HOW MANY Cups of Flour?!?
January 1, 2015 6:35 PM Subscribe
I have an old family recipe for beigli that we make every year for Christmas. The hand-written recipe is at least 75 years old, if not older. Whenever I make it, I wind up using almost twice the flour the recipe calls for to get the correct result. Why?
Did flour used to be different? Does the fact that I'm making it in the southwestern US rather than the northeastern US make that much of a difference (elevation, temperature, humidity, etc)? If I follow the recipe exactly, I wind up with a soupy mess that doesn't turn into the bread-dough-like texture and doesn't knead or rise properly, much less roll out.
The obvious answer is that the recipe is wrong, but I can't believe the recipe was written down that incorrectly so many years ago, or that nobody corrected it over the years (I believe I'm the 4th generation using this exact version of this recipe). There are other notes and suggestions added to the recipe over the years by various family members, but none about the ingredients themselves or about the flour specifically.
There is nobody in the family I can ask about how much flour they use or used to use -- the beigli-making privilege/duty has passed on to me and no one else has made it.
Any ideas why I'd have to double the flour nowadays?
Did flour used to be different? Does the fact that I'm making it in the southwestern US rather than the northeastern US make that much of a difference (elevation, temperature, humidity, etc)? If I follow the recipe exactly, I wind up with a soupy mess that doesn't turn into the bread-dough-like texture and doesn't knead or rise properly, much less roll out.
The obvious answer is that the recipe is wrong, but I can't believe the recipe was written down that incorrectly so many years ago, or that nobody corrected it over the years (I believe I'm the 4th generation using this exact version of this recipe). There are other notes and suggestions added to the recipe over the years by various family members, but none about the ingredients themselves or about the flour specifically.
There is nobody in the family I can ask about how much flour they use or used to use -- the beigli-making privilege/duty has passed on to me and no one else has made it.
Any ideas why I'd have to double the flour nowadays?
Best answer: Any chance it was grandma's measuring cup and not a perfect measuring cup? We have recipes in my family that are things like "two cups of diced onions" and it turns out it's not a measuring cup cup it's this one particular cup my grandpa always used for measuring ingredients and my mom took it with her when she got married and it is THE cup not A cup. Maybe the originator of the recipe had a particular measuring tool that just got handed down to the next generation?
Cf. the "why do you cut the ends off the roast" story.
posted by phunniemee at 6:43 PM on January 1, 2015 [17 favorites]
Cf. the "why do you cut the ends off the roast" story.
posted by phunniemee at 6:43 PM on January 1, 2015 [17 favorites]
Best answer: I can see this being a combination of slightly different sized cups, elevation and humidity, and whether your grandma used to pack the flour in and heap it on top, while you don't, and level it off more carefully.
When I make bread, humidity can mean a difference of about a third to how much water I have to add.
posted by lollusc at 6:52 PM on January 1, 2015 [1 favorite]
When I make bread, humidity can mean a difference of about a third to how much water I have to add.
posted by lollusc at 6:52 PM on January 1, 2015 [1 favorite]
Could the recipe be referring to tightly packed cups of flour instead of scoops? When baking, I normally use recipes with weights instead of cups for this exact reason.
posted by roshy at 6:52 PM on January 1, 2015
posted by roshy at 6:52 PM on January 1, 2015
Best answer: How are other ingredients measured? If grandma had a personal, not standard, measuring cup then all of the "cups" would be in the right ratio to each other. If the flour is the only thing measured by cups (everything else is a teaspoon or something) then Grandma's Cup would explain it. Otherwise I'd guess it was a mistake in the recipe and nobody bothered to correct it because they didn't really rely on the recipe to begin with. I have a few recipes like that, which I've never corrected because it's so obvious to me what SHOULD be done, so I can believe that generations of experienced bakers just adapted on the fly.
posted by Quietgal at 6:53 PM on January 1, 2015
posted by Quietgal at 6:53 PM on January 1, 2015
Roshy could have it. Measuring flour by volume is notoriously inconsistent.
posted by kenko at 7:07 PM on January 1, 2015
posted by kenko at 7:07 PM on January 1, 2015
Best answer: Possibly Grandma wasn't using a standard cup for this recipe, especially if she wrote it for her personal use. I have this problem with ethnic recipes from my mom, where a "spoon" is a heaping serving spoon and a "cup" is a coffee mug.
Just as likely to be that she did not uncompact the flour before scooping out, or used a heaping cup of flour instead of an evened cup. Flour is notoriously difficult to measure by volume for exactly these reasons.
Or some combination of all these factors.
posted by zennie at 7:17 PM on January 1, 2015 [2 favorites]
Just as likely to be that she did not uncompact the flour before scooping out, or used a heaping cup of flour instead of an evened cup. Flour is notoriously difficult to measure by volume for exactly these reasons.
Or some combination of all these factors.
posted by zennie at 7:17 PM on January 1, 2015 [2 favorites]
Measuring flour by volume is notoriously inconsistent.
It is quite variable depending on how the flour is stored and how it is measured, but Cooks Illustrated's Chris Kimball's tests (as documented in The Dessert Bible) don't show it varying by even close to a factor of two! He finds a cup ranges from 3.1 oz (if sifted directly into the measuring cup) to 4.3 oz (scooped right out of the bag). So if the OP is actually doubling the flour then something else is going on.
Without knowing the rest of this specific recipe it's hard to really make good guesses.
posted by aubilenon at 7:19 PM on January 1, 2015 [2 favorites]
It is quite variable depending on how the flour is stored and how it is measured, but Cooks Illustrated's Chris Kimball's tests (as documented in The Dessert Bible) don't show it varying by even close to a factor of two! He finds a cup ranges from 3.1 oz (if sifted directly into the measuring cup) to 4.3 oz (scooped right out of the bag). So if the OP is actually doubling the flour then something else is going on.
Without knowing the rest of this specific recipe it's hard to really make good guesses.
posted by aubilenon at 7:19 PM on January 1, 2015 [2 favorites]
I'm skeptical of the answers pointing to variation in volume. All good bakers sift their flour before using a volume measurement, and that's enough to reduce the variation well below 2x. This would have been especially important 75 years ago, when flour was much less consistent.
On preview, I see aubilenon and I are in agreement.
posted by d. z. wang at 7:21 PM on January 1, 2015 [3 favorites]
On preview, I see aubilenon and I are in agreement.
posted by d. z. wang at 7:21 PM on January 1, 2015 [3 favorites]
Is it possible that the recipe was originally in grams and converted to American cups incorrectly somewhere along the way? Beigle is an European type dessert and it's not as common to use cups there.
posted by Lingasol at 7:21 PM on January 1, 2015 [2 favorites]
posted by Lingasol at 7:21 PM on January 1, 2015 [2 favorites]
There are many different kinds of flour, so maybe that's a reason.
Also, I've found in my baking that whenever I'm combining solids and liquids, I always have to eyeball the flour or liquid (whichever comes last). The measurements are never quite right, and the margin of error can be slim. My mom does this whenever she gives me a recipe: it's always "about a cup" of flour, but actually it's "until it looks right".
Hence, the amount of flour in a family recipe could just be a placeholder or an estimate, since nobody would use it anyway.
posted by archagon at 7:23 PM on January 1, 2015 [1 favorite]
Also, I've found in my baking that whenever I'm combining solids and liquids, I always have to eyeball the flour or liquid (whichever comes last). The measurements are never quite right, and the margin of error can be slim. My mom does this whenever she gives me a recipe: it's always "about a cup" of flour, but actually it's "until it looks right".
Hence, the amount of flour in a family recipe could just be a placeholder or an estimate, since nobody would use it anyway.
posted by archagon at 7:23 PM on January 1, 2015 [1 favorite]
"All good bakers sift their flour before using a volume measurement"
I don't know about that? All the good bakers in my family just do whatever's fastest, and whatever leads to less dishes in the sink. :)
If you're looking for restaurant-grade consistency, then obviously it's a different story.
posted by archagon at 7:25 PM on January 1, 2015 [18 favorites]
I don't know about that? All the good bakers in my family just do whatever's fastest, and whatever leads to less dishes in the sink. :)
If you're looking for restaurant-grade consistency, then obviously it's a different story.
posted by archagon at 7:25 PM on January 1, 2015 [18 favorites]
Oh yeah, and our family recipes always use the nearest coffee cup as a "cup" measurement, which I imagine is 1.5x-2x smaller than an actual cup.
posted by archagon at 7:30 PM on January 1, 2015
posted by archagon at 7:30 PM on January 1, 2015
One of my grandmother's recipes uses egg shells (of the eggs involved) as a volume measurement for the flour. My guess is that "cup" is not a real cup.
posted by unknowncommand at 7:30 PM on January 1, 2015 [2 favorites]
posted by unknowncommand at 7:30 PM on January 1, 2015 [2 favorites]
Where is all the liquid coming from? Any reason that measurement couldn't be at fault, rather than the flour itself?
posted by teremala at 7:31 PM on January 1, 2015 [2 favorites]
posted by teremala at 7:31 PM on January 1, 2015 [2 favorites]
I rarely sift and only very roughly measure when I bake, so sifting is definitely NOT guaranteed.
posted by zennie at 7:31 PM on January 1, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by zennie at 7:31 PM on January 1, 2015 [1 favorite]
I swear I remember The Splendid Table talking about how flour in the western US is actually milled differently from flour in the east, but I can't find the reference right now. But it might be that.
posted by zug at 7:32 PM on January 1, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by zug at 7:32 PM on January 1, 2015 [1 favorite]
I just made cookies that turned out all flat and runny because I used cake & pastry flour instead of all purpose flour. Could it something like that?
posted by ThatCanadianGirl at 8:04 PM on January 1, 2015
posted by ThatCanadianGirl at 8:04 PM on January 1, 2015
Did flour used to be different?
I think it did.
This site claims that wheat berries need to have a moisture content less than 14.6% to have adequate storage life, but the moisture content can be much less than that, and this site says millers typically increase the moisture content to maximum permissible levels in order to maximize profit:
posted by jamjam at 8:24 PM on January 1, 2015 [3 favorites]
I think it did.
This site claims that wheat berries need to have a moisture content less than 14.6% to have adequate storage life, but the moisture content can be much less than that, and this site says millers typically increase the moisture content to maximum permissible levels in order to maximize profit:
Moisture content can be an indicator of profitability in milling. Flour is sold by weight, grain is bought by weight, and water is added to reach the standard moisture level before milling. The more water added, the more weight and profitability gained from the wheat. Wheat with too low moisture, however, may require special equipment or processes before milling to reach the standard moisture level.My guess is your ancestors had drier wheat which was stored in berry form until right before use, and was not moisturized at milling -- but that might imply that adding less liquid could give you a more authentic Beigli than more flour would.
posted by jamjam at 8:24 PM on January 1, 2015 [3 favorites]
Clearly we need to know what the recipe is to answer this question correctly. I'm serious, we do, at least the ingredients and techniques. That might change the answer.
posted by bq at 8:30 PM on January 1, 2015
posted by bq at 8:30 PM on January 1, 2015
Response by poster: I'll transcribe the recipe when I get a chance later this evening. Great suggestions everyone!
posted by erst at 8:41 PM on January 1, 2015
posted by erst at 8:41 PM on January 1, 2015
I've come across a lot of recipes, old and new, that are just wrong-- I chalk it up to the recipe being written from memory or with guesswork because the original chef didn't measure, then never being kitchen tested or corrected after publication. I could see the original chef writing or dictating the recipe and saying "Oh, two cups of flour" and not thinking to mention the little bit here and there or the extra cup she thinks she doesn't need because she always puts it in the end at the last minute and doesn't think about it as a formal part of the recipe. So the recipe she dictates is very different from the recipe she would show you how to make.
Other comments have mentioned the discrepancy in measurements that might be happening, but I wonder if this is related to flour milling? Is the recipe actually about 75 years old, or is it possible that it's older? Milling changed over the course of the centuries...notably from being stone-ground to being ground on steel rollers during the Industrial Revolution. Off the top of my head, I know that the millstones vs. rollers change was a huge deal in terms of consistency in flour because true white flour with no germ whatsoever was finally possible-- using a millstone, people had to filter out the hull and germ by pouring it through cloth, and they couldn't get all the germ out, so the flour was moister and yellowish and had a short shelf life, and thus white flour was very expensive. When steel milling became a thing, the germ could be more efficiently stripped out and cheap white flour was more accessible. (It also strips out all the vitamins, hence why bread flour became fortified after vitamins and fortification were developed in the 30's.)
So I'm wondering if the recipe is old enough-- 1870's or so? Maybe a couple decades before or after if your ancestor was more rural or lived somewhere without modern mills nearby, or if their town had a mill run by a millstone holdout. Possibly your ancestor 75 years ago inherited the recipe and it was already old!
posted by blnkfrnk at 8:43 PM on January 1, 2015
Other comments have mentioned the discrepancy in measurements that might be happening, but I wonder if this is related to flour milling? Is the recipe actually about 75 years old, or is it possible that it's older? Milling changed over the course of the centuries...notably from being stone-ground to being ground on steel rollers during the Industrial Revolution. Off the top of my head, I know that the millstones vs. rollers change was a huge deal in terms of consistency in flour because true white flour with no germ whatsoever was finally possible-- using a millstone, people had to filter out the hull and germ by pouring it through cloth, and they couldn't get all the germ out, so the flour was moister and yellowish and had a short shelf life, and thus white flour was very expensive. When steel milling became a thing, the germ could be more efficiently stripped out and cheap white flour was more accessible. (It also strips out all the vitamins, hence why bread flour became fortified after vitamins and fortification were developed in the 30's.)
So I'm wondering if the recipe is old enough-- 1870's or so? Maybe a couple decades before or after if your ancestor was more rural or lived somewhere without modern mills nearby, or if their town had a mill run by a millstone holdout. Possibly your ancestor 75 years ago inherited the recipe and it was already old!
posted by blnkfrnk at 8:43 PM on January 1, 2015
Wouldn't OP's SW flour be more likely to be drier than grandma's NE (or even central European) flour? Which would mean the recipe would take somewhat less flour, if anything, if moisture makes a difference?
posted by zennie at 9:01 PM on January 1, 2015
posted by zennie at 9:01 PM on January 1, 2015
I'm going to make my bet. My bet is that you need to leave the dough in the fridge overnight to make it handleable.
posted by bq at 9:03 PM on January 1, 2015
posted by bq at 9:03 PM on January 1, 2015
My bet is that this has to do with the fat content in your butter, but if your recipe doesn't call for resting, it could also be related to that.
posted by DarlingBri at 9:28 PM on January 1, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by DarlingBri at 9:28 PM on January 1, 2015 [1 favorite]
Looking forward to seeing the recipe.
It occurs to me that in some baking recipes, the given amount of liquid is just what you are recommended to have on hand; you're not supposed to add it all...
posted by zennie at 9:41 PM on January 1, 2015
It occurs to me that in some baking recipes, the given amount of liquid is just what you are recommended to have on hand; you're not supposed to add it all...
posted by zennie at 9:41 PM on January 1, 2015
Response by poster: The recipe could very well be much older than I think. Pretty sure it was brought over in someone's head in the 1870s, but this is the version that got written down.
The woman who wrote this recipe down would have got fresh milk, butter, and eggs delivered from a nearby dairy.
The transcribed recipe, with notes that have been added over the years in parenthesis:
I'll leave out the recipe for the filling because I don't follow it since I can buy it in cans.
Things I use:
Fleischmann's yeast packages
All-purpose flour. I don't sift it. I scoop it with a spoon into the measuring cup and level it off.
Whole milk.
Medium or large eggs, never extra-large.
Room-temp unsalted butter.
By the end of the beigli-making, I've used almost 10 cups of flour to get the right consistency, but it turns out just like I remember it and everyone says it is perfect.
posted by erst at 10:11 PM on January 1, 2015 [6 favorites]
The woman who wrote this recipe down would have got fresh milk, butter, and eggs delivered from a nearby dairy.
The transcribed recipe, with notes that have been added over the years in parenthesis:
3 pkgs yeast (Fleischmanns best)
1 1/2 c warm water (not too hot just warm out of the tap)
1 1/2 c scalded milk
3 c sugar (white sugar)
2 tsp salt
1/2 lb butter (or oleo)
4 eggs
5 c flour and a little more (NOT self-rising or presifted)
Sprinkle yeast on warm water in a large bowl and leave it for a bit.
Add butter to scalded milk and add to the yeast in the bowl.
Add sugar and salt to this then eggs.
Add flour until it is like bread dough then let rise an hour or so in a warm place not too hot.
Punch down and knead with a little more flour if necessary.
Form into 12 or so balls.
Let rise 1 hour or so in a warm place. Do not have made them too large.
Knead each well before rolling out. Roll out about as thin as noodle dough into a circle about 12 or 15 inches. Spread with filling and roll up.
Let rise for 15 more minutes or so. (Brush with butter or milk or some egg)
Place in a well-greased and floured pan, 3 rolls per pan.
Bake at 350 degrees for 30 to 40 minutes but check often and if the top is golden brown then it is done. Watch closely as they do burn easily.
This makes about 12 rolls.
I'll leave out the recipe for the filling because I don't follow it since I can buy it in cans.
Things I use:
Fleischmann's yeast packages
All-purpose flour. I don't sift it. I scoop it with a spoon into the measuring cup and level it off.
Whole milk.
Medium or large eggs, never extra-large.
Room-temp unsalted butter.
By the end of the beigli-making, I've used almost 10 cups of flour to get the right consistency, but it turns out just like I remember it and everyone says it is perfect.
posted by erst at 10:11 PM on January 1, 2015 [6 favorites]
Zennie makes a good point. Opposite point would be that part of the recipe is missing. My older bread making recipes call for proofed yeast to be mixed with about half of the four. It is stirred, left to rise, then the rest of the flour is added, kneaded, risen once or twice, then baked.
If the recipe calls for butter or lard and you use Crisco or margarine, that can also change the amount of liquid and thus your flour needs.
Have you looked the recipe up online to see how yours compares to modern versions?
posted by 101cats at 10:16 PM on January 1, 2015 [2 favorites]
If the recipe calls for butter or lard and you use Crisco or margarine, that can also change the amount of liquid and thus your flour needs.
Have you looked the recipe up online to see how yours compares to modern versions?
posted by 101cats at 10:16 PM on January 1, 2015 [2 favorites]
Was the recipe translated at any point? "Cup" could have meant a different- sized vessel in the original language and it could be that all previous cooks "just knew".
(Older French recipes often refer to "une verre de farine" - a glass of flour, which means the equivalent of 6 fluid ounces, not 8 fluid ounces as a cup holds)
posted by girlgenius at 10:21 PM on January 1, 2015
(Older French recipes often refer to "une verre de farine" - a glass of flour, which means the equivalent of 6 fluid ounces, not 8 fluid ounces as a cup holds)
posted by girlgenius at 10:21 PM on January 1, 2015
Response by poster: And just one more note: This recipe would have only been made around Christmas, which would mean this recipe was written in a very different climate than the one I'm making it in.
posted by erst at 10:30 PM on January 1, 2015
posted by erst at 10:30 PM on January 1, 2015
Best answer: Daughter of a flour miller here. My money's on it being a difference in flour from when the recipe was written down to now. I know the mill run by my family has had to change the flour "recipe" from time to time over the years, depending on the quality of the wheat, and the dryness (or not) of the weather.
posted by The Almighty Mommy Goddess at 10:57 PM on January 1, 2015 [3 favorites]
posted by The Almighty Mommy Goddess at 10:57 PM on January 1, 2015 [3 favorites]
Best answer: Add flour until it is like bread dough
This is one of those mostly experiential reference points that "everybody knows" - I wonder if a bit more than "a little" might have been added here.
posted by cotton dress sock at 11:35 PM on January 1, 2015 [1 favorite]
This is one of those mostly experiential reference points that "everybody knows" - I wonder if a bit more than "a little" might have been added here.
posted by cotton dress sock at 11:35 PM on January 1, 2015 [1 favorite]
I wonder if it's a half cup of warm water primarily to check that the yeast is still active, and a cup and a half of scalded milk, and there was a minor transcription error along the way? I agree that three cups of liquid to five-ish cups of flour seems unreasonably high...
posted by susanbeeswax at 12:21 AM on January 2, 2015 [3 favorites]
posted by susanbeeswax at 12:21 AM on January 2, 2015 [3 favorites]
I would try the "different flour" theory by--for instance--using Italian Farina 00 or some other extra absorbent flour. It might be part of the explanation for sure. Apart from that it feels like susanbeeswax is on to something. There's too much water in the recipe it feels like...
posted by Namlit at 12:46 AM on January 2, 2015
posted by Namlit at 12:46 AM on January 2, 2015
Yeah, when I make even a wet dough, I wouldn't have that high of a liquid percentage to flour. My pizza dough uses 5 1/2 cups and about 1 1/2 cups of liquid.
You would lose some volume when you scald the milk (is that the measure before scalding or after? Either way, it's really low) but that's not enough to account for it. I would also venture a guess that the "recipe" was probably just a starting point and the person making it would add flour as necessary.
Fascinating though. Hope you figure it out!
posted by guster4lovers at 1:05 AM on January 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
You would lose some volume when you scald the milk (is that the measure before scalding or after? Either way, it's really low) but that's not enough to account for it. I would also venture a guess that the "recipe" was probably just a starting point and the person making it would add flour as necessary.
Fascinating though. Hope you figure it out!
posted by guster4lovers at 1:05 AM on January 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
I'm with those suggesting that the 5C flour quantity is incorrect for one reason or another, be it a nonstandard cup measurement, transcription error, or whatever. The ratios between 5C of flour and the rest of the ingredients -- 3C of liquids, 3C of sugar, 4 eggs, 3 packages of yeast -- are all out of whack.
Have you ever made the filling from scratch? Does that part of the recipe result in an amount of filling appropriate to the amount of dough you've been ending up with?
The recipe could very well be much older than I think. Pretty sure it was brought over in someone's head in the 1870s, but this is the version that got written down.
FWIW, Wikipedia puts the invention of active dry yeast, which is what comes in those little Fleischmann's packets, at sometime during WWII.
posted by jon1270 at 1:50 AM on January 2, 2015
Have you ever made the filling from scratch? Does that part of the recipe result in an amount of filling appropriate to the amount of dough you've been ending up with?
The recipe could very well be much older than I think. Pretty sure it was brought over in someone's head in the 1870s, but this is the version that got written down.
FWIW, Wikipedia puts the invention of active dry yeast, which is what comes in those little Fleischmann's packets, at sometime during WWII.
posted by jon1270 at 1:50 AM on January 2, 2015
Actually, re-reading, I suppose the water ought to be tablespoons. 1 1/2 tablespoons, to dilute the yeast.
posted by Namlit at 2:37 AM on January 2, 2015
posted by Namlit at 2:37 AM on January 2, 2015
There is a small mill in my small rural community... They advise to use about 3/4 of your recipe's flour amount because their flour is milled using a dry process, instead of today's standard wet process which adds moisture and volume to the flour. Could also have to do with how fully the bran and germ were removed in the refining...
posted by hannahelastic at 3:44 AM on January 2, 2015 [2 favorites]
posted by hannahelastic at 3:44 AM on January 2, 2015 [2 favorites]
Best answer: The recipe has too much liquid. You are using something like 24 oz of liquid and another eight oz of eggs and probably something like 21 oz of flour. That's not dough, its batter. Even doubling the flour it will be a little wet for a pastry like this.
There is no way this is from the changes in flour. Your recipe is just poorly written.
Also use less yeast and let it ferment longer.
posted by JPD at 4:51 AM on January 2, 2015 [2 favorites]
There is no way this is from the changes in flour. Your recipe is just poorly written.
Also use less yeast and let it ferment longer.
posted by JPD at 4:51 AM on January 2, 2015 [2 favorites]
Best answer: 3 cups of liquid (about 3.5 including the eggs) to 5 cups of flour! Soup indeed. A lot of sugar to flour too. That's cake mix. You could try using extra dry, extra fine flour and see if it makes a difference, but this recipe has the appearance of someone doubling the recipe and forgetting to double the flour.
I think "and a little more" unsifted flour might be the key here. I bet grandma just pulled heaping cups (or maybe it was scoops) of flour out until the dough was right... and 5 cups is an imaginary number pulled from the air.
posted by zennie at 4:57 AM on January 2, 2015 [3 favorites]
I think "and a little more" unsifted flour might be the key here. I bet grandma just pulled heaping cups (or maybe it was scoops) of flour out until the dough was right... and 5 cups is an imaginary number pulled from the air.
posted by zennie at 4:57 AM on January 2, 2015 [3 favorites]
Could it possibly be 1 1/2 c warm water OR 1 1/2 c scalded milk?
posted by sriracha at 6:37 AM on January 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by sriracha at 6:37 AM on January 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
My money is on the word "cup" being imprecise. Take a look through posts and links at The Old Foodie (a blog about vintage recipes). Many old bread/cake recipes use "wine glass of flour" or another non-standard cup size. Also, US measuring cups are not used, even now, in European countries, at least in my experience (I had to bring some with me in my suitcase when I was living in Spain).
Since this is a Hungarian item, maybe special flour was used -- see Hungarian High Altitude flour (and this recipe that uses it). Another thought is that the yeast used was different -- maybe it was fresh yeast or hop yeast or brewers yeast, etc.
posted by melissasaurus at 6:50 AM on January 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
Since this is a Hungarian item, maybe special flour was used -- see Hungarian High Altitude flour (and this recipe that uses it). Another thought is that the yeast used was different -- maybe it was fresh yeast or hop yeast or brewers yeast, etc.
posted by melissasaurus at 6:50 AM on January 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
I am also speculating that it could be 1 1/2 cup warm water or 1 1/2 cup scalded milk instead of both, or that the water ought to be tablespoons, 1 1/2 tablespoons, just enough to dilute the yeast.
This is nitpicky and I do not think the cause of your problems, but my mother would have interpreted this direction : 5 c flour and a little more (NOT self-rising or presifted) - to mean that you measure out 5 cups or so of flour and then sift them. She lectured me quite a bit on the difference between recipes where you measure out the flour and then sift it, vs. recipes that use sifted flour that you then measure. So putting on the Mom hat, she would think you were originally supposed to sift the flour after measuring out 5 or so cups of it for this recipe. (I too usually skip the sifting of flour after measuring, when using the finely milled and presumably sieved modern flours we have today.)
posted by gudrun at 7:08 AM on January 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
This is nitpicky and I do not think the cause of your problems, but my mother would have interpreted this direction : 5 c flour and a little more (NOT self-rising or presifted) - to mean that you measure out 5 cups or so of flour and then sift them. She lectured me quite a bit on the difference between recipes where you measure out the flour and then sift it, vs. recipes that use sifted flour that you then measure. So putting on the Mom hat, she would think you were originally supposed to sift the flour after measuring out 5 or so cups of it for this recipe. (I too usually skip the sifting of flour after measuring, when using the finely milled and presumably sieved modern flours we have today.)
posted by gudrun at 7:08 AM on January 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
If the liquid is off so is the sugar and eggs.
Yeast won't really effect dough handling - especially for a dough with this short a rise time.
Neither would sifting after measuring. A shifted cup of flour is about an ounce lighter than unsifted so that's not the problem.
posted by JPD at 7:46 AM on January 2, 2015
Yeast won't really effect dough handling - especially for a dough with this short a rise time.
Neither would sifting after measuring. A shifted cup of flour is about an ounce lighter than unsifted so that's not the problem.
posted by JPD at 7:46 AM on January 2, 2015
Best answer: This is so very relevant to my interests. My wife inherited a bunch of recipes of similar vagueness and when we were in Budapest a few weeks ago she saw beigli at a market and said "my [Slovakian] grandmother used to make those!" Luckily we don't also seem to have inherited the tradition of making beigli, unlike the half dozen different cookie recipes we're already trying to reconstitute ("add nut meats …").
I'm with the people who say that's too much liquid and/or too little flour, and the "and a little more" is the key. Flour has changed over the years, and US flour is different than European flour, but I still wouldn't expect the total amount of flour to double unless the 5 cups was just the "about half the flour" measure to ensure even mixing with the liquid ingredients (and there are a number of bread dough recipes that specify such a step, so it doesn't seem unlikely).
Also if you spend much time on baking forums (or reading bread baking books) you'll see recipes refer to the percent hydration (weight of liquid expressed as percentage of the weight of the flour). When you say this recipe is soupy, it's because the hydration is WAY off as the recipe is written. You might want to weigh all your ingredients the next time you make the recipe, so you can calculate the final hydration and update the recipe accordingly. Or if you want to measure out ten cups of flour your way (scoop and then level) you can weigh the total flour and get a good estimate to start with.
Unless you're giving these away or you have a very large family, even with just five cups of flour that seems like a whole lot of dough to go through at once (and a whole lot of bread at the end). If I were making these I'd calculate the hydration of a successful batch and then scale everything down to make, like, half that much dough. At most.
posted by fedward at 8:21 AM on January 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
I'm with the people who say that's too much liquid and/or too little flour, and the "and a little more" is the key. Flour has changed over the years, and US flour is different than European flour, but I still wouldn't expect the total amount of flour to double unless the 5 cups was just the "about half the flour" measure to ensure even mixing with the liquid ingredients (and there are a number of bread dough recipes that specify such a step, so it doesn't seem unlikely).
Also if you spend much time on baking forums (or reading bread baking books) you'll see recipes refer to the percent hydration (weight of liquid expressed as percentage of the weight of the flour). When you say this recipe is soupy, it's because the hydration is WAY off as the recipe is written. You might want to weigh all your ingredients the next time you make the recipe, so you can calculate the final hydration and update the recipe accordingly. Or if you want to measure out ten cups of flour your way (scoop and then level) you can weigh the total flour and get a good estimate to start with.
Unless you're giving these away or you have a very large family, even with just five cups of flour that seems like a whole lot of dough to go through at once (and a whole lot of bread at the end). If I were making these I'd calculate the hydration of a successful batch and then scale everything down to make, like, half that much dough. At most.
posted by fedward at 8:21 AM on January 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
Response by poster: I'm guessing the amount of flour is just really, really imprecise.
And yes, this recipe is meant to make enough to give to a large family, neighbors, friends, and people at church. I make a half-batch.
Next year I'll weigh the flour carefully and see exactly how much I end up using. Everything else about the recipe works just fine.
Thanks so much, everyone! I'm definitely not an experienced baker so I appreciate all the tips and information.
posted by erst at 9:11 AM on January 2, 2015
And yes, this recipe is meant to make enough to give to a large family, neighbors, friends, and people at church. I make a half-batch.
Next year I'll weigh the flour carefully and see exactly how much I end up using. Everything else about the recipe works just fine.
Thanks so much, everyone! I'm definitely not an experienced baker so I appreciate all the tips and information.
posted by erst at 9:11 AM on January 2, 2015
Response by poster: And fedward, you could always try making beigli next year. It's good stuff!
posted by erst at 9:12 AM on January 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by erst at 9:12 AM on January 2, 2015 [1 favorite]
Oddly enough, after we told my mother in law about the beigli in Budapest (which we didn't enjoy because the woman at the market MICROWAVED it, and microwaved poppy seeds smell a lot like bleach), she found some at a church bake sale and sent us one for Christmas. It was delicious.
I was guessing the recipe was enough to feed a church, but I didn't want to presume.
posted by fedward at 9:23 AM on January 2, 2015
I was guessing the recipe was enough to feed a church, but I didn't want to presume.
posted by fedward at 9:23 AM on January 2, 2015
I have exactly this issue on one of my great-grandmother's recipes. Each generation has slightly altered her tea-ring recipe, resulting in one I find pretty easy to make (and alter slightly for my own preferences). Her original recipe also called for about half the amount of flour than the amount I had to use to turn it into dough at all.
Her recipe (and the generationally altered ones) were also about this size -- it works pretty well to feed the whole visiting family at Christmas and maybe again for a morning or two, depending on how many relatives you've got around (so I don't think it's the size of the recipe itself that's odd).
I wonder if a combination of wetter flour now, more sifted flour prior to measuring*, and even if the eggs commonly used were smaller than today's commercial eggs. I have also noticed that recipes tend to need (or appear to need) more flour when I use my stand mixer than when I knead by hand. It could just be a bunch of these small differences adding up.
*I bake a lot, but rarely if ever sift my flour before measuring it.
posted by Margalo Epps at 7:56 PM on January 2, 2015
Her recipe (and the generationally altered ones) were also about this size -- it works pretty well to feed the whole visiting family at Christmas and maybe again for a morning or two, depending on how many relatives you've got around (so I don't think it's the size of the recipe itself that's odd).
I wonder if a combination of wetter flour now, more sifted flour prior to measuring*, and even if the eggs commonly used were smaller than today's commercial eggs. I have also noticed that recipes tend to need (or appear to need) more flour when I use my stand mixer than when I knead by hand. It could just be a bunch of these small differences adding up.
*I bake a lot, but rarely if ever sift my flour before measuring it.
posted by Margalo Epps at 7:56 PM on January 2, 2015
One cup may refer to one of several different units. The imperial cup (284 mL) is about 20% larger than the U.S. customary cup (237 mL). Also, the U.S. has sometimes used different measures for dry vs. liquid ingredients. Half a U.S. dry pint is about 276 mL. If the recipe used “dry” measures for the flour, you'd need to multiply the amount by about 1.16 to covert it to the more common “customary” cup. (Of course, as many people pointed out, lots of old household recipes don't use standardized measures at all.)
posted by mbrubeck at 8:19 PM on January 2, 2015
posted by mbrubeck at 8:19 PM on January 2, 2015
I have an old family recipe like this. It, too, calls for about half the flour it needs. (In fact, I think it's 5 cups you start with in that one, too...) I think it's basically that you can put in 5 cups without worrying about the consistency, but after that you need to start paying attention as you gradually add more. :)
I've never worried about the amount because it's just one of those things everyone who's been making the recipe over the years already knows -- the amount listed isn't enough to complete the dough, it's just a starting point. But if I gave the recipe to someone else without explaining that, I imagine they might be slightly confused. The first time I made the recipe on my own, I was around 10 and my mom wasn't around, and I was definitely confused that the dough was more like cake batter. But then she explained it to me.
I don't think it's a difference in flour in our case -- just one of those family things that is verbal knowledge that didn't quite get written down correctly. (I have another family recipe, with a cooking time that is about 50% of the correct time... have I corrected it on the written version yet, after years and years? No.)
posted by litlnemo at 11:12 PM on January 2, 2015
I've never worried about the amount because it's just one of those things everyone who's been making the recipe over the years already knows -- the amount listed isn't enough to complete the dough, it's just a starting point. But if I gave the recipe to someone else without explaining that, I imagine they might be slightly confused. The first time I made the recipe on my own, I was around 10 and my mom wasn't around, and I was definitely confused that the dough was more like cake batter. But then she explained it to me.
I don't think it's a difference in flour in our case -- just one of those family things that is verbal knowledge that didn't quite get written down correctly. (I have another family recipe, with a cooking time that is about 50% of the correct time... have I corrected it on the written version yet, after years and years? No.)
posted by litlnemo at 11:12 PM on January 2, 2015
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by chocotaco at 6:43 PM on January 1, 2015 [6 favorites]