{"id":126,"date":"2019-05-20T13:48:09","date_gmt":"2019-05-20T13:48:09","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/nevillesonline.com\/?page_id=126"},"modified":"2019-05-20T15:53:36","modified_gmt":"2019-05-20T15:53:36","slug":"grilling-guides-and-info","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/nevillesonline.com\/?page_id=126","title":{"rendered":"Grilling Guides and Info"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\n\n
All About Barbecue<\/big><\/big><\/big><\/strong><\/span> <\/b><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
The History of Barbecue<\/a><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
The Difference Between
\nBarbecuing and Grilling<\/a><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Rubs<\/a><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Marinades<\/a><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Mops, Sops and Bastes<\/a><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Barbecue
\nSauces<\/a><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
When is it Cooked ?<\/a><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Using a Grill to Barbecue \/
\nSmoke Food<\/span><\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Brining<\/a><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n
\n

<\/a>The
\nHistory of Barbecue<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

The Etymology of Barbecue<\/h4>\n

 <\/p>\n

The roads of the Southern United States are lined with a succession of grinning
\npigs, advertising the availability of barbecue in countless restaurants. The origins of
\nbarbecue in the South, however, are traceable to a period long before the smiling pig
\nbecame a fixture on Southern roadsides. The etymology of the term is vague, but the most
\nplausible theory states that the word “barbecue” is a derivative of the West
\nIndian term “barbacoa,” which denotes a method of slow-cooking meat over hot
\ncoals. Bon Appetit<\/i> magazine blithely informs its readers that the word comes from
\nan extinct tribe in Guyana who enjoyed “cheerfully spit roasting captured
\nenemies.” The Oxford English Dictionary traces the word back to Haiti, and others
\nclaim (somewhat implausibly) that “barbecue” actually comes from the French
\nphrase “barbe a queue”<\/i>, meaning “from head to tail.” Proponents
\nof this theory point to the whole-hog cooking method espoused by some barbecue chefs. Tar
\nHeel<\/i> magazine posits that the word “barbecue” comes from a nineteenth
\ncentury advertisement for a combination whiskey bar<\/strong>, beer<\/strong><\/p>\n

hall, pool<\/strong> establishment and purveyor of roast pig<\/strong>,
\nknown as the BAR-BEER-CUE-PIG <\/strong>(Bass 313). The most convincing explanation
\nis that the method of roasting meat over powdery coals was picked up from indigenous
\npeoples in the colonial period, and that “barbacoa” became “barbecue”
\nin the lexicon of early settlers.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Barbecue Before the Civil War<\/h4>\n

The history of barbecue itself, aside from its murky etymological origins, is more
\nclear. For several reasons, the pig became an omnipresent food staple in the South. Pigs
\nwere a low-maintenance and convenient food source for Southerners. In the pre-Civil War
\nperiod, Southerners ate, on average, five pounds of pork for every one pound of beef (Gray
\n27). Pigs could be put out to root in the forest and caught when food supply became low.
\nThese semi-wild pigs were tougher and stringier than modern hogs, but were a convenient
\nand popular food source. Every part of the pig was utilized– the meat was either eaten
\nimmediately or cured for later consumption, and the ears, organs and other parts were
\ntransformed into edible delicacies. Pig slaughtering became a time for celebration, and
\nthe neighborhood would be invited to share in the largesse. The traditional Southern
\nbarbecue grew out of these gatherings.<\/p>\n

William Byrd, in his eighteenth century book writings The Secret History of the
\nDividing Line Betwixt Virginia and North Carolina<\/em> has some pretty snippy things to
\nsay about some Southerners’ predilection for pork. He writes that hog meat was:<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

the staple commodity of North Carolina . . . and with pitch and tar makes up the whole
\nof their traffic . . . these people live so much upon swine’s flesh that it don’t only
\nincline them to the yaws, and consequently to the . . . [loss] of their noses, but makes
\nthem likewise extremely hoggish in their temper, and many of them seem to grunt rather
\nthan speak in their ordinary conversation (Taylor 21-2)<\/span><\/p>\n

“Yaws,” of course, is an infectious
\ntropical disease closely related to syphilis. Perhaps because of natives like Byrd,
\nVirginia is frequently considered beyond the parameters of the “barbecue belt.”<\/span><\/p>\n

At the end of the colonial period, the practice of holding neighborhood barbecues was
\nwell-established, but it was in the fifty years before the Civil War that the traditions
\nassociated with large barbecues became entrenched. Plantation owners regularly held large
\nand festive barbecues, including “pig pickin’s” for slaves (Hilliard 59). In
\nthis pre-Civil War period, a groundswell of regional patriotism made pork production more
\nand more important. Relatively little of the pork produced was exported out of the South,
\nand hog production became a way for Southerners to create a self-sufficient food supply–
\nSouthern pork for Southern patriots (Hilliard 99). Hogs became fatter and better
\ncared-for, and farmers began to feed them corn to plump them up before slaughter. The
\nstringy and tough wild pigs of the colonial period became well-fed hogs. Barbecue was
\nstill only one facet of pork production, but more hogs meant more barbecues.<\/p>\n

In the nineteenth century, barbecue was a feature at church picnics and political
\nrallies as well as at private parties (Egerton 150). A barbecue was a popular and
\nrelatively inexpensive way to lobby for votes, and the organizers of political rallies
\nwould provide barbecue, lemonade, and usually a bit of whiskey (Bass 307). These
\ngatherings were also an easy way for different classes to mix. Barbecue was not a class-
\nspecific food, and large groups of people from every stratum could mix to eat, drink and
\nlisten to stump speeches. Journalist Jonathan Daniel’s, writing in the mid-twentieth
\ncentury, maintained that “Barbecue is the dish which binds together the taste of both
\nthe people of the big house and the poorest occupants of the back end of the broken-down
\nbarn” (Bass 314). Political and church barbecues were among the first examples of
\nthis phenomenon. Church barbecues, where roasted pig supplemented the covered dishes
\nprepared by the ladies of the congregation, were a manifestation of the traditional church
\npicnic in many Southern communities. Church and political barbecues are still a vital
\ntradition in many parts of the South (Gray 133-4).<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Barbecue Restaurants<\/h4>\n

At the beginning of the twentieth century, barbecue appeared in a new venue, that of
\nthe barbecue restaurant. After the South went from a rural-agricultural region to a more
\nurban and industrial area, grocery stores provided hog meat (is it any wonder that the
\nnation’s first supermarket chain was christened Piggly Wiggly<\/i> ?), agricultural
\nfairs replaced festive hog killings, and the barbecue restaurant took over the
\ntime-consuming task of slow-cooking pork (Bass 301). Usually, these restaurants grew out
\nof a simple barbecue pit where the owner sold barbecue to take away. Many of the pit men
\nonly opened on weekends, working (usually on a farm) during the week and tending the pit
\non weekends. The typical barbecue shack consisted of a bare concrete floor surrounded by a
\ncorrugated tin roof and walls (Johnson 9). Soon, stools and tables were added, and the
\nubiquitous pig adorned the outside of the building. Few pit men owned more than one
\nrestaurant– the preparation of the pig required almost constant attention, and few expert
\npit men were willing to share the secret of their sauce preparations. The advent of the
\nautomobile gave the barbecue shack a ready-made clientele– travelers would stop at the
\nroadside stands for a cheap and filling meal (Johnson 6). As the twentieth century
\nprogressed, barbecue pits grew and prospered, evolving into three distinct types.
\nAccording to barbecue scholar Jonathan Bass, the three kinds of barbecue restaurants are
\nblack-owned, upscale urban white, and white “joints” (more akin to honky-tonk
\nbars). These racial denotations, however, do not mean that barbecue restaurants catered to
\na specific racial clientele. Good barbecue drew (and draws) barbecue fans of every color
\nand class.<\/p>\n

Perhaps because much of its trade consisted of
\ntake-out orders, the barbecue restaurant was an interracial meeting place long before the
\nforced integration of the 1950’s and 1960’s (Egerton 152). When these restaurants first
\nappeared, many were owned by black Southerners, and “whites, in a strange reversal of
\nJim Crow traditions, made stealthy excursions for take-out orders” (Wilson 676). In
\nthe 1950’s and 1960’s, much of this comity was lost. Many barbecue joints became
\nsegregated by race. Barbecue has even made it into the annals of legal history, with the
\ndesegregation battles at Ollie’s Barbecue in Alabama and Maurice’s Piggy Park in Columbia
\nproviding often-cited case law as well as a stain on the fascinating history of barbecue.
\nIn the case Newman v. Piggy Park Enterprises<\/i>, the court ruled that Maurice
\nBessinger’s chain of five barbecue restaurants unlawfully discriminated against
\nAfrican-American patrons.<\/span><\/p>\n

The varied history of barbecue reflects the varied history of the South. Sometimes
\nshameful, but usually interesting, the history of barbecue can be seen an emblem of
\nSouthern history. For the past seventy-five years, the barbecue joint has flourished.
\nAlthough local specialties and the time-intensive nature of barbecue preparation have
\ninsured that real barbecue (as opposed to defrosted and microwaved meat) will never be a
\nstaple at chain restaurants, barbecue has endured. Aside from its succulent taste,
\ndelicious sauces and the inimitable, smoky atmosphere of an authentic barbecue joint,
\nbarbecue has become a Southern icon, a symbol that is cherished by Southerners. Without
\nthe racist subtext of the Stars and Bars, the anachronistic sexism of the Southern belle,
\nor the bland ennui of a plate of grits, barbecue has become a cultural icon for
\nSoutherners, of every race, class and sex.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Barbecue By Region<\/h4>\n

 <\/p>\n

Barbecue is a cherished example of the cultural heritage of the South to most
\nSoutherners, but within the region, debate as to the nature of barbecue rages on. While
\nbarbecue-loving Southerners agree that the “Northern” definition of barbecue– a
\ncook-out in the back-yard– is ludicrous, barbecue aficionados also like to argue about
\nwhat constitutes true Southern barbecue. State by state, and even town by town, no method
\nis exactly alike. For the purposes of this paper, the one non-debatable component of
\nbarbecue is pork, and the South is bounded by the parameters of the “barbecue
\nbelt” (Louisiana, Missouri, Tennessee, Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, South
\nCarolina). With apologies to the dedicated barbecue chefs of Owensboro and southwestern
\nTexas, Kentucky’s misbegotten notion of mutton, and the beef and mesquite of Texas simply
\ndo not qualify as barbecue, and these regions will not be closely examined here.<\/p>\n

Why do the regional differences in pig-roasting merit attention? Barbecue is
\nemblematic of a lot of things in the South– despite intra-regional differences, barbecue
\nis barbecue all over the Southern United States. We may argue about which kind is the best<\/i>
\nbarbecue, but very few people assert that the different types are not part of a vital (and
\ndelicious) Southern tradition. Despite (in John Egerton’s words) the Americanization of
\nDixie, the South has maintained a distinct regional flavor that makes it special–
\ndifferent from any other part of the United States. In tracing the differences between the
\ndifferent types of pork barbecue, we demonstrate one example of how, despite geographical
\ndisparities, encroaching national homogeneity, and bitter intra-regional disputes, the
\nSouth continues to cherish those parts of itself which make it peculiarly Southern.<\/p>\n

This established, our attention turns to the differences between the many types of pork
\nbarbecue. These are many and hotly contested. Differences can be gauged by comparing
\ncooking styles, serving methods, side dishes preferred by each camp, and (most contentious
\nof all) sauces.<\/p>\n

Barbecue in the South<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Much of the variation in barbecue methodology and saucing in Southern barbecue can be
\nexplained by its geographical migrations. After originally appearing on the East Coast,
\nbarbecue began travelling West, picking up permutations along the way. Spanish colonists
\nspread the cooking technology (Johnson 6), but the agriculture of each region added its
\nown twist. The simple vinegar sauces of the East Coast were supplanted by the sweet tomato
\nsauce of Memphis and the fiery red Texas swab. In western Kentucky, mutton was substituted
\nfor pork, and the cattle ranchers of Texas used barbecue techniques for slow-cooking beef
\n(with these innovations, southwestern Texans and western Kentuckians put themselves
\nirrevocably outside the “barbecue belt”).<\/p>\n

There are several main regions of barbecue saucery in the South. Each region has its
\nown secret sauces, with much intra-regional variation. This “barbecue belt”
\nshares the same tradition of slow-cooking the meat, but diverges widely in sauces and side
\ndishes.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Barbecue on the East Coast<\/em><\/h4>\n

 <\/p>\n

In eastern North Carolina, the meat is chopped or sliced pig and the sauce is
\npeppery vinegar. Traditional side dishes include coleslaw and hush puppies (perhaps a
\ncarry-over from the area’s many seafood restaurants). These hush puppies are light and
\noval-shaped. The area of North Carolina west of Raleigh uses the same type of meat, but
\ndouses it in a sauce rich with vinegar and tomatoes. Western North Carolinians eat
\nbarbecue with bread and sometimes Brunswick stew, a stew made with vegetables, chicken and
\nsometimes game.<\/p>\n

Further south, in South Carolina and Georgia, the pig is still chopped or sliced, but
\nit is doused in a yellow mustard-based sauce. In much of South Carolina, barbecue is
\nserved alongside light bread, coleslaw, and “hash” with rice. Hash is made of
\nstewed organ meats. In this region, the skin of the pig is often removed and fried
\nseparately. (This delicacy should not be confused with the pre-packaged pork rinds
\npopularized by George Bush). In Georgia, Brunswick stew often appears.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Barbecue in the Central South<\/em><\/h4>\n

As the barbecue aficionado travels further west, pork remains the meat of choice, but
\nit is served “pulled” rather than chopped. Pulled pork is slow-cooked, shredded
\nby hand into succulent threads of meat, then doused with sauce. The pulled pig region,
\ncentered around Memphis, Tennessee, usually serves a sweet tomato sauce flavored with
\npepper and molasses. Because Memphis is a port city, the creators of barbecue sauces in
\nthis area had a larger repertoire of ingredients from which to choose. Molasses was
\nshipped up-river, and became a popular seasoning. The popularity of the “pulled”
\nserving method has resulted in the appearance of “pulled chicken” on several
\nchain barbecue restaurant menus. Pulled chicken is reminiscent of the Northern concept of
\nbarbecue as backyard activity, and the purist should avoid it. Barbecue joints serving
\nMemphis style barbecue usually serve it alongside coleslaw, cornbread, and sometimes
\nFrench fries. Memphis barbecue is a term that encompasses both pulled pork and slow-
\ncooked pork ribs. This ribs are either basted with sauce or rubbed with a mixture of tangy
\nspices before pit cooking.<\/p>\n

In Alabama, most sauces are also red, but a bit spicier than those served in Tennessee.
\nPulled and chopped pork is offered, as well as slabs of ribs. In Arkansas, the sauces
\nvary. Because the state borders Tennessee, Texas, and several other states, one can find a
\nwide variety of barbecue styles and sauces in Arkansas. Side dishes can include baked
\nbeans, coleslaw, and potato chips. On the western side, Arkansas borders Texas, and beef
\nbarbecue is more prevalent.<\/p>\n

After examining the many types of barbecue, it is easy to wonder, “why on earth is
\nslow-cooked pig a Southern icon<\/strong>
\n?” <\/span>Although it is different all over the South,
\nand though it is a homely and unassuming pork product, barbecue has assumed heroic
\nproportions in the cultural iconography of the South. One reason for this is the regional
\nfoodways endemic to the Southern United States. The pig has always been a crucial facet of
\nthe Southern diet, and a study of Southern foodways helps to explicate the importance of
\nbarbecue.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

A Barbecue Bibliography<\/h4>\n

 <\/p>\n

Craig Claiborne. Southern Cooking<\/i>. New York: Times Books, 1987.<\/p>\n

Mary Douglas, ed. Food in the Social Order<\/i>. New York: Russell Sage Foundation,
\n1984.<\/p>\n

John Egerton. Southern Food: At Home, On the Road, In History<\/i>. New York: Alfred
\nA Knopf, 1987.<\/p>\n

Sam Bowers Hilliard. Hog Meat and Hoecake: Food Supply in the Old South<\/i>.
\nCarbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1972.<\/p>\n

Jeremy MacClancy. Consuming Culture: Why You Eat What You Eat<\/i>. New York: Henry
\nHolt and Company, 1992.<\/p>\n

James Donald Mackenzie. Colorful Heritage: An Informal History of Barbecue
\nPresbyterian Church and Bluff Presbyterian Church<\/i>. Olivia, NC: Rev. James Mackenzie,
\n1969.<\/p>\n

Ernest Matthew Mickler. White Trash Cooking<\/i>. Berkeley: 10 Speed Press, 1986.<\/p>\n

Charles L. Perdue, Jr., ed. Pigsfoot Jelly and Persimmon Beer<\/i>. Santa Fe: Ancient
\nCity Press, 1992.<\/p>\n

Joe Gray Taylor. Eating, Drinking and Visiting in the Old South<\/i>. Baton Rouge:
\nLouisiana State University Press, 1982.<\/p>\n

Mary Anne Schofield, ed. Cooking by the Book: Food in Literature and Culture<\/i>.
\nBowling Green: Bowling Green State University Popular Press, 1989.<\/p>\n

Jane and Michael Stern. Good Food<\/i>. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1983.<\/p>\n

Charles Reagan Wilson and William Ferris, eds. Encyclopedia of Southern Culture<\/i>.
\nChapel Hill: UNC Press, 1989.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n

 <\/p>\n

<\/a>The Difference Between Grilling and Barbecue<\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

This is a question that is asked by many, but not widely known or understood. A lot of
\nthe confusion lies in the fact that people often use the same piece of equipment for
\ngrilling as they do for barbecue. The two are however antithetical to one another.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Grilling<\/strong><\/p>\n

Grilling is a high heat cooking method. Food is cooked directly over the coals and is
\nnormally ready in a matter of minutes. Grilling temperatures are usually in excess of 500
\ndegrees Fahrenheit, and food is cooked close to the heat source. The high heat chars the
\nsurface of the food, seals in the juices and creates a smoky caramelized crust.<\/p>\n

Grilling is the oldest, most widespread and most forgiving method of cooking. Rich and
\npoor alike practice it on six continents in restaurants, street stalls, and backyards.<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/i><\/p>\n

Barbecue<\/strong><\/p>\n

Barbecuing by contrast lies at the opposite end of the spectrum from grilling. It is a
\nlong, slow, indirect, low-heat method that uses smoldering logs or charcoal and wood
\nchunks to smoke-cook the food. Barbecue temperatures are usually between 200 and 300
\ndegrees Fahrenheit. This low heat generates smoke, and this smoke gives barbecue its
\ncharacteristic flavor. The heat source is often separate from the cooking chamber, which
\ncontains the actual food.<\/p>\n

This method of cooking is ideally suited to large pieces of meat such as whole pigs. It
\nis also perfect for cuts with lots of tough connective tissue, like brisket and spareribs.
\nIn fact barbecue was traditionally associated with the poorer echelons of society, who
\nwere unable to afford the more expensive cuts of meat.<\/p>\n

More recently a hybrid method of cooking, Indirect Grilling<\/i>, has become very
\npopular. This method bridges the gap between barbecue and grilling. As with barbecuing the
\nfood is not cooked directly over coals. But the actual cooking takes place in the same
\nchamber as the heat source, and temperatures usually range between 350 and 400 degrees
\nFahrenheit. Wood chips or chunks are often placed on the heat source to generate smoke for
\nflavor. Indirect grilling effectively transforms your barbecue grill into and outdoor
\noven, which is perfect for cooking larger cuts of meat such as prime rib and turkey.<\/p>\n

We actually use all three of the above cooking methods. Each has it\u2019s own merits.
\nIndirect grilling gives you the best of both grilling and barbecuing. The charcoal flavor
\nfrom grilling and the tenderness and smoky flavor from barbecue. Whereas the flavor of
\ntrue barbecue is hard to beat, the trade-off is that it takes a lot longer than grilling
\nor indirect grilling.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

<\/a>Rubs<\/span><\/p>\n

Rubs are for the most part, dry ingredients (herbs, spices and seasonings) that are
\nrubbed or sprinkled on meat before cooking to enhance the flavor when cooked. A dry rub is
\na form of marinade, however a rub has an advantage over a marinade, in that it forms a
\ntasty crust on food when it is cooked. Rubs are used to provide a higher degree of
\nconcentrated flavor to larger cuts of meat like beef brisket and pork shoulder. These cuts
\nof meat will taste very bland without a good sprinkle of rub. Rubs are sometimes used as
\nthe basis for a table or finishing sauce for your cooked food, but most often a rub\u2019s
\nmagic is done before the cooking process is over.<\/p>\n

Ingredients in dry rubs vary, depending on the kind of food you are using, but some
\nitems are more common than others. Salt and sugar seem to appear more often than anything
\nelse, and surprisingly are also the most controversial. Some cooks say that salt draws the
\nmoisture out of meat, and everyone agrees that sugar burns on the surface of food. If
\nmaking your own rubs keep these two ingredients in check. Use them in moderation in a way
\nthat supports the rub rather than overpowers it. Garlic powder, onion powder, chili and
\nlemon pepper seasonings are also very popular. Secondary seasonings such as dry mustard,
\ncumin, sage, thyme, allspice, cinnamon, nutmeg and ginger are used to round a rub off
\nnicely.<\/p>\n

If you are making your own rubs, use finer ground spices for rubs on thinner cuts of
\nmeat, as these break down and flavor the food faster. Use coarser ground spices for
\nlarger, thicker cuts of meat, as these will not break down as fast and will give you more
\nflavor when cooking over a longer period of time.<\/p>\n

When applying a rub to meat we do not actually rub the spices into the meat, as the
\nname would suggest. We believe that rubbing causes the pores of the meat to clog up. In
\naddition if you have ever rubbed a rub into a cut of meat, where does most of the rub end
\nup? On your hands!<\/p>\n

When applying a rub, add it thoroughly and evenly. Generally you don\u2019t need to
\nskimp on the amount, though some dishes benefit from a light touch. Allow the flavors of
\nthe rub to penetrate the food by covering it and leaving it in the refrigerator for a
\nwhile. Fish fillets and shrimp usually need to sit for 30 to 45 minutes, big cuts of meat
\ncan be left overnight, and other kinds of food are somewhere in between.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Rub Tips<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n