"J Dixon" wrote:

Having a very strong connection to the wine bottle business I can tell you
that Clyde is correct despite whatever "internet refererences" you have.

Please refer to my TWO previous posts in this thread.

When Clyde posed his objection to my definitions (which I also obtained from
someone "in the wine bottle business"), I did an Internet search to see if
my source was in error. I found there were just as many merchants "in the
wine bottle business" who used the term to refer to a 375 ml bottle as there
were merchants "in the wine bottle business" who used the term for a 187 ml
bottle. So I concluded that the term (obviously) is used for both sizes (by
different people), and so stated. [For that matter, merchants "in the wine
bottle business" also use the term "split" to refer to a 500 ml bottle!]

I also noted that the Treasury once used the term to denote the 1/20 gallon
(189.3 ml) bottle (which has now been replaced by its closest metric
equivalent, the 187 ml bottle), just as the "fifth" gallon (757 ml) bottle
has now been replaced by ITS closest metric equivalent, the 750 ml bottle.
Thus the 187 ml bottle is of even more recent origin (in this country) than
the 1/20 gallon "split".

I also did some additional research, which indicates that the term "split"
originally referred to the 375 ml bottle (or rather the 1/10 gallon bottle)
for the reason stated in my earlier post. It was the Treasury that later
chose to "misuse" the term for the 1/20 gallon bottle. However, those who
were accustomed to calling a 1/10 gallon bottle a split have continued to do
so, as have those who learned their "bottle terminology" from those sources.

Furthermore, since we have three different size bottles (3.0 litre, 4.5
litre, and 5.0 liter) represented by the term "Jeroboam", and three current
legal measures represented by the term "gallon" (US dry gallon, US liquid
gallon, Imperial Gallon) , why is it so difficult for you to accept that two
bottle sizes might be referred to by the term "split"?