Peter. That gives me a much better understanding of those measurements. And
thanks for the additional references. The hogshead measure of 1300 lbs sounds
like a mighty challenge for man to load and beast to haul given the status of
roads during that period. Would it have been typical to load into smaller
units for land transport and then transfer to larger storage to lade onto
ships? Ron
Peter Bergstrom wrote:
> A tierce is one/third of a hogshead, while a barrel is typically half a
> hogshead. Two hogsheads make a tun.
>
> But unfortunately it's not quite that simple. Traditionally a tun contained
> a ton of wine -- that is the liquid measure and the weight measure were
> supposed to be the same for a tun of wine, but they rarely were in reality.
>
> Likewise a hogshead of tobacco started out at about 500 pounds in the 1630s.
> At that time four hogsheads were rated as a ton of freight -- which was just
> about right. But over time the size of the hogshead was increased and the
> amount of tobacco prized (that's tobacco speak for squeezed) into it
> increased so that by the Revolution a typical hogshead weighed nearly 1300
> pounds.
>
> While we're on the subject of confusing measures, the weight of the
> container -- referred to as the tare -- also varied from barrel to barrel
> and hogshead to hogshead. So in practice you always needed to know both the
> gross weight and the net weight of a container and its content to be sure of
> what you were paying for goods and what you paid for packaging.
>
> As I recall a barrel of flour was supposed to be 31.5 gallons, but somebody
> will need to double check that before they rely upon my memory.
>
> Besides the OED, I'd recommend two books on mensuration by Ronald E. Zupco.
> I forget the exact titles, but its something like _The Handbook of Medieval
> Metrology_ or maybe _Dictionary of Medieval Metrology_. The other is
> something like _A Dictionary of English Weights and Measures_.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ronald L. Whitaker [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Saturday, 26 January 2002 4:19 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: early 19th C. packing crates
>
> Peter identified such containers as tierce, barrel, hogshead and tun. Would
> a
> typical storage reference been in wet or dry measure and what would have
> been
> the relative capacity of each of those containers mentioned?
>
> Ron
>
> Joe Mosier wrote:
>
> > As Peter Bergstrom says barrels of various sizes were the norm. In fact
> > they were normative enough that goods packed in another fashion were so
> > labeled in newspaper ads. The Norfolk Herald regularly listed cargos in
> > their shipping news section. Dry goods from Europe would usually be
> > indicated in a listing that might read: "ship Paragon, Dickson, 52 days
> from
> > Liverpool, salt & crates, Wm. Pennock"
> >
> > Joe Mosier
> > Library Archivist
> > Chrysler Museum
> > Norfolk, Virginia
> >
> > To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
> > at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
>
> --
>
> _________________________________
>
> *** A waist is a terrible thing to mind! ***
> _________________________________
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
> at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
> at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
--
_________________________________
*** A waist is a terrible thing to mind! ***
_________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
|
