On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 08:54:30 +1000, "David Hare-Scott"
wrote:

bluechick wrote:

I collected vintage recipes for awhile and have used some but some
have been unusable due to the way they'd measure things 100 or 200
years ago - not to mention weird ingredients, spice blends usually,
that were in use in ancient Roman or Medieval recipes. I've run
across things like a 'dessert spoon of sugar' (now I know it's about 2
teaspoons), a 'square of chocolate' (still in use and I hate that one
the most - if it's an ounce SAY 1 ounce!), a 'finger of rum' etc. I've
seen "finger" used as a measure in more recent recipes but I still
don't know what it means. And whose finger?

It means the width of one finger in the bottom of a glass. Obviously the
amount depends on the diameter of the glass and the width of a finger, so
start with a little less and taste before you add more. But this is more
accurate than the way I cook where except for bread and baking nothing is
measured. My daughters ask me for recipes that I don't have so it has been
known for one to follow me around the kitchen writing it down as I do it.

Ah! So now I know. But since the actual amount depends upon the
diameter of the glass (and the diameter of the finger), it's not
terribly accurate or easily reproducible.

I don't measure much when I cook either unless it's a canning recipe
or baking, especially bread. My great grandmother could create cakes
that were so light they'd almost float away and she never measured
anything. I remember her version of measuring something would be to
use a clean tea cup to dip into a flour sack and throw that into a
bowl. If I tried that method I wouldn't have a cake, I'd have a door
stop.