology -- UF
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )


Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Florida, 1993.
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 285-317).
Statement of Responsibility:
by James Gregory Cusick.
General Note:
General Note:

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 001942929
notis - AKB9167
oclc - 31054312
System ID:

This item is only available as the following downloads:

Full Text








Copyright 1993


James Gregory Cusick

Dedicated to Marie V. and James G. Cusick,
my parents,
and Maureen A. Cusick,
my sister


Funding for several aspects of this research was provided by the
following organizations. The National Science Foundation, Social Science
Division, Anthropology Program, provided funds toward identification and
analysis of faunal materials (grant #BNS-9003961). The St. Augustine
Historical Society funded the 1991 fieldseason at SA-34-3, one of its properties,
in order that data from this site could be included in the study. Monies from
the Charles H. Fairbanks Scholarship Fund, administered by the Department
of Anthropology, University of Florida, defrayed costs of producing this
dissertation. Teaching and research assistantships were also indispensable, as
was the constant support of the University of Florida's Department of
Anthropology, the Florida Museum of Natural History, and the Division of
Sponsored Research.
If there is a better or more gracious place to do archaeology than St.
Augustine, I have yet to find it. Field work and analysis were made possible
through the dedicated efforts of many institutions and individuals.
Excavations at SA-34-2 were carried out by Vicki Rolland, assistant field
supervisor, and crew members of the St. Augustine Archaeological
Association (Betty Riggan, Margaret Perkins, Jackie Bowman, George Allen,
Richard Todd, Dick Metzler, Charles Tingley, Les Loggin, Dot Miller, and Bud
Moler). Archaeological sites were included in the study with the enthusiastic
approbation of the site property owners: Mr. Fred White of St. Augustine,

Sister Mary Albert and the sisters of the Convent of St. Josephs, the Historic

St. Augustine Preservation Board, the St. Augustine Historical Society, and
the City of St. Augustine. Bruce Piatek and Stanley Bond of the Historical St.
Augustine Preservation Board and Carl Halbirt, City Archaeologist, provided
assistance, lab space, and advice during analysis of curated collections.
Bruce Chappell, archivist, and the staff of the P.K. Yonge Library of
Florida History, and Page Edwards, director, and the staff of the St. Augustine
Historical Society were constant guides during archival and historical
research. Of equal importance was the cooperation of Dr. Jane Landers of the
Department of History, Vanderbilt, Susan Parker of the Historic St. Augustine
Preservation Board, and Sherri Johnson of the University of Florida, all of
whom shared with the author information from their own research on life in
late colonial St. Augustine. Professor Jennifer Schneider, Theater
Department, University of Florida, provided background on eighteenth-
century costume. Special thanks go to Drs. John and Patricia Griffin, who
have provided data, advice, and encouragement throughout this project.
I also gratefully acknowledge the patient and long-suffering work of Dr.
Patricia Foster-Turley, who identified site faunal materials and provided the
baseline data for the study of foodways. I wish her good luck with her otters.
No amount of thanks can truly acknowledge the enormous donation
of time and effort given to me by the members of my doctoral committee: Dr.
Kathleen Deagan, chairperson; Drs. Jerald Milanich, Elizabeth Wing, Darrett
Rutman, and Murdo MacLeod, members; Bruce Chappell, invited member.
This dissertation presents only a fraction of the overall number of
research projects in historical archaeology which have come to fruition
because of Kathleen Deagan. Kathy communicates to her students her own
passion for the field of Spanish colonial archaeology. Her research in St.

Augustine provided the model, the inspiration, and the foundation for the
current study. I am grateful to Kathy for providing me with careful and
thorough archaeological training, for constant support during my graduate
education, and for the many (many) hours spent overseeing and reviewing
this work.
I am indebted to Darrett Rutman for introducing me to the world of
community study and for his astute and objective evaluation of this and
many other manuscripts. I am also most grateful to Jerry Milanich, Elizabeth
Wing, and Murdo MacLeod for helping me integrate the diverse fields of
archaeology, zooarchaeology, and history into a study that, ultimately, says
something about people rather than artifacts.
In addition, Dr. Prudence Rice, an earlier member of the committee,
provided much-needed advice in the early stages of the ceramic analysis, and
Dr. Elizabeth Reitz read early drafts of the chapters on foodways and provided
both editorial suggestions and additional information.
Anyone writing a dissertation gains a new appreciation of the meaning
of friendship. Becky Saunders and Ann Cordell had to listen to more
complaints about cluster analysis than any reasonable person should have to
tolerate. Kate Hoffman, Maurice Williams, George Avery, Donna Ruhl, Judy
Sproles, Greg Smith, and Marsha Chance managed somehow to keep me
grounded during many alternate days of euphoria and angst.
Finally, I reserve my most heartfelt thanks for my mother, father, and
sister, who have seen me through many hard times, and whose only reward
will be to flip through this dissertation before putting it on the coffee table in
the living room. They have always recalled me to the fact that scholarship is
a privilege accorded to a few by the generosity of the many.



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.................................................................................. iv

LIST O F TA BLES...................................... ....................................................... x

LIST OF FIGURES .................................... xiii
A B ST R A C T ................................................................................... ...................... xiv


1 INTRODUCTION.................................................. .. 1

2 CLASS AND ETHNICITY ........................................................ 11

Social C lass................................... .......................................... 11
Ethnic Groups ...................................................... .......... .... 16
The Study of Ethnicity and Assimilation.................................. 18

3 OLD COLONY, NEW BEGINNINGS.....................................24

Early Spanish Exploration 1513-1565 ........................................ 24
First Spanish Period 1565-1763.......................................... 25
British Period 1763-1783 .............................................................. 26
Late Colonial Spanish East Florida......................................... 27
Spain and its Late Bourbon Dynasty..................................... 29
The Circum-Caribbean and the Rise of Cuba. .................... ..... 31
Florida and the Cuban Model..................................................33
Political Events in Spanish East Florida.............................. 36

IN A ST. AUGUSTINE CONTEXT.........................................38

D em ography......................................................................... ... 39
Spaniards and Minorcans....*........................... ........... 48
Assimilation or Non-Assimilation?.................................... 61

Documentary Evidence for
Consumerism in St. Augustine ................................................ 62
Late Colonial Household Sites in St. Augustine ....................68

AND MINORCAN DRESS ........................................................ 79

Late Eighteenth Century
Costume in Spain and Minorca................................................ 80
Spanish and Minorcan Costume in St. Augustine ..................87

SECOND SPANISH PERIOD ST. AUGUSTINE..................... 101

Ceramics as a Data Source..................................................... ....... 103
Studies of Consumer Behavior.................................................. 104
Ethnicity and Consumption ........................................................ 113
Methodological Considerations
Governing the Comparison and
Quantification of Ceramic Assemblages.................... ......116
Methodological Considerations:
Cluster Analysis of Sites............................................................ 127

UTILITARIAN WARES.........................................................131

Initial Data Analysis: Sherd Counts and Weights.................. 131
V essel C ounts................................................................................ 136
Analysis Based on the Estimated
Minimum Number of Vessels.................................................143
Interpretation.......................................... ......... ........................ 159

ANTHROPOLOGICAL TOOL ....................................................166

General Zooarchaeological Methods: Overview...................173
Background to Colonial Subsistence in
St. Augustine Based on Historic Documents .......................184
Background to Colonial Subsistence in
St. Augustine Based on Zooarchaeological Data.................. 191
Spanish and Minorcan Diet
in Late Colonial St. Augustine ................................................ 195


AND MINORCAN HOUSEHOLDS...................................... 202

Zooarchaeology of Spanish
and M inorcan Households...................................................... 202
Comparison of the Second
Spanish Period Faunal Assemblages...................................... 213
Interpretation............................................................................. 221

10 JOURN EY'S EN D ....................................................................... )224


A LIBRARY INVENTORIES........................ ...........235

B OCCUPATIONS IN ST. AUGUSTINE ...................... 242


D STATISTICS FOR CERAMIC ANALYSIS............................... 253


USED IN THIS STUDY.......................................................... 280

BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................. 285

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH.................................... 318



4-1 Population of St. Augustine 1786
(Excluding the Garrison)......... ............. ...............................40

4-2 Free Black and Slave Population of St. Augustine...................41

4-3 Non-Spanish Household
Heads Arriving in St. Augustine.............................................42

4-4 Non-Spanish Immigration
into Spanish East Florida.......................................................... 43

4-5 Distribution of Occupations Across
Some Segments of St. Augustine's
Late Eighteenth-Century Population.................................... 49

4-6 Overall Volume of Goods by Major Ports................................. 63

4-7 Food Imported into St. Augustine 1787, 1794, 1803 ................. 65

4-8 Sites and Their Household Heads.......................... ..............69

4-9 Household Size and Socioeconomic Rank ....................... ... 69

5-1 Names and Occupations of Individuals in Sample..................90

5-2 The Distribution of Shirts, Breeches,
Pants, Stockings, Ruffles, Cravats, and Gloves................... 92

5-3 The Distribution of Coats, Waistcoats, Jackets,
and Suits by Year and Socioeconomic Position...................94

5-4 Mean Numbers of Shirts,
Breeches, Stockings, and Cravats............................................ 96

5-5 Mean Number of Outer Garments ......................................97

6-1 Categories of Earthenwares Used for St. Augustine...............125

7-1 Sherd Counts and Percentages
for Decorative Ware Categories........................................... 133

7-2 Sherd Weights (grams) and Percentages
Percentages for Decorative Ware Categories..................134

7-3 Sites Membership in Clusters
Generated from Rim Counts................................................ 140

7-4 The Categories for Flatware,
Teware, and Utilitarian Ceramics......................................... 146

7-5 Teaware Decorative Types.......................................................... 147

7-6 Plate Decorative Types................................................................. 148

7-7 Utilitarian W are Database..................................................... 149

7-8 Breakdown of Assemblages
by Form/Function Categories............................................... 149

8-1 Household Heads, Occupations, and Ethnic
Affiliation of Late Colonial Sites in St. Augustine...........182

8-2 Allometric Values Used for Biomass in This Study
With Size of Sample Used to Generate Constants
for Predicting Biomass (kg) from Bone Weight (kg)........ 185

8-3 Site Numbers, Occupants, and
Ethnic Affiliation of Eighteenth-
Century First Spanish Period Sites..................................... 194

8-4 Taxa of Fish Found Near Minorca and Florida...................... 199

9-1 Faunal Categories by MNI.......................................................... 206

9-2 Faunal Categories by Biomass.................................................... 207

9-3 Major Species at Second
Spanish Period Sites by M NI.............. ............................. 208

9-4 Major Species at Second
Spanish Period Sites by Biomass.................................. 209

9-5 Major Species at First
Spanish Period Sites by MNI....................................... ...... 210

9-6 Major Species at First
Spanish Period Sites by Biomass.......................................... 211

9-7 Measures of Diversity and Equitability
for St. Augustine Faunal Assemblages...................... ....... 212

9-8 Comparison of NISP, MNI, and Diversity for Sites................213

9-9 Identified Skeletal Elements of Chicken.................................. 217

9-10 Identified Skeletal Elements of Other Birds............................218



1 1791 map of St. Augustine by Mariano de la Rocque
showing the town, Castillo de San Marco, cultivated
fields to the north, the harbor, surrounding river
system s, and Anastasia Island....................................................... 28

2 Map of St. Augustine showing the central plaza and
city blocks with the Minorcan Quarter designated by
shading. Based on the 1788 Rocque town plan redrawn
by Marjorie A. Niblack from Griffin (1990)..........................46

3 The location of the archaeological sites used in this
study. Map based on Rocque 1788 as redrawn by
Marjorie A. Niblack from Griffin (1990)..................................... 71

4 Vestir de Militar. Major elements of male military
and civilian dress in late eighteenth-century Spain ................ 84

5 Major elements of male dress on Minorca. Not shown
is the short jacket typically worn in place of a coat................... 86

6 Examples of major classes of decorated ceramics.
Cream-colored wares: feather edged, Royal, diamond
motif. Edged: shell edge. Painted: polychrome
floral tea cup, blue on white oriental motif saucer................122

7 Single linkage, complete linkage, and Ward's
method clusters based on rim count data........................... 139

8 Single linkage, complete linkage, and Ward's
method clusters based on teaware vessel counts ................ 153

9 Single linkage, complete linkage, and Ward's
method clusters based on flatware vessel counts....................156
10 Single linkage, complete linkage, and Ward's
method clusters based on utilitarian ware
vessel counts ........................ ........................................ ...... 158


Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy



James Gregory Cusick

December 1993

Chairperson: Dr. Kathleen A. Deagan
Major Department: Anthropology

The community study has been one of the most productive but least
used approaches to the archaeological study of the past. This is especially
ironic because the community study approach offers a framework which

overcomes many of the problems and fulfills most of the goals of

contemporary historical archaeology. It is based in the relationship of people

and locale, it is conducive to the synthesis of documentary and archaeological

data, it can be used in conjunction with hypothesis testing and scientific

method, and it employs a comparative approach which deals with groups of

sites and multiple classes of data.

This approach was used here to study the influence of class and
ethnicity on the material world of colonists in late colonial Spanish St.

Augustine. The relative importance that peoples' socioeconomic position

and ethnic affiliation had on their material lives has been an issue of great

controversy in historical archaeology. In general, there is evidence that


ethnic groups can be distinguished based on material culture but that
distinctions often disappear with upward mobility.
This dissertation focused on two groups from St. Augustine circa 1784-

1821. The Spaniards were drawn predominantly from the urban, middle-class
strata of Cuba. The Minorcans were peasant farmers, fisherfolk, and artisans,
originally brought to Florida by the British to serve as indentured servants.
Archaeological assemblages and probate records were employed to compare

the material culture of households in both groups and answer a simple

question: Was the material life of these households more similar within
ethnic groups or across socioeconomic strata?
Results demonstrated that the relation between ethnic affiliation and

material culture varied depending on the type of material culture. Costume,
as represented in probate records, followed well-delineated Spanish and
Minorcan traditions. Archaeological ceramic assemblages, on the other hand,
were largely reflective of household socioeconomic position. Diet at
Minorcan households changed noticeably with rising affluence.
Thus, ethnicity influenced peoples' physical world but the influence
tended to decrease with mobility. This implies that processes of ethnic

cohesion and assimilation apparent in twentieth century life were also in
operation two hundred years ago.


This study in historical archaeology revolves around the concept of a

town as a community. Its intent is three-fold: (1) to continue the archaeology

of Spanish St. Augustine by extending archaeological research into the so far
uncharted territory of the late colonial, or Second Spanish, period (1784-1821);

(2) to examine the ways in which late colonial conditions helped both to

maintain and alter Spanish colonial patterns evident from the archaeology of
St. Augustine in the early eighteenth century; and, (3) to test, from the

perspective of historical archaeology, theories about the persistence or
assimilation of ethnic groups in a multicultural milieu, using data gathered

from probate records and archaeological assemblages of this late colonial
Spanish American town.

It is also an invitation to readers to visit the town of St. Augustine in
the period of Spanish rule between 1784 and 1821. Unlike many works on the
Spanish colonization of Florida, this is not a voyage into an unknown era to
see explorers, conquistadores, or missionaries in their encounters with native
American peoples. Rather it is a journey to what might seem surprisingly
familiar: a community on the edge of modernity. By the late eighteenth
century, St. Augustine was a small seaport caught between worlds--between
the modern and pre-modern, the Spanish-American and the Anglo-
American. Its creolized residents were engaged in occupations recognizable to
twentieth-century observers. People made their living through fishing,

planting commercial crops, keeping shops and taverns, government
administration, and shipping, as well as through a host of trades in baking,

barrel-making, blacksmithing, carpentry, cobbling, masonry, and tailoring.
Although they lived in a minor Spanish possession, residents of St.
Augustine led lives touched by the momentous political events of the day:
the birth of the United States, the French Revolution, the Napoleonic Wars,

the French invasion of Spain, and the forced abdication of the Spanish
monarchy. The science of the times might have struck modem visitors as
archaic, but the educated in St. Augustine were familiar with Buffon's theory
of catastrophism in natural history, Priestley's work on transpiration in
plants (which led to the discovery of oxygen), and Fourier's mathematical
formulas explaining the conduction of heat through solids. In their dress
both the rich and poor probably resembled the subjects depicted in sketches
and paintings by Spanish artist Francisco Goya or American artist Charles
Willson Peale--both their contemporaries. A period that opened in frockcoat
and breeches would close with a fashion shift to tailcoat and trousers. This
study is a guide into a community that was neither modern nor pre-modern,
but transitional between the two.

Other researchers have already marked the signposts for our intended
journey. St. Augustine has a rich historiography in social history,
ethnography, and archaeology. Its evolution from the sixteenth century
onwards has been chronicled in Eugene Lyon's The Enterprise of Florida
(1976), Elizabeth Reitz' and Margaret Scarry's Reconstructing Historic
Subsistence with an Example from Sixteenth-Century Spanish Florida (1985),
Amy Bushnell's The King's Coffer (1981), Albert Manucy's The Houses of St.
Augustine (1978), and Kathleen Deagan's Spanish St. Augustine: The
Archaeology of a Colonial Creole Community (1983), as well as in dozens of

articles and site reports written by the many scholars who have worked in the
colonial town.
Our route takes us into the core of the late eighteenth- and early
nineteenth-century town, along a line of archaeological excavations that
cross-cut the colonial community. This trip may necessitate detours-
ancillary excursions into documentary sources that give us details about ship
cargos off-loaded at dock, price structures of goods, or the household
inventories of those who died intestate. But in all things we will follow our
main road, our "avenue of inquiry" (Deagan 1982), that leads to the heart of
our topic, to the archaeology of two ethnic groups-the Spaniards and the
Minorcans--and what this archaeology can tell us about class, ethnicity, and

cultural process in late colonial St. Augustine.
It is questions about assimilation that form our "avenue of inquiry"
through St. Augustine. Were peoples' lives more similar by virtue of ethnic
background, or social class, or other factors? A focus on ethnicity and class
centers this study in the concerns of broader research within Spanish
American history, sociology, and anthropology. As such, the study addresses

the much debated emergence of new, class-based societies in late eighteenth-
century Spanish America (Anderson 1988; Brading 1973; Chance and Taylor
1977; McAllister 1963; M6rner 1983); it contributes to our understanding of
ethnic group versus class formation under early market economies
(Bjorklund 1986; Braudel 1981; Comaroff 1987; Hopkins and Wallerstein 1982;
Wallerstein 1974, 1979); and it furthers the literature on ethnic cohesion and
assimilation (Barth 1969; Crispano 1980; Dobratz 1988; Engelbrektsson 1986;
Glazer and Moynihan 1963, 1975; Gordon1964, 1975; Spicer 1971, 1972).
Of particular importance for starting our journey is Deagan's Spanish
St. Augustine. Published in 1983, it set forth to "depict and interpret patterns

of eighteenth-century Spanish colonial life, using information from a
number of fields (archaeology, history, geography, architecture, and
zooarchaeology), but synthesized and interpreted in an archaeological
framework" (Deagan 1983: 5). In doing so, it became one of the first and most
successful attempts to write a "community study" within the field of
historical archaeology.
Journeys require itineraries, and community study is to be ours. The
concept of community is an old one in social science. Poplin (1979: 3-8),
reviewing the etymology of the term in sociology, suggested three common
usages: 1) community as a synonym for an affiliation of people; 2)
community as a moral or spiritual ideal of human organization; and 3)
community as a unit of social and territorial organization, defined by a
geographical area, interaction, and common ties. Many community studies
in social history have followed the second usage and have sought in past
times for that ideal sense of belonging said to be lost in modern times (see
Rutman 1973, 1980) But it is the third usage--community as social unit-that
informs the work of the Rutmans in history (Rutman and Rutman 1984), of
sociologists interested in network systems or network analysis (see Powell
1991: 270-272; Wellman 1982; Wellman and Berkowitz 1988), and of most
anthropologists and archaeologists. Arensberg and Kimball, in Culture and
Community (1965: 1-7), characterized community study as fulfilling two
purposes. First, they said, it seeks to understand the role of "community" by
examining how people organize their societies in different cultures, places,
and times. Second, it uses communities as case histories, or social
laboratories, in which to study the various phenomena of culture.
Both the concept of community as ideal and of community as social
unit continue side by side. In social history, for instance, Isaac's The

Transformation of Virgina 1740-1790 (1982: 1) tried to define what constituted

the essence of eighteenth-century social identity by reconstructing the "alien

mentality of a past people." More often, however, community study has

come to mean the study of a locale and people with reference to material

conditions of life. Wallace in Rockdale: The Growth of an American Village

in the Early Industrial Revolution (1978) undertook a study of mill economy,

censuses, class structure, and settlement pattern to determine how technology

affected nineteenth-century American culture and worldview. In A Place in
Time (1984), a study of Middlesex County, Virginia, between 1650 and 1750,

the Rutmans focused on how demography, economy, and other factors

altered a community's structure over time (see Rutman and Rutman 1984;

Rutman 1980, 1986: 165-166).
Community study, as applied in archaeology, has adopted the material
framework of the Rutmans rather than the concerns with worldview and
mentality addressed by Isaac. Indeed, the use of quantitative methods and an

increasing interest in material aspects of life-geography, demography,

economy--have united the fields of history and archaeology in many cases

(Deagan 1988; Whittenburgh 1983). The bridge between the disciplines is

implicit in statements such as those by Darrett Rutman: "Allow me to

suggest that historians' efforts to characterize early American life should not
be directed by an assumption about the mind of Anglo-America and its small

communities but by the broad social processes underway to which those
communities-or at least the studies of them-testify" (1986: 172).
Whatever discipline they are used in-anthropology, history, or
archaeology--community studies have become powerful mechanisms for
integrating diverse fields of data into in-depth case histories of past societies.

For this reason, community study has been frequently recommended as a

research strategy ideally suited to the needs of historical archaeology (Cleland
1988; Deagan 1983; Schuyler 1988). By definition, historical archaeology is a
cross-disciplinary field, characterized by access to multiple sources of data
about the past and a strong anthropological perspective (Deagan 1982; McKay
1975; Schiffer 1988). The community study approach in historical archaeology
generally has been taken to mean a study of a town or other small settlement
at the household level, using numerous households, with information on
the occupants compiled both from documents-maps, censuses, tax records,
wills--and from excavation. The sites of historic towns and settlements,
researched in such a manner, would seem to offer unique opportunities as
"social laboratories" (Arensberg and Kimball 1965). As recently as 1988,

community studies were recognized as one of the most productive strategems
for research in historical archaeology (Cleland 1988: 16; Schuyler 1988: 40-41).
Despite this, only a handful of historical archaeologists have pursued the
community study approach: Deagan (1983) on St. Augustine; Geismar (1982)
on rural blacks in Skunk Hollow, New Jersey; Lewis (1987) on frontier sites in
South Carolina; Hardesty (1988) on railroad encampments in Nevada; and
(Pyszczyk 1989) on fur trading stations in western Canada.
These studies all have common features, particularly in their attitude
toward the written and archaeological record. In virtually all cases, they have
used documentary data as a basis for establishing hypotheses about cultural
processes to be tested through archaeology (Deagan 1982; Gorman 1982: 67).
Some also employed documents, in part, to collect data and focused on those
portions of the written record most concerned with material culture,
especially probate records and inventories (Bowen 1978; Bragdon 1988a;
Geismar 1982; Pyszczyk 1989; Yentsch 1983). Recent publications under the
headings of "documentary" or "text-aided" archaeology have reemphasized

the need for historical archaeology to have an interdisciplinary grounding in
archival research as well as excavation (Beaudry 1989; Little 1992).
Increasingly, researchers have incorporated information from store
inventories, probate records, account books, and day books into archaeological
comparisons of material culture and assemblages. Archives and archaeology
provide historical archaeology with a more holistic concept of the role of
material things in daily life (Little 1992: 4).
It is such integration and synthesis of archival and archaeological data
which is a hallmark of community study. Through access to a broad range of
data, an archaeologist's inquiry into the past can achieve the kind of depth
and scope that an anthropologist acquires when writing the ethnography of a
living community. Gorman (1982) has correctly noted that a reliance on
documents restricts community studies to sites with historical records; but it
also opens to archaeologists the means to address basic anthropological issues
about the past, particularly questions concerning social class, distribution of
wealth, ethnicity, acculturation, and assimilation. In the present case, for
instance, it is an indisputable advantage that the ethnic groups under study
are self-described in eighteenth- and nineteenth-century documents. As
discussed in the next chapter, documentary evidence for ethnicity removes
many impediments that have plagued previous archaeological studies of
ethnic groups.
This study, therefore, has one additional objective: to synthesize
documentary and archaeological information on late colonial society in St.
Augustine and construct a more complete ethnography of the period than
could be achieved by emphasizing only archival or only excavated materials.
A wealth of documentary sources and histories aid our investigation.
Unlike sources for earlier periods in Spanish Florida, the archive of materials

for the period 1784 to 1821 is extensive. It includes a vast official
correspondence as well as basic government records organized into bundles
according to the filing system used by the Spanish colonial administration.
The originals have been housed, since 1905, at the Library of Congress, but are
available as the East Florida Papers (EFP) on microfilm at the P.K. Yonge
Library of Florida History at the University of Florida. Selected papers
concerning two of the most important aspects of colonial life, politics and
trade, have been translated and published in Lockey (1949) and Whitaker
(1931), respectively. A brief summary of the most important documents are:
official correspondence between the governor, his superiors, and various
departments (EFP Bundles 44-78, Reels 17-30; EFP Bundles 81-111, Reels 31-42);
papers on military affairs, public works, and surveying (EFP Bundles 117-210,
Reels 44-90; papers on events in Louisiana, West Florida, and East Florida
(EFP Bundles 112-116, Reels 42-44); the treasury accounts (EFP Bundles 79-81,
Reel 30; EFP Bundles 211-212, Reel 90); the registers of shipping arrivals and
departures (EFP Bundles 214-258, Reels 91-109); public contracts (EFP Bundles
280-282, Reels 119-121); criminal proceedings (EFP Bundles 283-296, Reels 121-
130); testamentary proceedings (EFP Bundles 301-319, Reels 134-146b); census
returns (EFP Bundle 323a, Reel 148); civil proceedings (EFP Bundles 329-349,
Reels 150-164); as well as other documents relating to slavery, relations with
native Americans, proclamations, oaths of allegiance, and transfers of
property (for more complete information see Manning 1930: 392-397, and the
Calender of the East Florida Papers, P.K. Yonge Library of Florida History,
University of Florida).
Due to ongoing research by historians in these archives for the past
decade, historiography on late colonial Spanish Florida is also extensive. In
addition to recent overviews of the period (Poitrineau 1988; Weber 1992),

there are histories on most segments of the population: free and slave blacks
(Landers 1988a), Minorcans (Griffin 1988, 1990; Quinn 1975; Rasico 1987, 1990),
Spanish Americans (Johnson 1989a, 1989b; Tanner 1989), and Anglo-
Americans (Parker 1990).
Within this study, documentary sources-primary and secondary--are
used within an archaeological framework. The research presented here is
based on a detailed analysis of ceramic assemblages and faunal remains at six
sites, representing households of different ethnic affiliations and income.
These sites represent about one percent of the Minorcan and Spanish settlers
in St. Augustine. They are, in other words, a small sample. Documentary
sources, however, enable us to evaluate the sample fairly critically.
Documentation is used, as it has often been used in historical archaeology, to
establish the controls and generate the hypotheses for an anthropological
inquiry into the past.
Primary and secondary sources provide information on demography,
occupations, residential patterns, distribution of wealth, household size, and
other variables. Through such information, we can make better assessment
as to the representativeness of our sample. Primary documents also provide
background information on material life. Sources of data on material culture
(shipping records, probates, store inventories) augment our knowledge of
what archaeology tells us about material culture and the flow of commodities
in a late colonial economic system.
Finally it should be said that this study does archaeology "the old
fashioned way," that is, with a materialist perspective, a commitment to the
scientific method, and a concern for study of cultural process. To say there
have been many criticisms of this position would be an understatement. Yet
despite constant advocacy for a "post-processual" archaeology, this author

believes with Cleland: "Given that the scientific method is not the only way
of achieving insight and that it is not immune from subjectivity nor
invulnerable to covert cultural agendas, it is still, in the context of dealing
with material things, the best hope we have for collective progress in
terms of the systematic and cumulative acquisition of knowledge" (1988: 14).
This is the perspective of the archaeological community study.
"Community study has perhaps best assured in modern social science
research execution of two imperatives of all science: that hypothesis be built
from empirical perception and that generalization be checked by a return
to it" (Arensberg and Kimball 1965: 11). For late colonial St. Augustine,
archaeology offers the best means of gaining specific household level data on
daily life. Yet it is only through the wide lens of history that we can embed
individuals in their broader cultural environment. Through the synthesis of
archaeology and history that we have some hope of ending our journey in
the general vicinity of truth. The following study is therefore based in certain
principles. First, it employs the community study approach as offering the
best means by which one can "effectively integrate independent documentary
and archaeological data to produce otherwise unobtainable results" (Deagan
1988: 8). Second, it adopts a comparative approach to the study of ethnicity,
focusing primarily on whether social class or ethnic affiliation were more
influential in shaping the material life of the subjects. Third, it addresses
issues of culture process through a scientific and materialist perspective.


The current chapter lays the groundwork for the rest of this study by

introducing the concepts of social class and ethnicity and defining them in a

context that is relevant for late colonial Spanish American culture. Much of

the analysis undertaken in this study focuses on a consideration of these two

social phenomena and their relation to material culture. Unfortunately, the
terms "class" and "ethnic group" have suffered much abuse in archaeology,

often being confused with "social status," "estate," and other like concepts.
The two terms are also embedded in modern usage and therefore present the

illusion of needing no explanation. In fact, the opposite is true. We must

lose our common-place preconceptions about what constitutes social class or

ethnic groups in favor of definitions based both in social science and in the
context of eighteenth-century social organization. The social hierarchy of the
Spanish colonial period was based on different criteria to modern society and

it will be the task of this chapter to elucidate these criteria. In addition,

attention is given to the archaeological investigation of ethnicity and the

problems it has confronted.

Social Class
The first major division of late colonial society was that of social class.
The social hierarchy of Spanish America was in a period of transition

throughout the eighteenth century as it evolved from an earlier system of
estates. The hierarchy of St. Augustine must be seen against this background.
The preeminent view of social class--one that has become ingrained in
twentieth-century consciousness-centers on the class system defined by Karl
Marx: the proletariat or working class; the bourgeoisie, or middle and
professional classes; and the owner/landlord class, the capitalists. These
classes, according to Marx, formed from the division of labor and the
relationships to the means of production into which people are born. "The
separate individuals form a class only in so far as they have to carry on a
common battle against another class. On the other hand, the class in its turn
achieves an independent existence over against the individuals, so that the
latter find the conditions of existence predestined, and hence have their
positions in life and their personal development assigned to them by their
class [and] become subsumed under it" (Marx [1857] 1984:132).
Marx and his successors grounded the basis of this class structure in the
Industrial Revolution. Indeed, in a widely acclaimed study of the English
working class, the British historian E.P. Thompson noted that even in Great
Britain, the forerunner of world industrial powers, a self-aware working class
did not come into existence until the 1820s, when artisans and laborers began
to understand their social position viz a viz industrialists and government
(Thompson 1966:711-712). This occurred only at the end of the time period
under consideration here and in a society far more industrialized than Spain
or Spanish America. Even at the end of the Spanish colonial period, the
social hierarchy was still based to some degree in legal and corporate
privileges that dated from feudal times (McAlister 1963:363). This earlier
conception of class was based in several notions: one's estate, and its
accompanying privileges as derived from medieval social hierachy; one's

occupation; and one's wealth. In Spanish America, it included another
criterion--race--which was of more or less importance depending on locale.
In preindustrial societies, as one Marxist has put it, "economic and legal
categories [were] objectively and substantially so interwoven as to be
inseparable" (Lukacs 1968:57).
This observation was especially true for social class in Spanish
America. The elements of social class in the Spanish colonies were many and
complicated. Wealth was the key to privilege, but it was not the sole
determinant of status. In the Spain of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, a
person's rank in society depended in part on a hierarchy of estates. These
estates derived from functional categories of the Middle Ages, defensores,
oratores, and laboratories, which translated into nobles, ecclesiasts, and
commoners (McAlister 1963:350). The nobles were originally a functional
group-the feudal lords and knights who defended the land-but by the
sixteenth century much of this function had disappeared. Moreover, the old
nobility combined more and more of its lower ranks with the upper strata of
commoners: merchants, lawyers, physicians, and professional people with
university degrees (McAlister 1963:352). This group formed an estate by
possession of hidalguia or nobility, an economically valuable asset as hidalgos
were not subject to taxation or prosecution for debt. Ecclesiasts formed a
separate estate but one which was generally linked to the nobility. The
commoners included shopkeepers, artisans, soldiers, farmers, and herders.

These estates were not purely economic in character, but rather were
defined by a broad range of legal privilege and social obligation. At the peak
were those aspiring to nobility, or hidalgufa, which "was as much a set of
attitudes as it was a matter of lineage" (Lockhart and Schwartz 1983: 4). By the
eighteenth century, "full economic success in almost any branch of life

created nobility, and the nobles old and new all adhered to the same patterns.
Mastery of the martial arts, horsemanship, and literacy were expected. ... The
noble married a woman of high lineage; ... he maintained a large
establishment of relatives, retainers, and servants .... The goal was to 'live
nobly' from rents and herds without daily activity in trade" (Lockhart and
Schwartz 1983: 4-5). Birth was one route to nobility, but it could also be gained
by practice of a profession--theology, law, or medicine.
Intermixed with the nobles were the upper strata of the commoners,
the great merchants, letrados, clerics, and medicos. Although these
occupations differed considerably in economic terms, they carried a legal and
social acknowledgment of status and therefore accorded privilege (Morner
1983). "Pride in birth and its accompanying privilege rather than substantial
means separated most Spaniards from the remainder of the population"
(Burkholder and Johnson 1990:188).
Even soldiers, merchants, and artisans could claim some degree of
privilege by membership in a functional corporation, such as the army or a
guild. Another whole occupational strata--servants and retainers-were
dependents of the nobility. Below all of these was the peasantry.

When Spanish culture was transferred to the New World, this old
system was modified into a new one, encompassing colonial Spaniards, the
Indians they conquered, Africans brought to the Americas as part of the slave
trade, and the new intermediate ranks of castas, or people of mixed heritage.
Hence, a concept of race was incorporated into the old system (Mmrner 1983;
Lockhart 1984). In the Spanish American heartland, the social hierarchy,
from top to bottom, was Spaniards, castas free blacks, Indians, and black
slaves (McAlister 1963; Lockhart and Schwartz 1983). This social hierarchy
formed the official basis for assigning rank and privilege in colonial society.

In reality, it was further complicated by what was called "passing" the ability

to move from one estate to another by reason of marriage, wealth, or other
means. The chief distinction was between Spaniard and Indian, and many

castas were eventually accepted as "Spanish."
In the eighteenth century "passing" became so common that most

historians believe the old estate system was being replaced by a new

economically based hierarchy, with wealth as the chief criterion of who was
noble and who was not. Notably, the use of the terms "don" and "dofia",
once the exclusive province of the nobility, became more generally applied
(Lockhart and Schwartz 1983: 317). One of the most salient but controversial
aspects of eighteenth-century life in the Spanish Americas was the gradual
replacement of a social hierarchy based on ascribed status-peninsular
Spaniards, Spanish American creoles, mestizos, mulattos, blacks, Indians-
with a hierarchy in which income raised some peoples' rank while lowering
that of others (Burkholder and Lyman 1990; Lockhart 1984; Lockhart and
Schwartz 1983; M6rner 1967).
How far this transition had proceeded is unclear but recent research on

colonial Mexico has suggested it was well underway. A study of society in

Guanajuato, a Mexican mining town, found that late colonial society was still
principally divided according to traditional estates (Brading 1973). Yet at the

same time in Oaxaca in the 1790s there was clearly an emergence of classes
based on socioeconomic position. More than half of American-born
Spaniards, the creoles, supported themselves as low-grade artisans, despite
the high-status that would be accorded to them by their estate (Chance and
Taylor 1977). Another study, from Guadalajara in 1821 at the end of the
colonial period, found that poor Spaniards and poor Indians lived similar

lives in similar sectors of the city (Anderson 1988).

Social class, when used in relationship to late colonial times in Spanish
America, may thus bear the connotation "socioeconomic position," since it
was a shifting combination of both old statuses and new wealth which
opened the route to membership in the elite.

Ethnic Groups
"Ethnicity" is a twentieth-century term and concept and can, in the
modern sense, designate large, even national, groups of people (Glazer and
Moynihan 1975). This connotation of ethnicity has come to us largely
through the screen of nationalism, industrial enterprise, and the welfare state
(Glazer and Moynihan 1975: 4-17). In the case of eighteenth-century society,
however, we are dealing with ethnic groups in a more traditional and
delimited sense, a preindustrial form of social organization, consisting of a
relatively small group of people, usually located in one geographical place,
such as a city barrio, who shared a sense of common origin expressed in
religion, language, and history (Bell 1975: 169).

Many definitions of modern ethnic groups emphasize the importance
of affective ties between members of the group; that is, ethnic groups express a
conscious advocacy of common origins and shared values (Dobratz 1988;
Engelbrektsson 1986; Glazer and Moynihan 1975; Kelly and Kelly 1980). The
emphasis placed on affective ties and the advocacy of self-identity has been a
constant trip-wire for archaeologists studying ethnicity. The difficulty, of
course, is that much of the definition relates to people's self-conception or
attitude, something untraceable through material culture and archaeological
patterning. Other definitions, which place less emphasis on advocacy, are
better suited to the study of preindustrial groups. Talcott Parsons described

ethnic groups as types of fiduciary association combining family and

community in mutual obligations: a group [whose] members
S. have, both with respect to their own sentiments and those of non-
members, a distinctive identity which is rooted in some kind of distinctive
sense of history" (Parsons 1975: 56). For Greeley and McCready, "an ethnic
group is a large collectivity, based on presumed common origin, which is, at

least on occasion, part of a self-definition of a person, and which also acts as a
bearer of cultural traits" (1975: 210). A particularly apt definition is offered by
Engelbrektsson in a study of a modern self-contained, urban community of
Greeks in the Swedish city of Boras: "Ethnicity is to a great extent a matter of
upholding a functioning borderline between people considered to be one kind
versus people considered to be another kind. The differentiation as to kinds
is mainly accounted for in terms of separate origins" (1986: 148). When
assessing whether a group in the past can properly be called an "ethnic"
group, one should look for evidence of common origins and culture,
endogamy, and boundaries--whether they be physical, like the streets of a
town, or social, like marriage patterns-that demarcate the group from a larger
or more inclusive society. Common food preferences or material culture is
not sufficient to impute ethnicity to a group; these things may indeed be
incorporated into group ethnicity, but other types of information, such as
spatial formation of neighborhoods (Brastner and Martin 1987; Hardesty 1988)
and data on group marriage patterns, social networks, and professed values
are equally important (Crispano 1980; Dobratz 1988; Engelbrektsson 1986).
Common origins and culture, endogamy, and boundaries both social
and physical are the criteria that will be used to establish the existence of
ethnic groups in this study. If such criteria were applied to an earlier period
of Spanish American history, they might well be inappropriate. As noted

above, colonial Spanish America developed a social hierarchy based in part
on traditional social ranking in Spain and in part by the intermixture of
peoples in the New World (Burkholder and Johnson 1990; Lockhart and
Schwartz 1983). For much of the colonial period, a person's position in
Spanish American society was strongly influenced by his or her estate, a
combination of race, genealogy, regionalism, social behavior, and income. By
the late eighteenth century, however, this system of social rank was breaking
down. In St. Augustine, it was more characteristic of the First rather than the
Second Spanish Period. St. Augustine between 1784 and 1821 was a colonial
Spanish port town and its character derived as much from being a port as
from being Spanish. Like other ports, it acted as a magnet for diverse settlers
from around Europe and the Americas and its population was multilingual
and multicultural. For this reason, criteria on ethnicity drawn largely from
studies of immigrant, urban populations are deemed to be relevant.
This study follows other recent works of historical archaeology that
deal with ethnicity by relying on documentary evidence to identify ethnic
groups. The criteria of social and physical cohesion and common origins and
culture do indeed delimit one group of people from another. It will be
admitted that defining ethnic groups in this manner is an inference; but it is
an inference based on abundant evidence.

The Study of Ethnicity and Assimilation
Ethnic identity and ethnic groups hold continuing fascination for
American social scientists, in part because their persistence on the American
scene contradicts the age-old aphorism that the United States is a "melting
pot" in which different peoples merge into one. In a classic volume of essays,
Ethnicity: Theory and Experience, Glazer and Moynihan noted with various

authors that ethnicity has become an indelible part of the modern American
character (1975: 4-5). They also recognized that twentieth-century ethnic
groups are recent versions of much older social forms originating in pre-
industrial times. "As such," they maintained, the hope of doing without
ethnicity in a society ... may be as utopian and questionable an enterprise as
the hope of doing without social classes" (1975: 5).
The issue of why ethnic groups form, why some persist, and why

others assimilate has received constant attention from leading thinkers in the
social sciences. Within social history, theorists on early capitalism have
argued that ethnic groups are prone to assimilation whenever it means a rise
in status. This has been a tenet of Immanuel Wallerstein, whose model of
world society is based heavily on Marxism and the dependency theory of
Andr6 Gunder Frank (1967). For Wallerstein (1974), it is social class, not
ethnicity, that ultimately determines who and what a person is in society.
Under capitalism, ethnic groups are divisive agents, essentially pitting lower
and middle classes against each other instead of against the property-owning
class (Wallerstein 1979: 181-187). Within this framework, minorities with
some degree of status "strive to break down remaining discriminatory
barriers [and] prevent incursions into their privilege by lower status groups.
One major mode of defense is their own assimilation into the dominant
ethnic group, and it is frequently pursued" (Wallerstein 1979: 187).
Other theorists have emphasized ethnic groups as participants in
capitalism, rather than its dupes. Fernand Braudel, an influential theorist in
social history, noted the close correlation of ethnic minorities with various
occupations or professions in the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth
centuries. Control of trade circuits was often in the hands of such minorities,
whether defined by nationality or religion (Braudel 1982: 165). He concluded

that group cohesion provided members with crucial social networks and
helped them to maintain control over investments and commercial

enterprises (Braudel 1982: 164-165). Ethnic minorities also provided a means
for transferring capital or technical knowledge from one country to another.
Hence, England harbored Huguenot cloth-makers in the sixteenth century
(Scouloudi 1987) and Cuba welcomed French sugar planters and commercial
agents from Saint Domingue and Louisiana in the eighteenth (Knight
1970:13). As minorities, and often foreigners, immigrant groups were subject
to punitive or discriminatory legislation (Scouloudi 1987). Yet assimilation
did not guarantee security. A case in point were converse Jews in Spain.
Though they escaped expulsion in the sixteenth century, they afterwards
became targets of the Inquisition (Contreras 1992: 193-223). When
assimilation offered no benefits, cohesion as a ethnic group may have proved
a better strategy for survival.
In archaeology, the study of ethnic groups has covered three basic
interests: cultural histories of minorities left out of mainstream American
history; studies of ethnic boundaries; and studies of acculturation and
assimilation. These distinctions are artificial, however, as most studies
address at least two and usually all three of these concerns (Baker 1980;
Deagan 1983; Deetz 1977; Geismar 1982; Greenwood 1980, 1991; Hardesty 1988;
Henry 1987; McGuire 1983; Otto 1977, 1984; Pyszczyk 1989; Singleton 1985, 1988;
Staski 1987; see also McGuire 1982). In all cases, definitions of ethnicity have
emphasized similar themes: (1) that people coalesce into ethnic groups when
they face competition from some larger group; (2) that ethnicity provides
common ground, or a strong emotional tie, for pursuing group interests; and,
(3) that the basis of the tie is an emphasis on identity based in cultural origins

of region, language, and religion (Barth 1969; Bell 1975: 169; Greeley and
MacCready 1975; Horvath 1983: 23; McGuire 1982: 160; Spicer 1971, 1972).
Even with broad consensus on what defines ethnic groups, however,
the archaeological investigation of ethnicity has been fraught with frustration
and controversy. In prehistory, the problem has stemmed from trying to
correlate archaeological materials with specific linguistic or genealogical
groups. In the absence of documents, this has proven exceedingly difficult
(Shennan 1989).

Investigations of ethnicity in historical archaeology have often
encountered the same obstacles as those in prehistory. Drawing on the work
of the anthropologist Edward Spicer, numerous researchers have
recommended that historical archaeologists devise a method for identifying
so-called ethnic boundaries in the archaeological record (Kelly and Kelly 1980;
McGuire 1982). Spicer observed that both cultural and ethnic groups
sometimes distinguished themselves from others by using material culture--
clothing, ornamentation, residential patterns-to demarcate a spatial or
symbolic boundary between members of the group and nonmembers (Spicer
1971). This has led to conjecture that such "boundaries" might be evident in
the distribution or patterning of artifacts and material culture at sites. In
trying to identify ethnic boundaries, however, historical archaeologists have
frequently found that the links between peoples' material culture and their
cultural identity are far from clear. Indeed, Spicer, in his writings on culture
change, pinpointed the difficulty: "Under some circumstances material
culture items were replaced or changed rapidly while little else changed, but
in other situations social structure and religions changed rapidly while
material culture underwent small change" (Spicer 1962: 542). Recent studies
have underscored the dilemma. For instance, Bragdon (1988b), in a study of

native Americans in Natick and Nantucket, used probate records to compare

what people owned with how they lived. Although the farming community
of Natick had a more traditional material culture, it was in Nantucket that

other aspects of native American culture--language, religion, and political

hierarchy--persisted for the longer period of time (Bragdon 1988b: 130-131).
McGuire, in a study of Mexican- and Anglo-Americans in nineteenth-century

Tucson, could find no correlation between material life and ethnic affiliations

(McQuire 1983).
Ui er studies have focused less on identifying specific material

correlates to ethnic boundaries and concentrated instead on processes of

culture change: what factors influence the way people live and how new

cultural groups emerge out of old ones. These questions have been the

provenance for studies of acculturation, ethnogenesis, and assimilation.

Acculturation and ethnogenesis studies have focused mostly on culture
change when different societies come into contact with one another (Deagan

1983; Ewen 1988; Foster 1960). Closely related to this are studies of
assimilation, which often are concerned with the behavior of different groups

living in the same community. As might be expected, there is considerable

overlap between this research and the community study approach. Major

substantive contributions include the study of mestizaje in eighteenth-
century St. Augustine (Deagan 1983), of Chinese enclaves in nineteenth

century California (Greenwood 1980), of Mexican-Anglo relations in pre-
railroad Texas (Staski 1987), and of purchasing patterns among fur-trappers of

the.Northwest (Pyszczyk 1989). As opposed to studies of ethnic boundaries--
which too often have focused on members of a single group and their
material culture--research on assimilation has been based in a comparative

analysis which looks simultaneously at two or more groups within a

a.- a _

community, a method that has long been advocated (Horvath 1983: 24).
These studies are also less concerned with identifying ethnic groups from
archaeological criteria; rather, they use documentary information to pinpoint
groups for study and then examine the interrelationship between ethnicity,
distribution of wealth, and assimilation. In this, again, they are extremely
amenable to the community study approach. "Assimilation studies," noted
McGuire (1982: 162), "have formed a major facet of anthropological and
sociological investigation for several decades and in them historical
archaeology has come closest to realizing its anthropological potential."
The approach in this study is to determine whether an ethnicity well-
marked in documentary evidence is also evident in material culture by
comparing categories of data from households representing both different
ethnic groups and different socioeconomic positions. The next chapters take
us through a brief history of the late colonial period in St. Augustine, describe
the town's population, and focus on the two groups and the archaeological
sites that will be compared.


The late colonial period in St. Augustine lasted for only 37 years (1784-
1821). It was separated temporally from the earlier period of Spanish
colonization by a twenty year interval of British rule. Late colonial society
was built in part on Spanish cultural traditions that developed in Florida circa
1650 to 1763, in part by changes introduced by the British between 1763 and

1784, and in part by developments in Spain and the Caribbean after 1780. This

chapter presents a general overview of the First Spanish and British Periods
in Florida and then a more specific chronology of late colonial history.

Early Spanish Exploration 1513-1565
Spanish attempts to settle Florida commenced soon after Columbus'
voyages to the New World. The expeditions of Ponce de Leon, Diego
Miruelo, and Alvarez de Pineda occupied the period 1513-1521, and by 1520

Spaniards were already raiding Florida to capture native Americans for the
slave trade (Smith and Gottlob 1978: 1-2). This was followed by attempts at
conquest and settlement by Ayll6n and Narvaez in the 1520s, de Soto in 1539,
and Tristan de Luna in 1559 (Hudson, Depratter, and Smith 1989; Milanich
1990; Milanich and Hudson 1993). When Pedro Menindez de Avilds
destroyed a French settlement and established St. Augustine and Santa Elena
in 1565, Spain obtained its first permanent hold on the region (Chaney and
Deagan 1989; Deagan 1983; Lyon 1976, 1989, 1990, 1992; South 1892, 1983).

First Spanish Period 1565-1763
The next two centuries witnessed a gradual evolution of La Florida
into a society consisting of two major estates--Indian and Spanish. There
were repeated uprisings by native peoples endeavoring to counter Spanish
rule, but throughout the seventeenth century the native population was
reorganized and resettled in an extensive mission system. In the missions,
many traditional aspects of native life continued, but native groups were
subject to labor drafts and to Spanish political hegemony (Hoffman 1993: 16-
20). The economy was based in agriculture, ranching, and royal subsidy
(Hahn 1988; Reitz 1990; Ruhl 1990; Saunders 1990; Thomas 1990).
St. Augustine functioned as administrative center, coast guard, border
patrol, and trading post for the colony. Spain provided an annual situado, or
subsidy, to help support the military garrison and government and also
underwrote major works, such as the construction of the Castillo de San
Marcos (Bushnell 1981; Waterbury 1983). Colonial society reached its
maturity in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth century. Most of the
native population lived at the dozens of mission sites while the social
composition of St. Augustine evolved into the system of natives, castas,
creoles, and Iberian Spaniards which characterized other Spanish American
colonies. The archaeology of the town and its people during this period is
summarized in Deagan (1983) and numerous historical works describe
economic and social conditions of life (see Bolton 1921; Boyd, Smith, and
Griffin 1951; Bushnell 1981, 1983; Chatelaine 1941; Corbett 1976; Gannon 1983;
Harman 1969; Hoffman 1993; Lyon 1976; Proctor 1975, 1976; Tebeau 1971;
Tepaske 1964; Waterbury 1983; Weber 1992).

British Period 1763-1783
Spanish colonists in Florida staved off repeated British assaults in the
1700s only to lose the region as a result of Spanish setbacks in the Caribbean.
In 1762 a British invasion force captured Havana, and to regain it Spain was
forced to cede its Florida colony, as well as other possessions, to England
(Kuethe and Inglis 1985; Kuethe 1986; Lockey 1949).
British control of Florida was short-lived. Yet with its advent much of
what had characterized colonial Florida for 200 years disappeared. The
Spanish mission system, already under duress in the early 1700s, had been
eliminated by 1763 (Deagan 1983: 26). Spanish colonials and the remnant
population of Christianized Indians evacuated St. Augustine in 1763 to live
in Cuba (Deagan 1983: 32). Creek and Seminole peoples began to settle in
Florida from the early 1720s and became the major native American presence
in the region (Fairbanks 1978).

One of Britain's first acts was to divide Florida into two colonies. West
Florida, based in Pensacola, consisted of the panhandle and much of what is
now Alabama. Peninsular Florida, with its capital in St. Augustine, formed
the colony of East Florida. Investors introduced a plantation economy to
Florida, converting the landscape into the image of South Carolina and

Georgia (Greene 1988; Schafer 1983). Just as important, from an economic
standpoint, was the flourishing trade established with the Creeks and
The American Revolution brought an end to British rule. West
Florida and Pensacola fell to a Spanish army in 1781 (Weber 1992: 276). East
Florida was returned to Spain by treaty in 1783. By 1784, Spain once again
held possession not only of Florida, but of all the borderlands on Mexico's
northern frontier from the Atlantic to the Southwest (Weber 1992).

Late Colonial Spanish East Florida

The colony Spain re-established in Florida in 1784 was not simply a
reconstruction of the former society. Late colonial Florida was a product both
of traditions established during the first Spanish period and new economic
factors at play in the Spanish Caribbean. There were many parallels between
the colony of the early and late eighteenth century. Twenty years had not
altered the environment and geography of Florida--the new colony inherited
the same indigenous plants and animals, introduced livestock, and
agricultural cultigens for subsistence and the same river and coastal system
for transport (see Figure 1). The political situation also had not changed-
there was still a potentially hostile power--now the United States-to the
immediate north. Financially, Spanish East Florida was to be underwritten by
situado monies from New Spain, as had been the case in the early eighteenth
century. Finally, there was the town of St. Augustine itself-still built around
a central plaza according to the Spanish grid system with the Castillo de San
Marcos guarding the northern perimeter. With the return of many former
Spanish residents or their offspring the old capital fostered a direct link
between the peoples of the new colony and the old (see Bermlidez 1989;
Johnson 1989a, 1989b; Tornero Tinajero 1978). But there were new factors
involved as well. In earlier times, Florida was a frontier colony that had
combined a mission system with a social hierarchy based roughly on the
estate system of New Spain to meet the needs of regional defense and
localized economy. That society did not re-emerge in the late colonial period.
Late colonial Florida was more representative of life in the Spanish Caribbean
than in New Spain. Once a peripheral region of the Spanish American
Empire, Florida by the 1780s was sandwiched between two of the most
important regions in New World trade. The territory to the north had


Figure 1: 1791 ma of St. Auustine b Mariano de la Rocque showing the
I *"f, S d i'' =vy*W .i=^ ,wS a t

town, Castillo de San Marcos, cultivated fields to the north, the
harbor, surrounding river systems, and Anastasia Island.
,l .' s ., .- '" s- f .

Figure 1: 1791 map of St. Augustine by Mariano de la Rocque showing the

been transformed from a series of British colonies into the new nation of the

United States, whose ports were becoming booming centers of trade. To the
south, the rise of sugar, tobacco, and coffee had invigorated the economy of
the Caribbean with new life. The French colony of Saint Domingue was the
world's leading sugar producer (Geggus 1991; Knight 1978). Havana, Cuba,
important as a harbor and supply station for Spanish fleets and now a major
exporter of sugar, was Spanish America's third largest city and second largest
port, surpassed only by Vera Cruz, Mexico (Burkholder and Johnson 1990:
278-280; Kuethe 1991). From New York to Buenos Aires, the late eighteenth
century saw the rise of what has come to be known as the "Atlantic
economy," a regional trade network that was gradually effacing the political
and social barriers of the Americas (Knight and Liss 1991).

Spain and its Late Bourbon Dynasty
Life in Spanish East Florida was influenced throughout the late
colonial period by international and regional events. Although the late
colonial period in Florida was brief, it saw both the initial success and
ultimate failure of Spanish reforms in colonial affairs. Under Charles III
(1759-1788), the most powerful Spanish monarch in a century, Spain
reorganized its colonial bureaucracy to tighten Crown control over officials,
invested in fortifications in the Caribbean, altered the defense strategy for
Atlantic shipping, and introduced a liberalized trading policy--comercio libre--
which allowed most Spanish and Spanish American ports to trade directly
with one another (Brading 1987; Burkholder and Johnson 1990: 257-287;
Lockhart and Schwartz 1983: 346-368; Lynch 1987; see also MacLeod 1984).
In the end it was not reform but the collapse of Spanish naval and
military power which ensured changes in colonial life. For much of the

eighteenth century Spain was an ally of France. This long-term alliance began
to fail at the end of the century and Spain often found itself caught between
English and French ambitions. When France erupted in Revolution in 1789,
Spain turned to England as a protector of royalist interests in Europe.
However, in 1795 revolutionary French armies crossed the Spanish border
and the French government forced Spain to adopt a neutral position in
foreign affairs (Burkholder and Johnson 1990:291-294; Weber 1992: 285-291).
This change in Spain's policy brought on war with England and from
1796 to 1802 Spanish government and commerce struggled to maintain trans-
Atlantic contact with the New World against a British naval blockade. With
the rise of Napolean, Spanish fortunes reached their nadir. In 1799 Napolean
coerced Charles IV into returning Louisiana to France and then sold the
territory to the United States. The prestige of the Spanish Crown itself was
weakened by corruption and political intrigue. Government was largely in
the hands of Manuel Godoy, the king's principal minister and reputedly the
queen's lover; he was widely despised as a royal favorite and had little
popular support (Herold 1963: 202-203). In 1807, Ferdinand, heir to the
thrown, attempted to overthrow Godoy, was arrested for treason, and
imprisoned for a year. In the middle of this power struggle, Napoleon sent
100,000 French troops into Spain. The royal family, following the example of
the Portuguese Crown, attempted to flee to their New World possessions.
They were halted at Aranjuez, where a mob attempted to lynch Godoy and
insisted that Charles IV abdicate in favor of Ferdinand (Herold 1963: 210).
By this time, however, it was no longer Charles or Ferdinand but
Napolean who controlled Spain. He lured both king and prince to French
soil and then forced them to abdicate in favor of his brother, Joseph. Popular
uprisings against French rule began almost immediately, spawning a guerilla

war, and revolts against the French army of occupation continued until 1814
when the Bourbon monarchy was restored under Ferdinand VII (Burkholder
and Johnson 1990: 294-299; Lynch 1987: 15-23, 47-48; Weber 1992: 296-301).

The Circum-Caribbean and the Rise of Cuba
In addition to events in Europe, regional events also influenced life in
Florida. Foremost among them was the rise of Cuba as an economic power.
The fall of Havana in 1762 had shocked Madrid and forced Charles III and his
ministers into a program of reforms. Cuba was the key strategic point in
Spain's defense of its mainland colonial possessions. In order to ensure the
island's future safety, Spain poured millions of pesos into the Cuban
economy to strengthen harbor defenses and maintain a larger garrison
(Burkholder and Lyman 1990; Kuethe 1986, 1991). The Crown intended to
reforge Havana as the impregnable gate to the Gulf of Mexico.
But the island's shrewd entrepreneurs held a more expansive view of
their future. In the 1760s Havana already had a diversified economy based in
sugar production, trade, and ship building, as well as defense (Kuethe 1991).
The influx of silver from Mexico now provided liquid capital for further
expansion, especially of the sugar industry. Between 1760 and 1790 sugar
production on Cuba trebled and Havana became a leading port in the trans-
Atlantic trade with Spain (Kuethe 1991: 27). Repeatedly, the wealthy planters
and merchants of Cuba deluged the Crown with requests for economic
concessions; first, for a lessening of restrictions on trade (1765), then for
expansion of the slave trade (1792), and subsequently for enactment of land
reforms that would opened protected timberlands and create a surge in land
speculation (1795-1830) (Knight 1970; Kuethe 1991).

The bases of Cuban monoculture were laid down during the decade
1790-1800, converting the island, particularly the western region
around Havana, into a huge sugar mill. During this period, Cuba
established a new type of linkage with the outside world and with the
metropolis [Spain]; by the 1830s it was the richest colony in the world.
(Duany 1985: 103)

An essential feature in Havana's rise as an economic power was its
increasing integration into the regional Atlantic economy, especially in trade
partnership with the United States (Knight 1970:6-7). This partnership
originated in Cuba's need to import flour and export sugar. Bread was
essential to feed the garrison and provide a basic staple, but the flour for it had
to be imported (Lewis 1984: 113). Prior to the eighteenth century, Havana had
secured flour from Mexico or Spain. However, by the mid-1700s these
suppliers were being out-competed as cheap, reliable sources of flour by
merchants in the British colonies (Lynch 1987; Lewis 1984: 114). Exports of
flour from the Thirteen Colonies jumped during the American Revolution
when Spain opened the port of Havana to trade with allied and neutral
powers (Lewis 1984:115). U.S. ships, primarily from Baltimore and
Philadelphia, represented between 20 and 30 percent of arrivals and

departures in Havana's harbor between 1781 and 1783 and carried almost 90
percent of the flour trade (Lewis 1984: 117; Tornero Tinajero 1981: 89, 92).
Flour was off-loaded to Cuban factors in return from shipments of sugar
(Lewis 1984: 116). Although this trade lasted openly for only a few years (1780-
1785), it was, as Barbier noted, merely "a rehearsal for the vaster operations
destined to follow" (Barbier and Kuethe 1984: 3). Throughout the turbulent
1790s and early nineteenth century, U.S.-Cuban trade persisted--openly when
Spanish law allowed, undercover when it did not (Knight 1970; Kuethe 1984,
1991; Lewis 1984; Liss 1984; Salvucci 1984, 1991).

Florida and the Cuban Model

Spanish Florida was re-established from Havana at a time when Spain
was weakened by war in Europe and when Cuba enjoyed prosperity through
its ability to win concessions for its sugar industry and engage in fairly
unrestricted trade with the United States. The Caribbean orientation of the

Spanish colonists in late colonial Florida is essential to understanding the
history of the colony. Early historians of the period frequently interpreted late
colonial society as predestined to failure, a vain Spanish attempt to prevent
Florida from becoming part of the United States. In fact, it is important to
recognize that Spaniards returned to Florida with the determination and the
knowledge to make it a paying and prosperous settlement.
The contingent of Spanish colonists who arrived in Florida in 1784
came from the very center of the Spanish American possession which most
benefited from free trade, entrepreneurial spirit, and commercial ties to the
United States. They could not help but be aware of the economic revolution
that was transforming the island of Cuba. Some of them were floridanos
who had arrived in Havana only a year after its fall to the British. Others
were native cubanos or, like Govenor Z6spedes, were Old World Spaniards
who had held important royal offices in Cuba during the early years of the
sugar boom (Johnson 1989a; Tanner 1989).
It is also with the Cuban model in mind that one must understand the
willingness of Florida's governors to circumvent official Spanish policies in
order to promote growth in Florida. The first governor, Vicente Manuel de
Zespedes y Velasco (1784-1790) tried to resolve the colonies three major
problems: defense, settlement, and finance. In what was to be characteristic of
government in Florida during the late colonial period, Zespedes frequently
waived or ignored official Spanish policies in order to achieve his ends.

The Creek and Seminole peoples posed an immediate threat to the

colony. They controlled large areas of Florida and represented a military force
which St. Augustine and its garrison could not counter. Maintaining

peaceful relations was essential, and this in turn depended on a continuation
of the trade network established by the English. Unable to find a Spanish
provider for the Indian trade, Zespedes set aside Spanish trade law and
granted a license to the British firm of Panton & Leslie Co. to continue
trafficking with the Creeks and Seminoles. Panton & Leslie Co. retained a
monopoly on the trade and held rights to deal directly with English ports in
order to obtain trade goods (Tanner 1989; Whitaker 1931; Weber 1992).
Zespedes also had to modify Spanish regulations on immigration in
order to increase the population of Spanish East Florida. Early attempts to
bring in more Spanish settlers or to accept non-Spanish settlers on condition
that they convert to Catholicism failed to produce results. In 1790, adopting
policies applied in Louisiana and Texas, Spain dropped religious restrictions
and opened Florida to any settlers, provided they agreed to cultivate the land
and pledged loyalty to the Spanish Crown (Cusick 1989; Weber 1992). The
policy brought a steady stream of British and American settlers into the
colony, followed later by French and Irish. It led to a resurgence of plantation
agriculture and a sharp increase in the slave population. It also contributed to
the most striking feature of late colonial society-that Spanish Florida was
never destined to be mainly Spanish, or even Spanish American. Many
different peoples would make up the colonial population: Seminole and
Creek Indians, newly-independent Americans and old British loyalists,
Spaniards and Minorcans, French exiles and Haitian revolutionaries, free
blacks and black slaves, Catholics and Protestants (Griffin 1988, 1990; Johnson
1989a, 1989b; Landers 1988a; Parker 1990).

In matters of trade, attempts to evade Spanish regulations were even
more overt. From 1784 onward Spanish Florida petitioned Spain for the
same rights to trade that characterized Cuban commerce and emphasized the
necessity of trading with the United States. Shortly after arriving in Florida,
Zespedes wrote to a superior: "that a poor immigrant at the end of one year,
when he has made his first crop, or a Minorcan with a wife and four or five
children who does not earn half a peso fuerte a day, should have to provide
his family with goods bought from that place [Havana] and feed them with
food from New Spain--I must honestly say that I consider such a thing
impossible even with the most industrious effort on their parts, at least until
this country has developed several years with some measure of free trade"
(Whitaker 1931: 57). This demand, initiated by Zespedes, was taken up and
pressed by Governor Quesada. Both officials were encouraged by Spain's
liberalization of trade restrictions as applied to Cuba and also by a royal cedula
in 1782 that opened trade between France and Spanish Louisiana (Miller 1976;
Weber 1992). Under pressure, Spain promulgated a new cedula in 1793 which
granted Spanish Florida the right to trade with ports of nations allied or
friendly to Spain. In some respects, this cedula simply legalized practices
already underway. Throughout the 1780s, merchants in St. Augustine had
been making regular trips to U.S. ports, exploiting a loophole in Spanish
regulation which allowed Florida to import "emergency" provisions from
nearby ports (Cusick 1991). Even so, through the cedulas of 1782 and 1793,
Spain sanctioned a commercial freedom in its border colonies that, in
practical terms, meant direct trade with Spanish America and the United
States and indirect trade with much of Europe.

Political Events in Spanish East Florida

By the 1790s, Spanish East Florida had won every concession it desired;
but events in Europe were about to catch up with the colony. The first crisis
came in 1795, due in part to war with France and in part to the new
immigration policy. Disaffected American settlers on the Florida-Georgia
border, assisted by French agents, tried to usurp control of the colony. The
second governor, Juan Nepomuceno Quesada (1790-1795), responded with a
scorched earth policy, evacuating settlers from lands along the St. Johns and
St. Mary's rivers, burning plantations, and seizing rebels and their
possessions (Miller 1978).
The successful slave uprising in French Saint Domingue in 1791,
culminating in the revolution that created the new black republic of Haiti,
also had a direct impact on developments in Florida. During the late 1790s
French refugees from Saint Domingue began to arrive in St. Augustine.
Ironically, they were shortly to be reunited with some of the revolutionaries
who had expelled them. After 1796 Jorge Biassou, a free black military officer,
was placed in charge of the free black militia. Biassou, a former slave on Saint
Domingue, had joined Toussaint Louverture in leading the revolution in
Haiti and later entered the Spanish military (Landers 1988b).

The Napoleonic Era brought a surge in commerce but also renewed
threats from an expanding United States. In 1806, as a response to war in
Europe, U.S. president Thomas Jefferson signed the Non-Intercourse Act and
followed it in 1807 with the Embargo Act, closing U.S. markets to imports
from England and France (Ward 1989: 163). Spanish Florida capitalized on
the embargo by opening the port of Amelia Island (later Fernandina) as an
intermediary entrepot or transshipment point. Since the port was in neutral
territory, U.S. and European merchants could rendezvous there to exchange

cargos. Transshipment of goods through Fernandina soared between 1809
and 1811 and the colonial government cooperated in the the quasi-legal trade
in return for lucrative import and export duties (Ward 1989).
With Spain in turmoil between 1808 and 1814, Spanish Florida entered

a final period of unrest and instability. In 1812 Spanish troops suppressed
another rebellion of American residents who had declared the independence
of Fernandina and Amelia Island. In June 1817 a private army raised and led
by Gregor MacDonald crossed from Georgia, captured Fernandina without
significant resistance, and declared Amelia Island as the new and
independent Republic of Florida. MacGregor acted ostensibly under direction
from several Venzuelan agents for Spanish American Independence. A force
of Spanish troops and local militia, sent from St. Augustine, failed to
recapture Fernandina and local residents, although unsympathetic to
MacDonald's cause, waited to see if the United States would intervene
(Bushnell 1986: 5-6). In September, control of the town fell to Louis Aury, a
French-born privateer, who used it as a base to raid U.S. shipping. When it
became clear that the Republic of Florida was merely a front for piracy, U.S.
forces seized Amelia Island and expelled its so-called liberators; but, despite
protests from Spain, the United States refused to return the island to Spanish
sovereignty (Bushnell 1986)
In 1818 Andrew Jackson entered Florida to strike at the Creeks and
Seminoles. Spain was again on the verge of civil war and had no hope of
blocking an American take-over of the colony (Herold 1963: 231; Weber 1992).
Ferdinand VII began negotiations to cede the territory to the United States.
Transfer finally occurred in 1821, closing the final chapter on more than 200
years of Spanish rule in Florida (Norris 1983).


This chapter focuses on the central players in this analysis, the Spanish
and Minorcan colonists of St. Augustine, who are represented by

archaeological assemblages from several households. The criteria used to

define social class and ethnicity also are discussed to give the reader an idea of

where individual households fit in the social structure of St. Augustine
society. The chapters that follow are concerned only with segments of the
whole, with specific individuals, specific sites, specific families, and the small

world of mundane household things: the garments people wore, the plates

and crockery they purchased, and the food they ate. These will be the basis for

comparing upper and lower classes, Minorcans and Spaniards. Yet the

archaeology of individual households can tell us little if treated in isolation.

It is essential to embed archaeological data within the broader spectrum of the

demography and material conditions of late colonial society in St. Augustine.

The course of this chapter takes us from the general to the specific: first, to a
broad view of St. Augustine's physical layout and population, then to the two
components of that population under consideration, and finally to the

households, their history and excavation.

The chief reasons for St. Augustine's rebirth in the late colonial period
was its old importance as a guardian of Spanish shipping and its new role

as an Atlantic port town. Late colonial St. Augustine was a point in a larger
network of trade and immigration which influenced and shaped colonial life.
Although it was dwarfed in size by such Spanish American ports cities as
Havana, Vera Cruz, and Cartagena, not to mention the cities of the United
States, it nonetheless shared many characteristics with these places and fit,
albeit as a small cog, into the machinery that drove the Atlantic commercial
world. Like other Spanish American ports of the late eighteenth century, it
benefitted from infusions of military spending for defense and from
liberalized Spanish trading regulations. Like ports in general, it attracted a
diverse aggregation of peoples, drawn from many nations, who brought with
them not only their own cultures and languages, but also investments and
occupational skills. Moreover, with the growth of shipping and commerce,
colonial residents of St. Augustine had access to external markets and foreign
goods on a scale not seen in earlier periods. Late colonial St. Augustine
consisted of a multicultural society framed within a Spanish political and
cultural milieu. It is the town's multiculturalism in this period which makes
it a good choice as a community study dealing with social class and ethnicity.

Documentary sources on the resident population of St. Augustine in
late colonial times are numerous. Those most generally used include the
parish records; censuses for the years 1785, 1786, 1793, and 1813; maps of the
town in 1788 and 1797 with keys to lots and ownership; tax records; and a list
of non-Spanish residents, the Padr6n de los Extranjeros, which recorded
information on immigrants and ensured that they signed an oath of loyalty to
the Spanish crown (EFP "Census Returns," Bundle 323a, reel 148; EFP
"Loyalty Oaths," Bundle 350; Landers 1988a: 52). Unfortunately, no general

history of Spanish East Florida has yet been written. Data on population are
scattered through dozens of books and articles. Even from this disjointed
material, however, comes abundant evidence to justify the term
multicultural when applied to the late colonial period.

Until the early 1790s, Spanish settlers were the most affluent and
important members of the colony, although they never made up a majority
of the population (Johnson 1989a; Weber 1992). The Minorcans, a group of
Mediterranean peoples, formed the core of the town's residents (see Table 4-
1). After 1795, however, immigration brought many non-Spanish settlers to
the colony and also saw a rapid increase in Africans held in slavery.

Table 4-1. Population of St. Augustine 1786 (Excluding the Garrison)

Spanish 216
Minorcan 469
Casta/Free black 33
European 87
Slave 461

Total 1266

Source: Griffin 1990: 118; Johnson 1989b: 38; Landers 1988a: 58.

All demographic studies of late colonial St. Augustine begin with the
baseline data provided by the 1786 census conducted by Fr. Thomas Hasset,
parish priest, as modified by subsequent research (see Table 4-1). The town's
population consisted of 450 members of the Spanish garrison, 469 Minorcans,
216 Spanish, cubano, or floridano civilians, 87 foreigners, 33 free blacks, and
about 461 black slaves. Outside of town, an additional 130 settlers-mostly
British and American--and 170 slaves lived on plantations along the St. Johns

and St. Mary's rivers (Dunkle 1958; Griffin 1990). This population of rural

settlers increased to about 269 people by 1790 (Parker 1990: 59).
St. Augustine's population changed throughout the end of the colonial
period, subject to both Spanish policies and external world events. Two of the
most important regulations affecting population growth were those dealing
with slavery and immigration.

Throughout the eighteenth century, Spanish government in Florida
supported a sanctuary policy, establishing slaves' rights to manumission or
the purchase of their freedom through coartaci6n. The policy also freed slaves
who escaped from English colonies, provided they converted to Catholicism
(Landers 1988a: 7-9). The sanctuary policy continued in effect until 1790 and
led to a rise in the free black population of Spanish East Florida. After 1790,
however, the growth of this segment of the population leveled off and
remained at a little more than 100 people (see Table 4-2; see also Landers
1988a: 214-215). The most important additions were the extended family and
household of Jorge Biassou, one of the military leaders of the revolution in
Haiti, subsequently a Spanish military officer living in Cuba, and finally the
commander of the free black militia in Florida. Biassou and his entourage
were stationed in St. Augustine in the early 1790s (Landers 1988b).

Table 4-2. Free Black and Slave Population of St. Augustine

1786 1788 1793 1797 1814

Free 33 63 126 102 122
Slave 461 588 1527 483 1651

Source: Johnson 1989b: 38; Landers 1988a: 58.

Also in 1790, the colonial government instituted a revised immigration

policy, requiring non-Spanish subjects to take an oath of loyalty to Spain, but
no longer requiring them to convert to Catholicism. The new system
distributed land to immigrants based on the English headright system. Each

household head received 100 acres of land, with an additional 50 for every

person attached to the household; immigrants received title to the land after 10
years residence (Landers 1988a: 52).
Resulting immigration dramatically altered the demography of both St.
Augustine and the outlying lands of East Florida along the St. Johns and St.
Marys rivers. By 1795, the principally Spanish and Minorcan population of
St. Augustine was already being joined by American, English, French, and
Irish colonists (see Table 4-3). The suppression of rebellion in 1795 curtailed
immigration for several years; however, between 1797 and 1804 there was a
new and larger influx of Americans and Europeans into the town.

Table 4-3. Non-Spanish Household Heads Arriving in St. Augustine

Nationality 1790-1795 1796-1804

American 9 111
English 2 20
French 7 45
Irish 28 21
Scottish 8 2
Other 17 6

Source: Compiled from EFP, "Loyalty Oaths," Bundle 350, 1790-1804.

Immigration into St. Augustine reflected what was occurring more

generally in the colony (see Table 4-4). The period of greatest immigration

followed the 1795 rebellion and peaked in 1803 when approximately 500 new

settlers entered the colony. Americans were the most numerous

immigrants, but this should not obscure the fact that there were other

significant movements of people. Irish and Scottish colonists arrived during

most of the late eighteenth century, and French immigration picked up

dramatically in the 1790s during the aftermath of the French and Haitian

revolutions. With these arrivals, and allowing for duplications in the record

and for emigration out of Florida, the non-Spanish population of the colony

in the early nineteenth century consisted of at least 1,000 people, almost five-

fold what it had been only two decades before.

Table 4-4. Non-Spanish Immigration into Spanish East Florida



English French Irish Scottish Other

19 8 54 12 54
4 29 20 3 1
49 9 5 3

60 1
79 1
94 13
320 20
208 25

986 132

Compiled from EFP, "Loyalty

18 5 1
7 20
4 18 8
10 59 52
15 17 1

155 202 88

Oaths", Bundle 350,1790-1804.






The other major effect of immigration was to convert Spanish East
Florida permanently to a plantation economy in which the majority of labor
depended on slavery. Of the 4,351 people recorded as entering Florida
between 1800 and 1804, 3,241-or approximately three-quarters-were slaves
(EFP, "Loyalty Oaths," bundle 350, 1790-1804).

In all these respects, Spanish East Florida followed demographic trends
apparent throughout the other Spanish frontier territories in the North
American--West Florida, Louisiana, and Texas--as well as trends in the
Spanish Caribbean. Like other frontier colonies, Florida was largely
populated by a diverse peoples from outside Spain and Spanish America
(Weber 1992). Like Cuba, and to a lesser extent Puerto Rico, its port towns
acted as a magnet for immigrants and as a haven for free peoples of color
(Duany 1985; Kuethe 1991; Knight 1970). St. Augustine, and later Fernandina,
would become sanctuaries of free blacks and mulattos while the countryside
of Spanish Florida became the domain of slavery (Landers 1988a).
Yet numbers alone do not reveal the full impact immigration had on
the development of Spanish East Florida. People were not distributed
randomly over the landscape, nor, for that matter, across occupations. This is
evident from looking at the conjunction of settlers, geography, and

Urban and rural areas in Spanish Florida developed along different
trajectories. The northern hinterlands, as numerous studies have shown,
were increasingly settled by British or American families engaged in
agriculture and ranching (Parker 1990). This was somewhat mitigated by the
fact that important plantation families also had town residences in either St.
Augustine or Fernandina. Fernandina matured as a port for exporting cotton
and lumber during the nineteenth century and by 1813 the town and its

surroundings had a population of 428 free whites, 41 free blacks and mulattos,
and 838 slaves (Landers 1988a: 61; Ward 1989). Yet a basic town/countryside
dichotomy remained.

In the more heterogeneous and complex town of St. Augustine,
wealth, status, occupation, and ethnic background all influenced where
people lived. The physical layout of St. Augustine was dictated by
surrounding topography and Spanish regulations on the design of New
World cities (see Figure 2). The town lay on low coastal ground. To the west
it was bordered by Maria Sanchez Creek and to the south and east by the
Matanzas River (Deagan 1983). The Matanzas served as the town's harbor
and was separated from the Atlantic Ocean by the thin barrier island of
Anastasia Island. On the north side of town both the harbor entrance and the
city gates were protected by the Castillo de San Marcos, the massive coquina-
block fort which had been built in the late seventeenth century and had
dominated St. Augustine's topography ever since. Walls enclosed the town
on all sides and from the north gate ran the King's Road towards Georgia. St.
Augustine was subject to flooding but its location, encircled by fortifications
and marshes, provided excellent defense (Johnson 1989a: 47-48).

Within the walls, the town resembled many Spanish American towns,
laid out in a grid pattern with a central plaza--a pattern which the British had
not altered. High government officials and civil servants, wealthy
merchants, and other affluent people resided around the plaza or in the
blocks immediately south (Johnson 1989b: 28). Also in this area lived people
associated with the hospital and barracks, both located at the south end of
town. Soldiers and military widows had homes near Castillo de San Marcos
and some people engaged in commerce lived near the waterfront, which also

. 0


N 0

(U 'i-
I- 00 -

^ (U I.

.a g


" u <
's v

o 3 'Ea



housed commercial warehouses (Johnson 1989b: 28-29). The northern section
of town became known as the Minorcan Quarter. It had been
given to Minorcans during the British Period as a place to settle and most still
lived in it (Griffin 1990). Also in the northern section were some returning
floridanos who had reclaimed lots owned by their families in earlier times.
The free population practiced a variety of professions and some
occupations correlated closely with particular groups. Government and civil
service positions were wholly in the hands of Spaniards and a few Irish who
undertook service with Spain. Occupations for this period are difficult to
quantify, since many people practiced more than one means of gaining a
livelihood. Table 4-5 presents some of the available data on who did what
within different segments of the population. More specific information on
occupations is presented in Appendix A. The data are not comprehensive
and are compiled from a variety of years; however, they offer an
approximation of occupational strata in St. Augustine.
Spanish residents monopolized government positions. There are 57
Spanish individuals accounted for under "Public Employees" in Table 4-5.
From this, one can estimate that 50 percent of adult Spanish males held
government positions and half of these had prestigious positions in civil
service or the military. Those Spanish colonists not engaged by the civil
service, and therefore not represented in Table 4-5, tended to be merchants or
cattle ranchers, although some practiced trades (Johnson 1989b: 41-44).
Military officers were either Spaniards or Irishmen and the colony had a
Spanish chaplain at the hospital, two Irish priests who served the colony's
Catholic parish, and two Minorcan priests who headed the Catholic parish of
the Minorcans.

By contrast, the majority of Minorcans were farmers, fishermen,
sailors, or artisans. Minorcans, free blacks, and Seminole Indians all played
key roles in supplying farm produce, game, and fish to St. Augustine (Griffin
1990; Landers 1988a).
Other European groups were also divided among agriculture,
commerce, and trades. Among Irish immigrants named in the Padr6n de los
Extranjeros between 1790 and 1804, about 45 percent listed their occupations as
farmer or merchants. The remainder were largely tradesmen, especially
carpenters, tailors, and shoemakers or cobblers. Half of the French
immigrants were engaged in farming or commerce, but there were also
numerous carpenters, bakers, and doctor/surgeons, as well as a saddle-maker,
a coppersmith, and a barber.

Table 4-5 represents the free population only. Although many free
persons did day-labor, Spanish East Florida was a slave economy. The burden
of clearing forests, havesting crops, and tending cattle fell largely on Africans
forced into labor under slavery (Landers 1988a: 216). The slave population
also included many skilled laborers; however, as the plantation economy
grew, relatively few slaves, skilled or otherwise, succeeded in purchasing
their freedom. African slaves took the place of native Americans as the labor
pool which supported Spanish Florida's economy.

Spaniards and Minorcans
Demographic and occupational data delimit the parameters of St.
Augustine's society. But from the outset, and at the heart of this colony, were
two peoples with shared cultural backgrounds but radically different New
World experiences: Spaniards and Minorcans. There can be little question
that St. Augustine had a diverse population in late colonial times. Yet it is

debatable whether the people in various immigrant segments-American,

British, French, or Irish--had anything more in common with one another

than nation of origin. The Spaniards and Minorcans, however, present a

different case. Two major social lines shaped and divided these groups: class

affiliation and ethnic cohesion.

Table 4-5. Distribution of Occupations Across Some Segments
of St. Augustine's Late Eighteenth-Century Population

Occupation Spanish Minorcan Free Black French Irish

Public Employees
Government Official 15
Military Commander 3 2
Priest 1 2 2
Physician/Surgeon 2
Master Artisan 9
Hospital Staff 15
Hospital Servants 12

Farmer 59 15 30
Fisher 14 1
Mariner 46 1 12 3
Artisan n/a 42 10 22 40
Physician/Surgeon 3
Servants/Domestics n/a 9
Merchant/Retailer n/a 11 1 20 16

Source: Griffin 1990: 152; Johnson 1989b; Landers 1988a: 70; Lockey 1949: 198-
199, 202-204; EFP, "Loyalty Oaths," Bundle 350, 1790-1804.

The following profiles of the Spanish and Minorcan communities in

St. Augustine do not claim to be comprehensive. More complete discussions

can be found in a series of historical works (see Griffin 1983; Johnson 1989a,

1989b; and Tanner 1989, for Spanish culture; Griffin 1988, 1990; Poitrineau

1988; Quinn 1975; and Rasico 1987,1990, for Minorcan). Here the focus is on
providing background history on the two groups and on demonstrating why

the Minorcans, of all groups in the colony, can be identified as an ethnic

The Spanish Colonists

As previously noted, about 216 Spanish colonists arrived in St.
Augustine in the early 1780s as permanent residents. This grouped formed
the core Spanish population, as opposed to soldiers who were rotated in and
out of St. Augustine according to need (Johnson 1989b). Roughly a third of
the colonists were native-born Spaniards, a third were Spanish Americans
from Cuba, and a third were former residents of Spanish Florida or heirs to
estates in Florida (Dunkle 1958; Johnson 1989b: 36). Although this group
included servants, laborers, and artisans, by and large, it represented members
of the Spanish gentry and middle classes, engaged either as civil servants in
the colonial government, as military officers, as staff at the hospital, or as
merchants and ranchers. Most of these colonists grew up on Cuba or lived

substantial parts of their lives there. In many respects what distinguished
them as a cultural group were characteristics prevalent in Spanish American
society in Havana during the late eighteenth century.

General accounts of Havana's Spanish American elite in the late
eighteenth century described it as urbane and cosmopolitan, with a respect for
the latest fashions in Madrid (Allahar 1984; Kuethe 1991) and the newest
cuisine from France (Merlin 1974). The city's emerging noveau riche

consisted of a creole elite, some with titles, engaged as sugar planters and
ranchers; royal officials from Spain; and a mercantile class with close ties to
U.S. merchants--an association begun during the flour trade of the 1780s

(Kuethe 1984: 19). Habaneros had easy access to foreign traders, since Havana
boasted a sizeable enclave of non-Spanish commercial agents, including
Americans from Philadelphia and Baltimore and French from Saint
Domingue and the Louisiana territories (Knight 1970: 13; Kuethe 1991; Lewis
1984; Salvucci 1984). Havana's elite admired the economic progress of the
United States and fully embraced the new spirit of enterprise alive in Spanish
America (Knight 1970: 6-8). They organized new societies for economic
advancement and dispatched members to the British West Indies to study
methods of improving sugar production (Knight 1970). Although they may
have been considered provincial by Old World Spaniards, in fact they were
conversant with many of the' ideas embodied in the Spanish Enlightenment
and followed European affairs closely. Those who could afford it sent their
children to be educated in Europe.
The colonists who came to Florida in the 1780s created a society that in
many ways was a microcosm of this larger society. As previously noted,
Spanish colonists in Florida were town-oriented and drew their income
largely from civil service, landed estates, and commerce (Johnson 1989b).
Already, from the previous chapter, it is easy to see parallels between the

Spaniards of St. Augustine and their counterparts in Havana. The actions of
Governor Zespedes in the 1780s reveal a man willing to adapt or modify
Spanish policies on mercantilism and immigration in order to secure a
thriving plantation economy and commercial base for Florida (Tanner 1989).
This was also the attitude of the next governor, Quesada, and those in Florida
who advised him on colonial policy (Miller 1981; Romero Cabot 1985). Nor
were the governors' attitudes unique or idiosyncratic. Other wealthy
Spaniards in St. Augustine maintained much of the cosmopolitan character
noted of habaneros. Letters from the 1780s attest to interest in French fashion

and French food on formal occasions in St. Augustine (Tanner 1989). There
are surviving probate inventories for the private libraries of four heads of
households (see Appendix B): Don Miguel Yznardy, merchant and colonial
translator; Don Juan Jose Bousquet, surgeon at the hospital; Don Jose Maria de
la Torre, commander of the Third Cuban Infantry Batallion; and Don Enrique
White, an Irish officer in the Hibernian Regiment, who became the colony's
fourth governor. While these individuals obviously represent some of the
wealthiest people in the colony, they provide at least some idea of Spanish
colonists' connections to a wider world. It is evident from the libraries that
all of these men were conversant, if not fluent, in more than one language,
and that they were cognizant of Enlightenment ideas and philosophies.
Yznardy perhaps epitomized the worldly and well-travelled Spanish
commercial agent of the day. His library included Spanish-to-English and
French-to-English dictionaries, volumes on English grammar and spelling, as
well as French-to-Italian and French-to-German dictionaries. The merchant's
leisure reading included books in three languages, among them works by
Tomas A Kempis in English, The Adventures of Telemaco, probably an
English translation of a moral allegory by the French writer Finelon (1651-
1715), and several volumes of The Letters of Chesterfield, a popular collection
of worldly essays giving advice on manners by Philip Dormer Stanmore,
Fourth Earl of Chesterfield (1694-1773) (see Appendix A).
Other probates provide additional insight into the life and times of
members of the Spanish elite in Florida. Colonel Jose Maria de la Torre
owned the ubiquitous Spanish-to-French and Spanish-to-English dictionaries
mentioned in all four probates, a half dozen volumes on military subjects,
Don Ouixote the Commentaries of Julius Caesar, and a compendium of
writings by the French naturalist Buffon. Bousquet had an extensive library

of 71 volumes: 18 volumes by the French encyclopaediests; Spanish-to-French
and Spanish-to-English dictionaries (including a pocket edition of the latter);
books on medicine in Latin, French, and English; works on natural history;
two copies of Imitation of Christ by A Kempis; and another, Moral Reflections,
which was probably an English translation of MAximas. The library of White,
governor from 1796 to 1811, included essays on the French Revolution, books
on government in England and the United States, numerous maps and
atlases, and writings by the chemist Joseph Priestley.
Overall, these titles typify the intellectual interests of Spanish
American elites throughout the colonies during late colonial times. As noted
by several authors, the making of the Enlightenment in Spain took on a
characteristic different from Northern Europe, coupling religious
conservatism with a new-found fascination for "reason, science, practicality,
and simple clarity of expression" (Lockhart and Schwartz 1983: 344). This was
abundantly clear among the reformers around Charles III, who advocated
Enlightenment theories on economy and government without embracing the
notions of liberty and equality that infused the U.S. Founding Fathers or the
French Revolutionaries. This same attitude, transferred to the colonies, was
amply reflected in St. Augustine. A review of the titles (presented in
Appendix B) shows that religious works, largely by seventeenth-century or
medieval moralists, were coupled with contemporary works on science-
especially natural science, medicine, mathematics, chemistry, and the works
of the French philosophes. This is in keeping with what has been noted of
Brazil during late colonial times: "One manifestation of the Enlightement in
Brazil before 1808 was the serious examination of the natural environment.
Geography and biology gained a wider audience. The collection and
classification of indigenous plants became popular among some intellectuals.

And naturalists helped instill a growing pride in Brazil and an awareness of
its uniqueness" (Burkholder and Johnson 1991: 256).
Although government positions were concentrated within the
Spanish community, status and prestige varied by reason of wealth. The
governor, the surgeon, and the master of the shipyard were all hidalgos by
right of birth. But the governor's annual income was 5,000 pesos, that of the
surgeon and the head of the shipyard under 500 pesos (see Appendix B).
Did the Spanish community constitute an ethnic group? The evidence
suggests that they are perhaps better conceived of as a cultural group. Indeed,
as pointed out in social histories, membership in this group was not closed to
outsiders (Johnson 1989a, 1989b). Irish in the service of Spain gained entry
and Spanish colonists also intermarried with some well-to-do English,
German, and Minorcan families (Johnson 1989b). But it would be incorrect to
think that because the group was permeable it had no self-identity.
Distinctions of law and social status still separated this group from others, as
evident in the documents of the times.
The Spanish colonial government divided the residents of St.
Augustine and Spanish Florida according to numerous criteria, including
whether they were natural subjects of Spain and whether they were Catholic
or Protestant. Just as important were the distinctions Spanish, Minorcan, free
black, or European. Census roles were divided into these subcategories and
militias were composed based on these groups (Griffin 1990; Johnson 1988b;
Landers 1988a; Poitrineau 1987). Parish records of baptisms and marriages
reflected similar breakdowns. From an official viewpoint, at any rate, there
was no avoiding categorization.
Continuing respect for hidalguia as an element of social class also
placed barriers between this segment of the colonial population and others.

Nobility of birth still required fulfillment of the same expectations as in

earlier periods: "A gentleman was expected to 'live decently', maintaining
the dignity of his estate whether or not his means were adequate. Open-
handedness and lavish display were not the idiosyncracies of individuals but
the realities of class, the characteristics that kept everyone with pretensions to
hidalguia searching for sources of income" (Bushnell 1981:16). Hidalguia,

occupation, and income seem to have been the criteria for rank in St.
Augustine (Johnson 1989b). The importance of these variables is evident in
an episode from the life of the Zespedes family. One of the governor's
daughters, Dominga, fell in love with Juan O'Donovan, a low-ranking officer
in the Hibernian Regiment. The governor tried to discourage the romance,
but Dominga and Juan managed to recite the vows of a clandestine marriage
within the hearing of Miguel O'Reilly, parish priest, and two witnesses--
making their marriage legal under Spanish law (Tanner 1989). The marriage
created a scandal that reverberated even as far as Madrid, and Zespedes
immediately had O'Donovan arrested, although ultimately he acceded to the
marriage as a fait accompli (Tanner 1989). His letter to his superiors,
requesting that the marriage be approved, carried his dual concerns over
O'Donovan's lack of pedigree and lack of income.

Some time ago, Sublieutenant Juan O'Donovan of the Hibernia
Infantry Regiment had the boldness to request of me the hand of
one of my two daughters in marriage. My answer was non-
commital (rather for motives of prudence than with any idea of
yielding to his pretension). I told him that nobility of birth was
an indispensable requisite and that he ought to give proof of
possessing means sufficient to support my daughter with a
decency corresponding to her birth. Apart from seeing my
daughter united with a person who, I understand, has no other
means than his salary as an officer, I found this incident highly

disagreeable for several other reasons. The lack of respect for my
position touched me to the quick [and] the fear that this officer
would take my daughter with him to Providence [a British
colony in the Bahamas] assailed me. (Lockey 1949: 549-550)

The Minorcan Colonists
In contrast to the urban, middle-class contingent of Spanish colonists
in St. Augustine was the group which has come to be known in local and
regional histories as the Minorcans, or sometimes as the Mahoneses. The
Minorcans originally comprised a diverse group of Mediterranean
immigrants of largely peasant background from Greece, Italy, and the Balearic
Islands southeast of Spain. The majority of the group were natives of
Minorca, the northernmost of the Balearics. In the Old World, they made
their living primarily through herding, farming, or fishing, and also counted
many skilled artisans among their number (Griffin 1990).
Although Minorcans were similar to the peoples of the Catalonian
regions of Spain in language, culture, and religion, they did not arrive in
Florida as part of Spanish endeavors at colonization. Rather, they came in
1768 during the period of British rule, recruited as indentured servants by
Andrew Turnbull, a Scottish entrepreneur, who needed laborers to work on
his indigo plantation at New Smyrna, 60 miles south of St. Augustine (Rasico
1990). From the beginning, the privations of these immigrants counted
among the worst of any immigrant group that came to the New World.
Turnbull had convinced British investors to underwrite food and supplies for
a community of 500 people; but he brought more than 1400 immigrants and
stranded them in uncleared swampland with little more than palmetto huts
for shelter (Griffin 1990; Rasico 1990). One hundred and forty eight people

died during the Atlantic crossing, and 627 more perished during the first two
years at New Smyrna from disease, hunger, exposure, and mistreatment. In
1777, when the survivors petitioned the British governor to nullify their
indentures and allow them to settle in St. Augustine, only 419 of the original
group remained. In testimony before the governor, some recalled being
starved, flogged, manacled, and driven to the fields from their sickbeds by
Turnbull's overseers (Quinn 1975; Rasico 1990:147-157).
After their relocation to St. Augustine, the Minorcans settled in the
northern section of town, a run-down area unused by the British and
subsequently known as the Minorcan Quarter. By this time the few Italians
and Greeks remaining in the group had intermarried with Minorcan families
and Minorcan traditions and language predominated. The former
indentured servants began to acquire small parcels of land north of St.
Augustine and would journey daily from their homes in town to work small
garden plots (Griffin 1990). Most combined farming or another profession
with seasonal fishing. As Catholics in an English and Protestant colony, the
Minorcans were suspected of being sympathetic to Spanish desires of
recapturing Florida. They were also regarded as possible allies of American
rebels to the north. With the outbreak of the American Revolution, British
troops stationed in St. Augustine mistreated Minorcan residents. On at least
one occasion, soldiers invaded the Quarter, kidnapped a husband and wife,
and released them only after raping the woman (Rasico 1990). In spite of
prejudice and abuse, Minorcans managed to improve their circumstances,
making a living as farmers, fisherman, and mariners. By the close of the
American Revolution, they were essential to St. Augustine's agricultural and
maritime food base, and a few families accumulated sufficient capital to enter
commerce and shipping (Griffin 1988, 1990).

Whereas the Spanish component of St. Augustine might better be
called a cultural rather than an ethnic group, scholars have little hesitancy in

attributing strong ethnic cohesion to the Minorcans. It will be recalled from
Chapter 2 that the criteria set forth for calling a group "ethnic" were evidence
for "common origins and culture, endogamy, and boundaries--whether they

be physical, like the streets of a town, or social, like marriage patterns-that
demarcate the group from a larger or more inclusive society." The Minorcan
community meets all these criteria and in some respects also evinces
evidence of that affective tie which is central to many definitions of ethnicity.

The Minorcans under British rule were quintessentially endogamous.
They lived exclusively within the Quarter, married only among themselves,

continued to use CatalAn as their principal language, and maintained their
own parish in order to practice Catholicism (Griffin 1990; Rasico 1990).
Although made up of several Mediterranean peoples, intermarriage and the
traumatic experiences of the indigo plantation had fused them into one group
by the time of their relocation from New Smyrna to St. Augustine (Griffin
1990). Moreover, in St. Augustine, where they were free to establish
households as they saw fit, Minorcans followed their Old World cultural
traditions by clustering in groups based on town of birth on Minorca (Griffin
1990: 162-183). Land use and farming systems were also based on Minorcan

The return of Spanish rule to Florida in 1783 opened up various
opportunities to this group. The same treaty that gave Spain control of
Florida also gave it control of Minorca, so that the Minorcans of Florida
became subjects of the King of Spain (Lockey 1949). The evacuation of British
settlers also left farmland open for possession and Minorcans began to
petition for rights to purchase this land (Griffin 1990). The Spanish

government, needing settlers for Florida, and clearly glad to have Catholics
with cultural affiliations to Spain, confirmed rights to property made by the
British and allowed Minorcans to purchase additional lands.
Yet the endogamy that characterized the Minorcan community in the
British Period did not disappear. It was mitigated as wealthy Minorcans
settled in other parts of the city, but most of the community remained

geographically situated in the Quarter (Griffin 1990: 135-149; Johnson 1988b).
Other factors also continued to separate Minorcans from other
segments of the population. One of these was language. Although many
Minorcans probably knew Spanish or English, their native language was
Catalan. Catholic services for the Minorcans were performed in Catalan and
it was also the language of daily household use. Spanish, the official
language of the province of East Florida, was in fact spoken by only a small
element of the civilian population; and, undoubtably, the language which
was heard most often in the streets of St. Augustine was Minorcan Catalan"
(Rasico 1990: 126).
The importance of controlling language was not lost on the Spanish
colonial government. In an attempt to promote assimilation of Minorcans,
the government established a public school and prohibited Minorcan pupils
from speaking any language other than Spanish (Griffin 1988). This policy in
itself suggests that the use of Catalan operated as a boundary between
Minorcans and Spaniards. After the school was established Minorcans
probably became bilingual, although use of Catalan as a "first" language
continued to the end of the nineteenth century, well after the period under
consideration here (Rasico 1990: 126-127). The Minorcan parish also
remained separate from the official colonial parish until after the death of the
Minorcans principal priest, Fr. Pedro Camps, in 1790.

Beyond these criteria, there is some evidence to suggest a true affective

bond among Minorcans. Griffin, who has done the most extensive work on
the early community, noted that in addition to linkages through marriage
and settlement pattern, Minorcans also frequently bound themselves together
through the institution of compadrazgo, a god-parent relationship which
established a fictive kinship between the sponsors of children and the
children' parents (1990: 166-169). The institution has a long history both in
Spain and the Mediterranean, as well as in the Spanish New World. For the
Minorcans in Florida, however, it seemed to operate as an additional
mechanism for maintaining unity. Griffin thinks the compadrazgo assumed
special importance in Florida where, due to emigration and death, it was not
always possible to have blood kin as godparents. After the return of Florida to
Spanish rule poorer Minorcans also relied on compadrazgo to maintain kin
affiliation with wealthier members of the group (Griffin 1990: 183).
The conclusion of ethnohistorians who have studied the origins of the
Florida Minorcans and their subsequent history through the nineteenth and
twentieth centuries is that they exhibited considerable physical and cultural
cohesiveness as a group. Griffin noted the continuation of many Minorcan
traditions during the late colonial period, including aspects of dress, diet,
systems for naming children, and entertainment (1990: 163-183). Rasico, in
another study, concluded "The Minorcans formed a relatively closed cultural
subunit, a type of ethnolinguistic ghetto nearly independent of the society to
which the other inhabitants of St. Augustuine belonged, until well into the
nineteenth century" (1990: 76). In all these respects, the Minorcans of St.
Augustine can be said to fairly meet the criteria of what in social science
would be termed an ethnic group.

Assimilation or Non-assimilation?
The re-establishment of Spanish rule in St. Augustine thus occurred in
conjunction with a growth in population, a surge in commerce, and the
juxtaposition of diverse peoples. Social hierarchy was based on a Spanish

American system for assigning rank. As in Havana and other areas of
Spanish America, there was a color bar in St. Augustine which relegated

persons of color to inferior social positions (Johnson 1988a: 79; Landers 1988a).
Considerations of hidalguia, occupation, and income governed entrance into
the elite. The dominant milieu in the colony was Spanish and within this
milieu the Minorcans-despite being more numerous than the Spaniards--
were an ethnic minority. Yet with the growth of commerce and affluence in
St. Augustine, the route was open for well-to-do Minorcans to merge into the
colonial middle class.

The study of material culture, both through documents and
archaeology, provides one means of assessing whether ethnicity continued to
play an important role in social life after the return of Florida to Spanish rule.
The existence of a strong ethnic boundary between Spaniards and Minorcans

should be marked by differences in material culture and foodways across all
socioeconomic levels. On the other hand, if prosperous Minorcans lived in
much the same way as Spaniards of the same rank, there should be detectable
similarities in household material culture and diet within socioeconomic

levels. The theoretical underpinnings of comparing household possessions
are discussed in subsequent chapters. However, one influence on peoples'
material world was so basic that it will be dealt with immediately. To study
how material culture varied by household, one has to assume that the range
of goods available in St. Augustine was sufficiently varied; otherwise all
households would look identical. Obviously, people could only purchase

what was available on the market. A consideration of St. Augustine's market
system, the flow of commodities into the town, and the price structure of
goods demonstrates that colonists indeed had a wide-ranging choice of
consumables subject to their incomes and inclinations.

Documentary Evidence for Consumerism in St. Augustine
A full explication of the economy of colonial St. Augustine at the end
of the eighteenth century is not possible; only a few aspects of economy have
been thoroughly researched (see Bermuidez 1989 on the topic of colonial
finance; Romero Cabot 1983; Tornero Tinajero 1979; Ward 1989; and
Whitaker 1931 on commercial policy and trade). What can be demonstrated
is that St. Augustine was widely engaged in trade, that colonists had access to
a wide assortment of commodities, and that these differed according to quality
and price. Based on this, it would be reasonable to assume that differences in
peoples' possessions were a function of their economic position and other
factors. With this in mind, the focus here is on two points: the growth of
trade and commerce which contributed to commodity flow and the
availability of a wide array of goods at different prices.
Information about the financing of the colony is available from the
studies cited above and will not be dealt with here.

Evidence for a growth in commerce and an emerging merchant
network based in St. Augustine comes from the archives of the colonial
shipping records. From these it is clear that St. Augustine traded regularly
with ports up and down the Atlantic coast. Charleston and Havana became
St. Augustine's first and second most important trade connections and
retained this status throughout the late colonial period (see Table 4-6).
Shipping arrivals also reflected the importance of these two ports (see Cusick

1991: Table 1). However, New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore, and Savannah

in the United States and Guarico on the island of Hispaniola were also

regular parts of the trade circuit. The United States was a major supplier of

foodstuffs--especially grains and meats. In this respect, Florida's trade with

the United States was similar to Cuba's, which was also an importer of grains

and other staples from U.S. factors.

Table 4-6. Overall Volume of Goods by Major Ports (in pesos)

1787 1794 1803

Overall Value
of Imports 113,427 66,521 67,962

Major ports

Charleston 43,655 29,656 25,688
Havana 23,500 28,100 22,769
New York 22,090 4,216
Philadelphia 11,041
Savannah 1,693 3,871 7,493

Source: Cusick 1991: 287

St. Augustine's merchants went to Havana, on the other hand,
primarily for goods from Spain and Mexico, and for Caribbean products such

as sugar, rum, and coffee. This pattern of commodity flow is apparent both in

cargo manifests for individual ships and in overall trends in imports. For
example, in February 1787 at least three ships were at anchor in the quiet

waters of the Matanzas. Domingo Martinelli, Italian-born captain of the

schooner San Pedro, had just completed a voyage to Philadelphia, one of six

voyages which colonial shipping records show he would make that year,

including two to Havana (EFP, Bundles 215G17 and 216H17, reels 92-93,
February 5, 1787). Also in port was the sloop San Abiguel, captained by its
owner, Miguel Yznardy, the colonial translator, who had just arrived from
New York. The third vessel in port, the schooner Maria, captained by Don
Jos6 Aguirre, had been to Havana and was already off-loading its cargo.
The consignments of these ships tell us much about St. Augustine's
economic life-line in the 1780s and 1790s. All of these ships were locally
owned, private merchantmen engaged either on private business or under
contract to the governor to bring emergency supplies. Their ports of call and
cargos accurately reflect the pattern of commodity flow that characterized
Spanish East Florida (see Cusick 1991). Trade with U.S. ports, though not
completely free of restrictions until 1793, was already routine and crucial to
the colony's food supply. The hold of the ship from Philadelphia contained
100 barrels of flour, 3 pipes of brandy, 10 barrels of beans, 30 barrels and 37 kegs
of lard, 43 barrels of butter, 400 pounds of salted fish, 500 strings of onions, 400
pounds of cheese, 12 kegs of barley, 4 barrels of rice, and 45 kegs of biscuit.
Yznardy's ship from New York held a similar cargo: 56 barrels of
turpentine, 2 barrels of nails, 60 barrels of potatoes, 16 barrels of beef, 20 barrels
of butter, 10 barrels of lard, 1600 strings of onions, 12 barrels of bread, 1000
pounds of cheese, 14 barrels of salted fish, and other goods (EFP, "Shipping
Arrivals," Bundles 215G17 and 216H17, reels 92-93, February 6, 1787).
The cargo from Havana typifed the other pole of St. Augustine's trade
network. Private trade to Havana concentrated on importing products of
Spain, Mexico, and the Caribbean (see Cusick 1991: 289-294 and Table 4). The
Maria held consignments of sugar and rum from Cuba, brandy from Spain
and the Canaries, wine and pottery from Catalonia, and shoes from
Campeche. Government and family connections between Havana and St.

Augustine were also apparent, not only in consignments of goods, but in
transfers of money. Thus Captain Aguirre brought 750 pesos fuertes for Don
Antonio Fernandez, captain of the dragoons, and 500 pesos fuertes for Don
Miguel O'Reilly, the parish priest (EFP, "Shipping Arrivals," Bundles 215G17

and 216H17, reels 92-93, February 3, 1787).

Records on food imports for the years 1787, 1794, and 1803 provide

similar data. Foodstuffs were the major imported good throughout the late
colonial period (see Cusick 1991). As shown in Table 4-7, most grains, meats,
and other staples came from ports in the United States (see also Cusick 1991;
Tornero Tinajero 1979). The principle commodity from Havana was sugar.

Table 4-7. Food Imported into St. Augustine 1787, 1794, 1803
(value in pesos)

Fish Grain Oils/Fats Meats Produce Sugar

Charleston 5,048 21,574 30,090 4,876 3,863 77
Havana 34 0 2,114 83 565 25,706
New York 1,733 4,030 11,454 3,045 2,034 22
Philadelphia 608 2,141 2,950 629 796 0
Savannah 43 6,183 1,845 355 86 0

Source: Cusick 1991: 290, Table 4.

Commerce was also essential to providing St. Augustine with other
commodities. Like all Spanish American markets, consumerism in St.
Augustine was rewritten by the emerging Industrial Revolution. Spanish
colonists had always been apt to trade with British, Dutch, or French
merchants; the trade, though illegal, was the cheapest means-sometimes the
only means--of acquiring goods (Grahn 1991: 175-178; Harman 1969; Parry
1966: 293-297). In the late eighteenth century, however, European

manufactures flooded American markets. This was in part due to the rise of
the British navy and merchant marine, in part due to lifting of Spanish trade
restrictions, and in part due to the growth of mass-production in goods like
textiles and tablewares (Brading 1987: 316-137).
The extent to which St. Augustine relied upon imports may seem
exorbitant. In actuality, it was probably not far out of line with economic
activity in surrounding areas. Previous chapters noted the huge market Cuba
provided for imports from the United States. In addition, research into
consumerism in the Thirteen Colonies suggested that, on average, by the
time of the American Revolution colonies spent approximately 30 percent of
per capital income on imported goods (Shammas 1990). Nor was the demand
for imports much different from that evinced in Spanish Florida. "Great
quantities of sugar, rum, tea, textiles, clothing, and in some places grain
flooded in" (Shammas 1990: 292).
But to study consumer behavior in St. Augustine, we must also
assume there was variability in the type of goods available. Did people have a
choice about what they could buy? Again, the colonial records suggest that
they did.

Some evidence for a cash economy and variable pricing in St.
Augustine comes from the correspondence of the governor. In a letter to his
superiors in 1784-1785, Zespedes beleaguered the colonies need for more
currency, saying, "I have learned to my great sorrow, that there are days
when, though the plaza be filled with produce, not one real's worth can be
sold. I must respectfully bring to Your Excellency's attention that unless
funds arrive soon to pay the debts and to provide a medium of circulation in
the town for the purchase of the produce of the small farmers and the
payment of wages to laborers, the garrison will be left without its last recourse

for obtaining food, and the Minorcans will all have left" (Lockey 1949: 571,
573). In a letter from the same period, the governor complained about the
high prices of goods shipped through Havana, arguing that unless the colony
had access to cheaper products from the United States, survival in St.
Augustine would be impossible (Lockey 1949).

An even clearer demonstration of price differentials, however, comes
from shipping manifests. Commodities ranged widely in their quality and
cost. Cloth offers a particularly good illustration.

Cloth was one of St. Augustine's biggest imports and probably no other
commodity had as a broad a range in quality and cost. Shipping and probate
records provide ample evidence for variations in price (based on the
equivalency of 8 reales = 1 peso = approximately $1). For the gentry, shops sold
the materials typically preferred for making greatcoats, cloaks, and frockcoats:
bayet6n, a heavy and probably waterproofed woolen similar to baize, at 4 to 6
reales per vara; velveteen (the finest at 28 reales per vara, the cheapest at 6
reales per vara) for frockcoats; and taffeta, at 8 reales per vara typically used
for linings. Lace cost up to 5 pesos per vara and silk sold at 6 to 7 pesos per

Of more moderate price were the textiles required for everyday wear:
muslin, typically used for shifts, underclothes, and women's gowns, at 4 to 9
reales per vara; and baize, serge, fustian, linen, and printed cotton at about 4
reales per vara. Cheaper still were calimanco, a twilled woolen, at 1 to 2 reales
per vara, and coleta the Oznaburgh cloth made from cotton waste and
frequently bought in bulk by plantation owners to produce clothing for slaves.
In between the extremes was a range of textiles from throughout Europe,
including Irlandes (Irish linen), Bretafia (a linen made in Brittany), Platilla (a

French weave), Bramante florete and Rollo (both from Germany) and Mah6n

(a cloth from the Balearics).
Hats could cost up to 6 reales each, stockings up to 8 reales per pair (but
the cheapest were only 2 reales), and shoes anything from 6 to 10 reales a pair.
The cheapest saddle cost 6 pesos. Earthenwares will be discussed more

extensively in ensuing chapters, but it is worth noting that a set of dishes was

a relatively minor expense: 12 dinner plates for 6 reales. By contrast, a tea
kettle or coffee pot, whether metal or ceramic, cost between 6 and 12 reales a
piece. Tureens and cups and saucers were also considerably more expensive

than plates. Prices for different kinds or earthenwares are presented in

Appendix C.

Late Colonial Household Sites in St. Augustine
The stage is thus set for a consideration of the basic research question in
this study: whether households were more similar by virtue of ethnic
background or of social class. To answer this requires an investigation into

the daily life of colonists as reflected in materials recovered archaeologically
and this investigation will be the subject of the next five chapters. The next

chapter uses available colonial probates to compare the costume of Spaniards
and Minorcans in St. Augustine. The other chapters of analysis focus on six

households with archaeological assemblages and compare earthenwares and
faunal remains from these sites. The final task here is to introduce and
familiarize the reader with these households and present basic data about
both them and the sites with which they are associated.
Tables 4-8 and 4-9 present data on the six households represented by
archaeological assemblages in this study. Table 4-8 gives the site designation,
the name of the household head, the occupation of the household head, and

the ethnic affiliation of the household. Table 4-9 contains data on household

size and several criteria for socioeconomic position.

Table 4-8. Sites and Their Household Heads

C:lj., KTT.. b


Site Num er can us o %A 44

Juan Sanchez
Juan Jose Bousquet
Bernado Segui
Gaspar Papy
Bartolom6 Usina
Juan Triay

Shipyard foreman




Table 4-9. Household Size and Socioeconomic Rank

1790 Tax Value of Residence
Size Slaves (reales) (vesos)




Source: Census returns for 1784-1814, EFP Bundle 232A, Reel 148; Property
tax assessment for 1790, EFP Bundle 364, Reel 52; EFP Testamentary
Proceedings, Bundle 301-319, Reels 139-146, for the years 1803, 1813,
1815, 1816, and 1817.

Household size was calculated for the year nearest to the terminus post

quem for archaeological deposits at the site. Socioeconomic variables were

the number of slaves owned by the household, tax assessment of lots in 1790,

value of each household's main residence, and the value of total estate. It



Occu ation

was not possible to assess household socioeconomic position from any one of
these variables, since they are not reported in all cases. Households were
ranked based on the data presented in Table 4-9, weighted by the value of

their estate. Gaspar Papy owned three properties in addition to his residence,
so his rank was adjusted upwards. Households were never given the same
rank. They progress from most affluent (ranked 1) to least affluent (ranked 6).
The Usina household was ranked in higher socioeconomic position than the

Triay household based on the 1790 tax assessment of the properties. The
house assessment for Triay is of a later masonry house that post-dates the
period represented by archaeological materials used in this study.

The following discussion covers the excavation histories of the above
sites, the proveniences used, and more information on the occupants. The
locations of the sites in St. Augustine are shown in Figure 3.

Sites in St. Augustine are generally identified by their occupants in the
eighteenth-century First Spanish Period and by their block and lot numbers as

recorded on colonial maps. The site names are given here in the first
instance, but sites will subsequently be identified by either their site number
or by the late colonial occupants.

SA-7-6, the de Mesa Site

This was the home of Juan SAnchez, the master of the shipyard for the
colonial government. SAnchez was born in Puerto Real, Andalusia, Spain,
and was married in Cuba to Maria del Carmen Castafeda, who was born in St.
Augustine during the First Spanish Period. The SAnchez family owned a
two-story masonry house of coquina block on St. George Street near the
Minorcan Quarter and drew an annual salary of 420 pesos.

/ u



U Sc

a .4
. -

- *-


3 <


Colonial records show SAnchez buying and then selling off schooners

at various times, suggesting that he might have augmented his income by
repairing vessels for resale. Sanchez died in 1802 leaving the household in
the hands of his widow and his son-in-law, Tomas de Aguilar, an official on
the governor's staff. The value of the estate at the time of SAnchez' death was

5815 pesos. The Sanchezes continued to live at the site throughout the late
colonial period. An 1814 census listed 19 people in the household: Castafteda,
Aguilar and his wife, six children, and ten slaves.

SA-7-6 is owned by the Historic St. Augustine Preservation Board. The
site was excavated in 1977 and 1978 as part of a project to restore the house
and property (see Bostwick 1978; Deagan 1977). The archaeological assemblage
for this site was drawn from a series of interrelated trash pits located in the

backyard of the house. The terminus post quem for these deposits was 1813
(based on Ironstone China). Excavation followed standard field methods
employed in St. Augustine. Proveniences were excavated in natural strata
and by arbitrary levels of 10 centimeters within large proveniences
representing one depositional episode. All materials were water-screened
through 1/4 inch hardcloth. Soil samples were taken to recover botanical and
minute faunal material.

SA-26-1, the de Le6n Site

This site represented the Spanish household of Juan Jose Bousquet, the
surgeon employed by the military hospital. Bousquet was a native of Ciudad
de Puerto de Santa Maria Cadiz, Spain, and was married to Maria Blanco, also
a native of Spain. He drew an annual salary of 400 pesos as surgeon major to
the hospital, supplemented by an income from his orange groves outside of
town. He was also president of the Junta de Caridad, a charitable organization

or cofradia. A census of 1793 lists seven people in his household: Bousquet,

his wife, two daughters, a sister-in-law and her daughter, and one slave. The
Bousquet family had as many as nine slaves but only three are listed in his
probate record and only one seems to have lived with the family (Zierden

1981: 37). Bousquet's probate record includes a valuation of his estate and
lands at approximately 4000 pesos. This included his two-story masonry

house of coquina block located on Marine Street to the south of the plaza. His
actual estate was probably worth closer to 4500 pesos as many items, including
cloths, the books in his library, and 141 pesos in coin, were inventoried but
not included in the assessment.

SA-26-1 is owned by Fred White of St. Augustine. Fieldwork at the site
was carried out between 1976 and 1979 under the direction of Kathleen
Deagan (see Braley 1977; Singleton 1977; Zierden and Caballero 1979; Zierden
1981). It is the only late colonial occupation which has been extensively
treated prior to the present study. A masters thesis by Zierden characterized
Bousquet as "one of the more prominent well-educated men in St.

Augustine" and found that his material culture was cosmopolitan and drawn
from around the world (1981: 7, 37). The assemblage used here consists of
materials recovered by Zierden and Caballero from two wells (Features 48 and
54). The terminus post quem for the assemblage is 1795 (delicately hand-
painted polychrome pearlware). Field methods were the same as at SA-7-6.

SA-34-3, the Segui-Kirby Smith Site (formerly Public Library Site)
This was the household of Bernardo Segui, a merchant and baker. The
1786 census lists his household as consisting of Segui, 44, from Minorca, his
wife Agueda Villalonga, 33, also of Minorca, four daughters, ages 11, 9, 7, and
4, and two sons, ages 6 and 2. The household also included one male and one

female slave. In 1814, a year after Segui's death, the census records his widow

and two unmarried daughters living at the family house on Avilds Street, the
site of excavations for this study. The family at that time had eight slaves but
it is unclear whether they lived at the main house or on lands which the
Seguis held outside of town.

Segui was prominent in the St. Augustine community. His brothers-
in-law, Pedro Cosifacio and Domingo Martinelli, were important members of
the Minorcan community who jointly ran a family shipping syndicate
(Griffin 1990: 186-192). Segui at times acted as captain aboard his brothers-in-
laws' ships on trading expeditions and also received lucrative contracts from
the colonial government to supply the garrison at the Castillo de San Marcos
with bread. One Segui daughter married into the Minorcan Cavedo family
and another married the Spanish official Dimas Cort6s, second in charge at
the colonial treasury. Segui served for a time as captain of the Minorcan
militia and was frequently called upon to do assessments for probate
inventories, including the estates of Fr. Pedro Camps, the priest in charge of
the Minorcan parish, Pedro Jose Salcedo, captain of artillery, and Enrique
White, a governor of the colony. The Seguis owned a two-and-a-half story
masonry house of coquina on Aviles Street in the affluent neighborhood
south of the plaza. The property included a separate bakery at the back.
According to Seguis probate of 1813, the house and bakery together were
worth 5611 pesos and his total estate was valued at 14,049 pesos. As can be
seen from the socioeconomic ranking in Table 4-9, the Seguis were the most
affluent household examined in this study and probably represented one of
the wealthiest Minorcan families in St. Augustine.

SA-34-3 is owned by the St. Augustine Historical Society. Fieldwork at
the site was carried out during 1978-1981 under the direction of Kathleen

Deagan (see Deagan 1978; Johnson 1981) and again in 1991 by the author.
Material used in this study was drawn from the 1991 excavations and came

from one lens of a large multi-lensed trash pit at the back of the main house
(Cusick 1993). The terminus post quem for this deposit is 1805 (even scallop,

straight line shell edge pearlware). The deposit also contained a coin dated
1788. Field methods were the same employed at other St. Augustine sites.

Materials were waterscreened through 1/4" hardware cloth and 1/16"
finescreen. Soil samples were taken for floatation.

SA-35-2, the Sisters Site

This was the household of Gasper Papy, a Greek born in Smyrna, who
arrived in Florida with the Minorcans at the age of 17 (Griffin 1990: 16). He

was married to Ana Pons, from Minorca. The 1786 census lists no other
members in their household but the Papys had at least two daughters,
mentioned as heirs in Gaspar's probate inventory of 1817. Papy apparently
started out as a farmer cultivating two-and-a-half acres of land, and between
1787 and 1794 acquired ownership of a lot to the south of the plaza, for which
he paid 250 pesos. He eventually became a storekeeper and owner of at least
three other properties around town (Griffin 1990: 122; Parker 1989). His

property at SA-35-2, on the northeast corner of St. George and Bridge Streets,
was described in probate as having a wooden house with tabby floor, a
separate kitchen and an almacen, or warehouse, collectively worth 1380 pesos.
This was one of four properties he owned, their collective value being
approximately 5390 pesos. His estate at the time of his death in 1817 was
valued at more than 8000 pesos.
SA-35-2 is owned by the Convent of the Sisters of St. Joseph. The site
was excavated in 1989 by Mary Herron and Chris Newman as a project for the

city of St. Augustine to mitigate construction of a new building on the
property. Data for this study come from the contents of a privy with a
terminus post quem of 1805. This is based on a pearlware mug bearing the
image of Horatio Nelson and probably dating to the period immediately after
Nelson's 1805 victory at Trafalgar. The deposit also contained a coin dated
1799. Field methods were the same as at the sites above. Fine screens were

not used in recovery; however, soil samples were taken for floatation.

SA-12-26, the Ribera Gardens Site
This site was the residence of the Minorcan Triay family. The 1786
census describes the household members as Juan Triay, 32, from Minorca, his
wife Juana Xim6nes, 35, from Minorca, Juana's son from an earlier marriage,
age 9, three additional sons, ages 5, 4, and 2, and one male slave (Rasico 1987:
177). Triay was a farmer who worked a plot of land outside the city to the
north. The Triays obtained the property during the British Period and
continued to reside on it for the first half of the Second Spanish Period. They
were involved in legal disputes with a Spanish family which also claimed the

property as part of its inheritance. The house at SA-12-26 was described as a
wooden structure of cypress with a palm thatch roof on a lot owned by the
Crown (Parker n.d.). The Triays financial condition apparently improved
over time and in 1806 Triay built a two-story masonry house on a different lot
but still within the Minorcan Quarter (Griffin 1990). This later house was
assessed in his 1816 probate at 337 pesos in an estate totaling 1215 pesos.
SA-12-26 is owned by the Historic St. Augustine Preservation Board. It
was excavated in 1988 by Stanley Bond of the Historic St. Augustine
Preservation Board (Bond 1992). The assemblage used here came from

numerous trashpits. These deposits had a terminus post quem of 1799 (based
on Mocha annular ware) and contained a coin dated 1787.

SA-16-23, the de la Cruz Site

This was the household of the Usina family. The 1786 census lists the
household as Bartolom6 Usina, 46, from Minorca, his wife, Maria, 38, from

Minorca, and a daughter, 2. Another daughter, 14, was living in a
neighboring household (Griffin 1990: 168). Usina was a farmer who owned
land to the north of town. The 1788 Rocque map of St. Augustine and the
1790 tax assessment described his house as timber frame with a palm thatch
roof and located on a lot owned by the Crown.

Excavations at SA-16-23 were carried out in 1972-1973 and resulted in a
master's thesis (McMurray 1975) and dissertation (Deagan 1974). The data for
this study were drawn from Feature 37 in the 1972 field season, a barrel well
dating to the Usina occupation. Terminus post quem for the deposit was 1813
(based upon recovery of a Newcastle Upon Tyne slipware dish or milkpan
marked "1813;" see McMurray 1975: 109).

Probate records exist for five of these six households. However, with
the exception of the Bousquet household, the probates lack inventories of
movable household possessions. Those for Sanchez and Segui are primarily
assessments for houses and land. The probates for Papy and Triay also
include inventories of merchandise held for sale and sporadic assessments of
household goods. Thus, archaeological data are the most detailed source of
information for material culture. However, one category of evidence was
deemed important enough to present here, even though it required going
beyond the limits of the archaeological sample. Costume has traditionally
been a prominent marker both of socioeconomic and ethnic differences


between people. Hence, all available Spanish and Minorcan probate records
for the late colonial period were reviewed for information on dress. These

are presented in the next chapter. Subsequent chapters focus on analysis of
archaeologically recovered materials from the sites noted above. In
comparing site assemblages, the focus was on ceramic assemblages, as
discussed in Chapters 6 and 7, and on foodways and diet, as discussed in
Chapters 8 and 9.


Clothing has been important throughout history not only to protect
people from environmental conditions, but also to demarcate social

affiliations. It is probably the most visible symbol of identity in community
life. In St. Augustine, inventories of personal dress provide the best evidence

for differences in the material culture of Spanish and Minorcan colonists.

The evidence is sporadic and conclusions tentative, but a review of available

probate records suggests that Spanish and Minorcan dress in St. Augustine
followed fashions and traditions prevalent in Spain and Minorca. As such,
clothing seems to have been one aspect of material culture which demarcated

Spaniards and Minorcans.

Historians of the development of costume have covered in great detail
the differences in material and style that characterized dress among the

gentility, townsfolk, and peasantry of France, Germany, England, and Spain

(Anderson 1979; Davenport 1956; Kbhler 1963; Laver 1988; Payne 1965). By the

sixteenth century, costume in Europe varied widely according to region and

fashion. Just as important to trends in dress, however, were economic and
social factors. As trade with the Americas and Asia brought in new fabric
materials and as cloth production became a major industry, more elaborate

costume spread from court to the professional classes to shopkeepers, artisans,
and laborers. A review of the evolution of European dress from 1500 to 1800

is not possible within the scope of this study. However, the eighteenth
century in many respects represents a cohesive chapter in the history of
fashion and provides the necessary background to costume in Spain and

Late Eighteenth-Century Costume in Spain and Minorca
By the eighteenth century, Spain had lost the dominant influence it
had exercised over European fashion during the period 1500 to 1650
(Anderson 1979). Throughout the 1700s costume in Spain followed the
dictates of dress in France and England, varying more in elements of style
than in components of dress. Male costume consisted of articles of clothing
that had been in use, in one form or another, since the 1680s (K6hler 1963:
333-340; Laver 1988: 133-116): Garments basic to the male attire of the nobility,
military, and middle-classes were the shirt (camisa), breeches (calzones),
stockings (medias), and buckled shoes. Shirts were adorned at the cuff and
down the breast with ruffles (bolantes) and at the collar with neckcloth
(pafluelo) or cravat (corbatin). Over this went a sleeveless vest (chaleco) or
long-sleeved and skirted waistcoat (chupa), a long, full-skirted coat (casaca) or
a swallow-tailed frockcoat, and a cape (capa) or greatcoat (caote).
Spanish terminology for articles of dress are loosely translatable into
English equivalents, but carry connotations of style and cut which escape easy
translation. Hence, it is worth defining certain terms within their Spanish
context. The main outer garments of male dress were the casaca, the chaleco,
the chupa and the capote. According to an 1817 edition of the Diccionario de
la Lengua Castellana published by the Royal Academy, Madrid, these articles
of clothing were described as follows [author's trans.]:

The casaca was "una vestidura con mangas que llegan hasta la mufieca,
y con faldillas hasta la rodilla" (a coat with sleeves that reached to the wrist
and skirts to the knee). According to K6hler, this garment had its origins in
the sixteenth century: "Popular and universally worn as the Spanish doublet
then was, it was chiefly a summer garment. In winter men wore instead of it
a coat made like it, but with a skirt reaching nearly to the knees. This coat,
called casaque, and often beautifully trimmed, was worn even in summer by
manservants, pages, and grooms" (1963: 296). The direct model of the
eighteenth century casaca was the French justaucorps, a long skirted coat
arranged for buttoning with large turned-back cuffs (K6hler 1963: 308).

The chupa was "parte del vestido que cubre el tronco del cuerpo con
faldillas de la cintura abajo y con mangas ajustadas A los brasos" (part of the
clothing that covered the trunk of the body with skirts or coat-tails from the
waist downwards and with sleeves fitted to the arms). For much of the
eighteenth century it functioned as a waistcoat. However, by 1790, a
sleeveless waistcoat, much like a modern vest, replaced this earlier form
(Davenport 1956, Vol. II: 698-699). In Spanish, the vest-like garment was
called the chaleco, "una especie de justillo sin mangas ni faldillas" (a type of
waistcoat or jerkin without sleeves or skirts). It could be worn underneath a
chupa but more usually was worn with the casaca. A variation was the
vest6n, also sleeveless but retaining the skirts of the earlier waistcoat (K6hler
1963: 357,385-387).
The capote was "una capa hecha de albornoz, barragAn, patio ti otra tela
double, que sirve para el abrigo y para resistir el agua, diferenciase en la
hechura de la capa comfin solo en que el cuello por lo regular es redondo" (a
cape or cloak made of coarse woolen, waterproofed camlet, woolen, or other
thick or doubled fabric that served as a coat and to keep off rain, differing in

manufacture from the common cape only in that the collar was usually

rounded). The capote had been a component of Spanish dress since at least
the early sixteenth century and was often hooded (Anderson 1979: 111). The
capa, or cloak, was also worn as protection from the weather. In Madrid and
other large cities, capas and soft brimmed hats were essential protection
against blowing dust and garbage (Kany 1932: 37).
Womens' fashion changed throughout the eighteenth century. The
awkward farthingale, a framework for billowing out the skirts of a dress, went
out of fashion about midcentury, but was reintroduced into court costume by
Marie Antoinette in 1774 (K6hler 1963: 359). The other elements of dress
were the corset, petticoats, bodice, underdress and overdress.

The most distinctively Spanish element of female dress was the
mantilla, a cloth or lace-work veil, which came into general use around 1700
(Espinosa 1970: 42). The custom for women to wear head coverings instead of
hats had a long history in Spain and the mantilla was both preceded and
supplanted by other forms of shawl or veil (Espinosa 1970).

This basic garb changed with the political and cultural conditions of the
times. In France, the Revolution caused an over-night alteration in daily
dress. "Rich and poor alike were careful to dress as negligently as possible, for
anyone whose outward appearance brought him under suspicion of being an
aristocrat went in danger of his life. During that time even wealthy men
went about wearing the blue linen pantaloons and short jacket of the working
man and the red cap of the galley slave--the symbol of the Jacobins" (Kohler
1963: 374). With the rise of Napolean, there was a return to elaborate and
ornamented dress, notable in the costume of the French Incroyables.

English fashion also made itself felt with the adoption of the English
riding coat, or frock. This was a knee-length coat with the front skirts cut

away so that the wearer could more easily sit astride a horse. The back skirts
had a tapering, swallow-tail shape. In Spain, both the full-skirted casaca and
the frock coat were popular and were made with wide, flailing lapels as seen
in such portraits as Goya's SebastiAn Martinez (1792), Caspar Melchor de
lovellanos (1788), and Bartolom6 Sureda (1804-1806) (Perez SAnchez and Sayre
1989). By the 1790s, pantalones, ankle length trousers worn very tight, were
also becoming popular and began to replace breeches, although the latter
continued to be essential for formal dress.

While male dress underwent modifications, women' dress changed
radically. Commenting on the period 1800-1810, Laver says "perhaps at no
period between primitive times and the 1920s had women worn so little"
(1988: 155). The corset and petticoats were abandoned in favor of low cut,
diaphanous gowns. Women covered their shoulders and filled in the neck
line with rich, overlapping shawls. That this change was felt even in Spain
can be seen in Goya's portraits of Condesa de Chinch6n (1800) and Marquesa
de Santa Cruz (1805) (Perez SAnchez and Sayre 1989).
In Spain, the changes in fashion were apparent in the sharp disparity
between dress influenced by French fashion and more regional,
conservatively oriented dress. According to Kany, the two distinctive trends
in Spanish costume between 1760 and 1800 were vestir de military. a modern
costume favored by the military and based on French models, and national
costume, a continuation of local and regional dress among people openly
hostile to French influence in Spain. Vestir de military was the costume of the
court, the army, and the bourgeosie (see Figure 4) and denoted the elements
of coat, waistcoat, breeches or pantaloons, and cravat. The petimetre, or
Spanish dandy, "wore a snuggly fitting casaca which fell in folds like a skirt
below the waist, a lavishly embroidered chupa, a scarlet cape, and yards of






Figure 4: Vestir de Militar. Major elements of male military and civilian
dress in late eighteenth-century Spain. The vest is probably a
sleeveless veston rather than a chuva.

material for the cravat" (Kany 1932: 178). In contrast was the costume of the
fashionable lower class in Madrid, the majos and majas who made a point of
rejecting anything French. "The major wore close-fitting breeches, stockings,
buckled slippers, waist-coat, short jacket, and a large sash (faja)" with a cape
over all (Kany 1932: 222). Goya depicts both types of dress in his portraiture of
gentry and poor.
Information is also available about costume on Minorca. Some notion
of the dress of typical Minorcans can be obtained from paintings of a
Minorcan man and women in the collection of the St. Augustine Historical
Society and reproduced in Griffin (1990: 177-178). Their costume contains
some of the same elements as that of the majors and majas (see Figure 5). The
man is depicted in a long sleeve shirt and a sleeveless vest squared-off at the
bottom, knee breechs secured by a belt, gaiters, sandles, and a wide-brimmed
hat. The cloth hanging over one shoulder may represent a capa or cloak.
The woman wears an underdress and over it a tight-fitting long sleeved
bodice or jacket, an ankle length skirt, an apron, and low, slip on shoes. Her
head is covered with a rebozilla, a shawl-like half circle of cloth, arranged like
a habit. This was a traditional Minorcan article of female dress that fulfilled
the same function as the mantilla.
These paintings agree with a description of Minorcan costume in The
History of the Island of Minorca (1756), written by John Armstrong, an
English engineer stationed on Minorca in the mid-eighteenth century, and
cited in a more recent ethnohistory by Quinn (Armstrong 1756: 206; 1975: 10-
11): "The Dress of the lower Rank of the Men consists of a loose short Coat, a
Waistcoat, and a red worsted Girdle going many times round the Belly, or a
broad Leather belt; a coarse Shirt, a colored Handkerchief about the Neck, a
red Worsted Cap, a Pair of Breeches reaching almost to the Ankles, coarse

Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd