[Sca-cooks] LONG Fwd: Re: Grinding wheat

[Laura C Minnick]

This is long, but really interesting, and some of you might enjoy it! 
(The string begins a fair ways down-  begins with "

>>> Thank you for
>> responding to my question and especially for telling me
>> about the Brunt and Cannon essay. I wrote to Edmund Cannon
>> and received this response: “I believe it was standard 
>> practice that the flour was returned minus a proportion
>> for  the miller's costs or that everything was returned
>> and  the miller was paid in cash. I have found no
>> documentary  evidence of wheat being weighed when farmers
>> sent it to the  mill to be ground for the family: they
>> still measured by volume.”

Liutgard

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: 	Re: Grinding wheat
Date: 	Sun, 18 Mar 2018 11:20:54 -0400
From: 	Erick Kelemen <ek at ERICKKELEMEN.COM>
Reply-To: 	Chaucer Discussion Group <CHAUCER at LISTSERV.UIC.EDU>
To: 	CHAUCER at LISTSERV.UIC.EDU



To add to the discussion: I recall—but don’t have the book in front of me to check—that Steven Justice has a section on hand-turned private grain mills and the politics of owning such, when explicating “John the Miller hath ground small small.” I suspect that rural communities were far more aware of what one measure of grain became when ground to flour than has been credited.

> On Mar 18, 2018, at 11:02 AM, Dr. Robert Delius Royar PhD <r.royar at MOREHEADSTATE.EDU> wrote:
> 
> What is the evidence that volume measurement was a common practice? Measurement by weight is generally easier than volume measurement in a world where there aren’t factories making teaspoons and measuring cups. But ratio measurement is even easier (1 part this with 2 parts that). As the old saying goes, “a pint's a pound the world around,” probably not that old of a saying but catchy nonetheless. In the case of the saying, the reference is to 16 fluid oz. of water compared to 16 oz. by weight of water.
> 
> -- 
> Dr. Robert Delius Royar PhD, Associate Professor of English
> Morehead State University     r.royar at moreheadstate.edu
> 
> 
>> On 17 Mar 2018, at 18:37, Robert Simola <00003ca12d79f4d6-dmarc-request at LISTSERV.UIC.EDU> wrote:
>> 
>> Cannon's only comment on weight was that he has found no evidence that the grain was weighed before milling. He did not make any statement about time period.  If the bags of wheat had been measured before milling and the bags of flour weighed after milling the difference would have been obvious, but this did not seem to have happened.
>> 
>> Even today, when looking on Google I found it surprisingly hard to find out the conversion ratio of wheat berries to milled flour.The answer to the question, "How much lbs of wheat is in a cup of flour?" gives the following answer: "If your recipe calls for 1 pound of all-purpose flour, use 3 1/3 cups. If your recipe calls for 1 pound of cake flour, use 4 1/2 cups. If your recipe calls for 1 pound pastry flour, use 4 1/4 cups. If your recipe calls for 1 pound whole wheat flour, use 3 1/3 cups.Aug 9, 2012" which I find of no help at all. Nor does, "How much does a cup of wheat berries weigh?" or "How many pounds of wheat does it take to make a pound of flour?" It was only when I asked, "How many cups of flour does a cup of wheat berries make?" did I find an answer: "The general rule of thumb is that one cup of wheat berries is equal to about 1.5 cups of flour when ground.Jun 13, 2017" 
>> 
>> The reason I asked the question in the first place was that when grinding wheat to make waffles I would put in two cups of berries and take the resultant flour and pour it in a bowl with the rest of the  dry 
> What is the evidence that volume measurement was a common practice? Measurement by weight is generally easier than volume measurement in a world where there aren’t factories making teaspoons and measuring cups. But ratio measurement is even easier (1 part this with 2 parts that). As the old saying goes, “a pint's a pound the world around,” probably not that old of a saying but catchy nonetheless. In the case of the saying, the reference is to 16 fluid oz. of water compared to 16 oz. by weight of water.
> 
> -- 
> Dr. Robert Delius Royar PhD, Associate Professor of English
> Morehead State University     r.royar at moreheadstate.edu
> 
> 
>> On 17 Mar 2018, at 18:37, Robert Simola <00003ca12d79f4d6-dmarc-request at LISTSERV.UIC.EDU> wrote:
>> 
>> Cannon's only comment on weight was that he has found no evidence that the grain was weighed before milling. He did not make any statement about time period.  If the bags of wheat had been measured before milling and the bags of flour weighed after milling the difference would have been obvious, but this did not seem to have happened.
>> 
>> Even today, when looking on Google I found it surprisingly hard to find out the conversion ratio of wheat berries to milled flour.The answer to the question, "How much lbs of wheat is in a cup of flour?" gives the following answer: "If your recipe calls for 1 pound of all-purpose flour, use 3 1/3 cups. If your recipe calls for 1 pound of cake flour, use 4 1/2 cups. If your recipe calls for 1 pound pastry flour, use 4 1/4 cups. If your recipe calls for 1 pound whole wheat flour, use 3 1/3 cups.Aug 9, 2012" which I find of no help at all. Nor does, "How much does a cup of wheat berries weigh?" or "How many pounds of wheat does it take to make a pound of flour?" It was only when I asked, "How many cups of flour does a cup of wheat berries make?" did I find an answer: "The general rule of thumb is that one cup of wheat berries is equal to about 1.5 cups of flour when ground.Jun 13, 2017" 
>> 
>> The reason I asked the question in the first place was that when grinding wheat to make waffles I would put in two cups of berries and take the resultant flour and pour it in a bowl with the rest of the  dry ingredients, but when I added the liquid the result was always too heavy and dry and I would have to add more liquid a little at a time until I got the consistency right. I didn't think anything about it since I am a novice baker and knew the amount of liquid needed would vary according to humidity, the phases of the moon, or just because. Besides, I thought, a cup is a cup isn't it? It was only when I started making bread and measured out the flour the recipe called for that it became obvious that there was much more flour by volume than the amount of wheat berries I put in the machine to be ground. 
>> --------------------------------------------
>> On Sat, 3/17/18, Travis Brown <travis at FLIGHTDECKMEDIA.COM> wrote:
>> 
>> Subject: Re: Grinding wheat
>> To: CHAUCER at LISTSERV.UIC.EDU
>> Date: Saturday, March 17, 2018, 1:57 PM
>> 
>> Interesting. So do you think
>> Cannon is differentiating from his references to sack weight
>> as the measure of trade because you are asking about Middle
>> Ages and their paper covers a later scope, or commenting
>> specifically on personal customer-use transactions vs.
>> larger commercial scale where measure was more precisely
>> unitized, or dissenting from the premise altogether? 
>> 
>> Whatever the method of the
>> scam, I still think you can count on gristers gonna grist.
>> 
>> 
>>> On Mar 17, 2018, at
>> 6:56 AM, Robert Simola <00003ca12d79f4d6-dmarc-request at LISTSERV.UIC.EDU>
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Travis,
>>> 
>>> Thank you for
>> responding to my question and especially for telling me
>> about the Brunt and Cannon essay. I wrote to Edmund Cannon
>> and received this response: “I believe it was standard 
>> practice that the flour was returned minus a proportion
>> for  the miller's costs or that everything was returned
>> and  the miller was paid in cash. I have found no
>> documentary  evidence of wheat being weighed when farmers
>> sent it to the  mill to be ground for the family: they
>> still measured by volume.”
>>> 
>>> I have my own flour mill for grinding
>> wheat. It is not a commercial mill, just a small mill for
>> grinding wheat for my own bread and waffles. My question
>> came about because the volume of flour always exceeded the
>> volume of wheat berries that I put into the mill for
>> grinding. If I put in two cups of wheat berries to be
>> ground, I end up with about three cups of flour. A little
>> research on Google showed that this is the typical result: a
>> cup of wheat berries results in about one-and-a-half cups of
>> flour. This led me to "The Miller's Tale" and
>> made me question what I have always been told about medieval
>> millers adulterating their flour with chalk. But if when a
>> farmer brought his grain to the mill it wasn't weighed
>> and the farmer brought in ten bags of wheat and went home
>> with ten bags of flour (minus the 12th to 16th cut the
>> miller took, then there was no need for the flour to be
>> adulterated. It also makes more sense why millers were so
>> protective of their "secrets" and wouldn't
>> allow anyone to observe what was happening while grain was
>> being milled and why there were "cut-outs" where
>> "stolen" flour could be hidden from the farmers, 
>> This increase in volume when grain is milled into flour also
>> explains why millers were considered cheats and thieves and
>> why they were so much more prosperous than they should have
>> been. After all, how could the miller have so much
>> "extra" flour if he wasn't cheating and
>> stealing from everyone who brought his wheat to the mill.
>> Milling grain must have seemed like spinning straw into
>> gold.  But I still wonder when it became generally known in
>> the scientific community at least that when grain is milled
>> the resultant volume of flour greatly exceeds the original
>> volume of grain? So I guess millers were really dishonest
>> but in a different way than what has been generally assumed.
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> --------------------------------------------
>>> On Wed, 3/14/18, Travis Brown <travis at FLIGHTDECKMEDIA.COM>
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Subject:
>> Re: Grinding wheat
>>> To: CHAUCER at LISTSERV.UIC.EDU
>>> Date: Wednesday, March 14, 2018, 11:00
>> PM
>>> 
>>> I don’t know
>> for how far into the past
>>> beyond C18
>> this standard stood, but in their
>>> 
>> seductively-titled paper, "Variations in the price
>> and
>>> quality of English grain,
>> 1750-1914: quantitative evidence
>>> and
>> empirical implications,” Liam Brunt and Edmund Cannon
>>> footnote:
>>> 
>>> "Flour was often sold by the
>> “sack”
>>> in England. Although
>> appearing a volumetric measure, English
>>> 
>> flour sacks had a standard weight of 240lbs, so were
>> really
>>> a mass measure.” (p.4)
>>> 
>>> The g(r)ist of the
>> matter is that grain
>>> quality
>> (represented by mass) varied significantly, so sacks
>>> would be overstuffed with lower quality
>> grain to normalize
>>> by volume an
>> ostensible “price" per sack. There was also a
>>> volumetric accommodation made for the
>> lower flour yield of
>>> lesser grain to
>> achieve unity.
>>> 
>>> 
>> The authors relate this anecdote:
>>> 
>>> "Component proportions varied
>>> significantly across parcels of wheat,
>> greatly affecting
>>> value. Thomas
>> Dimsdale, corn factor, was asked by a
>>> 
>> Parliamentary Committee: 'What proportion do you reckon
>> that
>>> a sack of flour compares to a
>> quarter of wheat, generally
>>> 
>> speaking?' He answered:
>>> 
>>> 'It depends so entirely upon the
>>> quality of the wheat, that I should
>> mislead your Lordships
>>> by giving an
>> answer. Flour, if good, will make more loaves
>>> per sack than if indifferent.’"
>> (p.9)
>>> 
>>> https://brage.bibsys.no/xmlui/bitstream/handle/11250/280986/DP%2006.pdf?sequence=1
>>> 
>>> In the end, I
>> suppose you can count on
>>> that a
>> scurrilous miller would seek means by which to take
>>> advantage of of a less sophisticated
>> customer. Perhaps
>>> cutting with lesser
>> grain and skimming the high grade stuff
>>> 
>> for their own sale or bakeries. There are some
>> historically
>>> reliable and bankable
>> features of humankind when it comes to
>>> 
>> trade.
>>> 
>>> The
>> millers of Bethlehem, PA in the
>>> 1700s,
>> however, seem to have held themselves above such
>>> reproach, perhaps having engaged in a
>> virtuous miller
>>> ocean-traversing
>> diaspora to disassociate from such
>>> 
>> disreputable peers:
>>> 
>>> "Unfortunately, throughout history
>>> millers, had a reputation for dishonesty.
>> Their payment was
>>> a prescribed portion,
>> or toll, of the finished
>>> 
>> product--one-eighth part of wheat and one-sixth part of
>>> corn, for example. Unscrupulous millers
>> would be fined if
>>> they took more, and
>> some tricky millers had a small extra
>>> 
>> chute from the vat to a concealed bin as a means to
>> acquire
>>> more flour than was their due.
>> Even an honest miller might
>>> put a
>> square housing over his round stones and take what
>>> profit accumulated in its comers. There is
>> no mention in the
>>> records of such
>> dealings occurring with the millers in early
>>> Bethlehem, however."
>>> 
>>> "The Grist
>> Mill-fulling Mill Complex"
>>> https://www.engr.psu.edu/mtah/articles/pdf/grist_milling_process.pdf
>>>