Grists 1920-1939

You may have noticed that my reading material this week is "Brewing Science & Practice" H. Lloyd Hind, published in 1940. It's a wonderful book. I'm learning so much. If you're paying attention, you should be, too. Learning lots, I mean.

One of the things I'm most interested in doing in the course of my research is comparing theory with practice. Seeing how well what the brewing manuals say matches with what's in the brewing records. In some periods there's considerable divergence. Not so with Hind and the 1930's. Most of what he says I can find real practical examples of.

"Brewing Science & Practice" is a detailed work. Very detailed, in fact. Today I'm sharing some of those details with you. To be specific, the details about the grists for different types of beer.



Grists
Different types of beer required different malts. "Pale ales have to comply with higher standards of brilliance and stability than mild ales, while they lack certain constituents of dark beers that hinder the formation of protein haze, and contains a greater proportion of the hop tannins which participate in its production." Which meant Pale Ales had to be made from malt of the best quality, whereas brewers could get away with lesser malt in Mild. No surprise there.

To maintain a constant colour and flavour, a blend of pale malts was usually used in Pale Ale grists. Part of the blend was malt made from six-rowed barley, either Californian or Smyrna (Syrian). At one time up to 50% six-rowed had been used, but by the 1030's 20% was usually the maximum. Sugar and flaked rice or maize helped to prevent a protein haze, especially in filtered beers. Pale invert sugars, such as No. 1 or No. 2 were suitable. Adjuncts could make up 10-25% of the total extract.

These are the example Pale Ale grists given by Hind:


Malts for Mild and dark Ales were of slightly lower quality, did not need to be so well-modified and were slightly darker in colour than those used for Pale Ales. Crystal malt and amber malt were used for flavour. A greater proportion of sugar could be used than for Pale Ales, usualy in the form of a dark invert sugar such as No.3 or a proprietary mixed sugar containing caramel.


There were different types of Porter and Stout which all had their own distinct grists. Some Stouts used just malt and perhaps roasted barley, others, like Mild, has a percentage of sugar and maize. The majority of the grist was pale malt that was not too highly modified, usually a mix of English 2-row and foreign 6-row. No. 3 invert sugar and proprietary dark mixed sugars were added in the copper. Milk Stouts also contained unfermentable lactose which was added as primings.


That's the theory from Hind. How does it compare with reality? It just so happens that some of tghe Whitbread brewing records give the yield of each particular malt. That means I can put together similar tables to Hind's.


It's certainly true that the Milds (XX,X A) and the Stouts (P, CS, COS) used lower quality pale malt than the PA. There's a mix of foreign 6-row and English 2-row pale malt in all the grists, too. But when it comes to sugar, Whitbread's grists diverge significantly from Hind's. Rather than the Mild and Stout, it's the Pale Ale that had the greater proportion of sugar. As for brown malt in Mild, I've only seen that in low-gravity WW I Government Ale.