No frills was definitely Younger’s theme when it came to grists. Just pale malt again. Oh, and 6 Flgs patent malt. Whatever amount that might be. Pale malt from three types of barley, two foreign, one English, I think. The photo is a little blurry and the malt types are in tiny writing.
Later in the same day, another brew had no patent. Zero Flgs. I should have done the recipe for that beer, shouldn’t I? It’s the same in every other respect. Let’s just imagine this was gyle 301 rather than 295. That will make life simpler for everyone.
Loads of different hops to compensate for the lack of variety in the malt. Six in all: American from the 1884 and 1885 harvests, Californian from 1884, Württemberg from 1885, Bohemian from 1885 and Kent from 1884.
| 1885 William Younger XXX | ||
| pale malt | 15.00 lb | 100.00% |
| Cluster 120 min | 1.00 oz | |
| Hallertau 90 min | 1.00 oz | |
| Fuggles 60 min | 1.00 oz | |
| Saaz 30 min | 1.00 oz | |
| Goldings dry hops | 0.50 oz | |
| OG | 1071 | |
| FG | 1024 | |
| ABV | 6.22 | |
| Apparent attenuation | 66.20% | |
| IBU | 49 | |
| SRM | 5.5 | |
| Mash at | 153º F | |
| Sparge at | 163º F | |
| Boil time | 120 minutes | |
| pitching temp | 59º F | |
| Yeast | WLP028 Edinburgh Ale | |
Posts
1 comment:
My guess would be flagons, suggesting that the patent may have been liquid and the patent used to change the colour of the beer for different markets, as was common in Scotland. The second Gyle might support this. Unfortunately, a flagon doesn’t have a defined capacity, so not a great deal of use unless you could find the actual flagon that the brewery used.
Post a Comment