Description

Raw brown sugar molded into solid cones from a dark natural molasses-colored extract. This product has been in existence for literally hundreds of years, likely over a thousand, and was well known in the sugar industry and common culture in North America. It goes by different names in different cultures, as the sugar industry was imported throughout the world, but it is essentially known as the poor man’s brown sugar.  (Brown sugar, as is available today and found in use among the better classes of the period, was actually refined cane originated sugar, with the molasses, a byproduct of the refining process, added back in. This product was made prior to the refining process from the product of reducing the boiled extracted cane liquid into a mixture which would solidify and form into molds) Each cone is about 3 1/2″ tall and about 2 1/4″ across the base. Comes wrapped and labeled to documented period producer. (double wrapped with interior sealed waxed paper layer and our custom made, period type colored waxed paper, also food grade, outside) Consistent with our commitment to the vast diversity of commerce during the period we are re-introducing one of our first labels for this product. The sugar industry, just as the cotton industry, had strong ties between the north and the south in the antebellum period, as did The Leverich family and companies who had a strong presence in both. Domiciled in both New York, and in New Orleans and the surrounding area, they had processing plants which contracted with the largest sugar plantations in the region. (Goods were commonly marked or labeled from the plantation or region from which they originated, “Teche” being one of their primary sources.) Products were shipped in every level of processing to points north. A great and durable essential for the field kitchen or common home front. Broken up into pieces it makes a fine treat, boiled in your coffee it is divine.

We have had to limit purchases to two pieces per order as we are again experiencing purchases of our consumable products in quantity and reports of them being resold, with our labels and packaging, at a premium by unscrupulous blanket type vendors, depriving our individual living history customers of the opportunities to buy our museum quality items at our reasonable prices. We are not a sutler supplier, we are the Sutler. Please help us protect our mutual interest by reporting anyone found reselling our products not as a second-hand item, or, just as important, reproducing and using our copyrighted labels. Verification will result in $25 store credit. We do not work hard at our research and development on your behalf, while keeping costs as low as we reasonably can, in order to provide our products for the less industrious to profit from at your expense.

WE HAVE JUST BEEN ADVISED THAT YET ANOTHER YAHOO IS CURRENTLY MARKETING A QUITE LOUSY COPY OF THIS PRODUCT/PACKAGING USING OUR PROPRIETARY AND PROTECTED LABEL AND COPYING DESCRIPTION AND RESEARCH TEXT DIRECTLY FROM OUR WEBSITE ON SOME TRADE BLANKET F/B SITE. AS OFTEN AS THE WARNINGS ARE POSTED ON OUR SITE NO ONE COULD CLAIM IGNORANCE WHEN ENGAGED IN SUCH DISHONEST AND DISRESPECTFUL ACTIVITY. WE HAVE ATTEMPTED TO MORE CLEARLY IDENTIFY THE CULPRIT AND ALSO POLITELY REACHED OUT TO THE TRADE BLANKET “ADMINSTRATORS” TO SEE IF THEY HAVE ANY INTEGRITY POLICY CONCERNING SUCH THINGS. BUT THEY HAVE THUS FAR NOT RESPONDED. (OF COURSE, WE CANNOT LOCATE ANY DIRECT EMAIL CONTACT) REST ASSURED, WE WILL CONTINUE TO PURSUE ALL REMEDIES ON THIS ISSUE AND VIGOROUSLY PROTECT OUR LFETIME OF DESIGN WORK AND PERIOD LABEL RESEARCH ON YOUR BEHALF.

OUR LABELS ARE PROPRIETARY AND PROTECTED. ANY UNAUTHORIZED USE WILL BE VIGOROUSLY PURSUED.

Note: I am sorry that I have to take the space here, but it seems that an erroneous statement published many years ago on an internet gaggle is yet persistent in some circles. (we are looking to create a new section/page on the website which allows us to add such notes and provide corrections-something we believe in, when necessary, away from the product description, with just a reference note to the page when warranted)  Apparently, a self-proclaimed “historical sugar expert” did a few google searches and claimed that there was no historical basis for this product in the civil war period Living History community and arrogantly declared it a “reenactorism” which should apparently be then tarred and feathered in the public square. That is flatly BS. His basis for the opinion seems to have been founded on an uninformed comparison between this product and a refined sugar product which was also produced in cone shaped molds. Because these cones and the molds he found produced to make them in the period were larger and a bit more conical than the product in question, he declared them unanointed by the powers that be. He then furthered his straw dog argument that such a product in that form was never formally produced or issued by the US Govt to troops in the field. First, in addition to the established multi-century history of this product, molds made specifically for this product, in this size and shape, and their availability here is well documented – this is almost laughable were it not so sad. (cones are the most common by far, but square and rectangular molds are also known) Secondly, the product was actually introduced to the community in the field with The Army of the Pacific. (an important pioneer in the “authentic campaign” style commitment in the community at both the battalion/brigade level, which we actually co-founded, produced the pioneering of large organization commissary and field sutlery programs for, and was also honored to lead troops in the field as Lt. Col.) It was first provided to our troops at an event which represented part of the Vicksburg Campaign directly into one of the regions where this product was common. It was never presented as an item produced by the Govt as a regularly issued item, rather it was presented as a procured item by the commissary of the organization to supplement the ration issue, as the govt issue sugar ration was so often unavailable.  (being quite durable and not rendered completely ruined by dampness, it proved very popular so we continued to provide it in the same manner at subsequent events. The army should have issued it!) The source of the original erroneous article was actually a sometime participant of the Army of the Pacific, along with many of the members and hierarchy of the site, who all knew where it had originated from. He was also aware that the product had then been made available directly to the Living History community exclusively by the Sutler of Fort Scott. He never made any attempt to contact us prior to publishing his answer to the website inquiry, if he had the community would have had the correct and larger historical context, not history controlled by a few “authoritarians” for their own self interests. This is why I do not genuflect at the altar of such sources, who too often either have a vested interested in a finite number of certain vendors who are either willing to submit to their often-unearned authority, or, are actually partnered with persons within the organization’s hierarchy. I have many friends within the diverse and varied Living History community over 50 yrs, including most all of the internet clubs, but I do not order my business or my life by them. Our customers and clients committed to historical authenticity are familiar with our business philosophy and know us and our commitments, that is more than enough for us!