measures-msg - 2/3/08 Period measures and cautions for recipes. NOTE: See also the files: commerce-msg, p-menus-msg, beverages-msg, measures-art, Sandglass-art, clocks-msg, calendars-msg, coins-msg. KEYWORDS: measures measurements conversions units ************************************************************************ NOTICE - This file is a collection of various messages having a common theme that I have collected from my reading of the various computer networks. Some messages date back to 1989, some may be as recent as yesterday. This file is part of a collection of files called Stefan's Florilegium. These files are available on the Internet at: http://www.florilegium.org I have done a limited amount of editing. Messages having to do with separate topics were sometimes split into different files and sometimes extraneous information was removed. For instance, the message IDs were removed to save space and remove clutter. The comments made in these messages are not necessarily my viewpoints. I make no claims as to the accuracy of the information given by the individual authors. Please respect the time and efforts of those who have written these messages. The copyright status of these messages is unclear at this time. If information is published from these messages, please give credit to the originator(s). Thank you, Mark S. Harris AKA: THLord Stefan li Rous Stefan at florilegium.org ************************************************************************ From: perkins at msupa.pa.msu.EDU ("corpusculorum velocium perexiguorum Date: 1 Oct 91 15:46:39 GMT Jeremy de Merstone greets the Rialto and comments (at length--sorry) on Duke Sir Cariadoc's interpretation of the Hippocras recipe from Le Menagier de Paris (as found in the 1928 translation of the 1830s collation): > To make powdered hippocras, take a quarter of very fine cinnamon > selected by tasting it, and half a quarter of fine flour of cinnamon, > an ounce of selected string ginger, fine and white, and an ounce of > grain of Paradise, a sixth of nutmegs and galingale together, and > bray them all together. And when you would make your hippocras, take > a good half ounce of this powder and two quarters of sugar and mix > them with a quart of wine, by Paris measure. And note that the > powder and the sugar mixed together is the Duke's powder. > > (this is the end of the period recipe; the rest is how we do it) > > 4 oz stick cinnamon 1 oz of ginger > 2 oz powdered cinnamon 1 oz of grains of paradise > RA sixthS (probably of a poundQ2 2/3 ounces) of nutmegs and galingale > together > > Grind them all together. To make hippocras add 1/2 ounce of the > powder and 1/2 lb (1 cup) of sugar to a quart of boiling wine. Strain > through a sleeve of Hippocrates (a tube of cloth, closed at one end). > We generally use somewhat less of both sugar and powder than the > recipe calls for. This last remark started me wondering what the units of measure in use in Paris in 1393 were -- so I looked them up: The standard "pound" in use in that time and place for food items was the "livre poids de marc" or "livre de Paris" established by King John II (the Good) in the 1350s (replacing for all but a few commodities the old "livre" analogous to [but not quite equal in size to] the Troy pound used in England). The "livre de Paris" continued in use for quite some time (up to the Revolution, and metricization), virtually unchanged, so we know it to be equal to 0.489506 kg (1.0792 US pounds) (at least to the precision of the available weighing devices). It was divided into 16 "onces", so the recipe is fine in that respect (this is not just a trivial matter -- the pre-1350 "livre" was divided into 12 "onces", not 16, and even in 1393, there were special "livres" used for certain goods (e.g., wool) which were divided into 15 "onces"). The standard "quarte" used in Paris for wine held 1.863 liters (1.969 US liquid quarts). The "quartes" used for other commodities varied widely, and were usually much much larger, analogous to the British "quarter" rather than to the "quart". The "by Paris measure" part is also rather important, in that there was not a lot of uniformity in measurements from place to place -- the fact that the Goodman follows the recipe His Grace has quoted with a variant of it, mentioning "quarts of xxx" (where xxx was a list of other regions) is evidence that this lack of regularity could even affect ordinary household matters. The "Paris" standards were considered as a sort of French national standard, but it was not required that people elsewhere use them -- just that any measure claimed to be "of Paris" had to conform to the standard. The fact that His Grace finds that using "somewhat less of both sugar and powder than the recipe calls for" gives more satisfactory results is probably confirmation that modern tastes are *not* too different from the Goodman's, whose "pound" is only 8% larger than ours, but whose "quart" was 97% larger. To reach the same sugar+powder concentration the Goodman found most palatable, we should put only 55% of the expected quantity of our measured-out-with-modern-equipment sugar+powder mixture into our measured-out-with-modern-equipment wine (or else use measuring implements calibrated to 1393 Parisian weights and measures standards -- I probably should NOT assume that His Grace DOESN'T do this, but based on his "generally use somewhat less" remark, I think it safe to so assume, I hope, fingers crossed). Reference: _French_Weights_and_Measures_Before_the_Revolution_:_A_Dictionary_of_ Provincial_and_Local_Units_, Ronald Edward Zupko, Indiana Univ. Press, Bloomington & London, 1978 (LC Classification QC89.F8 Z86, Dewey Decimal 389.10944, LC Cat Card # 78-3249, ISBN 0-253-32480-7) --------------------------------------------------------------------- Jeremy de Merstone George J Perkins perkins at msupa.pa.msu.edu North Woods, MidRealm East Lansing, MI perkins at msupa (Bitnet) --------------------------------------------------------------------- Newsgroups: rec.org.sca From: cav at bnr.ca (Rick Cavasin) Subject: Re: How sweet were medieval wines? Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd. Date: Tue, 29 Jun 93 18:09:30 GMT In article <20pv22$qp at agate.berkeley.edu>, dgreen at athena (David Greenebaum) writes: |> Greetings from Bjalfi! |> |> In sweetened- and mulled-wine recipes, I seem to recall a posting a long |> time back, I think it was from Duke Cariadoc? showing research which |> indicated that the term "quart" actually signified a larger measure |> than the modern U.S. quart. Thus, making a recipe using modern quarts |> of liquid in place of the medieval/renaissance quarts would yield a |> stronger/sweeter recipe than the one actually enjoyed by the creators |> of the recipe. (Though I don't think this ccan explain away ALL the |> difference...) Milord Cariadoc, if it was indeed you who posted this |> information, is this accurate? |> |> --------------------- Bjalfi Thordharson/College of St. Katherine/Province of |> |\ | |\ |\ |// | the Mists/Principality of the Mists/West Kingdom |> | > | |\\ | \ |/ | David Greenebaum/University of California/Berkeley, CA |> |< | | \ | | | dgreen at athena.berkeley.edu, dgreen at garnet.berkeley.edu |> | > | | | | | |> |/ | | | | | "I make mistakes, but I am on the side of good -- by |> --------------------- accident and happenchance." -- the Golux Depends on the recipe. If it specifies 'X quarts honey to Y quarts water', then it hardly matters whether quarts are thimbles or barrels (as far as strength/sweetness is concerned). Some of Digby's recipes go no further than parts honey vs parts water (yes I know it's OOP). Where it *does* make a difference is in cases where the measures are different (ie. X quarts honey to Y barrels water) or where other ingredients (eg.spices) are included. Of course, I don't know much about medieval recipes. My favourite example of obscure units in a medieval recipe comes up in a recipe for cheverel (a type of oil tanned leather) wherein you find the phrase: 'Take as much oil as you would use to warm a bowl of soup' Cheers, Balderik From: perkins at MSUPA.PA.MSU.EDU Newsgroups: rec.org.sca Subject: Re: How sweet were medieval wines? Date: 30 Jun 1993 00:02:08 GMT Organization: MSU Dept. of Physics & Astronomy Angharad [jtn at nutter.cs.vt.edu (Terry Nutter)] writes in response to Bjalfi: >>In sweetened- and mulled-wine recipes, I seem to recall a posting a long >>time back, I think it was from Duke Cariadoc? showing research which >>indicated that the term "quart" actually signified a larger measure >>than the modern U.S. quart. Thus, making a recipe using modern quarts >>of liquid in place of the medieval/renaissance quarts would yield a >>stronger/sweeter recipe than the one actually enjoyed by the creators >>of the recipe. > >I'm confused. If all the ingredients are specified in quarts, surely >the diffence in the size of the quart will not affect the ratio of >water to sweet ingredients, and so will not change anything but absolute >amounts. If some of the ingredients are specified, say, in pints, and >others in quarts, then again, surely the important issue is the number >of quarts to pints in each system (are their pints _also_ commensurately >larger), etc. With honey, the amounts are frequently specified in pounds >-- and I've found that different varieties of honey measure out to different >volumes to the pound anyhow, almost surely within the level of variation >suggested here for the volume measures themselves. The particular circumstance which Bjalfi recalls was a posting back in September or October of 1991 by Duke Cariadoc of a translation/interpretation of the Hippocras recipe in _Le_Menagier_de_Paris_. It had some measurements expressed in terms of volume (mainly the liquids) and some in terms of weight (mainly the solids, such as the added sugar and spices). He mentioned that he himself generally made the recipe with less sugar and spicing than it appeared was called for, as the result tasted better. I was curious about this comment, as well as by the phrasing of one of the measurements ("by Paris measure", I believe), so I checked a reference on the details of the measurement system in use in the Paris of the late 14th Century. It turned out that the "pound" ("livre de Paris") used for the dry measures in the recipe was only a little heavier than our modern American pound, while the "quarte" used in the recipe's liquid measure was almost twice as large as the modern American quart. Hence, a blind translation would yield a result more than 80% higher in sugar and spice concentration than the original recipe writer intended. I posted this information and pointed out that His Grace's reduction of the "blind translation" amounts for taste's sake was supporting evidence that medieval taste was not terribly out of line for our own (or, to be more accurate, for the experienced-in-medieval-cookery palate, such as His Grace's), as it went in the direction of restoring the true original recipe. Obviously, had there not been the nearly-factor-of-two difference in the solid/liquid measuring system ratio, it would have been harder to distinguish the "blind" translation from the original. Or, if Le Menagier had stuck to weights only or volumes only in the recipe, there would have been no problem to begin with. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Jeremy de Merstone George J Perkins perkins at msupa.pa.msu.edu North Woods, MidRealm East Lansing, MI perkins at msupa (Bitnet) Newsgroups: rec.org.sca From: ddfr at quads.uchicago.edu (david director friedman) Subject: Re: How sweet were medieval wines? Organization: University of Chicago Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1993 06:27:10 GMT Bjalfi asks about medieval quarts. What he is remembering is probably not a posting by me but a posting politely pointing out an error I had made; I have forgotten who posted it. My error involved the ratio of spices and sugar to wine in Le Menagier's Hippocras recipe. Spices and sugar are given by weight, wine by quarts of Paris measure. The poster, whose name I have forgotten, pointed out that the quart of Paris measure c. 1392 was almost twice the modern quart, whereas the units of weight used were close to the modern unit, making the ratio of spice and sugar to wine about half what my careless reading of the recipe (taking quarts as modern quarts) implied. This was particularly interesting because it meant that in modifying the recipe to my own taste (cutting the spice and sugar in half) I had inadvertently corrected my error--thus providing evidence, through a blind experiment, that medieval tastes in spicing were similar to modern tastes (or at least my taste). Note that units of volume varied from time to time and place to place, so you should not conclude from this that all medieval quarts were bigger than modern quarts. David/Cariadoc From: djheydt at uclink.berkeley.edu (Dorothy J Heydt) Newsgroups: rec.org.sca Subject: Re: Rosary/Paternoster Date: 11 Jul 1994 03:34:22 GMT Organization: University of California, Berkeley In article <9406097738.AA773807543 at inet.sagepub.com>, CATHERINE_CHILTON wrote: > Incidentally -- has anyone ever actually timed a Latin Ave > or Pater to see how long it takes to say them? I'd know a > lot better how long to stir things in medieval recipes. A Pater Noster is 20 seconds. I say three when blanching almonds, to know when to take 'em out of the boiling water. An Ave is about 13 seconds. This is recited at a good speed, but not dropping any syllables for Titivillus to pick up. Dorothea of Caer-Myrddin Dorothy J. Heydt Mists/Mists/West UC Berkeley Argent, a cross forme'e sable djheydt at uclink.berkeley.edu PRO DEO ET REGE From: IMC at vax2.utulsa.edu (I. Marc Carlson) Newsgroups: rec.org.sca Subject: PEDANTRY: Measurement (Was: Army Times) Date: 13 Oct 1994 14:13:29 -0500 Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway U.J|rgen \hman (bubba at adolf.ludd.luth.se) wrote: : Could someone by the way tell me where the yard, mile, pound and gallon comes : from and how/if they are related to each other. Inch English. From the Latin "Uncia" (or a twelfth part), an inch is 1/12 Foot. A measure of length. In French, the unit of 1/12 a "foot" is the Pounce. In Spanish, Pulgadas. nb. A 12th of a Pounce is a Ligne, and a 12th of a Pulgadas is a Lignas. English inches are traditionally divided into eighths. Foot The length of a Man's Foot. A measure of length. From town to town, country to Country, this measurement could differ, but as a rule a French Pied was equal to 12.8 English inches, while a Spanish Pie was 10.96 English inches Yard A unit of linear measure equal to equal to 3 feet or 36 inches. Also the corresponding measure of area (square yard = 9 square feet) or of solidity (cubic yard = 27 cubic feet). Aka Verge. NOT to be confused with: Yard A unit of linear measure equal to 16 1/2 feet or 5 1/2 yards (but varying locally); AKA rod, pole, or perch. Sometimes distinguished as land-yard. Ell English. From the Latin "Ulna". A unit of linear measure equal to 45 inches. The word ell seems to have been variously taken to represent the distance from the elbow or from the shoulder to the wrist or to the finger-tips, while in some cases a "double ell" has superseded the original measure, and has taken its name. English ell = 45 in. Scots = 37.2 in. Flemish = 27 in. Nail A measure of weight for wool, beef, etc., usually equal to eight pounds = clove A measure of land. A measure of length for cloth; 2.14 inches, or the 1/16th part of a yard. "The precise origin of this sense is not clear. The use of the nail in early examples suggests that one sixteenth from the end of the yard-stick may have been marked by a nail." (OED) Ounce English. From the Latin "Uncia" (or a twelfth part), an ounce is 1/12 Pound (or was originally, and is still in "troy" weight). A measurement of weight. Pound A measure of weight and mass derived from the ancient Roman libra (which is equal to 327.25 grams), but this ancient standard has been modified variously over the course of time, and in different countries. The pound consisted originally of 12 ounces, corresponding more or less to that of troy weight. This is still used by goldsmiths and jewellers in stating the weight of gold, silver, and precious stones; but as early as the thirteenth or fourteenth century a pound of sixteen ounces was used for more bulky commodities. This was made a standard for general purposes of trade by Edward III, and known as the pound aveir de peis, i.e. of merchandise of weight, now called avoirdupois, q.v. At other times the pound has varied locally from 12 to 27 ounces, according to the commodity, pounds of different weight being often used in the same place for different articles, as bread, butter, cheese, meat, malt, hay, wool, etc. Scotch pound of 16 ounces of Troy or Dutch Weight consisted of 7608.9496 grains the Tron pound kept at Edinburgh = 9622.67 grains. Italy between 300 and 350 grams Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands, and some German states between 459 and 469 grams (Ie., those lands ruled by Charles V?) In other German states, Denmark, etc. between 477 and 510.22 grams. But the standard German pfund is now 500 grams. Mark A denomination of weight formerly employed (chiefly for gold and silver) throughout western Europe; its actual weight varied considerably, but it was usually regarded as equivalent to 8 ounces (= either 23 or 12 of a pound, according to the meaning given to the latter term). Mile Originally, the Roman lineal measure of 1,000 paces (mille passus or passuum), computed to have been about 1,618 yards. Hence, the unit of measure derived from this, used in the British Isles and in other English-speaking countries. Its length has varied considerably at different periods and in different localities, chiefly owing to the influence of the agricultural system of measures with which the mile has been brought into relation (see furlong). The legal mile in Britain and the U.S. is now 1,760 yards (5280 feet). The Irish mile of 2,240 yards is still in rustic use. The obsolete Scottish mile was longer than the English, and probably varied according to time and place; one of the values given for it is 1,976 yards. Furlong Originally the distance an Ox could pull a plow before needing to rest, ie., "a furrow long". As early as the 9th c. it was regarded as the equivalent of the Roman stadium, which was 18 of a Roman mile; and hence furlong has always been used as a name for the eighth part of an English mile, whether this coincided with the agricultural measure so called or not. The present statute furlong is 220 yards, and is equal both to the eighth part of a statute mile, and to the side of a square of 10 statute acres. League An itinerary measure of distance, varying in different countries, but usually estimated roughly at about 3 miles; app. never in regular use in England, but often occurring in poetical or rhetorical statements of distance. Although the league appears never to have been an English measure, leuca occurs somewhat frequently in Anglo-Latin law-books (Bracton, Fleta, etc.); it is disputed whether in these works it means one mile or two. Gallon An English measure of capacity. The imperial gallon contains 27714 cubic inches: the winegallon of 231 cubic inches is the standard in the United States. Quart An English measure of capacity, one-fourth of a gallon, or two pints. Pint A measure of capacity for liquids (also for corn and other dry substances of powdery or granular nature), equal to 1/2 a quart or 1/8 of a gallon; of varying content at different times and places. Ton Tun. A unit used in measuring the carrying capacity or burden of a ship, the amount of cargo, freight, etc. Originally, the space occupied by a tun cask of wine. Now, for the purposes of registered tonnage, the space of 100 cubic feet. For purposes of freight, usually the space of 40 cubic feet, unless that bulk would weigh more than 20 cwt., in which case freight is charged by weight. But the expression "ton of cargo" is also used with regard to special packages which are conventionally assumed as going so many packages to the ton. A simple scholar, Diarmuit Ui Dhuinn Shire of Northkeep, Kingdom of Ansteorra (I. Marc Carlson/IMC at vax2.utulsa.edu) From: asewpo1 at peabody.sct.ucarb.COM (Steve Weaver) Newsgroups: rec.org.sca Subject: Furlongs Date: 14 Oct 1994 12:12:23 -0400 Organization: the internet According to my inforation: 1 furlong = 660 feet = 0.125 miles = 40 rods/poles = 440 cubits (Now re-entering lurking mode) ;-) From: jeffs at math.bu.EDU (Jeff Suzuki) Newsgroups: rec.org.sca Subject: pound of gold, pound of feathers Date: 17 Oct 1994 14:10:00 -0400 Organization: the internet >Worth remembering next time someone asks which weighs more -- a pound >of gold or a pound of feathers... Actually, a pound is a pound is a pound. However...one pound of non-precious metal goods is 16 avoirdupois ounces (French for "goods of weight"). One pound of gold is divided into 12 troy (from Troyes) ounces, so the individual ounces weigh more. Thus, 1 ounce of gold is heavier than 1 ounce of feathers. Each ounce was subdivided into 20 smaller weights, whose names I will withhold pending a surprise. Notice the ratio: 1:12:20. The pre-decimal British currency was so divided: 1 pound = 12 shillings, and 1 shilling = 20 pence. Thus it should be no surprise that the smallest weight is a "pennyweight". Originally a pound of _silver_ (equal in value to an ounce of gold) was divided into 12 ounces (from the Latin _uncia_), and each ounce could be minted into 20 silver pennies. Depending on the time in England, pay on the order of shillings per year put you in the middle class. (An ounce of silver has a volume of about 2.5 cubic centimeters, or a coin about the size and thickness of a quarter, if you're wondering how big the coins were) William the Alchymist Organization: Penn State University Date: Mon, 17 Oct 1994 15:24:11 EDT From: Chris West Newsgroups: rec.org.sca Subject: Re: pound of gold, pound of feathers In article <199410171806.OAA06196 at math.bu.edu>, jeffs at math.bu.EDU (Jeff Suzuki) says: >Actually, a pound is a pound is a pound. > >However...one pound of non-precious metal goods is 16 avoirdupois >ounces (French for "goods of weight"). One pound of gold is divided >into 12 troy (from Troyes) ounces, so the individual ounces weigh >more. Thus, 1 ounce of gold is heavier than 1 ounce of feathers. >Each ounce was subdivided into 20 smaller weights, whose names I will >withhold pending a surprise. ...snip >William the Alchymist A pound is not a pound. It is true that a pound avoirdupois is 16 ounces avoirdupois. It is also true that a pound troy is 12 ounces troy. It is NOT TRUE that a pound avoirdupois is a pound troy. Why? an ounce troy is about 32 grams, an ounce av. is about 29 grams. Thus, a #av is about 465 grams, and a #t is more like 390 g. (probably these numbers are not exact, if so, flame me and I'll post truth when I can look it up). Therefore a pound of feathers is significantly heavier than a pound of gold. On the other hand, a pound of lead is _exactly the same_ as a pound of feathers. --Raul de Paz From: WJMICHALSKI Newsgroups: rec.org.sca Subject: Re: pound of gold, pound of feathers Date: Mon, 17 Oct 94 19:37:50 -0500 Organization: Delphi (info at delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice) Jeff Suzuki writes: >Actually, a pound is a pound is a pound. Not quite. See below. >However...one pound of non-precious metal goods is 16 avoirdupois >ounces (French for "goods of weight"). One pound of gold is divided >into 12 troy (from Troyes) ounces, so the individual ounces weigh >more. Thus, 1 ounce of gold is heavier than 1 ounce of feathers. >Each ounce was subdivided into 20 smaller weights, whose names I will >withhold pending a surprise. The actual smallest measurement is the grain, of which 24 grains = one pennyweight (dwt) of gold. 20 dwt do indeed make one ounce troy, which is 480 grains. With avoirdupois weight, 27,343 grains one dram, and 16 drams make one ounce av. Total being 417 grains per ounce. So yes, an ounce of gold is heavier than an ounce of feathers. However... One pound troy = 12 oz. = 5760 grains. One pound av. = 16 oz. = 6679 grains. A pound of feathers is heavier than a pound of gold. Mikhail From: Erika.Sarah at launchpad.unc.edu (Erika Sarah) Newsgroups: rec.org.sca Subject: English measurements Date: 26 Oct 1994 07:54:24 GMT Organization: University of North Carolina Extended Bulletin Board Service *This story is slightly off topic, and not really period, but it's really funny and pretty short, so I'm going to post it anyway* An American laboratory sent some data to an English lab using the Metric notation grams per cubic centimeter. The English lab sent back the data with the comment "This is an English laboratory. WE do not use the METRIC system. Please send the data back to us in English measurements." The American laboratory sent back the data in stones per royal firkin. -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Launchpad is an experimental internet BBS. The views of its users do not necessarily represent those of UNC-Chapel Hill, OIT, or the SysOps. -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- From: djheydt at uclink.berkeley.edu (Dorothy J Heydt) Newsgroups: rec.org.sca Subject: Re: mile yard etc. Date: 22 Oct 1994 01:37:27 GMT Organization: University of California, Berkeley [Hal posting from Dorothy's account...] In article <199410191612.MAA24581 at math.bu.edu>, Jeff Suzuki wrote: >1 knot = 1 nautical >mile/hour = .01 degrees/hour. The "1 naut. mile per hour" is correct, but the nautical mile was originally 1 minute of longitude at 45 degrees North latitude. It's now defined in metric units and varies by country. >Mark twain is two fathoms.... Yes, but... The reference is to both the depth (two fathoms) *and* that that particular depth is has a visual and tactile indicator on the lead line. All depths with such attachments are "marks". All others are "deeps." A leadsman measuring 12 feet of water calls "by the mark two (or twain)." If the depth on the lead is 36 feet (6 fathoms) he would call "by the deep six!" Per Bowditch _The American Practical Navigator_ (1931 edition, but this stuff doesn't change very fast), the marks are: 2, 3, 5, 7, 10, 13, 15, 17, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, etc. fathoms. Note the concentration with depths of use and interest to sailing and other early ships. Samuel Clemens chose that particular _nom de plume_ because, as a riverboat skipper on the Mississippi, when the water was 12 feet deep, it was safe sailing for those boats. --Hal Ravn (Hal Heydt) From: phefner at aol.com (PHefner) Newsgroups: rec.org.sca Subject: Re: How much is an ell? (Was: Baggy pants) Date: 23 Dec 1994 00:15:45 -0500 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) In Paris, in 1400, an ell was the length equal to the distance between the extended middle finger and the elbow. Christine de Pisan refers to a gown made for a lady by a contemporary Parisian dressmaker thus: "...which required five ells of wide Brussels material trailing three-quarters on the ground, replete with bombard sleeves hanging to the feet". Gosh, could five ells have been adequate for such a huge houppelande? ---Isabelle de Foix From: jeffs at math.bu.EDU (Jeff Suzuki) Newsgroups: rec.org.sca Subject: ell Date: 29 Dec 1994 10:57:10 -0500 Organization: The Internet >PMJI: How much is an ell? > >Rosalyn MacGregor of Glen Orchy I don't know what PMJI stands for, but there are several answers to the question. The right answer is, "It depends". (Oddly enough, this question just came up a few days ago, when my lady needed to know the answer for a sewing project, whose lengths were measured in ells) The three ells we could find were: Flemish (27 inches), French (45 inches), and English (54 inches). William the Alchymist From: s.krossa at aberdeen.ac.uk (Sharon Krossa) Newsgroups: rec.org.sca Subject: Length of a Scottish 'ell' (was: Great Kilt) Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 02:42:43 +0000 Organization: Phuture PhuDs In article <3259CC85.5674 at dimensional.com>, Archer wrote on 8 Oct 1996: >Matthew Pius wrote: >> >> Archer writes: >> >My understanding of an ell is that it is a measurement from the tip of >> >your elbow to the tip of your middle finger, which on myself is about >> >30" or so... >> >this being the case, 16 ells of cloth would be a little over 13 >> >yards...egads, that's a lotta cloth...:) >> >> Well, I'm certainly not going to comment on the length of >> Archer's arms, but I WOULD be somewhat surprised if they measured 30 >> inches from the elbow to fingertip (unless you mean the elbow of one arm >> to the tip of middle finger on the opposite hand :) ) I don't have a >> ruler with me at the moment, but as a guess, I'd say that the described >> measurement on me (tip of elbow to tip of middle finger) is round about >> 18 inches, which makes 16 ells VERY roughly equivalent to 8 yards. This, >> of course assumes that an ell is the measurement from tip of elbow to tip >> of middle finger, something for which I can not vouch one way or the other. > >As I said in another post, 30" was a typo. The actual measurment is >20", which would make 16 ells just short of 9 yards. I got the >description of ell out of my trusty, rusty Bookshelf '96 CD, so I don't >know how accurate it is, but it's the only dictionary I've got. BTW, >the elbow to fingertip measure was listed as the "ancient" usage, with >the modern being a set 45". Don't know why 45" would be a good >standardization, but hey, it's not my word... The answer is, Bookshelf is not very accurate. Have fun someday, and compare the encyclopedia entries in Bookshelf to those in Encarta for the same subjects... and then check out some proper books and discover that often neither answer is right ;-) As regarding the Scottish ell, it was defined by Act of Parliament in the reign of David I as being 37 inches, where an inch was defined based on a medium-sized man's thumb. James I re-stated this definition in 1426. Notice that this definition had nothing to do with elbows, arms, etc, but with thumbs (37 of them). In _Changing Values in Medieval Scotland_, Gemmill & Mayhew say "There does not seem to have been any particular change in the [Scottish] ell over time, but there is explicit reference in the records to the ell of Scottish measure. TA II.234 (treasurer, purchase in Flanders, 1504): 24 Flemish ells of grey damask ('gray dames') equivalent to 18 Scots ells, so the Flemish ell was only three-quarters of the size of the Scots ell in this instance." Assuming a medieval Scottish inch is the same as a modern inch would be a very rash thing to do, so I will refrain from calculating the length of 16 ells in modern units. Effrick neyn kenyeoch vik harrald mka Sharon Krossa, finding Mayhew & Gemmill useful once again skrossa at svpal.org (permanent) -or- s.krossa at abdn.ac.uk (until Nov 1996) Medieval Scotland Web Page (including information on names & clothing): http://www.abdn.ac.uk/~his016/medieval_scotland.html From: david_key at vnet.ibm.com (Dave Key) Newsgroups: rec.org.sca Subject: Length of an ell, was Re: Length of a Scottish 'ell' Date: 18 Oct 1996 08:15:12 GMT Organization: IBM UK Laboratories Ltd. In , s.krossa at aberdeen.ac.uk (Sharon Krossa) writes: >As regarding the Scottish ell, it was defined by Act of Parliament in the >reign of David I as being 37 inches, where an inch was defined based on a >medium-sized man's thumb. James I re-stated this definition in 1426. Notice >that this definition had nothing to do with elbows, arms, etc, but with >thumbs (37 of them). In _Changing Values in Medieval Scotland_, Gemmill & >Mayhew say "There does not seem to have been any particular change in the >[Scottish] ell over time, but there is explicit reference in the records to >the ell of Scottish measure. TA II.234 (treasurer, purchase in Flanders, >1504): 24 Flemish ells of grey damask ('gray dames') equivalent to 18 Scots >ells, so the Flemish ell was only three-quarters of the size of the Scots >ell in this instance." Very interesting post ... I'm still waiting for the library to deliver a copy of the Acts of Parliament for Scotland ... however to add a bit extra ... In C15th England the Ell was defined as 45" (5/4 of a yard ... which was 36" unless you were measuring cloth in which case it was 37"!) This was a change from the older ... and still 'relatively' standard measure on the continent of 27" ... which is the 3/4 of an English yard or (as described above) Scottish ell. However these measurements varied from Country to Country & town to town 'a Flemish ell' varied between regions & was different to the Paris ell. I'm not sure of the origin of the change ... but, from memory, the length of the ell in England changed for tax reasons ... both at the Conquest & later ... the version I recall goers something like ... you make cloth 1 ell wide or I fine you ... so you make a loom to make cloth that size ... then the ell becomes longer ... your cloth is now under assize ... you get fined ! Seems a bit simplistic to me but you never know ! I have a suspicion that the ell WAS originally 18" ... elbow to fist ... but where I got that from I haven't the foggiest ... some Norse thing or other ... so be VERY careful on the last 2 paragraphs!!! Hope this was helpful/of interest Cheers Dave From: Fideli To: Mark Harris Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 20:49:30 -0500 (EST) Subject: shorts, for fill in TRADITIONAL BEER MEASURES 1 nip = .25 pint 1 small = .5 pint 1 large = 1 pint 1 flagon = 1 quart 1 anker = 10 gallons 1 firkin = 9.8 gallons 1 barrel = 31.5 gallons 1 hogshead= 2 barrels = 63 gallons 1 butt = 2 hogsheads = 126 gallons 1 tun = 2 butts = 252 gallons Found by Lord Xaviar the Eccentric WINE MEASURES TRADITIONAL WINE MEASURES 10 gallons = 1 anker 1 hogshead = 1 pipe 2 hogshead = 1 tun 1 puncheon = 84 gallons 1 butt = 126 gallons WINE BOTTLE SIZE Minature = 100 ml Small = 187 ml (split) Medium = 375 ml Regular = 750 ml Large = 1 Liter Magnum = 1.5 L Extra Large= 3 L CHAMPAGNE BOTTLE SIZES Split = .25 bottle Pint = .5 bottle Bottle = .75 liters = 26 fl oz Magnum = 1.5 l = 2 bottles Jeroboam = 3 l = 4 bottles Rehoboam = 4.5 l = 6 bottles Methuselah = 6 l = 8 bottles Salmanazar = 9 l = 12 bottles Balthazar = 12 l = 16 bottles Nebuchadnezzar = 15 l = 20 bottles Transcribed by Josef Barleycorn head brewer for Lord Xaviar the Eccentric. From: manth at ozemail.com.au (Aramanth Dawe) Newsgroups: rec.org.sca Subject: Re: Conversions Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 06:45:01 GMT Organization: OzEmail Ltd - Australia Norvell Molex wrote: >There are many excellant recipes at on the online section of Cariadocs >& Elizabeth's recipes however some of the measurement are given in >metrics. Being new to the cooking business I am not well versed in the >conversions. Also some of the recipes seem to rotate between fluid and >solid. Could someone, anyone please help a gentleman out of a jam. >Norvell Molex >Aka: Brian MacQuarrey Metric conversion is not too hard to manage - although Australian cookbooks have been metric for a couple of decades now, I have also successfully used recipes form my mothers and grandmother's books. There are about 28g to the oz, but I find (for ease of mental arithmetic) that consitant use of 30g (or 2 measuring tablespoons) works well. For fluid measurements - 250ml is equivalent to 1 standard 8oz measuring cup. I hope this helps. I haven't tried out any of the recipes you're talking about - but now that I know they're there, I'll certainly give them a try. Aramanth de Warrene (mka Aramanth Dawe) From: "Philip W. Troy" To: sca-cooks at eden.com Date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 19:38:21 -0400 Subject: Re: sca-cooks - subtleties Mark Schuldenfrei wrote: > > So, as I alluded to in earlier posts, half the fun is figuring out what to > > do. What do you think the original says? I'll repeat it here. > > That and how long a Whalme is!! > > Context, please? This is ringing a bell. > > I think what I liked best, was the translation in Caterina's German work, of > timing something "A League and Back". The end result was to find out how > much distance a league was in that time and place, use US Government figures > for average walking pace, and time the cooking that way... > > Tibor (For me, a paternoster takes no time at all!) Would you folks be referring to a walm? That is an unspecified time; the modern equivalent instruction to letting something boil for one walm (or presumably a whalme) is to bring it to a boil once. Using a heat source far less easily controlled than what we generally use today, cooking times were often measured by letting food come to a boil, drawing the pot away from the fire to cool a bit, then bringing it back to a boil. This process is repeated for the specified number of times. This is very common in later-period recipes such as you find in Elinor Fettiplace or Gervase Markham. Adamantius Date: Thu, 11 Sep 1997 20:34:43 -0400 (EDT) From: Fideli To: Chroniclers --mark_harris at quickmail Subject: Greetings...just some small tidbits for you... A Clove by any other name? Clove, a weight used in England of six and one-half, seven, or eight pounds (2948, 3.175, or 3.629 kilograms) for cheese, wool, metals, and other agricultural and nonagricultural goods. Commonly called a half-stone, it was ultimately derived etymologically from the Latin clavus (nail). One of the most frequently used weights in mediebal England, the clobe appeared in the documents with such variant spellings as claw, clawe, clou, cloue, claue, clavbe, cleaue, and cleave. Ronald Edward Zupko Strayer, Joseph R; Dictionary of the Middle Ages, Vols 1,3,5,10,13. Charles Scribners sons, NY. 1982. Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 10:14:25 -0500 From: "Decker, Terry D." Subject: RE: SC - Plum Pudding >My deepest thanks...one question....how large is a penny loaf? >Dragonfyr I believe the penny loaf is about 1 lb. I don't have my English Bread and Yeast Cookery to hand or I would check. With a pint of milk and eight eggs to 1 lb of flour, 1 lb of bread crumbs sounds about right. The amounts are in Imperial measures, so they will be slightly different from U.S. measures. Bear Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 21:16:28 -0500 From: "Decker, Terry D." Subject: RE: SC - Plum Pudding To get back on subject, the penny loaf was the price of a loaf of bread under the Assize of Bread established in 1266. There were three qualities of flour listed and three different weights of loaf. In terms of 17th and 18th century recipes, what is usually meant is the penny white loaf (a manchet) which weighed between 6 and 8 ounces. A wheat or brown loaf would weigh 12 to 16 ounces. Elizabeth David recommends using 81 to 85 percent extraction wheat meal with a small proportion of unbleached white flour enriched with milk and eggs to approximate Jacobean or Georgian manchets. So, my guess at a 1 lb. loaf is half off. Bear Date: Wed, 3 Dec 1997 13:18:51 -0600 From: "Decker, Terry D." Subject: RE: SC - Re: sca-cooks V1 #460 >"A pint's a pound, the world around". That's a pound as a measure of weight, >not a currency unit ;^D. > >Aoife Tain't necessarily so. A dry pint = 1/64 bushel. A U.S. bushel = 2150.4 Cu. inches. An Imperial bushel = 2219.4 cu. inches. Weight in either case would depend on the density of the material being wieghed. As a point of interest, the U.S. uses the Winchester bushel which equates to about 54 lbs of wheat and Great Britian uses the London bushel which equates to about 60 lbs of wheat. Both measures were in use in medieval England, causing some interesting problems. Both the U.S. and Great Britain use a 16 oz lb which are approximately equivalent. The U.S. gallon is a wine gallon of 231 cu. inches or approximately 8 lbs. The Imperial gallon is based on 10 lbs of pure water at 62 degrees F equaling 277.42 cu. inches. The liquid pint = 1/8 of a gallon = 16 oz. U.S. (1 lb.) = 20 oz. Imperial (1.25 lb). So a pint's a pound only if you're measuring a liquid with the density of water in a U.S. 1 pint measuring cup. Bear P.S. The pound as a measure of currency is a measure of weight with variable value. Dats da nature of economics. Date: Thu, 4 Dec 1997 22:06:44 -0800 From: david friedman Subject: RE: SC - Re: sca-cooks V1 #460 At 11:58 AM -0800 12/4/97, kat wrote: >Bear writes: >> P.S. The pound as a measure of currency is a measure of weight with >> variable value... > >...and is primarily dependent on where you're located. For example, a >pound, in London, is currently worth about $1.68; but a pound in Beirut is >only worth about six-hundredths of a penny... > > - kat (who wishes she didn't have to know all this stuff, really...) The pound started out meaning a pound of silver pennies (the Carolingian monetary reform). It's been downhill from there. David/Cariadoc http://www.best.com/~ddfr/ Date: Tue, 9 Dec 1997 00:42:17 -0800 From: david friedman Subject: RE: SC - Re: sca-cooks V1 #460 At 10:27 AM +1100 12/9/97, Charles McCathieNevile wrote: >Assuming we are thinking of GBP Pounds Sterling (so-called) I think a >pound of silver pennies has appreciated a bit. >Charles The pound sterling is one of the descendants of the pound defined by the Carolingian monetary reform--which, incidentally, was a unit of account, not an actual coin. Initially, 240 pennies weighed a pound. When the penny was debased over time, instead of defining a pound as "the number of pennies that weighs a pound, however much that is" they defined a pound as 240 pennies. For the long version, see Carlo Cippola, _Money, Prices and Civilization in the Mediterranean World_. A good book. David Friedman Professor of Law Santa Clara University ddfr at best.com http://www.best.com/~ddfr/ Date: Sun, 5 Apr 1998 11:02:17 -0800 From: david friedman Subject: Re: SC - Middle East-Help needed At 10:34 AM -0400 4/5/98, LrdRas wrote: >An observation on the Andalusian translation in the Miscellany> The transaltor >seems to equate 1 uqiya with 1 once. The uqiya/ratl system, like the troy system and unlike the avoirdupois, has twelve ounces to the pound. David/Cariadoc Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 14:47:31 -0400 From: Nick Sasso Subject: RE: SC - Rarity of Fermantation recipes (was Fermented Beverage Even wonder what they used for timing and thermometers in the brewing; afterall, yeast is VERY temperature sensitive. niccolo difrancesco ******************************************************************************** My friend Geoffrey is doing some research into period brewing. Admittedly, most of his documentation is late period, it is still pretty cool. He was wondering himself how they dealt with temperature. ........ I am going to forward this to him and see if he will write something about this if you are interested. Yours, Avelina - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Aveline, I will greatly appreciate any information you would proffer on this. What I am familiar with is pretty remarkable. Recipes refer to quantities of boiling water (hard boil) mixed with room temp water to get a certain 'ideal' for mashing stages or pitching, or whatever. We marvelled and said 'these poor, technologically deprived boobs....don't they wish they had thermometers and watches?'. Well, the crow was mighty tasty that night as we mixed the amounts listed and came within 2-4 degreesF of the temps listed in our high falooting brewing guides. I suppose they were the Masters after all! After a time, you get to know by touch. I can tell the proper temperature to pitch yeast in a carboy (70 F or less) by touch. Primarily because I've felt the warmth so many times before pitching the yeast and it being TOO WARM! Reputedly, a brewer would run his finger through the top of a pot of water as it heated to determine proper temp. The number of times he could do so wouild tell him if hot enough. As for time, one reference we found has directions to boil something for a 'furlong' or some such. We had to really look and cogitate to figure out that that was the time it took to walk a 'furlong' and back. Pretty ingenious. Or another that told of three tuns of time......a tun is a vessel used to hold water.....time to fill it at the stream three times. Brilliant people compared to our electronic dependent lives. pax et bonum, niccolo difrancesco Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1998 18:52:42 EDT From: LrdRas at aol.com Subject: SC - thriddendele-more readable In a message dated 9/21/98 5:34:02 PM Eastern Daylight Time, mfgunter at fnc.fujitsu.com writes: << http://pleth.Princeton.EDU/cgi-bin/OED/oed-id?id=493538280 >> Cindy, the info you sent was fascinating. Hope you don't mind that I',m reposting it in a more readable form. :-) OED Entry Search - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ thirdendeal 'thirdendeal. Obs. Forms: 1 priddan dæl; 4 pridden-, 4-5 thridden-, 5 threden-, thredden-, thryden-, thyrdyn-, 6 thirdin-, thyrden-, (thirding-, 7 thurron-), 6-8 thirden-; 4-5 -del, 5-7 -dele, 6 -deale, deall, 7 -dell, 7-8 - -deal; 4-6 (9 dial.) -dale. OE. (pone) priddan dæl, accus. case of (se) pridda dæl the third part (see thirdel, deal sb.1, dale2). Cf. halfendeal, farthingdeal. 1. The third part of anything; a third. •C. 1000 Sax. Leechd. I. 98 Seope on wætere to priddan dæle; •C. 1000 Sax. Leechd. II. 120 Bewyl op priddan dæl; •13.. Guy Warw. (A.) 7306 + st. 65 Thriddendel his lond haue he schold. •14.. E.E. Misc. (Warton Cl.) 72 With the thyrdyndele of gume, and twyse so mych of water. •A. 1500 in Arnolde Chron. (1811) 147 Euery Sonday a soule out of purgatory and the thredden dele of al synnes releced. •1558 Warde tr. Alexis' Secr. i. i. (1580) 37 b, Drinke thereof two thirdendales of a glassefull. •1581 J. Bell Haddon's Answ. Osor. 459 b, A thyrdendeale of the Crowne of Thornes is shewed at Paris in the Holy Chappell there. 2. A third of a tun; = tertian B. 2. •1423 Rolls of Parlt. IV. 256/1 Thredendels and hoggeshedes so aftur lesse mesure. •14.. MS. Cantab. Ff. 5. 48, lf. 55 b (Hartshorne Anc. Metr. T. (1829) 54), Hit holdis a gode thrydendele Ful of wyne euery mele. 3. (See quots.) •1571 in Shaks. Jahrbuch (1896) 142 The hooped pot commonly called a thirdindeale and a half thirdindeale. •1590 [Tarlton] News Purgat. (1844) 114 When Tapsters..Fill thirdingdeall pots till the drinke run ouer. •1620 Melton Astrolog. 32 Many of them dare not goe to bed without a Thurrondell Pot of six shillings Beere. •1678 Phillips (ed. 4), Thirdendeal, a Liquid Measure used in Salisbury containing three Pints. •1721 in Bailey. Ras Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:01:52 EDT From: THLRenata at aol.com Subject: SC - Re: How Much Juice? Angeline asks: >>How much juice do you get out of the average lemon and the average orange?<< According to the equivalents chart in the BH&G Cookbook 1 medium lemon = 3T juice, 2 t. shredded peel 1 medium orange = 1/3 to 1/4 cup juice, 4 T shredded peel Renata Barony of Altavia Kingdom of Caid Los Angeles, CA Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1998 22:40:17 EST From: LrdRas at aol.com Subject: Re: SC - Verzusum phlip at bright.net writes: << First, what sort of ounce is he saying- volume, or weight? >> When cooking from Platina I have always used the 2 tablspoons = 1 ounce rule of thumb. It has always produced satisfactory results so far. Try 1 tablspoon of cinnamon which wouldn't be over much for a half cup of sugar plus the other ingredients. Ras Date: Fri, 27 Nov 1998 17:58:18 -0500 From: "Pat LaPointe" To: Subject: RE: Measurements Styrbjorn Ulfhamr asked: ... if there were different measurements for ale? According to Stuart Peachey, in Measures and Dates 1580-1660, Bristol: Stuart Press, 1997, "Measures often differed with commodity so that a gallon of beer was different in size from one of ale and also from one of wine." Some liquid measurements from Peachey's book are found on page 8: Measuring Wine Volume Liquid Litre Gallon 8 pints 4.55 Varied with comodity 35 beer gals=42 wine gals Wine Gallon 3.74 1 gal wine =231 cubic inches. Pottle 4 pints 2.27 Quart 2 pints 1.14 Pint 1 pint .568 Gill or Quadron .25 pint .142 [Randle Holme: Academy of Armory 16823/339] Spoonfull .031[1/32]pint .018 Firkin Quarter of a barrel [Websters New International Dictionary 1927) Ale Firkin 8 gallons [Websters] Beer firkin 9 gallons [Websters] Runnlet Variable aprox 15 gallons [Websters] Barrel 36 gallons depending on comodity [36 Beer, 32 Ale] Hogshead 52.5 gallons [variable with comodity and region] [Websters] Puncheon 2 barrels 72 gallons [Websters) Pipe 2 hogsheads [Websters] Butt 2 hogsheads [Websters] Awme poss french ell Aune poss dutch/german volume 30-35 gallons-136-159 liters Wine Oil or Honey Tun 2 butts Butt or Pipe 2 hogsheads Hogshead 2 barrels Tierce 1.5 barrels Barrel 1.75 Rundlet Barrel 2 kilderkin Wine Barrel 31.5 Gallons Ale Barrel 32 Gallons Beer Barrel 36 Gallons Rundlet 18 gallons Aqua Vitae Barrel 10 gallons [Scottish Import Regulations 1611] Gallon 2 pottles Wine Gallon 8 pound tory weight Stock fish and Herring 10,000 to the last which is 12 ale barrels Salmond and Eels Some measure them by ale measures.[Randle Holme: Academy of Armory 1682 3/260] Looking up the terms in the OED would give a start date for their usage. That wasn't Peachey's intent in providing the list of terms. His intent was to provide modern definitions for mesures encountered in Elizabethan and Stuart documents. Alisoun Mistress Alisoun Fortescue of Maplehurst in the Barony of Bergental, East Kingdom, 1585 Pat LaPointe in Western Massachusetts, 1998 Date: Fri, 27 Nov 1998 23:50:53 -0600 From: "I. Marc Carlson" To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Subject: Re: Measurements >The measurements Marc gave are certainly quite helpful. Here are >some I ran across in an old newsletter. I have no way of >verifying these and do not know the original source. Perhaps >someone out there has more info. These are supposed to be >traditional wine measurements, but I wonder if they are Medieval >and if there were different measurements for ale? Also does >anyone know what a 'flagon' is and how much it measures? (My >dictionary says that it is a pottery vessel with a lid and spout >holding about two quarts.) Let me check my _Historical Measures, Weights, Calendars, & Money of all Nations_ (I don't have any of the other sources with me)... >... >Traditional Wine Measures: >10 gallons =1 anker >1 hogshead =1 pipe >2 hogsheads =1 tun >1 puncheon =84 gallons >1 butt =126 gallons Hogshead of Claret.....................46 gallons Butt of Sherry........................103 " Pipe of Port or Masden................115 " Pipe of Madeira or Cape................92 " Pipe of Teneriffe.....................100 " Pipe of Lisbon or Bucellas............117 " Butt of Tent, Malaga, or Mountain.....105 " Aum of Hock, Moselle, or other German Wines..30 " Pipe of Marsala or Bronti..............93 " Puncheon of Scotch Wiskey.............110-130 " Puncheon of Brandy....................110-120 " Hogshead of Brandy.....................55-60 " Puncheon of Rum........................90-100 " A hogshead is 1/2 a Pipe, Butt or Puncheon A quartercask is 1/4 of " An Octave is 1/8 of " English Wine and Spirit measure 4 gills = 1 pint 2 pints = 1 quart 4 quarts = 1 gallon 36 gallons = 1 tierce 54 gallons = 1 1/2 tierces = 1 hogshead 108 gallons = 2 hogsheads = 1 pipe, butt, or puncheon. Ale, Beer or Porter measurements 4 gills = 1 pint 2 pints = 1 quart 4 quarts = 1 gallon 9 gallons = 1 firkin 2 firkins = 18 gallons = 1 kilderkin 2 kilderkins = 36 gallons = 1 barrel 3 kilderkins = 54 gallons = 1 hogshead 2 hogsheads = 108 gallons = 1 butt 2 butts = 216 gallons = 216 gallons Before 1824 The Wine gallon = 231 cubic inches The Corn Gallon = 268.8 cubic inches The Ale gallon = 282 cubic inches (The post-1824 Imperial Gallon = 277.274 cubic inches) ============ Marc Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 16:41:10 -0500 From: Maggie Allen To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Subject: Re: Melanie's Measurements There is a Complete Anachronist entitle Period Metrology: A Study of Measurement, Volumes 81 and 82 (it didn't all fit in one) by Master Grant Graeme de Menteith that is very well put together and as seems as complete as something like this can get. It's far more complicated than I want to think about at any one time but it does make a wonderful reference. I haven't used it very much but every now and then I come across something in my reading that I have to look up to figure out how much it equals in some term that I can imagine (the book includes conversion info too). Let's just say to the mathematically inept it is a godsend. Margarita Kofinopoia (called Maggie Basketmaker) Date: Sun, 6 Dec 1998 21:01:27 -0800 From: david friedman Subject: Re: SC - An introduction and hopefully a quick query At 8:39 AM +0800 12/7/98, Matthew Legge wrote: > I was browsing the recipes of the cookbooks and was >trying to convert the measurements to metric when I found that there are >two different sets (at least) of pound weights and matching volume measures >in use today. Which one should I use? The one where 2.2 pounds = 1kg or the >other one? In the US, weights are almost always avoirdupois; troy is used for precious metals and not much else. So a kg is 2.2 lbs, and there are 16 ounces to the pound. A gallon contains four quarts, each of two pints, and a pint of water weighs about a pound. If you happen to be working with medieval Islamic recipes, it is worth knowing that "ratl" and "uqiya," sometimes translated "pound" and "ounce," are from a system with 12 ounces to a pound, which I think is also true of the troy system. David/Cariadoc http://www.best.com/~ddfr/ Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 10:22:55 -0600 From: "Decker, Terry D." Subject: RE: SC - An introduction and hopefully a quick query > << If you happen to be working with medieval Islamic recipes, it is worth > knowing that "ratl" and "uqiya," sometimes translated "pound" and "ounce," > are from a system with 12 ounces to a pound, which I think is also true > of the troy system. > > David/Cariadoc >> > > So is the ounce bigger or is it the same ounce? What I mean is that if the > ratl is 12 oz. = 1 1/2 cp liquid then is the uqiya still 1 oz=2 tblsps liquid? > This is how I have been doing it and have had consistently successful > results. > > Ras I believe you will find that the Troy or apothecary measures are strictly weight based. Troy and avoirdupois measures are based a standard grain of 64 milligrams. A Troy oz is 480 grains. A Troy pound is 12 Troy oz or 5,760 grains. An avoirdupois ounce is 437.5 grains. An avoirdupois pound is 16 oz or 7,000 grains. The variation is less than 10 per cent, which means it has minimal effect given the innaccuracies of volume measure. Bear Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 17:01:52 -0800 From: david friedman Subject: Re: SC - An introduction and hopefully a quick query At 10:40 AM -0500 12/7/98, LrdRas at aol.com wrote: > ddfr at best.com writes: > ><< If you happen to be working with medieval Islamic recipes, it is worth > knowing that "ratl" and "uqiya," sometimes translated "pound" and "ounce," > are from a system with 12 ounces to a pound, which I think is also true of > the troy system. > > David/Cariadoc >> > >So is the ounce bigger or is it the same ounce? What I mean is that if the >ratl is 12 oz. = 1 1/2 cp liquid then is the uqiya still 1 oz=2 tblsps liquid? >This is how I have been doing it and have had consistently successful results. From the notes at the end of Charles Perry's translation of the Andalusian cookbook: 1 ratl (< the Greek litra < the Roman libra)=12 ûqiyas; in 13th century Andalusia, 1 ratl=468.75 g, about a pound 1 ûqiya (< the Roman uncia)=10 dirham; in 13th century Andalusia, 1 ûqiya=39 g, about 1 1/3 ounces or 7 teaspoons Presumably the exact quantities might have been different in other times and places. David/Cariadoc Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 10:48:58 -0600 From: "I. Marc Carlson" To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Subject: RE: Stride measure by leg length? [SCA] > >...form (say...ankle to ankle), not the complete stride on the ground. This >is to compute tolerances for tunic/gown fullness. Something to consider, as a rule of thumb, while we keep looking for you... The "Pace" (say, left-right-left) is 5 feet (60"). Half that, or one step, would be 30", which is what the Army always taught me was the correct length of stride when marching. From that, a thousand paces would be 1 (Roman) mile (from Mile "a thousand") or 5000 feet. Marc/Diarmaid Date: Sun, 14 Feb 1999 15:31:29 EST From: LrdRas at aol.com Subject: SC - PECK peck [1] (noun) [Middle English pek, from Middle French] First appeared 13th Century 1 : either of two units of dry capacity equal to 1/4 bushel: a : a U.S. unit equivalent to 537.605 cubic inches b : a British imperial unit equivalent to 554.84 cubic inches 2 : a large quantity or number bush*el [1] (noun) [Middle English busshel, from Old French boissel, from (assumed) Old French boisse one sixth of a bushel, of Celtic origin; akin to Middle Irish boss breadth of the hand] First appeared 14th Century 1 : any of various units of dry capacity as a : a unit of dry capacity used in the United States equal to 2150.42 cubic inches b : a British imperial unit of dry and liquid capacity equal to 2219.36 cubic inches or 8 imperial gallons 2 : a container holding a bushel 3 : a large quantity : LOTS Ras Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 8:51:26 -0600 From: "I. Marc Carlson" To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu Subject: RE: 40-60 acres Land Holding > >> I'm sorry, why are you saying the Medieval acre was smaller than the >> modern one? That would really have to do with where you were from and >> the local standards for units of measurement like the foot (which were >> often larger than the modern foot). >Didn't you just say about the foot, exactly what was said about the >acre? No, I didn't. Her comment states unequivocally that at some earlier time the Acre was smaller than it is now. Begining with the reign of Edw I, the acre has been defined as a furlong x 32 furrows, or the amount of land an ox could plow in one day. This was eventually regularized to 40x4 poles, or 4840 sq yards. Before 5 Edw I, the acre referred to land of about that size, but without any solid definiton. It was never smaller than a furlong x 32 furrows. On the other hand, the measurement of a Foot, not being based on something generally unchangeable, and having no set standard, varied quite a bit in size. In France, for example, the Pied (or "foot") is said to have equaled 12.08 English inches, but really this only refers to the Parisian foot, since every other district and region had its own standards for what contituted a foot, a pound (livre) or gallon (the French development of the Metric system had a real *reason*). In England things weren't quite that bad, and the variation between inches really only varied a little. But if you are measureing your "acres" by the foot, a variation of an inch per foot could alter the outcome by as much as... Well, my bad a math skills tell me that doing so would make a yard 171,610 square (standard) yards, which sounds way off, but it would be a considerable amount. Marc/Diarmaid Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 20:41:36 -0500 From: "Decker, Terry D." Subject: RE: SC - Saffron > The Pepperer's Guild lists it for $$6.00/dwt. I don't know what a dwt is. > > ~Maedb dwt or pwt = pennyweight = 1/20 Troy ounce = approx. 1.555 grams Bear Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 11:20:17 -0400 From: snowfire at mail.snet.net Subject: RE: SC - Saffron - -Poster: Jean Holtom >> The Pepperer's Guild lists it for $$6.00/dwt. I don't know what a dwt is. >> >> Hope this helps >> ~Maedb >> >dwt or pwt = pennyweight = 1/20 Troy ounce = approx. 1.555 grams Because d is the way we used to denote pennies in the old pre-decimal British currency - Four shillings and three pence (or "threpence" as it was pronounced) would be written 4s 3d (or 4/3 "four and three"). Bring back the old money! Elysant Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1999 21:29:29 -0500 From: "Decker, Terry D." Subject: RE: SC - A weird conversion.....Now OT > >That shouldn't be difficult. The US measures are taken from the pre-1825 > >British measures. > > News to me! Do you have any more on this please? > > Elysant U.S. liquid measures are based on the British wine gallon of 231 cubic inches and 128 ounces. This was the standard British measure until 1825 when Great Britain fixed the gallon as 10 pounds of water at 62 degrees F and introduced Imperial measures. The U.S. bushel is based on the Winchester bushel of 60 pounds. U.S. measures are essentially based on standards used in medieval England, which were replaced by the Imperial measures. Of course there are some problems with the standardness of the old standards. Bear Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 09:05:28 -0000 From: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?Nanna_R=F6gnvaldard=F3ttir?=" Subject: Re: SC - Mead recipes from the Danish cookbook Ras wrote: >You're going to keep us in the dark about lispunds aren't you? "-) Nope, only those of you unfamiliar with the metric system. If you follow the asterisk trail, you will see that I explained a lispund is around 8 kilos (something like 17 lbs). The term comes from Low German lispunt and means originally "Livonian pound". I'm not sure how large the barrels in question should be (I think it might be something like 136 liters). Nanna Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 09:03:39 -0500 From: Richard Keith Subject: Re: SC - measurements There is a book about Italian weights and measure that details by area, town how big a cup is etc in that area. I will look through my notes from last Pennsic to see if I can find it. Frederich From: "Brian Songy" To: Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2002 09:38:45 -0600 Subject: [Sca-cooks] Following a recipe... THL Stefan li Rous, Archivist Non Pareil, asked: But presumeably the folks for whom these recipes were written would be familar with these. We have briefly talked about these sorts of timings before, but I can't remember if someone gave us non-Catholics some numbers to use instead. So, in your opinion, what would be a reasonable range in time for each of these? In other words, when spoken at a normal speed and if one was reciting a well-known, memorized set of verses? Although I suspect that if this was used as a timing piece that it would have been said about the same each time and not rushed. Well Stefan, this is what I managed to put together: Timing of Common Catholic Prayers Title In Latin In English Gloria time: 13 seconds +/- 2 seconds http://www.unidial.com/~martinus/thesaurus/Basics/GloriaPatri.html Gloria Patri, Glory, to the Father, et Filio, and the Son, and the et Spiritui Sancto. Holy Spirit. Sicut erat in principio, As it was in et nunc, et semper, the beginning, is now, and et in saecula saeculorum. ever shall be, world without end. Amen. Amen. Shorter Version of the Ave Maria time: 13 seconds +/- 2 seconds (taken from Luke 1:28 and Luke 1:42) Ave Maria gratia plena Hail Mary, full of Grace, Dominus tecum. the Lord is with you. Benedicta tu in mulieribus Blessed are you amoung women, et benedictus fructus And blessed is the fruit of ventris tui, Jesus. Amen. your womb Jesus. Amen. Longer version of Ave Maria time: 21 seconds +/- 2 seconds http://www.unidial.com/~martinus/thesaurus/Basics/AveMaria.html Dominus AVE Maria, gratia plena, Hail Mary, full of Grace, tecum. the Lord is with you. Benedicta tu in mulieribus, Blessed are you amoung women, et benedictus fructus and blessed is the fruit of ventris tui, Iesus. your womb, Jesus. Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, Holy Mary, mother of God, ora pro nobis peccatoribus, pray for us sinners, now and nunc, et in hora mortis at the hour of our death. nostrae. Amen. Amen. Pater Noster (taken from Matthew 6: 9-13) PATER noster, Our Father, qui es in caelis, Who art in heaven, sanctificetur nomen tuum. hallowed be thy name. Adveniat regnum tuum. Thy kingdom come. Fiat voluntas tua, Thy will be done, sicut in caelo et in terra. on earth as it is in heaven. Panem nostrum quotidianum Give us this day our daily da nobis hodie, bread, and forgive us our et dimitte nobis debita trepasses, as we forgive nostra sicut et nos those who trepass against dimittimus debitoribus us. And lead us not into nostris. Et ne nos inducas temptation but deliver us in tentationem, sed libera from evil. Amen. nos a malo. Amen (Five Decade) Rosary consists of some introductory prayers, and then five "decades", with each decade cconsisting of a pater noster, ten Ave Maria's, and one Gloria. time: ~20 minutes - I had difficulty with making accurate Full (Fifteen Decade) Rosary consist of some introductory prayers, and then fifteen "decades", with each decade cconsisting of a pater noster, ten Ave Maria's, and one Gloria. time: 1 Hour - I had difficulty with making accurate prayers, and then The times were generated by timing myself saying the latin form of the prayer three times and taking the median measurement Note that I converted to Catholicism three years ago; I'm not particularly skilled at saying these prayers quickly. A collection of Latin resources, including common Catholic prayers, can be found at: http://www.unidial.com/~martinus/Thesaurus.html Also, this web page references the stability of the prayers in latin, vice other languages: http://www.unidial.com/~martinus/thesaurus/Introductio.html Brian Songy Manager, Computer Services UL Lafayette-NIRC Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 12:57:13 -0700 From: David Friedman Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Andalusian measurements To: mirhaxa at morktorn.com, Cooks within the SCA > Is there a lst somewhere (Cariadoc's maybe?) which translates the > measurements from Andalusian recipes, ratl and dirham and uqiya? > > Mirhaxa It's included in the Perry translation webbed on my site. The information on measurements is at: http://www.daviddfriedmn.com/Medieval/Cookbooks/Andalusian/ andalusian10.htm#Heading541 -- David/Cariadoc www.daviddfriedman.com Date: Wed, 26 May 2004 10:46:35 -0400 From: jah at twcny.rr.com Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Andalusian measurements To: sca-cooks at ansteorra.org The Corning Glass museum a year or so ago had original weights that were kind of a green glass, and one was a "ratl"! It was very enlighting to see. Jules/Catalina Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 02:26:08 -0800 (PST) From: Huette von Ahrens Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Mrs. Penn's Apple Beer... To: Cooks within the SCA Stefan enquired: > What is the volume of a hogshead? A hogshead is a unit of volume for alcoholic beverages in the imperial system. A hogshead of wine is 63 gallons. A hoghead of beer or ale is 54 gallons. Huette Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2005 17:11:14 -0600 From: "Terry Decker" Subject: [Sca-cooks] Hogshead was Mrs. Penn's Apple Beer... To: "Cooks withinthe SCA" A hogshead is a measure of volume for liquids. It was equivalent to 48 gallon of ale, 54 gallons of beer, 60 gallons of cider, 63 gallons of oil, honey or wine, or 100 gallons of molasses. These are not Imperial gallons, but the traditional British gallon which is equivalent to the U.S. gallon. The U.S. currently defines the hogshead as 2 barrels or 63 gallons. the U.S. hogshead measures 14553 cubic inches or about 8.422 cubic feet (238.48 liters). In Imperial measure it is 1/2 butt or 52.5 Imperial gallons, being 8.429 cubic inches (238.67 liters). The modern US and Imperoal hogsheads are functionally equivalent. Mrs. Penn's hogshead is probably 54 gallons. Bear > Awk! My first thought was that I've seen 15th and 16th Century recipes > which were more understandable. But after re-reading it a couple of times > it is clearer. "put it upon the malt" must mean pour it through malted > grain. Lots of figuring out still to do, like "worke it like other bere". > What is the volume of a hogshead? > > Stefan Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 22:38:10 -0600 From: "margaret" Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Dimensions To: "Cooks within the SCA" > I'm reading "On Divers Arts" and looking at the forge in the third book, > chapter 3. Can anyone tell me how they're measuring here? > > Many of the measurements are in "fingers". Are we talking length or width? > I know the measurement, "hands" was started, for horses, as the width of the > palm, and has been standardized to 4 inches by equestrians, but I'm not sure > about fingers. > > Also does anyone know, had they standardized "feet" by then? The book > itself is believed to be 12th century, more German than anything else. > > Saint Phlip, A finger (length) is 2 nails or about 4.5 inches. A nail is 1/20 of an ell. A finger (width) is roughly 3/4 of an inch. A thumb (width) is roughly 1 inch. The Roman foot is roughl 11.7 inches. A competing measure, the natural foot is 9.8 inches. The modern foot of about 12 inches began to be used in England some time after the Conquest and has roughly remained the same since 1300. However, since the book is using fingers and ands, it is likely that the foot mentioned is the manual foot, a Northern European measure determined by two hands on a shaft, thumbs extended and touching, estimated at 13.1 inches. In the German states, the foot varied. The Viennese foot is about 124 inches, the Rhine foot is about 12.36 inches and the Bavarian foot is about 11.6 inches. Bear Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2007 07:50:49 -0500 From: "Terry Decker" Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Period Peeps? To: "Cooks within the SCA" Spanish and Portuguese libra were a 16 onca pound ranging between 1.011 and 1.016 percent of the period English pound (avoirdupois, close to the modern U.S. pound), so roughly 460 grams. Bear > Okay, some stupid questions that probably aren't issues, but might > be. Is a pound sixteen modern ounces in this case? Again, what kind > of sugar did you use? Ideally, you should be allowing each increment > of added sugar to dissolve in the egg whites (eventually, it's > probably icing rather than egg whites) before adding more. > > Adamantius Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 19:07:38 -0500 From: "Terry Decker" Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Not bagels, pretzels To: "Cooks within the SCA" The Italian 'libra" was virtually equivalent to the Roman "libra pondo." It is a pound of 12 ounces weighing about .722 of the avoirdupois pound. Bear Edited by Mark S. Harris measures-msg Page 33 of 33