General Diet and Instructions for Proper Nutrition

The Diet and Nutrition of Slaves in the Southern United States in Regards to Health and Growth Patterns

Miranda Moore

10/18/00

Text pages: 19

Table Pages: 2

Figure Pages: 1

Bibliography Pages: 2

Introduction

The state of slave diet in the Southern United States is a greatly debated topic in history. In fact, it was the main argument used by abolitionists in the fight to end slavery. Public thought on slave diet is generally rendered as insufficient for the workload many slaves dealt with. But any insufficiency extended not from the amount given to slaves, but the lesser quality and monotony of the diet itself (Mummert, 1952). Plantation owners saw their slaves as an investment, so rations were strictly overseen and allotted to ensure proper health, as was understood for blacks at the time. Most accounts of slave diet consist of three main topics: the general makeup of the slave diet in terms of rations, the influence and use of slaves’ personal plots of land and the raising of livestock, and the medical conditions of slaves resulting from their diet. The purpose of this paper is to explore these aspects of slave diet in order to ascertain the general health of slaves in the South, and its effects on growth patterns.

General Diet and Instructions for Proper Nutrition

The generally understood allotment of food per slave was one peck of corn and two to five pounds of salted pork, or bacon, per week. This pertained to working slaves; children and the elderly received proportionately less, ranging from one-third to one-half of the usual ration. Slave diet was not a luxurious affair. Planters were interested in making profits, and to spend excessive amounts on diverse food for slaves was thought of as unnecessary (Sutch, 1976). Because the economics of feeding slaves was important to owners, many strove to feed slaves by what could be grown on the plantation. This did add some diversity to the diet, depending on the location and the season. Food was distributed in rations, in some instances daily, but usually weekly. It was believed that slaves would consume more than was actually needed if such precautions were ignored, and the rations were generally believed to be enough to tide them over for a certain length of time (Taylor, 1924). Also, instances of slaves selling their food for tobacco or whiskey prompted owners to use the ration system. Rations were never to be skimped, however. Owners realized the importance of a full stomach, although care was taken to not waste any food (Phillips, 1966). One planter from North Carolina wrote that it was his Christian duty to make sure his slaves had enough to eat, and that planters should not starve their slaves in order to save money. He argued that slaves will have their food, and if not provided, it will be stolen (Breeden, 1980). Another planter wrote that if doubtful about what amount should be given, a planter should give the largest amount, and ensure that only the finest foods were used (Breeden, 1980).

The diet of slaves consisted mainly of bacon and cornmeal. In most instances, owners supplemented this diet with fruits and vegetables when they were available. This included turnips, apples, greens, sweet potatoes, peas, cabbage, figs, and Irish potatoes, most commonly. The nutritional quality of a pork and corn diet was not high. Table 1 details the average amount of vital nutrients supplied to slaves with a pork and corn diet, and compares it with the minimum requirements for men and women. It is important to note that the minimum requirements noted in this table are low; Owens (1976) states the slaves would have required an average of at least 3000 calories. Also, a high ratio of fat to meat in pork or loss of nutrition due to cooking would seriously alter these levels. On average, a pork and corn diet provided one-fifth the needed calcium, and no vitamin C. This diet was especially lacking for pregnant and lactating females (Savitt, 1978). One helpful staple of the slave diet was molasses, which unbeknownst to anyone, provided almost half the minimum iron requirement and provided 250 precious calories (Savitt, 1978). Pork itself was considered an energy-producing food. It was thought to have “heat generating” properties which here beneficial to blacks (Smith, 1985). The high fat content was considered a necessary part of the slave diet, because it was thought that blacks could not produce “animal heat” as readily as whites and needed fatty foods to help produce the heat (Breeden, 1980).

Cornmeal provided the core of the slave diet. It was thought that cornmeal was the best grain to provide, being more advantageous that flour. But occasionally, flour was substituted for cornmeal. This sparseness is fortunate in that cornmeal has more food value than unenriched flour. Cornmeal provided more than 100 calories per ounce. It was also beneficial because it endured storage and changes in weather, and grinding it into meal allowed for varied dishes (Owens, 1976). Cornmeal was usually ground for the slaves so that their rest time was not used for the grinding. Planters differed on this, however, with some saying that slaves preferred to grind their own meal.

Perhaps the most debated topic among masters was not the diet itself, but the proper preparation. Planters differed in opinions over whether slaves should cook their own food, or if it should be cooked by one household servant delegated especially to this task. On small plantations, the food for the master and slave were often prepared in the same kitchen. On the plantation of John Tillman in Georgia, slaves were treated like family. Tillman had the same cook prepare the meals for the slaves in the same manner as the meals for his own family (Postell, 1970). This was impractical on larger plantations, however. It was the custom in many places to have a cook prepare the breakfast and dinner for the slaves. The slaves were responsible for preparing their own supper. However, toward the end of the antebellum period, plantation kitchens became the norm (Postell, 1970). Many planters did not think it was fair to require the slaves to work long days in the field, and then expect them to prepare an adequate meal. Owners were very explicit in their rules for the preparation of the slave meals, so that proper nutrition was obtained. It was believed that slaves were too careless to properly cook their own food (Mummert, 1952). Each day slaves would bring their ration for the next day, so the cook could prepare everyone’s rations together. Before the serving of the food, it was usually the job of the overseer to check the food for proper preparation and the addition of vegetables. One planter in South Carolina required that his cook use several pots to ensure even cooking. Also, he found it advantageous to boil the meat with the food, so that a small bit of meat could flavor the food for a whole plantation (Breeden, 1980). Planters were strict about the times that meals were to be served. One planter from Virginia stated that there should be strict hours for breakfast and dinner, with breakfast at eight o’clock and dinner at one o’clock. Breakfast was served before the slaves went to the fields, so it was important that breakfast be provided in a timely manner. Dinner was taken out into the fields, usually in buckets to be eaten during a break (Breeden, 1980). Although there continued to be debate over group cooking versus private cooking, most plantations subscribed to group cooking because it lessened the time slaves spent working, provided a normal schedule of eating as well as lessening the amount of improperly cooked food, and allowed planters to be more economical with the rations.

Additions to Slave Diet

Slave diets differed on different plantations based on geographic location, the owner’s temperament, and knowledge about dietary needs (Smith, 1985). Coastal plantations and those near freshwater usually had the benefit of seafood, and many owners allowed the slaves to fish for extra resources. The relative abundance also allowed for diversity within the rationed diet, with stews made with oysters and other shellfish (Owens, 1976). Slaves were sometimes given guns for hunting the various fowl and animals, and the use of boats for transportation through the marshes (Smith, 1985). Along with this, rice plantations along the Atlantic Coast usually provided rice as a staple instead of cornmeal. Some plantations served beef or mutton instead of pork, and others refused to serve fruits because its propensity to cause sickness in the slaves.

The most common source of supplemental foods was small plots of land that slaves could use to grow whatever they pleased (Sutch, 1976). This was generally used by the master as a way to lessen the amount of rations. Slaves grew potatoes, various greens, and peas most commonly. On some plantations, slaves were not allowed to grow corn or cotton, as not to interfere with the master’s supply of these goods (Owens, 1976). The size of the plots varied from one to two acres, but some were as small as half an acre per family (Smith, 1985). Slaves also raised hogs and chickens on this land, harvesting the meat and eggs. Although these plots were supplied to provide more food, many slaves sold what they raised in order to make money or trade for coffee, tobacco, whiskey, and non-food items. Eggs could be sold for four cents per dozen, and some slaves were known to make up to a hundred dollars from their pursuits (Mummert, 1952; Smith, 1985). These plots of land were located next to the slave quarters in most instances, much like the depiction of Figure 1.

There were variations on the use of farming plots. On a plantation in Chunnennuggee, Alabama, plots of land were used for profit sharing. Each slave was assigned a half-acre, and as long as he worked well at the master’s crop, the whole gang would work his plot. This would be done for every good slave, each taking turns having the group work his land. The hopes were that this would eliminate night and Sunday work for the slaves. The crops were then sold and used by the master to buy preferred Sunday clothing or other supplies (Mummert, 1952). Plots of land seemed to have more benefits than disadvantages, and were used widely throughout the South.

Another addition to slave diet that was much less common was milk. Butter and milk were generally ignored in the diet of slaves, as dairy products were not generally regarded as beneficial to slaves. However, some planters went as far as to build dairies on their land. Spring and summer months had good production of dairy products, but winter months usually experienced shortages or none at all (Postell, 1970). However, milk may not have been a viable addition to slave diet. Kiple and Kiple (1977) argued that since lactose intolerance was high among blacks, between 70 and 77 percent at the time of their article, that many slaves would have also been lactose intolerant.

Generally, additions to slave diet came mainly from the vegetable gardens or local natural resources. The vegetable gardens did supply much needed nutritional resources to supplement the corn and pork diet. However, the amount that the plots were worked and the actual number of slaves who had access to them are unknown (Postell, 1970). Accounts are mixed as to the propensity of milk consumption, though it seems that milk and other dairy products were rare.

The General Health and Growth Patterns of Slaves

The nutritional deficiency of slave diet went beyond the lack of variety. It was noted earlier how the corn and pork based diet was missing many of the essential nutrients needed by hard laborers. Sore eyes, bad teeth, skin rashes, and lesions were common ailments among the slaves. This vitamin deficiency had serious consequences for the general health of slaves, and may have had long term affects on the growth patterns in children and adolescents.

Some of the sickness experienced by slaves was not caused by lack of nutrition, but the preservation of the food. Spoiled meat that was given to slaves, whether intentionally or not, had dire consequences. One account from an imprisoned slave noted that the meat provided was often covered in worms or flies. They had little choice but to eat it, or starve. To preserve meat, it was necessary to salt it and hang it out to dry for a few days. This was a meticulous process, and even when special care was taken to insure quality, there were no guarantees. One Georgia planter lamented that meat was hard to keep because of the heat exposure (Owens, 1976). Unfortunately, it was hard to spot spoiled meat. The only clues came when the meat was seriously decayed with evidence of worms. Because of the meticulous process of curing and relative difficulty of noticing decay, spoiled meat often led to plantation or even region wide sickness (Owens, 1976).

One common and disturbing sickness among slaves was known as beriberi, or most commonly, dirt-eating (Sutch, 1976). It is now known that beriberi is caused by thiamine deficiency, but at the time, doctors believed it to be caused by poor nutrition and depression. Along with the symptom of dirt eating, slaves appeared sluggish or idle, which was easy to attribute to laziness. By the time the sickness had progressed, victims showed great susceptibility to cold, puffed shiny skin, thin blood, and decreased bowl movements (Owens, 1976). The prognosis was always death. This sickness affected slaves of all ages, but one planter recalled how children were most affected. In fact, adult slaves considered it juvenile, and would hide it from family until the symptoms were obvious. Beriberi was considered second only to yellow fever, and hundreds of slaves died yearly (Sutch, 1976). It is still not known why thiamine deficiency causes dirt eating.

It is odd that thiamine deficiency was so common among slaves, considering that pork is considered an excellent source of the nutrient (Sutch, 1976). However, thiamine is depleted by heat and alkaline solutions. Pickling pork by soaking it in brine would have seriously depleted its nutritional value. Also, prolonged dehydration, which was the main preparation of pork, destroys thiamine (Sutch, 1976). Due to this, it is understandable how thiamine deficiency developed.

One of the most recorded diseases in the slave community is pellagra, a disease caused by a largely corn diet. Pellagra was generally thought to be caused by niacin deprivation, but it could also be caused by multiple vitamin deficiencies or amino acid imbalances (Kiple and Kiple, 1977). Corn is actually high in niacin, but it comes in a bound form that is not readily available to the consumer. Pork also contains limited amounts of niacin, only 9.3 mg per pound (Sutch, 1976). If needed, niacin can be produced from tryptophan, an amino acid that helps make up protein. However, there was little protein to share. The crude protein available from one-half pound of pork and two pounds of corn is 133.3 grams. This diet was lacking in tryptophan, and the body can only utilize those proteins with all the amino acids present. Because of this imbalance, only 47.4 grams of protein would have been useable (Sutch, 1976). Milk would also be a good source of tryptophan, but as discussed earlier, slaves had a high level of lactose intolerance, and milk was a rare addition to diet in any case (Kiple and Kiple, 1977).

Instances of pellagra have been recorded in Europe, Africa, and the United States, where it made an abrupt appearance in the slave population (Kiple and Kiple, 1977). The problem was that pellagra long went unrecognized. Diagnosing the disease was a problem, because its symptoms of diarrhea, dermatitis, and dementia were symptoms of many other diseases. Also, pellagra does not progress along the classical lines of disease (Kiple and Kiple, 1977). There are four stages to the disease, as noted in Table 2. In the first stages, the victim merely feels a loss of appetite and digestive disturbances. As it progresses, the mouth becomes sore, and the tongue develops a thick coating. The muscles in the back begin to hurt, and the leg muscles may become weak. This first stage would normally appear at the first of the year, after a hard winter diet. These symptoms would persist for some length of time and then vanish completely, usually when spring allowed for a more nutritious and varied diet. The symptoms would then return the second year as the second stage. In the second stage, the skin becomes red and scaly and the mucous membranes become inflamed, leading to diarrhea. This was often accompanied by a high fever. At this point, a doctor was usually called. Unfortunately, pellagra was unknown to antebellum doctors, and it was often regarded as typhoid fever or diphtheria (Kiple and Kiple, 1977). The third stage was characterized by cerebrospinal disturbances, coupled with burning sensations in various parts of the body and acute dementia. The fourth stage consisted of the wasting away of the victim, and finally death (Kiple and Kiple, 1977). It was a complicated disease for doctors to treat, and was not recognized until after the antebellum period.