Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Sa073 PDF
Sa073 PDF
FIGURE 1. Map of the western rivers in the time of the steamboat Heroine. (Map by Kevin Crisman, 2005.)
the U.S. Army issued pork as part of its soldiers’ ELGV DQG LQ LWV ¿QDO FRQWUDFWV 7KHVH VSHFL¿HG
rations (Billings 1960). The discovery of three “each hog to weigh not less than two hundred
army-contract pork barrels with their contents pounds [before butchering], and will consist
intact in Heroine provides the opportunity to learn of one hog to each barrel, excluding the feet,
more about the American pork processing industry legs, ears, and snout,” adding: “side pieces may
in the 1830s in general, and the U.S. govern- be substituted for hams.” The meat was to be
ment’s procurement practices in particular. The “carefully packed with Turks’s Island salt” in
research presented here has three goals: to assess pieces not exceeding 10 lb. each (Pennsylvania
the cuts and quality of the meat to determine Reporter 1837).
ZKHWKHU LW PDWFKHG WKH FRQWUDFW VSHFL¿FDWLRQV WR Barreled pork was typically graded by the
identify butchering and packing procedures, and to skeletal parts and ratios of pieces, although
determine whether there were any standardization H[DFW GH¿QLWLRQV RI WKHVH JUDGHV YDU\ GHSHQG-
in packing by comparing the barrels’ contents. J. ing on the source. For example, Wilson and
K. Brophy analyzed two of the barrels (Barrels Southwood (1976) and Mescher (2005) provide
02-740 and 02-472), while the third (Barrel 02-35) GLIIHUHQW GH¿QLWLRQV IRU WKH VDPH JUDGHV RI SRUN
was analyzed by Gregory Lucas at the University $FFRUGLQJ WR VWDWHPDQGDWHG GH¿QLWLRQV SXE-
of Georgia’s Museum of Natural History (Lucas lished in the Louisiana Daily Public Advocate
2005). in 1830: “Mess Pork” consisted wholly of
VLGHV EHWZHHQ WKH VKRXOGHU DQG ÀDQN ³3ULPH
&RQWUDFW6SHFL¿FDWLRQV Pork” had three shoulders with the shanks cut
off at the knee, one-and-a-half heads halved
The U.S. Army’s Commissary General of and divested of ears, snouts, and brains, a bal-
6XEVLVWHQFH OLVWHG D VWDQGDUG VHW RI VSHFL¿FD- ance of side, neck, tail pieces, and up to two
tions for pork in its requests for provisioning hams, with side pieces forming the bottom and
JULIET BROPHY AND KEVIN CRISMAN—A Taphonomic Evaluation of Three Intact Pork Barrels 73
FIGURE 2. An intact barrel of pork (swathed in bandages and netting to maintain its integrity) is recovered from the wreck
of the steamboat Heroine in 2005. (Photo by Kevin Crisman, 2005.)
topmost layers in the barrel; and “Cargo Pork,” how many hogs should be in each barrel, nor
at the bottom of the scale, consisted of “any does it explicitly state which grade of meat
parts ... of merchantable pork,” including not should be in the barrels.
more than two processed heads (lower shanks, The following section provides a description
brains, ears, and snouts were to be excluded). of the bones from the three Heroine barrels by
:KLOH WKHVH VWDQGDUGV DUH GH¿QHG IRU WKH VWDWH skeletal part and the meat associated with those
of Louisiana, the pork producers in Cincinnati bones. The skeletal parts and ratio of pieces
needed to ensure that their products would be will demonstrate what grade of pork existed
accepted in markets around the country and in the barrels and if the barrel content met
would have adhered to these guidelines. the government requirements. Since the exact
The contract for the meat in the cargo of names of the pork bones and meat that the
the Heroine parallels the list of standard pork Cincinnati butchers used in the 1800s are not
VSHFL¿FDWLRQV GH¿QHG E\ WKH FRPPLVVDU\ VWDWLQJ documented in the literature, this paper relies
that the hogs are not to weigh less than 200 lb., on the nomenclature from Savell (2000) and
excluding the feet, legs, ears, and snout, and illustrates the parts in Figure 4. Furthermore,
highlighting that side pieces may be substituted according to Savell (2000), the ham (pork
IRU KDPV 7KH FRQWUDFW GRHV QRW KRZHYHU GH¿QH leg), loin, picnic shoulder, and Boston butt are
74 HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY 47(4)
Figure 3. The stencil on this pork-barrel lid, though faded, is still legible: A. S. REEDER PACKER CIN’T. (Photo by C.
Wayne Smith, 2005.)
considered the lean, high-quality, primal cut, permanent teeth and four with deciduous teeth.
while the jowl, belly, spareribs, feet, tail, and Barrel 02-472 had two right mandibles: one with
neck bone are nonprimal, less-valuable pieces deciduous teeth and another with permanent teeth.
(Figure 4). Primal cuts are the large, wholesale Both of the right mandibles in Barrel 02-35 had
pieces of the animal that are distributed by the deciduous teeth. The eruption patterns suggest that
meat industry; they are considered more valu- the pigs were two years of age or younger. The
able and of higher quality than nonprimal pieces mandibles are of particular interest due to the fact
(Savell 2000; Hasheider 2010). that they were removed from the heads prior to
packing, and that there are more mandibles than
Bone and Meat Description maxillae in Barrel 02-740. The mandibles were
removed in a fashion similar to those found in
Cranial the pork cargo of the William Salthouse (English
1990). The maxillae and mandibles provide attach-
The barrels all contained longitudinally halved ment for the cheek and jowl muscles. These parts
pig heads; curiously, it was the right half in are considered the nonprimal, fattier cuts of meat
every instance. Four halved heads were in Barrel (Savell 2000).
02-740, two in Barrel 02-472, and three in 02-35.
All but one of the maxillae exhibited deciduous Vertebrae
teeth, although third molars can be seen coming
into occlusion. According to Matschke (1967), the Cervical, thoracic, and lumbar vertebral
third molar erupts in pigs at approximately two SLHFHV LQFOXGLQJ DWODVHV DQG D[HV WKH ¿UVW DQG
years of age. second cervical vertebrae, respectively), were
All of the barrels included mandibles; however, recovered from all the barrels. The vertebral
none of them was articulated with a maxilla. column is surrounded by the loin (Figure 4).
Barrel 02-740 contained five right mandibles The loin consists of high-quality, lean, and
including one adult mandible with fully erupted tender meat (Savell 2000).
JULIET BROPHY AND KEVIN CRISMAN—A Taphonomic Evaluation of Three Intact Pork Barrels 75
BACK BONE
sacral vertebrae (4)
CHINE BONE
bodies of cervical, thoracic,
lumar and sacral vertebrae
BACK BONE
lumbar vertebrae (7)
FINGER BONES
transverse processes RIB CARTILAGES BELLY
of lumbar vertebrae LOIN
costal cartilages
RIB BONES
FEATHER BONES
spinous processes SPARERIBS
BACK BONE
thoracic vertebrae (14)
BREAST BONE
sternum
BLADE BONE
CARTILAGE BLADE BONE
scapula PICNIC
RIDGE OF ELBOW BONE
BLADE BONE BOSTON SHOULDER
olecranon of ulna
BUTT
FORE SHANK BONES
NECK BONE ulna
cervical vertebrae (7) radius
FIGURE 4. Diagrams identifying pig bones (left) and their associated meat (right) (Savell 2000).
FIGURE 5. Rib bones from barrel 02-740. (Photo by Juliet K. Brophy, 2010.)
FIGURE 6. Three left and three right pelvic pieces from Barrel 02-740. The complete innominate (center) is a wild pig
used in the picture for reference. One right and one left piece not pictured here. (Photo by Juliet K. Brophy, 2010.)
JULIET BROPHY AND KEVIN CRISMAN—A Taphonomic Evaluation of Three Intact Pork Barrels 77
right pelvic fragments were recovered from and -sized ulna for every radius in each barrel,
02-472, while Barrel 02-35 had one right and suggesting complete foreshanks were packed.
one left. Pork legs consist of very high-quality, This cut of meat is often considered part of
lean, primal meat (Savell 2000). the high-quality shoulder, though there is a
lower percentage of meat and higher percent-
Arm age of tendon and bone at the distal ends of
the foreshank (Ockerman and Hansen 1999;
The humerus, or arm bone, is well represented Savell 2000).
in the barrels. The distal ends of the humeri
were fused, while the proximal ends were not Leg
fused. This fusion suggests an age of about
two years (Figure 7). The meat associated with Legs were also recovered from all of the
this area is the picnic or part of the shoulder barrels. The leg, according to Savell (2000),
(Figure 4). consists of the femur bone, which articulates
proximally with the pelvis and distally with
Foreshank the tibia (Figure 4). Three left and one right
bones were found in Barrel 02-740. One left
The foreshank, or forearm, bones consist and one right femur were recovered from both
of a radius and ulna, and were evident in all Barrel 02-472 and 02-35. The epiphyseal fusion
three barrels (Figure 4). Two left and two right of the femora suggests that the pigs were juve-
forearms were in Barrel 02-740, one left and nile. Only one of the femora in the barrels had
right in Barrel 02-472, and one left and right a fused epiphysis on the proximal end (Figure
in 02-35. In mature pigs, the two bones fuse 8). Paired with the aitch bones, the meat around
to become the radiulnar complex. While these the femora is called the pork leg or ham, and
bones were not fused, there was a matching-side is considered high-quality meat (Savell 2000).
FIGURE 7. Humeri from barrel 02-740. The complete humerus of a modern pig (center) is shown as a reference. (Photo
by Juliet K. Brophy, 2010.)
78 HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY 47(4)
FIGURE 8. Femoral remains from Barrel 02-740. Only one proximal-end epiphysis is fused. Complete bones (center and
far right) are shown as a reference. (Photo by Juliet K. Brophy, 2010.)
The bones in the barrel demonstrate that The contents of the Heroine barrels meet most
primal and nonprimal cuts of meat were being of the contract requirements. The wording of the
shipped to Fort Towson; however, accounts FRQWUDFW VSHFL¿FDWLRQV ³HDFK KRJ WR ZHLJK QRW
describing the pork consumed at forts do not less than 200 pounds, excluding the feet, legs,
explicitly state which part of the pig was being ears, and snout,” strongly suggests that most of
JULIET BROPHY AND KEVIN CRISMAN—A Taphonomic Evaluation of Three Intact Pork Barrels 79
the edible portions of the pig were acceptable as the U.S. Army wanted excluded. In the literature,
long as the four parts listed were not included. the “leg” can refer to the femur and the aitch
The barrels contain no foot bones. Therefore, in bone, the femur, the femur and the tibia, or just
terms of feet, Niswanger and Sullivant’s supply the tibia (English 1990; Savell 2000; Hasheider
of pork was in accordance with the contract. 2010). The aitch bone and the femur carry the
Pig ears are made up of soft tissue that did not ham and would be surrounded by high-quality
survive in recognizable pieces; thus, no evidence meat (Figure 4). Thus, it would make sense to
of ears exists in the barrels. include this part of the pig in a pork barrel. The
A snout, or the nose of the pig, is an area of tibia, on the other hand, carries less meat and
cartilage at the front of the cranium. No evidence lower-quality meat than the femur, although it
of soft snout tissue was found in the barrels. still yields some protein. Based on the difference
Since the snout itself does not contain any bones, in quality of the meats, the army was probably
the butchers could theoretically remove it without referring to the tibia, or hind shank, in its use
affecting the cranium. However, when preparing of “leg.” In addition, it is probable that U.S.
the Heroine pork, the butchers did not cut off Army contractors did not use the term “leg” in
just the snout but removed both the snout and the strictest sense, but rather used “leg” to refer
the premaxilla bone (Figure 9). This evidence generally to the hind shank and the foreshank,
reveals an important step in the processing of the since, as Ockerman and Hansen (1999) stated,
pigs. Mandibles were released from crania before they both consist of a low percentage of meat
the snouts were cut off, due to the fact that the and are considered poor quality (Savell 2000).
skeletal part where mandibles would meet the 5HJDUGOHVV RI WKH GH¿QLWLRQ RI ³OHJ´ IHPRUD DQG
premaxillae is still complete, and no premaxillae hind shanks are in Barrels 02-740 and 02-472,
are in the barrel. while femora, hind shanks, and foreshanks (radii/
The contract also states that no legs should be ulnae) were found in all three barrels, which was
LQFOXGHG LQ WKH EDUUHOV KRZHYHU WKH GH¿QLWLRQ RI not in accordance with the contract.
a pork leg is ambiguous (English 1990; Savell All of the barrels contain evidence of more
2000; Hasheider 2010), however. Therefore, it is than one pig. While the 1838 contract for Fort
GLI¿FXOW WR LQWHUSUHW H[DFWO\ ZKLFK SDUW RI WKH KRJ Towson did not explicitly declare how many
FIGURE 9. Illustration showing how the premaxilla is missing in the pig skull from Barrel 02-740 (left), while the anterior
portions of the mandibles are still in the barrel (right
5IFCSBDLFUEFmOFTUIFQSFNBYJMMBPGUIFSFGFSFODFQJHTLVMM 1IPUP
by Juliet K. Brophy, 2010.)
80 HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY 47(4)
hogs should be in a barrel, the U.S. Army’s Alfred S. Reeder’s (and possibly other) packing
Commissary General of Subsistence call for houses in Cincinnati in the 1830s. The analyses
contractor bids does state that each barrel should suggest that pork butchery at that time was
have only one hog (Pennsylvania Reporter not exceptionally different from modern-day
1837). The bones suggest that select portions of practices, as described in Savell (2000). After
multiple individuals were included in the pack- the pig was cleaned and gutted, the feet and
ing. In accordance with the contract, the overall tail were removed, and the skull was separated
size, shape, and age indicators of the bones from the body at the point where the skull and
suggest that the pigs were all approximately 200 vertebral column meet. Clear processing marks
lb. before butchering. can be seen in three places on the Heroine
Overall, the bones from the three barrels sug- pig skulls. First, the back of one skull shows
gest that the quality of the meat was midgrade that the occipital of this pig was cleaved at
and mostly compatible with the requirements of an angle that separated the skull from the ver-
the contract. Neither heads nor mandibles were tebral column and severed the major muscles
to be included in “Mess Pork” according to and tendons holding the mandible to the skull
WKH 6WDWH RI /RXLVLDQD VSHFL¿FDWLRQV FLWHG (Figure 10). Second, the premaxillae, the bony
above; thus, the contents of the Heroine barrels area directly behind the snout, was cut off
DSSHDUV WR EHVW PDWFK WKH GH¿QLWLRQ RI ³3ULPH all the specimens (Figure 9). Third, the skull
Pork.” However, barrels also contained lower- was halved in the sagittal plane, allowing the
quality cuts of meat, specifically the “legs” removal of the brains.
forbidden by the terms of the army’s contract. It As noted earlier, evidence suggests that max-
is also important to note that meat not attached illae and mandibles were not articulated when
to a bone, such as bacon, might have been in they were put into the barrels. The butchers
the barrel, but these pieces, if present, were not likely removed the mandibles at the same time
SUHVHUYHG LQ DQ LGHQWL¿DEOH IRUP 5HJDUGOHVV that they severed the pigs’ heads from their
even if boneless high-quality meats were present necks. Another line of evidence demonstrating
in the barrels, the evidence of lower-grade parts that articulated maxilla and mandibles were not
demonstrates that the contents largely consisted included in the barrels is the fact that there are
of low- to mid-quality pork. more mandibles than maxillae in Barrel 02-740.
After the head of the pig was separated
Pork-Processing Procedures from the body, the bones show evidence that
the body was cut in half sagittally down the
Taphonomic marks on the bones can help backside, cutting through the vertebral column
identify the processing procedures followed at or as close to the vertebral column as possible.
FIGURE 10. Occipital bone with cleaver mark (left), illustrating that the styloid processes and occiput were intentionally
removed (right). (Photo by Juliet K. Brophy, 2010.)
JULIET BROPHY AND KEVIN CRISMAN—A Taphonomic Evaluation of Three Intact Pork Barrels 81
This process is similar to modern-day butchering the tibia. The complete acetabula and proximal
procedures (Savell 2000). Today this processing femoral heads support the idea that the pelvis
is largely done with a table saw, but it can also and femur were still in articulation when packed
be accomplished with a handsaw (Savell 2000). (Figures 6 and 8). Again, this process would
Unfortunately, the preservation of the bones is have kept the large pieces of ham intact in the
not good enough to decipher the exact instru- packing process.
ment used in the processing of these pigs. The The tibiae show signs of butchery. These
pigs from Barrels 02-740 and 02-35 were cut bones were separated from the femur at or just
alongside the vertebral column as evidenced EHORZ WKH VWLÀH MRLQW )LJXUH FKRSSLQJ WKH
by the relatively complete vertebrae in the proximal end of the tibia. The proximal heads
barrel and by the missing transverse processes. of three of the four tibiae from Barrel 02-740
This cut would have been easier than chop- and both of the heads in Barrel 02-472 were
ping directly through the vertebral body. The severed. Furthermore, evidence for the removal
vertebrae from Barrel 02-472 appear to have of the hind foot bones is apparent in a butcher
been processed differently. The three vertebral mark on the distal end of one tibia from Barrel
fragments are cut in half, suggesting that the 02-472 (Figure 4).
sagittal cut was made right through the vertebral
bone. Next, the shoulder/foreshank sections and Standardization
leg/hind shank sections were cut off from the
loin and ribs. Lastly, by comparing the skeletal parts and
At this point, the loins and vertebral column ratios of bones in the three barrels, this study
could be removed from the ribs or left intact for addresses how strict Cincinnati’s pork packers
transport. The vertebrae and the ribs were prob- were about standardization of contents. Barrel
ably left articulated but cut into square sections 02-740 had a total of 117 identifiable bones
and put directly into the barrels as a complete DQG D FROOHFWLRQ RI VPDOO XQLGHQWL¿DEOH ERQH
“side” piece due to the complete vertebrae and fragments. The barrel contained a minimum
rib heads recovered from the barrels (Figure 5). number of individuals (MNI) count of five
It is possible to disarticulate the vertebrae from different pigs. The MNI is the lowest number
the ribs and still have complete rib heads, but of individuals necessary to account for all the
WKLV LV D GLI¿FXOW WLPHFRQVXPLQJ SURFHVV WKDW bones in the barrel. The five pigs in 02-740
was likely not performed in the mass production were approximately two years of age based on
of pork (Mark Holzkopf 2012, pers. comm.). the occlusion of their teeth and fusion of their
The side piece would be cut as square as pos- epiphyses.
sible in order to facilitate secure, tight packing Barrel 02-472 is similar in content to the
and reduce the chances of spoilage (English SUHYLRXV EDUUHO EXW RQO\ LGHQWL¿DEOH ERQHV
1990; Mescher 2005). were present. Also, the bones in this barrel had
No butchery marks are visible on the pig an MNI of only two pigs, one adult and one
shoulder bones, including the scapulae and smaller, younger pig. This barrel had an increase
humeri. However, the completeness of the proxi- in the percentage of foreshanks and femora, and
mal scapulae and the proximal humeri suggests a decrease in the percentage of ribs. Otherwise,
that articulated shoulder pieces were included in the cuts of meat were similar to those in the
the barrels (Figure 7). The scapula was likely ¿UVW EDUUHO
cut off from the loin, and the humeri were sev- 7KH WKLUG EDUUHO FRQWDLQHG LGHQWL¿-
ered from the foreshanks. Evidence of the latter able bones (Lucas 2005). Lucas states that an
processing can be seen in a butcher mark on a MNI of three pigs were in Barrel 02-35 based
proximal radius from Barrel 02-472 (Figure 11). on the cranial material and pelvic bones. The
The leg area was likely processed in a barrel is more similar to 02-740 than 02-472
manner similar to the shoulder area, with the and contains fewer foreshanks and femora than
pelvis and femur almost certainly articulated 02-472. Barrel 02-35 includes no tibia/fibula
when they were placed in the barrels. The material but has a large number of ribs and
pelvis was removed from the rear loins, and vertebrae (Lucas 2005). The quality of the meat
then the distal femur was disarticulated from aligns most closely with 02-740.
82 HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY 47(4)
TABLE 1
PERCENTAGES OF IDENTIFIED BONES FROM EACH PORK BARREL
Barrel 02-740
,GHQWL¿DEOHERQHV 01,
Cranial Pieces Mandibles Vertebrae Ribs Shoulders Humeri Foreshanks Pelvic Bones Femora Hind Shanks
Barrel 02-472
,GHQWL¿DEOHERQHV 01,
Cranial Pieces Mandibles Vertebrae Ribs Shoulders Humeri Foreshanks Pelvic Bones Femora Hind Shanks
Barrel 03-35
,GHQWL¿DEOHERQHV 01,
Cranial Pieces Mandibles Vertebrae Ribs Shoulders Humeri Foreshanks Pelvic Bones Femora Hind Shanks
40% 3% 24% 7% 4% 7% 3% 4% 3% 7%
JULIET BROPHY AND KEVIN CRISMAN—A Taphonomic Evaluation of Three Intact Pork Barrels 83
pork is so rusty that considerable part of each barrel. The butchers likely knew what quality
piece must be cut from the outside before it of meat was required for each grade of pork,
LV ¿W IRU FRRNLQJ´ 9RVH D 7KH VLQNLQJ ZKDW ZHLJKW WKH EDUUHO KDG WR EH DQG ¿OOHG LW
of Heroine on 6 May and consequent damage accordingly.
or loss of part of the cargo, coupled with the At least one key question remains unan-
poor quality of aged foodstuffs already at Fort swered: Was this pork packed specifically to
7RZVRQ SURPSWHG 9RVH WR VHQG D MXQLRU RI¿FHU meet the terms of the U.S. Army contract,
to New Orleans to make an emergency purchase under the direct supervision of Niswanger and
of replacement provisions for the coming year Sullivant or their agents, or was it simply taken
(Vose 1838b). randomly from a much-larger production batch?
Heroine’s snagging, while unfortunate for the It is possible that the 240 barrels intended for
contractors and the fort’s garrison, has allowed Fort Towson were purchased after the meat was
an analysis of the bones found in three intact already in the barrels, with its selection based
pork barrels and provided a better understanding on the grading provided by Alfred S. Reeder
of butchering and processing procedures in the (and possibly other pork merchants if some of
second quarter of the 19th century. The qual- Fort Towson’s 1838 pork were bought from
ity of meat in the barrels, as evidenced by the more than one packing house). With such large
bones, generally agrees with the quality of the quantities of pork being processed and shipped
meat expected by the military; the inclusion of from Cincinnati, butchers likely prepackaged
heads, mandibles, and a wide range of pieces pork barrels. More historical research on the
suggests that the army was getting a product Cincinnati pork industry and the buying prac-
resembling midgrade “Prime Pork.” Niswanger tices of private contractors have the potential
and Sullivant (or their purchasing agents) were to answer this question.
conscientious enough to buy pork that did not The three intact pork barrels from Heroine
include snouts or feet. However, there were also provide a unique firsthand look into primary
lower-quality pieces in the barrels, in particular pork-butchery practices of the 1800s. This
the fore- and hind shanks. The contract explic- knowledge can be useful from an historical
itly stated that “legs” were not to be included, perspective to see whether butchers respected
but some form of “leg” was included in every government or industry meat-grading criteria
barrel. Mescher (2005) stated that a typical (or military contracts) in terms of the quality
barrel of pork should weigh around 190 lb., of meat and how much of each part of the pig
and it is likely that if the primal, higher-quality was included in the barrels.
SLHFHV GLG QRW ¿OO WKH EDUUHO WKH EXWFKHUV PD\ The bone assemblage can also add to discus-
have tossed in lower-quality pieces of pork as sions about provisioning at military sites, i.e., to
³¿OOHU´ WR PDNH XS WKH H[WUD ZHLJKW help identify exactly which cuts of meat a sol-
While pork was a staple commodity for many dier’s rations contained. Furthermore, the bones
Americans during the 1800s, little information can also be compared to bones recovered from
exists about the actual butchering of the pigs. military sites to see whether the pork consumed
The practices of pork processing were probably at the site was salt pork from a barrel or locally
so commonplace that few felt the need to write raised pork, since the bone assemblage would
down a step-by-step procedure. Using the bones differ if the pork had been delivered in a barrel
from these three barrels, however, we were able or was a locally raised and butchered pig (Eng-
to make deductions about the butchering proce- lish 1990). While no archaeological evidence of
dures. In general, the practices did not appear military sites relying upon locally raised pork
to be significantly different than modern-day currently exists, assemblages are typically not
butchery (Savell 2000). examined with this research question in mind.
The three pork barrels exhibited varied pro- Finally, these analyses and conclusions can be
portions of body elements and numbers of pigs used as a comparison model if archaeologists
in each container. While the differences are are fortunate enough to find other barrels of
not extreme, it does suggest that there was salt pork recovered in a similarly well-preserved
no standardization as to what went into each condition.
84 HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY 47(4)