Dining at the Luna Settlement
©
UWF Division of Anthropology and Archaeology
Understanding Food-Related Artifacts
A substantial number of the artifacts uncovered by
University of West Florida archaeologists at the 1559-1561 Luna Settlement
(Worth 2016; Worth et al. 2017) are directly related to eating, preparing, and
transporting food. This includes a wide
range of broken pottery, including tin-enameled tablewares, lead-glazed and
unglazed cookwares, and large ceramic storage and transport vessels, all made
within the Spanish ceramic tradition, and produced either in Spain or in New
Spain (Mexico). Also included are
Aztec-tradition ceramics produced by Mexican Indians and likely used by both
Spaniards and Mexican Indians accompanying the expedition. The total quantity of Spanish and Aztec
ceramics analyzed as of 2019 is nearly 3,000 sherds, weighing more than 15
kilos. Also present is a range of local
Native American ceramics, which documents suggest may have been scavenged by
members of the expedition from abandoned villages and camps for use by the
Spanish (Worth 2018). Other, less common
food-related artifacts include remains of cooking and eating utensils such as
knives and spoons. Wooden spoons have been found on the Emanuel Point
shipwrecks offshore from the settlement.
The remnants of the food itself also constitute an important part of the
archaeological record both on land and underwater. Charred plant remains, fragments
of animal bone, and shell have been found on land, and a considerable diversity
of well-preserved organic animal and plant remains have been recovered from the
shipwrecks just offshore.
All these artifacts contribute to our understanding of the
daily lives of the soldiers and other colonists who lived for two years at the
Luna Settlement, providing an important supplement to narrative accounts and
other documentary records of the expedition.
Both documentary and archaeological data illuminate how expedition
members anticipated and prepared to sustain themselves when they originally
sailed from Veracruz to Florida to establish a port settlement as a launching
pad for pushing north and east across the interior Southeast to found a colony
on the Atlantic coast of modern South Carolina.
The archaeology and the documents
also provide evidence for the strategies that the colonists adopted to
survive after the bulk of their staple foods were lost in the hurricane just
five weeks after their arrival (Hudson et al. 1989; Priestley 2010; Worth 2018). Beginning on September 20, 1559, survivors
were obligated to wait for relief fleets from Veracruz and Havana that only
arrived at intervals of three to eight months, bringing decreasing quantities
of foods that were rapidly consumed by the hungry settlers on Pensacola Bay
(Bolte 2017). Expedition members were ultimately
forced to rely on whatever foodstuffs were available in the local natural
environment, including deer, fish,shellfish
and local plants, or on whatever they could barter or take from local Indian
groups who became increasingly antagonistic toward the hungry Spaniards. Luna even moved the bulk of the army 40
leagues inland to an abandoned Indian village called Nanipacana along the
Alabama River in an effort to relocate closer to a source of Native foodstuffs,
The Spanish returned to Pensacola just five months later amidst increasing
ambushes from local Indian groups who had withdrawn and hidden with all their
food. A 200-man Spanish detachment
remained in the interior for an additional four months living off food provided
for them in the province of Coosa at the foothills of the Appalachian Mountains
in Northwest Georgia before returning to Pensacola late in 1560.
If we are to understand what the distribution and relative
proportions of broken ceramics and other food-related artifacts on the Luna
Settlement are actually telling us, not just regarding what and how people
prepared and ate their food, but how the food and food-related items were
distributed among the soldiers, sailors, and families on the expedition, then
we must develop a sound understanding of the nature of dining in the
16th-century Spanish colonial world, both in Spain and in its established New
World colonies. We must also consider a variety of social contexts ranging from
private households to ships’ crews to terrestrial military units. Since archaeologists often use the types and quantities
of artifacts found in different areas of an archaeological site as a means of revealing
the identity and relative social status of individuals living there, it
behooves us to develop a sound model of how and by whom food and the utensils,
vessels, and containers used to transport, store, prepare, cook, and serve it
were originally purchased and provisioned for the expedition, and how and by
whom they would have been utilized on a daily basis at the Luna Settlement
site. This blog post, and others that
follow, will explore these subjects in greater detail for the mid-16th-century
Spanish colonial world.
The Organization of Dining
The Luna expedition was first and foremost a military one,
as its primary goal was to establish a permanent Spanish presence in
southeastern North America, which was at the time viewed as an extremely
vulnerable flank of the primary route for the Spanish treasure fleets returning
from the New World via Havana and the Florida Straits (a.k.a. the Bahama
Channel). The Viceroy of New Spain, Luis
de Velasco, developed a strategy in consultation with his advisors to establish
a first port settlement at the Bay of Ochuse (Pensacola Bay), then push quickly
inland to retrace Hernando de Soto’s 1540 route between central Alabama and
central South Carolina, and then descend to the Atlantic coast and establish a
second port colony at what maps called the Punta de Santa Elena. While the ultimate goal was to populate these
new Spanish colonial port towns with permanent settlers to begin the long
process of developing a local economy and expanding across the landscape, the
1559 expedition under Tristán de Luna y Arellano was mostly made up of soldiers
(including 100 Mexica nobles as
“Indian soldiers”) who would move quickly across the interior on horseback and
on foot, along with assorted servants, slaves, a group of Mexican Indian
craftsmen, and some family members. Although
Luna and other officers and royal officials probably intended eventually to
settle and remain long-term, few actually brought their families on this first
expedition, which was more than anything an initial Spanish army foray meant to
precede later colonists.
Without going into great detail here, the organization of Luna’s
expedition followed the broad parameters of the typical Spanish tercio military structure in Europe (a
good example of the composition of an entire army from 1591 is found in Barado
y Font 1884:552-555). With Luna
himself as captain-general of this army, assisted by a number of field-grade
officers over the entire army (most notably the field master, or maese de campo, and the sergeant major,
or sargento mayor, and also including
a doctor, principal bailiff, general ensign, royal notary, and a few others), the
rest of the officers and soldiers were divided into distinct infantry and
cavalry companies comprising roughly 50 men each. Each company had a captain (capitan), an ensign (alférez), a sergeant (sargento), and a handful of other
company-grade officers, along with several corporals (cabos de esquadra) who served as
leaders of smaller squads of soldiers within each company, commonly
comprising 25 men. A contemporary example
of this is Captain Juan Pardo’s company, sent as reinforcements to Florida in
1566, which had 250 men with 1 captain, 1 ensign, 1 sergeant, 1 fife, 2
drummers, 1 barber-surgeon, and 10 corporals over squads of 25 men each (Spanish
Crown 1565). After arrival, this company
was divided in two to explore far inland, including just 7 corporals with squads
under the same company officers (Hudson 1990:224, 271). Separate from the formal military
organization, but parallel to it, were three high-level royal officials,
including a quartermaster (factor),
treasurer (tesorero), and accountant
(contador), as well as a single
chaplain and six Dominican friars brought as missionaries who also served as
priests to the Spanish members of the expedition. Once 7 of the original 12 ships comprising
Luna’s fleet had been destroyed, surviving sailors and ships’ officers were
also incorporated into the settlement, at least temporarily.
The key element for understanding patterns in the distribution
and relative proportions of food-related artifacts like pottery at the Luna
Settlement is the basic unit of food preparation and consumption in both terrestrial
armies and shipboard crews, which was the camarada,
equivalent to the rancho, or mess. In Luna’s time, groups of soldiers who
formed a rancho were called a camarada, the word deriving from the
term cámara, or room, which refers to
a group of soldiers quartered together. Each
camarada was comprised of between 5
and 10 soldiers who prepared and ate their rations together, who divided tasks
such as cooking and cleaning, and who pooled at least part of their salaries
for common expenses. The rationale for
this practice was reiterated in a 1632 royal ordinance that directed the
renewal of the practice, which had fallen into disuse by that time. The
ordinance explained that “one soldier on his own cannot support the necessary
expenses with his salary, as several joining together can do,” and noted that
the practice of living in camaradas
reduced the “multiplicity of the baggage” carried by armies in the field
(Spanish Crown 1632). Moreover, each camarada or rancho had a leader selected by its members. A later 1728 royal
ordinance reinforced the practice of dividing companies up in ranchos, noting that “each rancho should have a leader [cabo] at the election of the soldiers
comprising it, and this person should be in charge of its money” (Spanish Crown
1728).
A 1669 author described the routine activities of these ranchos:
…in each rancho they should have their pot [olla], and plate of copper or wood, hatchet, and splitting axe, and
they should be distributed within the camaradas
in order to carry them, and likewise one person each day should take care that
there is everything to make the pot [of food], and this person, upon arriving
at their quarters, should remain in it, guarding their belongings and starting
up the fire with his fire-starting bag (which they should likewise have) while
the others go out for straw, firewood, vegetables, or whatever the country
offers, perhaps by water not being close by the squadron. And thus there is necessary someone to bring,
and someone to guard the containers or packs that each one should have in order
to carry garlic, peppers, and their clothing, and the rest of the neccesaries
for life and cleanliness (Dávila Orejón Gastón 1669:104).
This same author recommended that ranchos “not be less than five, nor should they exceed eight”
(Dávila Orejón Gastón 1669:111), but another oft-cited 17th-century letter from
an ambassador in Venice noted that camaradas
were formed when “eight or ten unite to live together” (Martínez Laínez and Sánchez
de Toca 2006:64-65).
As the 16th-century manifestation of the rancho, camaradas, therefore, seem to have been the basic economic and
residential unit of unmarried soldiers in terrestrial armies during Luna’s
time. The men comprising these camaradas evidently both purchased and
owned equipment, supplies, and food in common when circumstances allowed them
opportunities to use their salaries and ration allowances. Even when on expeditions in more remote
territories like mid-16th-century Florida, the camarada was the unit to which rations, munitions, and other
supplies and equipment were actually distributed and utilized. Within each company, it was the sergeant’s responsibility
to distribute food, munitions, and other supplies to the corporals in charge of
each squad, giving an account to the ensign and captain as his superiors
(Eguiluz 1595:18r; Gallo 1639:13v). The
corporals, on the other hand, were to ensure that the soldiers in their individual
squads actually made and lived in camaradas.
It was even specifically recommended that corporals should not be married men,
because in that case neither could they
be a part of a camarada themselves,
nor could the camarada to which the
corporal belonged come to the corporal’s home (Eguiluz 1595:7r; Gallo
1639:11r-v).
Shipboard ranchos
were similar to terrestrial ones, but limitations of space combined with the
need to maintain a state of vigilance and readiness at all times meant that
individual ranchos normally took
turns using the one or two fogones,
or firepits, on board, and sharing shipboard cooking gear in common. The 18th-century version of this system is
described in great detail in 1793 Spanish naval ordinances. The ordinances state how sailors and officers
were to be divided up into distinct ranchos
of between 8 and 12 men, depending on the size of the vessel and the number and
distribution of the artillery to which specific ranchos were assigned (Spanish Crown 1793). While ships during Luna’s era were smaller
and had correspondingly smaller crews, the descriptions of the basic system are
nonetheless instructive. Each rancho assigned cooking duties on a
rotation, and each cook:
…will provide himself in the dispensary
with the pots [ollas], cauldrons [calderos], large spoons [cucharones] and other utensils for their
tasks, with the ship master making a list of what is delivered, which will
serve as a receipt, overseen by the detail officer, each one of them
responsible for that which they have received…The aforementioned delivery
should be done in the mornings, after the guard of the firepits have confirmed
that the cauldrons are clean and ready for cooking, comprising at the same time
the goods that correspond to the afternoon meal...(Spanish Crown 1793:26-28).
Married men, however,
were permitted to go to land and eat and sleep with their families while
in port, a practice that seems also to have been the case with married soldiers
in a terrestrial army.
Given all the above, we can hypothesize that at the Luna
Settlement, the spatial distribution of artifacts and other material debris and
traces of both residence and food preparation and cooking activities will mirror
the spatial distribution of the many camaradas,
or ranchos, that must have
characterized daily life among the majority of the soldiers that comprised the
expedition. If we set aside the
contingent of field-grade and upper company-grade officers, which might have
comprised as much as 50 of the 500-550 soldiers to have accompanied Luna, along
with at least 36 married soldiers who are documented to have brought their
wives and some children, and who thus likely lived and ate with their families,
then we might be looking at a potential range of between 40 and 90 individual camaradas, or ranchos, which acted as basic dining/residential units across most
of the settlement. Each one of these
smaller units would likely have utilized a common set of cooking and serving containers
and utensils, originally purchased or supplied to each company (which was the
basic unit of equipment designation in the Luna expedition account records) and
then distributed by its sergeant to the corporals and their camaradas. However,
each camarada might instead have
purchased some of these supplies on their own using pooled portions of their
initial advance pay of 100-150 pesos issued to each soldier in Mexico City, or
they might simply have supplemented more general company equipment and supplies
using such funds. Some company equipment
might also have been shared among several camaradas,
since not all soldiers necessarily dined simultaneously due to guard duty or
patrols.
In addition to the localized archaeological signature of
each camarada/rancho, we would also expect to find traces of individual
residences with associated cooking areas for the highest-level officers (the
governor/captain-general, the three royal officials, a handful of other
field-grade officers, and perhaps 10-12 company captains), all of whom by their
elevated status and substantially-greater salaries and prior wealth would have
been able to purchase or bring along their own more individualized set of
equipment and supplies. Such individuals
are also all either documented or likely to have brought along either hired
servants or in some cases slaves as well.
The chaplain likely had his own residence, and the Dominicans presumably
resided and dined in common as well.
Whether or not the 100 noble Aztec soldiers or estimated 100 other
Mexican Indian craftsmen who accompanied the expedition also formed their own
separate ranchos and lived in common
is at present undocumented,although this seems likely given the broader
military dining/residential system described above. The size and configuration of such Mexican
Indian dining/residential units may have been quite different from that of the
Spanish camaradas, but if not, they
might have added another 20-40 locations on the landscape. Using these estimates, the number of individual
dining/residential units on the Luna Settlement might be in the range of 75-150 distinct
units.
 |
| One possible configuration of the internal structure of a 50-man company on the Luna expedition. |
What all of this means from an archaeological standpoint is
that if we take the area of the upper terrace portion of the Luna Settlement
where the soldiers and others seem to have been living, which has been found
through UWF shovel testing to be 9 hectares (90,000 square meters), but which
when enclosed in a rectangular outline might be as much as 11 hectares (110,000
square meters), then the average size of each dining/residential unit
corresponding to the 75-150 hypothesized camaradas/ranchos discussed above would be 600 to 733
square meters each on the low end, to between 733 and 1467 square meters on the
high end. These hypothetical areas would
correspond to circles measuring 28 to 31 meters up to 39 to 43 meters in diameter
(averaging 35 meters in diameter), or squares measuring 24 to 27 meters up to
35 to 38 meters on a side (averaging 31 meters on a side). How or if these hypothetical camaradas and other ranchos or residences were laid out with respect to the original
planned town grid of 140 lots described by the Viceroy in 1559 before the
expedition’s departure is unclear, but this may eventually be revealed through
careful, long-term archaeological research to document the locations of
concentrations of artifacts and subsurface features related to structures,
refuse disposal, or other activities.
The Equipment of Dining
Given the inference that most of the dining/residential units
at the Luna Settlement were likely to have been camaradas consisting of some 5-10 men who used a single set of
storage, cooking, and serving equipment in common, and who withdrew food (even
if on short rations) from the same common warehouse source, presumably supplemented
by gathering, fishing, hunting, or scavenging, what would such a set of
equipment have looked like?
While my ongoing in-depth documentary research into the
dietary range of 16th-century Spaniards in both Spain and its New World
colonies is beyond the scope of this article (but see some details in Cook et
al. 2016), a few brief observations are instructive here. Shipboard rations for Spanish military
vessels during the mid-16th century provide one reasonable baseline for the most
basic military diet of Luna’s era. As
can be seen from the table below, distilled principally from detailed records
from 1563 and 1576 fleets based in Spain, the average daily diet included just
over two-thirds of a kilo of hardtack, just under a third of a kilo of assorted
proteins varying in type based on religious requirements, about a liter of
wine, small servings of legumes and/or rice, and small amounts of vinegar and
olive oil for flavoring and cooking, plus salt, garlic, and other available
spices.
Average Daily Spanish Military Rations, Mid-16th-Century
|
||||
Item
|
Amt.
|
Span. Meas.
|
Amt.
|
Metric Meas.
|
Hardtack
|
24
|
onzas
|
0.690
|
kilograms
|
Legumes*
|
0.005
|
almudes
|
0.022
|
liters
|
Rice
|
0.229
|
onzas
|
0.007
|
kilograms
|
Proteins*
|
10.191
|
onzas
|
0.296
|
kilograms
|
Wine
|
0.5
|
azumbres
|
1.008
|
liters
|
Vinegar
|
0.053
|
azumbres
|
0.107
|
liters
|
Olive Oil
|
0.017
|
azumbres
|
0.034
|
liters
|
*Legumes included fava beans and chickpeas; proteins
included pork, beef, fish, and cheese.
|
||||
The cooking and serving equipment normally kept on board each
ship to prepare these rations was actually quite limited, at least based on
inventories found for 1558 and 1575 fleets, and typically included one or two
copper cauldrons or kettles, two or three cooking pots (ollas), commonly
ceramic but sometimes copper, several spoons of wood, iron, or copper, several
axes for splitting firewood, a small number of pitchers and jugs of ceramic or
copper for serving wine, and at least as many plates [platos] and bowls [escudillas]
as there were crew members, sometimes ceramic but also commonly made of wood. Shipboard cooking seems clearly to have been
dominated by one-pot meals.
The more typical terrestrial diet for 16th-century Spaniards
was quite a bit more diverse, and involved a broader range of cooking and
serving gear. My ongoing analysis of the
1560 edition of the Ruperto de Nola cookbook, originally published in 1520 in
the Catalán language, provides some preliminary insights that are useful in
understanding the material culture of 16th-century dining in Spain. The recipes in the book include a large
number of stews called pottages containing meat and vegetables, eggs, and
spices. Among the most common
ingredients in the recipe book are the items in the following table, demonstrating
quite a bit of diversity in the Iberian Spanish diet, at least among the most
well-to-do families (Nola was the king’s chef).
Even though many of these foods were likely unavailable or rare and
expensive in the New World, they at least provide a sense of what “fine dining”
might have looked like in Luna’s time.
Type
|
Item (English)
|
Item (Spanish)
|
fruits
|
grapes
|
ubas
|
fruits
|
oranges
|
naranjas
|
fruits
|
pomegranate
|
granadas
|
fruits
|
quince
|
membrillos
|
grains
|
bread
|
pan
|
liquids
|
honey
|
miel
|
liquids
|
olive oil
|
aceite
|
liquids
|
rose water
|
agua rosada
|
liquids
|
vinegar
|
vinagre
|
liquids
|
wine
|
vino
|
nuts
|
almonds
|
almendras
|
nuts
|
hazelnuts
|
avellanas
|
nuts
|
pine nuts
|
piñones
|
proteins
|
bacon
|
tocino
|
proteins
|
beef
|
carne
|
proteins
|
broth
|
caldo
|
proteins
|
cheese
|
queso
|
proteins
|
chicken
|
pollo
|
proteins
|
eggs
|
huevos
|
proteins
|
goat, kid
|
cabrito
|
proteins
|
goat, milk
|
cabras, leche de
|
proteins
|
hen
|
gallina
|
proteins
|
milk
|
leche
|
proteins
|
ram
|
carnero
|
proteins
|
sheep, milk
|
ovejas, leche de
|
spices
|
cilantro
|
culantro seco
|
spices
|
cinnamon
|
canela
|
spices
|
cloves
|
clavos
|
spices
|
ginger
|
gingibre
|
spices
|
mint
|
hierba buena
|
spices
|
nutmeg
|
nuezes moscadas
|
spices
|
parsley
|
perejil
|
spices
|
pepper
|
pimienta
|
spices
|
saffron
|
azafran
|
spices
|
salt
|
sal
|
spices
|
spices, mixed
|
especias
|
spices
|
sugar
|
azucar
|
Based on the texts of Nola’s recipes, the commonly-used cooking
containers were pots [ollas] and
casserole dishes [cazuelas], along
with metal frying pans [sartenes].
Most of these pots and casseroles seem to have been ceramic, though metal
(iron) ones were also noted. There are
also references to saucepans [cazos],
presumably metal. All these were
normally used directly over fire or hot coals, though oven roasting was also
common, and in the absence of ovens this could be replicated over hot coals by
lidded casseroles. Apart from knives and
wooden cutting boards, utensils seem mostly wooden, including spoons and sticks
for stirring. Worsted wool/serge was the
most common filter for sauces, as well as seives made from bristles. A list of cooking items explicitly noted in
the cookbook is below:
Item (English)
|
Item (Spanish)
|
basket
|
cesta, espuerta
|
bowl
|
escudilla
|
cane stirrer
|
caña
|
casserole
|
cazuela
|
cauldron
|
caldera
|
cloth
|
paño
|
cutting board
|
tajador
|
feather
|
pluma
|
grill
|
parrillas
|
jug
|
cantaro
|
knife
|
cuchillo
|
oven
|
horno
|
paddle/spatula
|
paleta
|
pan
|
sarten
|
paper
|
papel
|
plate
|
plato
|
pot
|
olla
|
rag
|
trapo
|
serge fabric
|
estameña
|
sieve
|
cedazo
|
sieve, silk
|
tamiz
|
spit/roaster
|
asador
|
spoon
|
cuchara
|
stick, wooden
|
palo de madera
|
storage jar
|
tinajuela
|
string
|
hilo
|
washbasin
|
aljafana
|
In terms of serving, pottages, stews, and broths were
overwhelmingly served in bowls [escudillas]
(which are also sometimes used in the cooking process as measuring or mixing
containers). There are also many
references to serving on plates [platos],
and sometimes larger platters. His
instructions on serving beverages to important personages also makes it clear
that the pitcher [jarro] was used to
serve water on the table, and drinking cups called copas or tazas were used at
the table for drinking liquids.
As an important addition to the above list, while originally
based on the Iberian ideal, the dietary regime of Spaniards in New Spain was
somewhat more limited in terms of Spanish foods, but also incorporated local foods
that were either absent or uncommon in Spain.
Most relevant here, the foods originally transported with Luna’s first
fleet represented a mix of both Spanish and New Spanish products, most notably
exemplified by the fact that some two thirds of the grain rations that would
normally have been exclusively hardtack or bread made from wheat flour in Spain
were instead provided in the form of dried corn, amounting to just over 288,000
kilos of dried corn accompanying just under 140,000 kilos of hardtack and wheat
flour. What this meant is that an
additional suite of food preparation items were also required for the Luna
expedition, including basalt manos
and metates used for grinding corn
after soaking it in lye to make hominy, wooden trays called bateas used to hold the corn masa before it was made into fresh
tortillas, and ceramic griddles caled comales
used to cook the tortillas for eating.
As a result, we can add these items to our anticipated set of cooking
and serving equipment in each camarada
or other residence at the Luna Settlement.
One additional consideration is the fact that the hungry
members of the Luna expedition were ultimately forced to rely not just on
whatever foods they could scavenge from abandoned Indian villages and camps,
but also on edible plants and animals they found in the environs of their settlements
at Ochuse (at Pensacola) and Nanipacana (in Alabama). They may therefore have intentionally
equipped themselves with local Native-made pottery and other cooking
implements, and perhaps adapted their own equipment for new uses in preparing
exotic foods. An example of this can be
found in the Dominican narrative of the expedition, likely authored by fray
Domingo de la Anunciación within the volume originally assembled by Agustín
Dávila Padilla in 1596. He described
that:
They found some bitter acorns, so bad
tasting that even their hunger rejected them, and with all this they found the
need to season them so that they could be eaten. The Spaniards soaked them and put them in
saltwater until their bitter flavor was exchanged for the flavor of the salt;
then they put them in fresh water so that they would lose their saltiness, and
with one bit of knowledge and another that they applied, in the end they could
be eaten (Dávila
Padilla 1625:200-201).
As noted above, documentary and archaeological evidence
confirms that local Indian ceramics were definitely obtained and used by the
Luna expedition members, which adds one more dimension to the standard set of
cooking and serving equipment we would expect to be present at the locations
where each camarada or other
residential unit would have lived and dined.
Future Research
Ultimately, unless far more detailed documentary records
emerge regarding the exact equipment and supplies carried, owned, and used by
the various populations within the Luna expedition, we will have to rely on
archaeological data to fill in the details of daily life at the settlement,
including who lived where, and how they each struggled to survive under
increasingly more dire circumstances between 1559 and 1560. Doing so, however, will require us to marshal
a wide range of documentary and comparative archaeological data to understand
the exact relationship between the distribution of broken ceramic cooking and
serving vessels and many other traces of human activity on the site, and the
actual activities that occurred in and around the locations where these are
found, as well as the identities of the people who lived there in the 16th century. The discussion above is just one piece in
that broader puzzle.
*Thanks are due to Elizabeth D. Benchley
and Christina L. Bolte for editorial help.
References Cited
Barado y Font, Francisco
1884 Museo Militar:
Historia, Indumentaria, Armas, Sistemas de Combate, Instituciones, Organización
del Ejercito Español, Tomo II: Segunda mitad del Siglo XVI - Siglo XVII - Siglo
XVIII. Barcelona: Editorial de Evaristo
Ullastres. https://books.google.com/books?id=R6M1AQAAMAAJ&pg=PP11#v=onepage&q&f=false
Bolte, Christina L.
2017 “From the North
a Fierce Tempest”: Disaster, Relief, and the Failure of the 1559-1561 Tristán
de Luna y Arellano Settlement. Paper presented at the 2017 North American
Society for Oceanic History Conference, Charleston, South Carolina.
Cook, Gregory D., John R. Bratten, and John E. Worth other
authors on report?
2016 Exploring
Luna’s 1559 Fleet: Final Report for Florida Division of Historic Resources
Special Category Grant SC 503. Report of
Investigations #202, Archaeology Institute, University of West Florida,
Pensacola.
Dávila Orejón Gastón, Francisco
1669 Politica y mecanica militar para sargento
mayor de tercio. Madrid: Julian de
Paredes.
Eguiluz, Martín de
1595 Milicia,
Discurso, y Regla Militar, del Capitan Martín de Eguiluz, Bizcayno. Antwerp: Casa de Pedro Bellero. https://books.google.com/books?id=7kUsAQAAMAAJ&pg=PP5#v=onepage&q&f=false
Gallo, Antonio
1639 Destierro de Ignorancias de Todo Genero de
Soldados de Infantería. Madrid:
Imprenta de Francisco Martínez. https://books.google.com/books?id=riRaAAAAcAAJ&pg=PP5#v=onepage&q&f=false
Hudson, Charles
1990 The Juan Pardo Expeditions: Exploration of
the Carolinas and Tennessee, 1566-1568.
Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press.
Hudson, Charles, Marvin T. Smith, Chester B. DePratter,
Emilia Kelley
1989 The Tristán
de Luna Expedition, 1559-1561. Southeastern
Archaeology 8(1):31-45.
Martínez Laínez, Fernando, and José María Sánchez de Toca
2006 Tercios de España: Una Infantería Legendaria. Madrid: Editorial EDAF.
Nola, Ruperto de
1560 Libro de
Guisados, Manjares, y Potajes, intitulado Libro de Cozina. https://books.google.com/books?id=8UlXAAAAcAAJ&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=false
Priestly, Herbert Ingram
2010 The Luna Papers, 1559-1561: Volumes 1 &
2 (reprint of 1928 edition).
University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.
Spanish Crown
1565 Decree to Juan
Paez [Pardo], August 24, 1565. Legajo
19, Ramo 18, Patronato, Archivo General de Indias, Seville, Spain.
1632 Ordenanzas Militares de Felipe IV. MSS 9422, Biblioteca Nacional, Madrid,
Spain. http://bdh-rd.bne.es/viewer.vm?id=0000100302&page=1
1728 Ordenanzas de su Magestad, para el Regimen,
Disciplina, Subordinacion, y Servicio de la Infanteria, Cavalleria, y Dragones
de sus Exercitos, en Guarnicion, y en Campaña. Madrid: Imprenta de Juan de Ariztia.
1793 Ordenanzas generales de la armada naval.
Parte primera. Sobre la gobernacion militar y marinera de la armada en general,
y uso de sus fuerzas en la mar. Tomo II. Madrid: Imprenta Real. https://books.google.com/books?id=P84-lrYpdPAC&pg=PP7#v=onepage&q&f=false
Worth, John E.
2016 Preliminary
Observations on the Archaeological Assemblage of the 1559-1561 Tristán de Luna
Settlement. Paper presented at the 49th
Annual Conference of the Society for Historical Archaeology, Washington, D.C.,
Jan. 9, 2016. https://pages.uwf.edu/jworth/WorthSHA2016.pdf
2018a Florida’s
Forgotten Colony: Historical Background.
In Florida’s Lost Galleon: The
Emanuel Point Shipwreck, ed. by Roger C. Smith, pp. 34-67. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.
2018b New Insights
into Spanish-Native Relations during the Luna Expedition, 1559-1561. Paper presented at the 70th Annual Meeting of
the Florida Anthropological Society, St. Petersburg, Florida, May 12, 2018. https://pages.uwf.edu/jworth/Worth%202018_FAS.pdf
Worth, John E., Elizabeth D. Benchley, Janet R. Lloyd,
and Jennifer Melcher
2017 The
Discovery and Exploration of Tristán de Luna’s 1559-1561 Settlement on
Pensacola Bay. Paper presented at the
69th Annual Meeting of the Florida Anthropological Society, Jacksonville,
Florida, May 6, 2017. https://pages.uwf.edu/jworth/Worth%20et%20al%202017_FAS.pdf
