Note: this article originally appeared earlier this year in The Smoke Sheet, a fantastic national barbecue newsletter that I regularly contribute to. For more information on how to subscribe, visit bbqnewsletter.com.

Monk: Phil Edwards is a Brooklyn-based journalist, producer, and digital creator who previously created videos on history, culture, design, and more for Vox. In this video, he sets his sights on barbecue and how and why different styles evolved across the US due to geography. Using a variety of historical maps obtained from Department of Agriculture Yearbooks from the 1920’s, Edwards explores barbecue through the lenses of meats, plants, and people.

Maps from a hundred years ago explain why certain meats caught on in certain parts of the country. Pork’s density in the eastern part of the US and in particular eastern North Carolina means that when you talked about barbecue on the east coast you meant pork. In Texas, beef and cattle has always been king and in the 1920’s it was even cheaper than pork (side note: can you imagine?). Meanwhile, the central United States had both and thus adopted both in their barbecue (think Missouri and Illinois).

Edwards then moves on to “plants” which refers primarily to the trees native to the area. While North Carolina has plenty of hickory trees, in Texas there is of course post oak and mesquite. Those woods contributed to the barbecue profiles those regions became known for. Agricultural resources also dictated the use of types of sauce in North Carolina or Kansas City (or the lack thereof in Texas).

“People” is the third element Edwards explores, and that influence is seen in sauce. The Great Migration of African Americans out of the American South, where molasses was prevalent, into places like Memphis, Chicago, and Kansas City eventually resulted in a thick, sweeter Kansas City-style sauce. Migration habits also explain the use of vinegar in both North Carolina sauces, mustard-based sauce in South Carolina, and the lack of sauce in Texas.

In the end, Edwards concludes that much like the United States itself, barbecue in the US is a melting pot of many things but he argues primarily of meats, plants, and people.