I guess I would have thot that function/content (medicine, beer, soda,
etc.)...was a given...a known attribute that all archys at least attempted
to record...if we have enough of the bottle....but Bill's post was
addressed to those many folks who fail to note the precise details of the
embossing, lip shape, etc...which can also help tell us what the contents
were...often, based on lip form...or company name on the bottle body,
etc.  But yes, bottle maker marks are different, but I don't see why one
would record some details and not all.

Um...how can knowing the date range a bottle was manufactured give 'zero'
information for interpretation of a site??  Don't we need to know the time
range of the deposit?  Sure, (some) bottles could be reused....but why do
so many reports have mean date tables/graphs...if this attribute is not
important??  I would think both date and function were equally important.

At 06:15 PM 11/9/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>Bill,
>
>This may be redundant, but the most useful thing you could help us with is to
>identify functional uses of bottle and container types. Knowing who made
>bottles is ok for dating, but it does zero for interpretation of the site.
>Sometimes I think people wallpaper their reports with useless information
>on the
>manufacture of containers because they cant or dont know what the
>container held.
>
>Ron May
>Legacy 106, Inc.