\ \ \ ~~ ,

PAPERS

The origin of the (reputed quart' and other measures

B. E. Moody United Glass Limited, London, 5.£.7

The reputed quart. equal to tll'o-thirds of an imperial was required to achieve this uniformity, but they would quart, is a firmly established, but unofficial, 'standard' be quite wrong. There is virtually no mention of the capacity for lrine- and spirit-boll/es, not only ill the UK. reputed quart in dictionary or reference book, no but also in most other parts of rhe lror/d. Up to nO\l', no officially agreed value and no account of its origin or satisfactory explanation for rhis has been found. reason for existence. The Excise authorities refuse to In an attempt to so Ire the mystery, the author has recognize it officially (although they themselves make studied the del'elopment of English glass \I'ine-botrles use of it), and the nearest it has come to official from the time when the first ones lrere made early in the recognition in recent years was when the Hodgson sel'enteenth century, and also rhe related history of Committee on Weights and Measures suggested in weights and measures. It l\'as found that the reputed 1951 that it should be abolished. quart has been ill continuous use for about three hundred This adherence to such an unofficial 'standard' is years, and it is suggested thar it \\'Os origina!!y an UII­ rather remarkable, and becomes even more so with the official rariatioll on the legal \\'ine quart, \I'hicll itself had discovery that the reputed quart has been in common arisen largely by accident, fo!!oll'ing mistakes in the use in England continuously for at least 300 years, wording of the early 1011's. although the legal capacity units have been changed at least twice during this time. It is unusual for anyone who is buying a bottle of wine All this becomes stranger still when we consider or spirits in this country to stop and enquire how much other parts of the world, as we find that many other the bottle holds. In fact the public tends to regard the countries also have a 'standard' size for wine-bottles 'bottle' as an actual capacity measure for wines and which agrees very well with the British reputed quart. spirits, and on the whole this is not very far from the For example, European countries favour :t , and truth. The better-informed members of the public, recently they have formally agreed on this as their including of course the bottle makers, know that standard. In the United States the preferred size is nearly all British bottles of this type are made to hold four-fifths of the U.S. quart. Even as far away as 26t fluid , which although it is only two-thirds Russia there is, or was in 1920 according to Inter­ of an. imperial quart, is known as a 'reputed quart'. national Critical Tables, a standard wine-bottle of Bottles used for a few special wines and for brandy capacity 6t 'tcharkas'. These various bottle capacities vary slightly from this capacity, but in general 26t oz when expressed in cubic are as follows: seems to be the standard. Half- and -bottles are often known as 'reputed ' and 'reputed half pints'. Region Name, etc. Capacity in Cll. in. Those who know the difficulties involved in getting agreement on any sort of commercial standard would U.K. Reputed quart 46·24 expect that considerable effort and probably legislation Europe i litre 45·77 Presented at the Society's Harrogate Meeting on 22 September U.s.A. t U.S. quart 46·20 1959. Russia 6t tcharkas 46·91

Class Technology Vol. 1 No. 2 April 1960 ss B. E. ~IOODY : THE OIUGI:\" OF THE 'REPUTED QUART' ,\:-;0 OTHER \IEASCRES

There are a few other bottles which fall into this liquids. The Assize of Measures of 1197, was worded group, for example the French champagne-bottle is as follows : said to hold 27 British fluid oz, or 46·82 cu . in. There 'The law is that all the measures throughout England was also an old Scottish 'five-' spirit-bottle which shall be of the same size, as for corn so~ for bean~ and might be included, as 5 gills is equal to 43·35 cu. in . similar things .... Likewise the measures for wine It may therefore be concluded that it has somehow and ale and all other liquids shall be of the same become established almost universally that a of size .. .. ' around 46 cu. in . is the 'right' size for a wine- or The sizes or shapes of these early measures are not spirit-bottle. The purpose of this paper is to suggest a known accurately as none has survived, but a fairly theory about the origin of the reputed quart in good guess can be made. They would have to be England; in doing so a number of other related prob­ convenient for filling and emptying. which suggests a lems about the hi story of British weights and measures large wide vessel for dry goods, and a smaller and will become resolved. This theory demands that the reputed quart originated in England but how the same narrower vessel for liquids. In fact they were probably capacity came to~ be used in s; ma~y other countries very similar to the more recent dry and liquid measures, the oldest surviving examples of which are the Henry cannot yet be explained. The course followed in the investigation was to VI! ones of 1497 (Figure I). study how the various capacity units became estab- 1isi1ed and changed or abolished, and then to see how this fitted in with the actual capacities of wine-bottles. This paper follows approximately the same plan, so the capacity units used in England during the bst few hundred yeal:s will be con s id~red first. -

Early and The basic British capacity measure today is the im­ perial , which was defined in 1824 as the volume occupied by 10 lb of water at 61' F; this is equal to 277 ·42 cu. in . Before this date there were three different gallons recognized: the 'corn gallon' of about 270 cu . in., the 'ale gallon' of about 282 cu. in. , and the 'wine gallon' of 231 cu. in. Our reputed quart is in fact about one-fifth of the old wine gallon. but that does not help to explain its origin, so~ we ~ust look more deeply into how and why these various units came about and how they were related to each other. Until the thirteenth century, the method used in England to fix standard measures was to declare a particular vessel to be the standard, after which copies of this vessel could be made and circulated. These Figure I. Hrll1Y VII stalldard gal/all olld meosurr, 1497 standards were usually fixed by the king and intended to be used throughout the kingdom, but in addition many other standards were issued by local authorities The was known as a bushel · this which might not always agree with the royal ones. In suggests that the earliest dry measures may hav~ been the City of London the local standards were firmly simple wooden boxes, as the words 'bushel', 'box', and established at an early date by the Aldermen, and the French 'bois' probably all come from the same these may have been the basis of some of the measures root. The liquid measure apparently did not acquire a which the sovereigns sought to establish as national name until the thirteenth century, when it became standards. The earliest known reference to this type of known as a gallon. standard speaks of 'King Edgar's Winchester Bushel'.* If the principle of one measure for solids and one for The system which the law-makers of the twelfth liquids had been adhered to,. the history of weights and century tried to establish was that there should be one meastlI'es might have been much simpler, though per­ standard measure for dry goods and another for haps less inte,'esting. What happened, however, was

t The te.\t of the Assize of Measures, 8 RicharJ J, is given in • Winchester ,i·a s the capital of the Anglo-Saxon Kingdom. Roger Hovcdcn·s Chrollicle, wrillen about 1200.

56 Clo.\"S Technology Vol. I No. 2 April 1960 B. E. !\1000Y : TIlE ORIGL'" OF TilE 'J{EI'UTED QL',\Wr' A:\O OTHER ;\IL\SURES

that in the succeed ing centuries the laws and customs meaning of the word 'gallon' was specifically 'a became more and more complicated and confused , and measure for winc'. it is difficult today to discover even what some of the This Tractatus was one of the earliest legal docu­ original intentions really were. How did all this come ments to refer to the liquid measure by the name about? 'gallon'. In a 'Statute for Wine and Bushels' issued a few years earlier, this term did not appear and the text Early history of capacity standards simply stated : 'The standard for the bushel and for wine shall be sca led with an iron seal. .. .'* The system of distributing standard measuring vessels There is no fully authentic version of the Tractatus never worked very well, presumably because there were still in existence, and unfortunately the two oldest not enough genuine standard measures and too many manuscript versions disagree over the wording of the spurious ones. So when in 1215 the Barons presented 2allon definition; a fuller discussion of these rival texts their famous ultimatum to King John, they included is given in Appendix I. The version most often quoted the demand: in subsequent documents and bookst may be trans­ 'That the measure for wine and corn, and for the lated: width of cloth and for other things, should be 'An English .. . shall weigh 32 wheat grains amended, and the same for weig hts.' from the middle of the ear, and an shall weigh • t3y this they presumably meant that the existing 20 pence. And 12 ounces make a London . . . system should be strengthened, rather than that the and 8 pounds make a gal/oil of lI'ille, and 8 gallolls of values should be altered ; it was well known that magis­ lI 'ine make a London bushel.' trates had found it impossible to enforce the law as The other \ersiont was essentially identical, except expressed in the Assize of l\leasures. All that Magna for the words in italics, where it stated instead ' . .. and Charta did however was to reaffirm the principle of 8 pounds 0/ lrheat make a gallon and 8 gallolls make a uniformity in a slightly more ambiguous way: London bushel'. 'One measure of wine shall be throughout our Whichever of these was the correct version, neither Kingdom, and one measure of ale and one measure of them succeeded in establishing the size of the gallon of corn , to wit the London quarter.' be yond doubt, although both of them had the same This has often been taken to mean that there should intended meaning. On the contrary, the first \vording be three different measures for wine, ale, and corn, but made it possible for a serious uncertainty to arise: was it is doubtful that this was really the intention. The the gallon supposed to be the volume of 8 pounds of Magna Charta was dra\vn up in a great hurry, so this wheat, or of 8 pounds of wine? The inevitable result of particular clause was probably intended only as a this situation was that t\\'o different gallons came into guarantee that 'something would be done' about lIse. The unofficial one was based on the weight of weights and measures. In fact, nothing was done as far 8 pounds of wine, and soon became known as a 'wine as is known for at least fifty years, until for the first gallon'; the legal gallon was larger, being based on the time the law was strengthened by an exact definition weight of wheat, and eventually this came to be of the si ze of the bushel and gallon. thought of as an actual measure for wheat, and it acquired the name of 'corn gallon'. It is not known just when the wine gallon came into Definition of the bushel and gallon being, but it was probably fairly soon after the This definition was given in the 'Tractatus de Ponderi­ Tractatus was issued . fndeed it was not long before the bus et Mensuris' which probably became law in 1303. law was trying to suppress this and any other illegal The intention of this document is fairly clear: that the measures, and to return to the system originally in­ main dry measure, .the bushel, should be the volume tended. For example, in 1350 Edward III ordered that occupied by 64 pounds of wheat, and that the main 'all the measures, that is to say bushels, half bushels, liquid measure, the gallon, should be onc-eighth of this , gallon, pottle and quart throughout England quantity, i.e. thc vo lume occupied by 8 pounds of shall be according to the King's standard'. And in 1389 wheat. This establishment of a simplc ratio between Richard II ordained 'there shall be one weight and one thc two measures meant that it was now possible to measure throughout the realm, saving in the county regard them as both belonging to a single capacity sca le for wet and dry goods, but apparently this did • The version quo led is that given in the Collon manuscripts, not happen to any significant extent. The bushel was reference Claudius 02, f241 b. generally used only for measuring dry goods, and the t From Liber Hom, fl2J "cat Ih e City of London Guildhall). gallon mainly for liquids, as they are today. Indeed it is ! From Ihe COllon M SS., reference Claudius 02, f259 (at the suggcsted in the Oxford English Dictionary that one British Museum).

Class Techllology Vol. 1 No . 2 April 1960 57 B. E. ;\IOODY : TilE OIUGI:'-I OF TIlE 'REPUTED QUAWr' '\0.'D OTHER ;\IEASCRES

of Lancaster'. The wine gallon, however, survived and Appendix 2). Eventually, in 1497, new 'Winchester eventually-after about 400 years-it became legalized. standards' were issued and found acceptable (Figure I), Thus it can be seen how the gallon originated and and yet another definition was supplied for the gallon, how two different sizes of gallon became possible. this time as the volume of 8t tray pounds of wheat, There was room for even greater diversity, however, as i.e. 100 tray oz. Some of these actual measures are still the pound weight itself, to which both gallons were in existence, so we know that the capacity of the 1497 linked, had more than one value, and so the situation gallon was about 268·4 cu. in.; This gallon was soon became quite complicated. In discussing the next intended to be used for all commodities including ale development, it will be convenient to deal separately and wine, but this aim was not achieved. with the three types of gallon : first the legal gallon, In 1588 Queen Elizabeth confirmed her grand­ later called the corn gallon, secondly the ale gallon, father's standards and the new gallon measures issued and lastly the wine gallon. in 160/ agreed very well with the 1497 ones.§ This gallon of about 270 cu. in. remained unchanged dur­ The legal or corn gallon ing the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, except The method of using a weight of wheat to define a that it became known as the 'corn' gallon to distin­ volume measure was by no means new: in ancient guish it from the ale and wine gallons. In 1824 it was Egypt there was, for example, a standard corn replaced by the slightly larger imperial gallon of measure known as a 'hekat', of something like 290 277 cu . in . cu .~ -; in. This is intriguingly close to the value of 277 cu. in. for the modern imperial gallon, but this is The ale gallon and quart probably just a coincidence; the Greek/Roman 'khous' The ale gallon is perhaps the strangest of the three or 'congius' _\vas much smaller at around 200 cu. in . gallons, as there seems to be no real reason for its As has been shown the first English gallon was de­ existence, unless one interprets very literally the clause fined as the volume of 8 pounds of wheat, and the in Magna Charta ('one measure of wine ... and one Tractatus made it clear that the London or tower measure of ale'). There is no definite evidence that it pound of 12 ounces was the one to be used. Assuming did exist up to about the end of the sixteenth century; a range of 44-50 lb/cu. ft. for the bulk density of for example, Henry VII declared in IS31!! that 'every wheat,* this gives a gallon in the range 213-242 cu. in. barrel of beer ... shall contain 36 gallons ... of the It is possible, however, that the pound actually used to King's standard gal/oil', which is interpreted as the determine the gallon was the larger merchants' pound legal or corn gallon. In 1589, however, Queen Eliza­ of IS ounces ""hich was introduced about 1266 (see beth used a rather ambiguous form of words in a Appendix 2); this would give a gallon of between similar Act:~ 'Barrels for beer and ale shall be law­ 267-303 cu. in. So the official gallon of the fourteenth fully gaged ... by the gallon appointed and allowed century may have been anywhere between about 200 for beer and ale.' and 300 cu. in. Apparently it became customary in the sixteenth or By the fifteenth century, there were several different seventeenth century to measure ale by the quart rather pounds in use, the old tower pound being more or than by the gallon, and this practice became obligatory less obsolete, and this, coupled with variations in the in 1660.** The standard quarts used for this purpose density of wheat, meant that any gallon measures made were the ones issued by Queen Elizabeth in 1601, and' to agree with the definition would probably disagree either these were intended, or came to be regarded, as considerably with the official standards. The resulting specifically for ale. The strange thing was that these confusion led Parliament in 1491 to petition the king quarts were about 3 cu. in. larger than a true quarter of to issue new standard measures. the contemporary gallon measure; one such measure Henry VII had considerable trouble with this was reported in 1688 to hold 70·5 cu. in ., and when re­ request. It took him four years to get the standard measured in 1758 a value of 70 cu. in. was obtained. measures made and distributed, and then it was quickly found that they were 'defective', so they all had ------

to be recalled and destroyed. In the meantime he issued ~ From this it can be deduced that the bulk density or the wheat a new definition of the gallont as the volume of 8 troy uscd was 44· 3 Ib/eu. ft. pounds of wheat; perhaps he specified the troy pound § A surviving example at the Science Museum has a value or 268 ·97 cu_ in., and the Exchequer onc, checked in 1819, was reported because it was the nearest to the old tower pound (see to be 270-4 cu. in. iI 23 Henry VII, cap. 4. 'J 3 I Elizabeth, cap. 8 . • This range was recommended to the author by the Research •• 12 Charles 11, cap. 23: 'Evcry 36 gallons or beer taken by the Association of British Flour Millers. gage according to the standard of the ale quart shall be reckoned ror t 1496, 12 Henry VII, cap. 5. a barrel or beer.'

58 Class Techllology Vol. / No. 2 April/960 B. E ..\IOODY : THE OHIGI:>; OF THE 'REPUTED QU:\ln' AND OTl-fER MEASURES

There may have been a good technical or historical reason for this, but the simplest explanation is that it was just a mistake. * Alternatively, it is just possible that the extra 3 cu. in. was to allow for the 'head' on the ale! Anyway, the principle became established that the a le quart was a little larger than the corresponding 'corn' measure. The ale quart receivcd official recogni­ tion in 1660, and there is a surviving William III ale quart measure dated 1689 whicll has a capacity of 7J·lcu.in. , So it was probably this 'over-size' ale quart which led to the ale gallon having a capacity of about 282 cu. in . The ale gallon, like the corn and wine gallons, was abolished in 1824. '

The wine gallon As already explained, the vcrsion of the Tractatus ~a);'ing '8 pounds make a gallon of wine' soon led to an unofficial \Vine gallon containing 8 pounds of wine. The merchants of this period would no doubt be quick to realize the advantages of an 'elastic' scale of measures, and there could have been as many different wine gallons as there were different pounds with which to check them. The exact size of these possible wine gallons can be calculated as the sizes of the various Figure 2. Quee/l Anne wine gaffo/l' measu/'e, 1707 pounds are known (see Appendix 2) and the specific gra\ity of \\'ine does not vary much from 0·99. These believed the 'correct' value was 231 cu. in., and they \'alues are as follows: were disturbed that the City of London Guildhall had issued many copies of their 'ancient standard wine Passible periad S(/flle 0/ pal/lid Sa. a/ Correspolldillg gallon' at 224 cu. in. It seems that the Excise version of grains h'ine gallon ill Ib (CI/, il/ .) the wine gallon and the Charles I version were both based on the Hanseatic merchants' pound, while the Until 1527 Tower or ' London' 5400 172-8 Until 1527 ~'ferchants' 6750 216' 1 Guildhall version was based on the avoirdupois pound. 13-10-1538 A.voirdupois 6992 223·8 By the end of the seventeenth century doubts and 1527 onwards H anseatic merchants' 7200 230·5 disputes about the gallon were increasing rapidly, and, 1-114 onwards Troy 5760 184·4 1497 onwards Henry VII merchants' 7680 145·8 most serious of all, the position was so obscure that the 1588 onwards Q. Eliz. a\'oirdupois 7000 224'1 Excise was having difficulty in collecting the right amount of tax on wines. Reform was needed urgently, Any of these possible wine gallons could have been and in 1706 the Queen Anne Wine Gallon was Jegal-­ in use from about 1300 onwards, but it was not until ized as being 231 cu. in.§ This value was chosen the seventeenth century that official recognition of any because it was already well established, but it had an wine gallon, or direct evidence of its capacity is found. added attraction as it could be defined exactly as the It appears that the oldest surviving official measure volume of a cylinder of height 6 in. and diameter 7 in. for wine is a Charles I pot tie (half gallon) dated Taking n as 22/7 this gives exactly 231 cu.in.; no other 164l.t It is inscribed 'A Wine pottle tryed by John cylinder with dimensions in integers will give an Renalds at the Tower', an'd,L found its capacity to be integral value for its volume anywhere near 231. (The 166·5 cu. in., equivalent to a wine gallon of233'0 cu. in. neal':"est would be height 7 in. and diameter 6 in., giving The Excise Commissioners said in 1688; that they 198 cu. in.) Figure 2 shows one of the Queen Anne measures made to these dimensions . • The standard issued in 1602 was probably also slightly inaccurate, as 'its \'olume was reported in 1758 as 34·8 cu. in., The imperial gallon equivalent to a gallon of 278-4 cu. in . There was still one final step in the evolution of the t This is in the Cambridge University Museum of A rchaeology and Ethnology. gallon. During the eighteenth century many people ! This information is from correspondence between the Com­ missioner of Excise and the Treasury in 168 8. It is quoted in A. E. Berriman's book Historical ,\tetralogy. § 5 Anne, cap. 27.

Clnss Technology Vol. 1 No. 2 April 1960 59 U. E. ;\!OODY : TilL:: OIUGI;-.i OF TilL:: '1{L::I'UTED QU ,\RT' A:,\D OTHEI{ ;\IE,\SURES began to realize that the situation was needlessly eOI11 - plicated, and the idea of a sinl!le universal gallon became attractive. This was thought to be a ne\; idea, but it was really just a reversion to the intention of 500 years before. Surprisingly, however, it was the wine gallon which found least favour generally; this may have been partly due to the fact that 'quart' wine­ bottles often mysteriously turned out to hold much less than a wine quart. At one stage a Bill was pre­ sented to Pariiament* 'that a quart bottle should hold a quart'. After investigation by a Parliamentary committee under Lord Carysfort, it was recommended in 1758 that the gallon should be standardized at 282 cu . in., i.e. the largest of the three existing gallons. A Bill to this effect was presented in 1765, but it did not become law. It took over fifty years to get round to the matter again, but eventually a Royal Commission jn,J8l9 hit on what now seems the obvious expedient Figure 3. Gerlllan s{oneware 'fine-ban/cs IIscd il/ Endal/cI in (lie of'defining a standard gallon as the volume of a stated sercn{£'ellfll eenflll)" (/rOIll (h£' Clli/dhall .\.[IIS£'III11, LOI;don) weight of water,t so in 1824 the imperial standard gallon was fixed as the \'olume of 10 Ib of pure water medieval times, however, glass bottle making came at 6Y F.t The equivalent number of cubic inches near to dying out, and only a few small bottles for was declared to be 277·274.~ which was a convenient medicine, etc., were made in England; the main output compromise betm::en the val'ues of the old corn and ale of the glass trade was window !!Iass and drinkin!!­ gallons. glasses. \Vine-bottles in England ~ntil the end of tl~e There was a fortunate coincidence about this choice sixteenth century were nearly all made of earthenware of definition , which according to all the records was and were imported from the Rhineland (Figure 3). not realized at the time: it gave a value which was Then early in the seventeenth century two important almost exactly 6/5 of the ;Id wine gallon (6 i 5 of things happened. First, the rate at which the English 231=277·2). The signiflcance of this ratio will be glassmakers were de stroying the forests to obtain wood referred to later. - fuel was causing serious concern, and this led to the de\'e[opment of coal as an alternative fuel, obtained at History of English winc-bottlcs flrst from Scotland and the Tyneside.ii The use of coal made higher melting temperatures possible, and In all the legal or customary measures discussed so far probably made glass-melting a cheaper process than it there has been no mention of the reputed quart, and was before. The use of wood for glass-melting was no unit with which it can be linked . But nevertheless prohibited in 1615. Secondly, th; English :glass­ many wine-bottles as early as the seventeenth century houses' one by one came under the control of one were made to hold the quantity now known as a man, Sir Robert Mansel!. reputed quart. Therefore the actual wine-bottles and Mansell, an ex-admiral and Treasurer of the Navy, their capacities will be considered next; first a few was at first probably more interested in preserving remarks about their early history may be appropriate. wood supplies for shipbuilding than in developing coal Glass bottles have been made for thousands of years burning for glass, but for some reason or other he for many purposes. In Roman times, particularly, decided to devote his fortune and his energies to glass, bottles were made whose designs colour and even and by 1623 had obtained control of the whole English glass composition were not very d'ifferent from some glass industry, consisting of at least thirty works in made today. Decorated moulds of complex shapc London, Bristol, Stourbridge, Newcastle, and else­ could be used, and the maker's name or even an where. He was a ruthless but shrewd business man, advertisement might be embossed on the punt. In and within a few years of obtaining his monopoly he apparently decided to try and compete with the • Appropriately enough by the Member for Cork. imported 'stoneware' bottle. He produced a strong, t The Commission emphasized Ihat for greatest accuracy in their heavy glass bottle of the simplest design, which could own measurements, they used only Thames water. be made cheaply and quickly, and it rapidly became t 5 George IV, cap. 74. ------§ The modern value is 277·42 cu. in., as a slight change occurred after the standard pound was lost when the House of Commons was !I The price of Scottish coal at this time was from 145. to 245. a destroyed by fire in 1834. ton.

60 C{a~)' Te,lInolo!!>, Vol.) No. 1 April 1960 11. E. ;\IOOOY : TilE OIUGIN OF THE 'HEI'UTEO QUAlCr' ,\1\1) OTHEI{ ,\tEA5UHES

popular. The timing of this venture was perhaps a In studying these results it must be remembered that little unfortunate, as these were the days of Puritans with these hand-made bottles there would be a con­ and Roundheads, when wine drinking was frowned siderable spread of capacities about any intended upon. Consequently not many glass wine-bottles value. Also the intended capacity would presumably survive from the earliest period and in fact it is not be something like a cubic less than the brimful certain exactly when they did first appear. After the capacity, to allow room for the cork. (Cork stoppers Restoration, however (1660), wine flourished and so came into use at about the same time as did glass wine­ did the glass wine-bottle, and within a few years it had bottles.) Bottles which appear to have been intended almost completely ousted the stoneware bottle, even as half bottles or double bottles have been included in though this too was by now being made in England. the same diagram after multiplying or dividing the The main reason for this success, apart from any measured capacity by two. considerations of quality, was the price: glass bottles As indicated by the shaded areas in the diagram, the sold for as little as 2e!. each, rising to about 6e1. each results can be divided into three fairly distinct groups. for bottles decorated with the owner's name and The centre group, with capacities between about 55 fami ly crest. This compares with Sd. to 10d. each and 63 cu. in., were probably genuine attempts at a wholesale for Fulham stoneware bottles, as sold to Queen Anne quart (57'75 cu. in.). There are some the Glass Sellers' Company in 1676. It became very members in this group before 1706, but they tend to be cps)1ionable for gentlemen to have a personal supply of on the high side, between 62 and 65 cu. in., and the \\·irie-bottles, and Samuel Pepys had his first ones made most 'popular' period for this group is, as is to be in 1663.* expected, in the years soon after 1706. The size seems It would certainly not be true to suggest that to have become gradually less popular and the last '\lansell 'il1\ented' the glass wine-bottle, but he does recorded member is dated 1797. A fairly large propor­ seem to have been the originator of the 'mass-produc­ tion of the bottles in this group are in West Country tion' of cheap wine-bottles. Indeed we might call him museums, presumably being made mainly in Bristol. the founder of the Britisll glass container industry, The second group has capacities around 70 cu. in. although his death in 1656 prevented his seeing the full and can be accounted for satisfactorily as being made fruits of his ventures. It is not clear when similar to hold an ale quart (70·5 cu . in.) or corn quart (about mass-production started in other countries. but it is 68 cu . in.). This does not mean that the bottles were kno\vn that before the end of the seventeenth century intended to be IIsed for ale; it is just additional English bottles were being exported to such places as evidence of the general confusion which prevailed 'Ireland, Holland, East and West Indies, Vienna and about the various standards. e\·en to Venice'.t In 1695 the annual production in The third and most interesting group has a few England was reported as nearly three million bottles. members right from the earliest years, but it becomes These bottles were commonly referred to as 'quart well established after about 1680. It continues more or glass bottles'; the earliest reference to this name is an less unchanged throughout the eighteenth and nine­ account for quart bottles (sold at 6d. each) in 1663 by teenth centuries, apart from a possible tendency to William Proctor, the landlord of the Mitre Inn in become a little larger for a time in the mid-eighteenth London. The next matter to discuss therefore is how century. A fair value for its average capacity is 47 cu . much these 'quart' bottles actually held. in. and there can be no doubt that this group is the direct ancestor of the reputed quart (46·24 cu. in.). In Capacities of wine-bottles from the sercnteenth to the Figure 5 is shown a selection of bottles, dating from nineteenth centuries 1650 to 1959, each of which holds about a reputed Several thousand bottles made in the seventeenth and quart. eighteenth centuries are still in existence, most of them The practice of putting dates on bottles was begin­ in museums throughout the country. Many of them ning to die out ·in the early nineteenth century, hence are marked with the year of manufacture, and most of the lack of 'results' in the later part of the diagram. the rest can be dated from their shape to within a few Other sources of information, however, make it quite years. clear that from about 1800 until the present day the The very ready help of the curators of many of these great majority of wine-bottles have had a capacity of museums has made it possible to obtain a fairly com­ around 46-47 cu. in. For example, an Act of 1803; prehensive record of the brimful capacities of many of refers to wine-bottles as 'making about five to the these bottles, and the results are shown in Figure 4. (wine) gallon'. A statement made to the Standards Commission in 1841 by Mr. Gingcll, the Bristol • Pepys possibly had a special inlerest in glass bOllks, being a Inspector of Weights and Measures, is also relevant. Navy man himself, like Sir Robert Mansel!. t Journal of Ihe House of Commons, 1697. : 43 George Ill, cap. 68 .

Gloss Technology Vol. I No. 2 April 1960 61 u. E. .\IOODY : TilE OIUGI:--; or TIlE 'REPUTED QC,\RT' '\;\0 OTIIER 1'IE.\SLiRES

He explained that there was a scak of bottle sizes Suggested origin of the reputed quart numbered from 12 to 18, the number indicating how Why then is it that wine-bottles made after 1650 are many bottles were needed to contain a quantity of found to be of two different sizes (in addition to those 3 old wine gallons. 'Respectable wine-merchants' used few made to hold an ale quart) and yet they were all the No. 15 bottle, i.e. onc-fifth of a wine gallon or rderred to as 'quarts'. The upper group fits in well 46·2 cu. in. (The No. 12 bottle would be a full wine with the known value of the Queen Anne wine quart quart.) (57·75 cu. in.), but what of the lower group? If these A statement made on the same occasion by Messrs. were also wine quarts, then the quart they were in­ Barrett & Clay, London wine merchants, is a little tended to hold must have been about 46 cu. in., confusing but the conclusion is the same. They said in corresponding to a gallon of 184 cu. in. Referring back effect: " to the table of possible sizes for the wine gallon, the 'The following are the sizes most in use: answer immediately becomes clear: a wine gallon based on the volume of 8 /roy pOllnds of wine would COlltellts ill distil/ed have a capacity of 184·4 cu. in., and the corresponding It"ater (each) wine quart would be 46·1 cu. in. This is practically No. I. known as smal[ 4·s, 51 to the identical to the value of the modern reputed quart. gallon 27+ oz. The origin of the reputed quart now suggested is No. 2. known as small 5"s, 6 to the: simply that it was a true quarter of an unofficial wine • :. gall~n whe:n room is allowed for [he gallon based on the volume of 8 troy pounds of wine. cork 27 oz. The evide:nce: obtained from bottle measurements in 1':0. 3, known as small 5·s, 6 to [he: favour of the: 'troy wine gallon' is not by itself con­ gallon brimful .26+ oz. clusi\"e, and it is strange that no direct reference to its A larger size for ale:, ·fs, 5t to me existence has yet been found, but let us conside:r some gallon 29+ oz.' other points in its fa\'our: This stalc:me:nt reads suspiciously like: an attempt to (I) It is known that the wine gallon evolved un­ officially from the definition as '8 pounds of wine'. blind the authorities with science, but the first three There is clear evidence that at least two different capacities quoted are practically identical to the pounds \\'ere: used in applying this: the avoirdupois reputed quart. pound, which gave the Guildhall gallon of 224 The reputed quart has thus been traced backwards cu. in" and the Hanseatic merchants' pound, which in time at least as far as the middle of the seventeenth led to the Queen Anne gallon of 231 cu. in, Tt would century. fn order to see whether it existed any earlier have been most surprising if someone had 1I0t also than this, it is necessary to examine the German stone­ used the troy pound at some stage, especially as it ware bottles used in England, which were the im­ gave a smalkr gallon than the: others. mediate predecessors of the glass bottk. This has been (2) Troy weight had been used before to define a possible on a limited scale, with the help of the gallon; in both of Henry VU's atte:mpts this system Guildhall Museum, \\ho have a fine collection of was specified. So this may have been regarded as a stoneware bottles found in the City of London. These precedent for using troy measure for the win~ bottles could be divided into groups by means of features of design, and the dates estimated approxi­ gallon. (3) The Tractatus specified that the London pound mately. Two main groups were both estimated as of 12 ounces should be used to determine the gallon. dating from about 1600, and in this there was not a When the London pound was abolished in 1527, the single example which could be fitted into the: 'reputed tray pound, which also had 12 ounces, and which quart' category. One group favoured a capacity was the pound nearest in size to the London pound, around 65-70 cu. in ., which may haye: been the ale or could have been regarded as its natural successor. 'legal' quart, and the second included some which could have been wine quarts. (All these: may of course have been made to a German rathe:r than an English Capacity measures in the rest of Europe specification.) A third group dated [650-1700 con­ A possible alternative explanation of the reputed quart tained some Eng[ish-made bottles, and the capacities might be that it came from outside England, so this ranged from 40 to 640 cu. in. in a rather random possibility should be considered next. manner. Scotland had a different scale of measures from This suggests that the reputed quart capacity was England, although the actual quantities seem to have not in common use in England before about 1650, been related to the Eng[ish ones. The basic Scottish and also that its origin was not associated with the unit was the pint, determined by the Stirling Jug of imported stoneware bottles. 1437. Its value was 104 ·3 cu. in. and it may have been

62 Clan Technology Vol. 1 No. 2 Apri/1960 B. E. ;\IOODY THE OIUGI:\, OF' THE 'I{EI'UTEf) QC.\ln' ,\ND OTHER ;\IE.\Sl.jIU~S

, . .. . . ale quart 11 +7 .. ·~.·. " .· ~;; r;:;~ :~~:~?if{·;·;~:··~~· !- i imperial qU~b~~ 70 o

~, ci .; ··o .. :~r:~;:.u ·~>·;~ ~ :r; . ~os ~ • ,0 e•• fI­ • .-:..J • _. ' J . • '182> ::::; '" ~ u .60 ...... , , ~.:..;...:.,..,..-''---ll Q.ueel1 Alllle -.~ll >, \\lI1e q U

1 1 1 1700 1750 1800 1350 Date Figure -to Co/'ccilies 'fg/uss Il'iIlC-.JOllles /rom 1650 f) = ordinar\' bailie o = hair botll.! '., 2 T = l~oub!\! bonk (m::gnum)--:-2

J "7 7:

Figure 5. Examples 0/ repulcd quart bOfllcs /rom 165010 1959 D31c en . 1650 1713 1757 cn. 1800 1959 1959 Brimrul capacily (cu. in.) 50·3 5 1'l 49,4 51·4 48 ·0 49·2 elas!>' Techllology Vol. I No. 2 April 1960 63 Il. E. \1000Y : TilE OIUGI:-i OF TilE 'REPUTED <)U .. \RT' ,\:-;0 OTIIEI{ ,\IE,\SUHES

derived rrom onc or the Engli sh hair-gallons. Later, in was influenced by their desire to be dillcrent from the the eighteenth century, a Scottish ale pint was in use in British, who had just abolished it! Anyway, this is the Glasgow, or 111·6 cu. in.; this is very close to hair a simple reason why the prese nt U.S . gallon is almost London Guildhall wine gallon of the seventeenth exactly five-sixths or the imperial gallon. It is also the century. The Scottish gallon was three times the size of explanation of a rather odd custom by which consic.n­ the English ale gallon, but the Scottish gill was the ments of English gin to the States must even today sa me size as the usual Englisll one, as the Scots have their contents declared in 'U.S. lI'ine gallons'. reckoned 16 gills to the pint. [n [reland measures were 0:0 bottles were actually made in North America apparently much the same as in England.* In neither until the nineteenth century, and Americans had country therefore is there any sign of the reputed become used to the preferred British size, i.e. the quart size. reputed quart. They are still used to the same size The situation in Europe in pre-metric times was very today, which they know as the 4/5 quart.:~ complicated, and it is difficult to trace any relation between the various capacity units. There was certainly Origin of the term 'reputed quart' some relation, however, between the English and French pound weights. The very old 'Iine de Charle­ The earliest reference to the term 'reputed quart' found magne' had 12 ounces, the same number as the English so far is in an Excise Act of 1824 ;§ this dealt with the .to}\·er pound and the troy pound, and their sizes, sale of beer and said that a wholesaler should only sdi 5610, 5400, and 5760 grains respecti\ely, were also in quantities of 'not less than fi\e gallons or not less si milar. The French 'Iivre poids de marc' was larger, at than two doze n reputed quart bottles at one time'. 7560 grains, nearer to the Hanseatic merchants' pound The term must surely have been used much earlier than of 7200 grains. So if a Frenchman computed a wine th is . and probably originated in the eighteenth century, measure in terms of its we ight of wine, he might ha\'e when although the legal wine quart was well estab­ obtained a value near to one of the English ones. li shed, most of (he actual bottles held only about four­ With regard to old European capacity units, se \'eral fifths of this quantity. All sorts of adjectives might have countries or districts had a unit close to the Queen been used to describe this undersize quart, as its origin Anne wine quart (57·75 cu. in.). For example, France, seemed to have been forgotten, and one of the politeI' or at least Paris, had a 'pinte' of 56·8 cu. in. , and in ones might well have been 'reputed'. Scandinavia there was a 'pot, pott or pottar' of Expressions such as this may come into use quite 58 ·9 cu. in . These units were the rorerunners of the unobtrusively. For example, few people yet know that metric litre, which equals 61·0 cu. in. In Poland and thi s same reputed quart was in 1949 officially described Prussia there was a similar unit known as a 'kwarta' as a 'spirit quart'.:: or 'quart' respecti\'ely., Of the many other units the only ones anywhere near the size of the reputed quart Conclusions were the Austrian 'halbe' of 43·1 cu. in. and the If this suggested theory for the origin of the reputed Portuguese 'meio' of 41·9 cu . in. quart is accepted, the history of English weights and This brief review is by no means comprehensive, but measures can now be reviewed in a slightly new light. it appears that there is no obvious evidence of any Much or this is conjectural, but I hope that in due­ established foreign capacity unit which could have course evidence may be found to fill in some of the been the origin of the English reputed quart. gaps, or to disprove the theory. First the legal gallon was defined as the volume of Capacity measures in the United States of America 'octo librae frumenti' ,! and this quantity, although The history of capacity measures and bottles in the subsequently redefined in different ways, led directly U.s.A. is short and straightforward. All the weights to the current imperial gallon and quart. In addition, and measures in the early years of the U.S.A. were of the alternative definition was wrongly interpreted to British origin, and when in 1830 the Senate decided to gi\e a gallon based on the volume of 8 pounds of wine, fix a standard gallon, they chose to copy the Queen Anne wine gallon of 231 cu. in. Perhaps this choice ! The reputed quart is two-thirds of the imperial quart. which is nearly six-fi fths 01 the U.S. quart, so the reputed quart is 2/3 x 6,'5 = 4/ 5 of the U.S. quart . • The I rish gallon legalized in 1695 (7 William Il" cap. 26) was of 272'25 cu. in ., which agrees well with the English onc. In 1736, § 5 George IV, cap. 54. This was passed a few days before the however (9 George ". cap. 9), a much smaller ale gallon of 217·6 cu. ACI legalizing the imperial gallon. in. was legalized, which does nOI agree wit h any of the others. 'i In a written Parliamentary answer by the Home Secretary. t In England, the pint, qua rt, and pOllle were units of increasing relating to the whisky bottles used in State public houses. size, but elsewhere these terms seem to ha ve been alternatives for '.; In Appendix I reasons are given for believing that this version basically the same quantity. was the original onc.

and naturally this gallon was thought of as being Acknowledgements intended specially for the measurement of wine. At This work would not have bcen possible had not a least three different wine gallons evolved, based on the considerable amount of assistance, information, and avoirdupois pound, the Hanseatic merchants' pound advice been received from many persons, and the very and the troy pound. The first of these was used by the ready and friendly manner in which this help was London Guildhall, and the second was eventually forthcoming was most impressive. In particular thanks legalized by Queen Anne; the troy gallon remained are due to various members of the staffs of the Board unrecognized. of Trade Standards Department, the British Museum, Whe~ glass wine-bottle making started in England, the Corporation of London Records Office, the Glass however, it seems that many people, no doubt includ­ Manufacturers' Federation, the Public Record Office. ing the wine merchants, preferred the smaller troy wine the Science Museum and the Wine and Spirit Trade gallon, and they continued to use it even though Queen Record. Also Mr. G. B. Beattie, bottling consultant, Anne decreed otherwise. The bottle makers supplied Mr. J. G. Maltby of the Distillers Co. Ltd., and M. Queen Anne quarts or troy quarts or even ale quarts, Andre L. Simon have been most helpful. presumably whichever the customer ordered, or per­ Finally, the staffs are thanked of all those museums haps according to the prevailing practice in each who responded enthusiastically to requests for details locality . of bottle capacities. This must have involved some cl' • from about 1720, the Queen Anne quart and the them in many hours of work and it is entirely due to tro~ quart were about equally popular, but by 1750 the them that it has been possible to present a fairly com­ smaller troy quart was definitely winning and the prehensive account of wine-bottle capacities. The Queen Anne one gradually dying out. This may have mu seum s which have so far been able to supply been because the troy quart was a more natural information are as follows: Bradford, Brighton. quantity, i.e. nearer to the size of the 'average man's Cambridge (the Fitz\\illiam, and the University thirst'. but also the Excise Tax on glass, which from Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology), Cardifr. 1745 t'o 1845 was levied on bottles accordi ng to thei r Chester. Colchester, Dorchester, Dublin, Edinburgh. weights, would have encouraged the use of the smaller Exeter, '[ps\vich, Lincoln, London (the Guildhall and and lighter bottle. the London Museums), Norwich, Northampton. So Tt came about that the 'quart' wine-bottle con­ Nottingham, Oxford (the Ashmolean), Portsmouth, tained about four-fifths of a legal wine quart, or one­ Reading, Rochester, Sali sbury, Sheffield, Stirling, fifth of a wine gallon, and hence the name 'reputed Swansea, Worthing, and York (the Yorkshire quart' was used~ When the new imperial gallon was Museum). Some interesting information about English fixed in 1824, it was very fortunate for the wine trade bottles in North America was received from James­ that the new gallon was almost exactly six-fifths of the town, Virginia. old wine gall;n, as the wine-bottle previously reckoned Figures I and 2 are reproduced by permission of the as one-fifth of a wine gallon could still be used, pro­ Scie;ce Museum, London (Crown copyright, negative vided that it was no\~ reckoned as one-sixth of a nos. 5574 and 6037). Figures 6 and 7 are reproduced by gallon. The name 'reputed quart' also continued. courtesy of the City of London Corporation and the The only question left is why this preferred size for Trustees of the British Museum respectively. The wine-bottles is found in so many other parts of the bottles shown in Figure 3, and three of the bottles in world, and this remains rather a mystery (except for Figure 5, \vere photographed by permission of the the U.S.A.). The simplest explanation is that the export Guildhall Museum, London. of English bottles from 1650 onwards was sufficiently extensive to convince many people that this was the Appendix 1 'right' size. However, it is just possible that European bottles developed independently but came to the same DisclIssion of the galloll definition in 'Trac!a!lIs de capacity. There must be a great deal of relevant in­ POIlderiblls et j\lellslIris' formation about this still available in Europe and in The whole evolution of the gallon rests on the defini­ this country, and it is hoped that all those with infor­ tion given in the Tractatus, and it is important to try mation or ideas on the subject will make them known. to establish what was the exact original text. In addi­ Finally, the Hodgson Committee on Weights and tion to the uncertainty about the text, it is not clear Measures recommended in 1951 that the 'reputed when it became law, and also whether it was issued as quart' should be abolished. It would be a great pity if a law complete in itself or just as an appendix to the this were to happen, in view of its long and curious 'Assize of Bread and Ale'. history. If, howevcr, a new name is all that is wanted , it The oldest of the manuscript versions is in Lio('( would be more accurate to call the quantity the 'troy Horn, a book compiled not later than 1311 by Andrew wine quart', or just the 'troy quart'. Horn, the Chamberlain of the City of London, and

Cln.l.f Tfc/II/ology Vol. 1 No. 2 April 1960 65 n. E . .\tOODY : THE OR[G[:\ Of THE 'REPGTED QC .. \ln' ..\:\0 OTHER .\IE..\SGRES

presumably intended as a reference book for adminis­ A :"ilor al/tI tIntc A.

66 Class Technology Vol. I .\'0, :1 April 1960 B. E. i\1000Y THE OIUG''." or THE 'I

Figure 6. 'Tracllillls de POllderiblls ('I ilfel/Sllris'-A /l{lre 11' Hol'II rersioll

more widely used. One possibility is thJt !:~C deniiir:olls and ,-\le', but. as explained :n Appendix I. there is Illay hale been worked out by' the Cit~ of LOI~don cor,s id erabk doubt about this date, and a more like ly authorities before they \\'ere adopted as la\'.-. !!1 .. ,hicn o; ~ e is L303, in the reign of Ed\\'ard I.) In addition case Horn may ha\'e been ql!otillg the correct' London' to ! h~ merchants' pou nG. t::~ 'a\'o irdupois' pound. \"ersion , although the legal \ersion '.',3.S .. , arced inte::oed originally for \\'ei ghing woo l, came into use ditTerently, If Horn did this, then ot!:er \\T ite!'; in and WJS legalized by Ed\\ard IIf in 1340. This con­ London may have done the same, and so it cou:d e;'1"ily tail:ed 16 ounces each of 437 grains, making a pound ha\'e becollle generally beliewd that r!~e London \'ersion was in fact the law,

Appendix 2 History and ra/ues of Ihe pound lre iglii In contrast to the values of some of the capacity uili'ts, the actual values of most of the old European \\eight units are known quite accurately, from 5un'i\ing standards. It is customary to refer to the \'-'eights in terms of the equivalent number of modern grains. The Romans had a 'libra' of 12 'unciae', the uncia being 420 grains, and this probably led to the pounds of 12 ounces which became established in England, France, and elsewhere. The various pounds \\"ere, how­ ever, all larger than the Roman one, iirst oecaL!se the ounce standards tended to be larger than the uncia , and later because pounds came into use containing 15 or 16 ounces instead of only 12. In the eighth century the English pound equalled 5400 grains, and as this was mainly used for precious metals and coinage, it became kno\\'J1 as th e 'to\\"er' pound, alternatively the London pound, containing 12 tower ounces of 450 grains. This apparently became inconveniently small for trading purposes, and an additional 'merchants' pound' of 15 to\\'er Ollnces, 6750 equal to grains, was authorized. (The date of this figure i. 'TraClO/liS de Ponderiblis ('I merchants' pound is usually given as 12 66, in the reign .Ifcnsliris·-Sir Robcrl COllon of Henry 11[; it was au thorized in the ',l, ssize of Bread r('rsi(11/

Class Tl'cllllologp 1'01, 1 ,vo. 2 .·jpl'il 1960 67 n. E. :\1 0 0 D Y : TilE 0 tU G 1:\ 0 r T 11 E 'I{ El' UT E I) Q L..\ n T' .-\:\ DOT If E R :\1 £..\ S t.: RES

of 6992 grains; this ounce corresponded exactly with only other change was in 1588 when Queen Elizabeth one used in Florence. adjusted the value of the avoirdupois pound to exactly In France the 'troy' system had become established 7000 grains, the value it still has today, the avoirdupois (the name is derived from the French town Troyes) and ounce becoming 437·5 grains. this too came into use in England; the value adopted The various weights in commercial use in Engl:1nd after 1414 was a troy pound of 5760 grains, containing may thus be summarized: 12 troy ounces of 480 grains. At about the same time

the pound used by the German merchants of the Prrind .\"ollle of {In 1111 d Eqllil'lI/CII' .\'0. o( Hanseatic League was coming into use in England: grains this was the largest one yet, containing 16 'tower' jn pOl/lld ._------_ . --- ounces, making 7200 grains. In 1527 Henry VIII L.:ntil 152, Tower or London 12 lowe r oz 5400 abolished the tower and old merchants' pound, which e nlil 1527 :-Oferchanls' 15 lower oz 6750 brought the Hanseatic pound into greater prominence, 1} ~0-15S8 A\'oiruupois 16 '1nlf'. OZ 69n because, as it was also equal to 15 troy ounces, it was (437 gr) :-Obinly afler 1414 Trov 121royoz 57W mistakenly regarded as the natural successor to the old \fainly afler 1527 Ha~ s ea,ic merch3nl s' 16 lower OZ 7200 merchants' pound of 15 tower ounces. or 15 lroy oz 1497 onw:1rds He nry VII m"rCilanls' 16 Ir0Y oz 7630 In 1497 Henry VII authorized yet another merchants' 15330n,,'3r<1s Q. Eliz. a"oir,l upois 16 :l\Up. oz 7000 pOl~od : or 16 t roy ollnces. eq U;t 1 to 7680 grains. The (437·5 grJ

68 GillS.\' Techllolngy Vol. I No. 2 A"ril 1960