Dutch beer during WW II

I'm off travelling again. Nothing really beer-related. It's my annual trip to Folkestone with Mikey. Which, obviously, will involve a degree of beer-drinking.

Every trip necessitates queueing up a good few posts. And what better way to generate posts than to consult my massive gravity spreadsheet. I first stared collecting gravities more than 20 years ago. The first iteration had maybe 50 entries. Now, it's just shy of 25,000. Most of which - 21,600 - are from the UK. It's an incredibly handy resource.

Anyway, I digress. I thought that it might be interesting to compare Dutch beers of WW II with the German ones we looked at yesterday. All of the beers I have analyses of would be confusing. Instead, I've plumped for those of two largest breweries from Holland's two largest cities: Amstel from Amsterdam and Oranjeboom from Rotterdam.

Though gravities had fallen below their pre-war strength, until the end of 1941, you could still find a beer of around 3% ABV. Not long into 1942, that dropped to 1.5% ABV at most. SO pretty much a waste of time, other than for hydration.

Note that there was much more than just Pils being brewed. With Dark Lagers both at full-strength (Münchener) and lower-gravity (Donker Lagerbier). 

Amstel beers during WW II
Date	Year	Beer	Style	package	OG	FG	ABV	App. Atten-uation	colour
19th Mar	1941	Donker Lager	Donker Lagerbier	draught	1030.7	1006.7	3.10	77.99%	6.80
18th Feb	1941	Licht Lagerbier	Licht Lagerbier	draught	1036.3	1006.7	3.79	81.41%	0.40
28th Dec	1941	M	Münchener	draught	1029.2	1010.9	2.35	62.67%	8.00
28th Jan	1941	Pils	Pils	draught	1041.4	1009.0	4.16	78.34%	0.48
30th May	1941	Pils	Pils	bottled	1039.6	1006.9	4.24	82.55%	0.40
5th Jun	1941	Pils	Pils	draught	1033.6	1006.7	3.46	80.17%	0.42
5th Dec	1941	Pils	Pils	draught	1029.2	1007.9	2.73	72.85%	0.45
18th Dec	1942	M	Münchener	draught	1014.5	1002.9	1.51	80.14%	2.50
18th Dec	1942	Pils	Pils	draught	1014.7	1003.7	1.41	74.83%	0.42
26th Jan	1943	Lager	Licht Lagerbier	draught	1010.1	1002.5	1.01	75.01%	2.80
25th Jan	1943	Pils	Pils	draught	1014.6	1003.3	1.46	77.13%	0.42
Source:
Rapporten van laboratoriumonderzoeken naar producten van Heinekenbrouwerijen in binnen- en buitenland en naar producten van andere brouwerijen held at the Amsterdamse Stadsarchief, document number 834 - 1794.

 

Oranjeboom beers during WW II
Date	Year	Beer	Style	package	OG	FG	ABV	App. Atten-uation	colour
19th Mar	1941	Donker Lager	Donker Lagerbier	draught	1030.1	1008.9	2.75	70.62%	6.80
17th Sep	1941	Donker Lager	Donker Lagerbier	draught	1025.0	1007.7	2.26	69.10%	10.00
30th Dec	1941	Dortmunder	Dortmunder	draught	1030.4	1005.4	3.24	82.27%	0.50
18th Feb	1941	Licht Lagerbier	Licht Lagerbier	draught	1030.9	1006.6	3.13	78.79%	0.48
17th Sep	1941	Licht Lagerbier	Licht Lagerbier	draught	1026.0	1005.2	2.71	79.86%	0.35
17th Sep	1941	M	Münchener	draught	1034.9	1007.1	3.61	79.67%	12.50
30th Dec	1941	M	Münchener	draught	1033.9	1007.1	3.43	78.96%	12.50
28th Jan	1941	Pils	Pils	draught	1040.6	1009.5	4.00	76.64%	0.52
30th May	1941	Pils	Pils	bottled	1032.5	1009.5	2.74	70.76%	0.60
17th Sep	1941	Pils	Pils	draught	1034.2	1005.7	3.66	83.22%	0.52
2nd Jan	1942	Belegen Gerste	Gerste	draught	1021.9	1006.1	2.01	72.14%	10.00
18th Dec	1942	Belegen Gerste	Gerste	draught	1011.9	1003.0	1.18	75.07%	4.80
2nd Jan	1942	Pils	Pils	draught	1030.7	1005.0	3.29	83.60%	0.55
26th Jan	1943	Belegen Gerste	Gerste	draught	1011.9	1003.6	1.07	69.87%	5.00
Source:
Rapporten van laboratoriumonderzoeken naar producten van Heinekenbrouwerijen in binnen- en buitenland en naar producten van andere brouwerijen held at the Amsterdamse Stadsarchief, document number 834 - 1794.

 

 

 

German beers in Holland during WW II

There's loads of dead handy Heineken material in the Amsterdam archives. Not just their brewing records. They also had their own version of a gravity book, containing analyses of all sorts of Dutch and foreign beers.

What makes it particularly interesting is that it covers WW II. A period where various unpleasantness made both brewing and moving beer about rather problematic. Plus the fact that the authorities weren't always keen on drinkers finding out what was happening to their beer.

For example, at one point in WW II the Dutch brewers organisation reduced the strength of beer without informing the public. No doubt fearing what their reaction would be.

Holland was quite fortunate is being just about self-sufficient in malting barley. Which allowed beer of a reasonable strength to be brewed much longer than in other places under Nazi control. In 1942, you could still get a Pils over 3% ABV.

It seems as if German beer was imported into Holland up until 1942. When I presume there was no longer enough beer to let it leave the country.

The beers in the table, though lower in gravity than pre-war, are at least still intoxicating, with only a couple below 3% ABV. And are stronger than the beers the general public were getting back home in Germany. As beers like these, intended for German servicemen, were stronger.

Unsurprisingly, most come from North Germany: Dortmund, Bremen and Hamburg. No surprise with the first of those, Dortmund producing the most beer of any German city and being relatively close to Holland. 

German beers in Holland during WW II
Year	Brewer	town	Beer	Style	package	OG	FG	ABV	App. Atten-uation	colour
1941	Dortmunder Kronen	Dortmund	Dortmunder	Dortmunder	bottled	1039.3	1009.5	3.79	75.78%	0.52
1941	Dortmunder Union	Dortmund	Dortmunder	Dortmunder	draught	1046.3	1012.3	4.35	73.35%	0.52
1941	Dortmunder Union	Dortmund	Dortmunder	Dortmunder	bottled	1040.2	1008.5	4.06	78.78%	0.48
1942	Bavaria Brauerei	Altona	Export Bier	Export	bottled	1031.6	1006.9	3.18	78.18%	0.35
1942	Bavaria Brauerei	Altona	Export Bier	Export	bottled	1031.8	1006.4	3.25	79.73%	0.45
1942	Beck	Bremen	Export Bier	Export	bottled	1034.2	1008.7	3.26	74.67%	0.30
1942	DAB	Dortmund	Export Bier	Export	bottled	1028.8	1008.0	2.70	72.41%	0.58
1942	Dressla	Bremen	Export	Export	draught	1033.1	1007.1	3.35	78.65%	0.28
1942	Dünckler & Rüppert		Export Bier	Export	bottled	1028.7	1007.1	2.75	75.10%	0.38
1942	Holsten	Bremen	Export Bier	Export	bottled	1040.0	1008.8	4.03	77.99%	0.30
1942	Janssen	Hamburg	Export Tafelbier	Export	draught	1045.3	1012.1	4.24	73.30%	0.40
1942	Schloss-Cabinet	Berlin	Export Bier	Export	bottled	1032.3	1008.6	3.04	73.44%	0.30
1942	Tijger?		Export	Export	draught	1037.2	1010.4	3.44	71.99%	0.40
1941	Paulaner	Munich	Helles	Helles	bottled	1039.3	1009.5	3.83	75.78%	0.52
1942	Schultheiss	Berlin	Helles	Helles	draught	1032.6	1009.9	2.90	69.63%	0.40
1942	Bavaria Brauerei	Altona	Pils	Pils	draught	1039.9	1007.8	4.11	80.46%	0.40
1941	Dortmunder Union	Dortmund	Pilsener	Pilsener	draught	1040.0	1011.0	3.73	72.59%	0.48
1941	Schultheiss-Patzenhofer	Berlin	Patz	Pilsener	draught	1042.6	1009.2	3.76	78.31%	0.50
Source:
Rapporten van laboratoriumonderzoeken naar producten van Heinekenbrouwerijen in binnen- en buitenland en naar producten van andere brouwerijen held at the Amsterdamse Stadsarchief, document number 834 - 1794.

 

 

Banana beer

There are some weird documents in the Heineken archive in Amsterdam. Not just about alcohol-free beer, but also banana beer.

Heineken conducted a study into the production of banana beer. Looking into the feasibility of brewing traditional banana beer from Rwanda on a more industrial scale. This is an overview of the results.

On January 4, 1965, the Central Laboratory of the H.T.B. [Heineken Technisch Beheer] Directorate commissioned Gis to conduct a laboratory-scale study into the feasibility of producing "banana beer." The following aspects were investigated:

1. Banana ripening. This was examined on both Fijffes bananas purchased in the Netherlands and those received from Rwanda. Result: To achieve a sufficient yield of fermentable sugars, it is necessary to use ripe to overripe bananas. During ripening, the pH drops from approximately 5.8 to 5.1. The extract percentage by wet weight, excluding the peel, is approximately 20%. The peel weight represents approximately 50% of the total banana volume.

2. Preparing banana "wort." It is not possible to prepare banana "wort" with any yield without the use of pectolytic enzymes. The optimal conditions for a pure enzyme preparation and for two of the three commercially available preparations were investigated. The investigation of the effectiveness of the commercial preparations is not yet complete, but the definitive results are expected soon. It seems certain that this research will yield a useful protocol for experiments on a semi-technical scale.

3. Fermentation. Various fermentation organisms were tested side by side, including Heineken yeast, baker's yeast, yeast strains received from Rwanda, and mixtures of microorganisms isolated from locally produced banana beer. The research progressed slowly because the "beers" produced required an assessment of the Rwandan population, so each sample had to be sent to Gisenyi before new experiments could begin. This research will certainly take several more months. We do now have the analysis of a locally produced banana beer, which serves as a guideline for our production. However, an unresolved question is whether we should approximate this product as closely as possible in terms of appearance, taste, and aroma, or whether, for example, a lighter-colored and/or clearer product is preferable. Technically, a clearer product is preferable.

It will likely be possible to submit a proposal to Gis by the end of this year, which can serve as a model for semi-technical banana beer production.

A study into the possibility of producing a higher alcohol content product (banana wine) from bananas is scheduled for the winter of 1965/66. Such a project seems feasible at first glance.

Furthermore, the possibility has been raised. To produce concentrated banana juice and banana jelly. The technical merits of this are unclear.
Source: Document 834-925 held at the Gemeente Amsterdam Stadsarchief. 

I wonder if this ever had any commercial results? Does banana beer still exist? And what on earth does it taste like? How was the traditional version prepared without the use of enzymes?

So many questions. 

Let's Brew - 1903 Binnie 54/- Bitter

Binnie weren’t the most consistent when it came to naming their beers in the brewhouse. This was also called 54/- IPA, IPA and plain old 54/-. How confusing is that?

The recipe is pretty similar to that of Best Bitter. Except that there’s flaked maize instead of flaked rice. Not sure why. It does seem to be fairly random, with some brews using flaked rice. Maybe it was just whatever they had to hand.

The hops are, again, equal quantities of Kent, Bavarian and Californian. And no spent hops. At the same rate – 6 lbs per quarter (336 lbs) of malt – as Bitter Beer.

No ageing for this beer, either. 

1903 Binnie 54/- Bitter
pale malt	9.75 lb	88.64%
flaked maize	1.25 lb	11.36%
Cluster 90 min	0.75 oz
Hallertau 60 min	0.75 oz
Fuggles 30 min	0.75 oz
Goldings dry hops	0.25 oz
OG	1046
FG	1019
ABV	3.57
Apparent attenuation	58.70%
IBU	33
SRM	4
Mash at	152º F
Sparge at	175º F
Boil time	90 minutes
pitching temp	62º F
Yeast	WLP028 Edinburgh Ale

 

 

Background work

I finally bit the bullet yesterday. Adding an extra column to my main beer gravity spreadsheet. 

I'd been planning on doing it for a couple of years. And had started using a new format table for any gravities I harvest. But it was getting out of hand. It was over 2,000 lines. And when I wanted to look up beers from a specific brewery, I had to search in both tables. Time to merge the two.

It itself, that wasn't particularly difficult. Just add the column to the main table and tack the entries from the temporary table on the end. Except, most of the entries now had a blank column. Which I'll have to add. Quite a palaver, in a table of 25,000 entries.

I started the work yesterday. And have completed maybe 25%. It's dull, tedious work. But it will be worth it, when I'm done. In case you're wondering, the column is the town where the brewery is located.

This work doesn't create any direct product. It does, however, extremely fucking handy when I am writing stuff. So is well worth it, in the long run.

While I was fiddling with the tables, I noticed that I had some analyses of Venezuelan beers. Courtesy of Heineken. Enjoy.

Venezuelan beers in 1950
Brewer	town	Beer	package	OG	FG	ABV	App. Atten-uation	colour
Cerveceria de Caracas	Caracas	Pilsener	bottled	1049.7	1005.9	5.71	88.07%	0.32
Cerveceria de Caracas	Caracas	Pilsener	can	1047.9	1012.5	4.56	74.01%	0.28
Cerveceria de Marquetia		Pilsener	bottled	1052.2	1011.2	5.13	78.56%	0.52
Cerveceria Regional Maracaibo	Maracaibo	Pilsener	draught	1032.0	1008.2	2.99	74.45%	0.32
Cervecerias Unidos		Pilsener	draught	1047.2	1014.5	4.20	69.36%	0.52
Cerveza Union		Pilsener	can	1046.0	1011.6	4.45	74.88%	0.52
Polar		Pilsener	bottled	1053.0	1010.6	5.45	80.05%	0.42
Source:
Rapporten van laboratoriumonderzoeken naar producten van Heinekenbrouwerijen in binnen- en buitenland en naar producten van andere brouwerijen held at the Amsterdamse Stadsarchief, document number 834 - 1794.

W.E. & J. Rigden hops in 1884/85

Finally, it’s the turn of hops.

Quite a lot of different ones, all of them English. Which, I suppose, isn’t that odd for a brewery located in Kent. Though none are specifically identified as being from that county. I suspect that the ones only identified by the name of the grower (English in the table).

Most striking is the presence of some spent hops in every single beer. They were really squeezing every last bit of goodness from them. I’ve come across brewers throwing spent hops into their cheap beers, but never into every single one in their range.

All the hops were pretty fresh, with nothing older than a year or two. That might be on account of them all being English. Which were mostly used without much age. Unlike American hops, which were often used when three or more years old.

As was standard, all the beers contained at least two types of hops. 

W.E. & J. Rigden hops in 1884/85
Beer	Style	hop 1	hop 2	hop 3	hop 4	hop 5
Beer	Mild	Sussex 1884	English 1883	English 1883	spent
AK	Pale Ale	Sussex 1884	English 1884	English 1884	English 1883	spent
AK Stock	Pale Ale	Worcs. 1884	English 1883	spent
Special Ale	Pale Ale	Sussex 1884	English 1884	spent
XXK	Pale Ale	Sussex 1884	Farnham 1884	English 1884	spent
TA	Table Ale	Sussex 1884	English 1884	English 1884	English 1883	spent
XXX	Stock Ale	Farnham 1884	English 1884	spent
P	Porter	English 1883	English 1883	spent
DS	Stout	English 1883	English 1883	spent
Source:
Fremlin brewing record held at the Kent Archives, document number U3555/2/GBR/BX2/1/9.

 

 

Let's Brew Wednesday - 1903 Binnie Bitter Beer

The weakest of Binnie’s Pale Ales looks remarkably like a modern English Ordinary Bitter.  Other than maybe being a little too pale. It’s very weak for a pre-WW I Bitter.

Just two ingredients in the mash tun. Pale malt and flaked rice. The latter was quite popular in the early days of the Free Mash Tun Act. Before eventually losing out to flaked maize in the popularity stakes.

The hopping is much heavier than in the Shilling Ales, as you would expect. Exactly double, to be precise, at 6 lbs per quarter (336 lbs) of malt. Though that’s a good bit less than the 10 lbs per quarter Whitbread used in its Pale Ales. Also, there are no spent hops, as in the Shilling Ales.

Definitely no ageing for this beer. Too weak, too few hops.

1903 Binnie Bitter Beer
pale malt	7.75 lb	91.18%
flaked rice	0.75 lb	8.82%
Cluster 90 min	0.67 oz
Hallertau 60 min	0.67 oz
Fuggles 30 min	0.67 oz
Goldings dry hops	0.25 oz
OG	1036
FG	1013
ABV	3.04
Apparent attenuation	63.89%
IBU	32
SRM	3.5
Mash at	152º F
Sparge at	175º F
Boil time	90 minutes
pitching temp	64º F
Yeast	WLP028 Edinburgh Ale

 

 

 

Alcohol-free beer

Like lots of other things in beer, alcohol-free versions are nothing new. As the letters below will demonstrate. Though producing something both palatable and free of alcohol was as much of a challenge then as it is today.

I came across these letters when checking that I'd downloaded from the Amsterdam archive all the Heineken documents which have been digitised.

The story starts with inventor C. Ingen Housz sending samples of his alcohol-free beer to Heineken. Presumably, in the hope of persuading them to purchase his process.

Arnhem, February 4, 1931.

To the Honorable Mr. H. P. Heineken, Amsterdam.

Honorable Sir,

As you will recall, some time ago I showed you some samples of alcohol-free beer, an invention of mine.

It is safe to say that my product has improved considerably through further testing, and therefore, on January 26th, I submitted four bottles for your inspection. It goes without saying that when my invention is in the hands of a company with all the technical resources at its disposal, a product will be obtained that, by the masses, is indistinguishable from alcoholic beer.

Furthermore, the product has never been offered to anyone, except to you. Should you ever wish to receive further details regarding its potential exploitation, I am always happy to do so, with the assurance that the conditions will be set in the most acceptable manner.

You have undoubtedly read in the trade journals that the Hansa Brewery in Dortmund will also begin producing non-alcoholic beverages this year.

Meanwhile, and awaiting your valuable feedback, I remain,

Sincerely,

C. Ingen Housz.
Source: Document 834-925 held at the Gemeente Amsterdam Stadsarchief.

There was a fairly swift, and somewhat brutally honest, reply from Heineken.

February 14, 1931

The Most Honorable Mr. C. Ingen Housz,
ARNHEM

Honorable Sir,

In response to your letter of February 4, 1931, I can inform you that the four bottles of non-alcoholic beer you sent have arrived at the brewery's possession.

The contents were tasted at our meeting of all Directors held yesterday, and we also had the contents of a bottle analyzed.

I regret to inform you that the product arrived cloudy, nauseatingly sweet, and with a taste that caused strong expressions of disgust from several gentlemen. It gives the impression of carbonated wort and certainly not enough of beer to be of any interest to anyone.

Should you, over time, arrive at a better product and perhaps be willing to discuss your invention, we would be happy to do so.

Meanwhile,

Sincerely,

H. P. Heineken.
Source: Document 834-925 held at the Gemeente Amsterdam Stadsarchief.

I think it's pretty clear that Heineken had absolutely no interest in this product. If this is what the much-improved version was like, I dread to think how the horrific the earlier iterations were.

I can remember tasting alcohol-free beer a couple of decades back. And that impression - carbonated wort - was exactly what I had. Something almost, but not totally, unlike beer. 

Singapore beers 1948 - 1950

I'm a bit late with this one. I wanted to write it just after I got back from Singapore. But, you know what it's like (or maybe not) when you get to my age. Things slip your mind.

In the period these analyses cover, Singapore had two rival brewing companies. The Archipelago Brewery Company (ABC) and Malayan Breweries Limited (MBL), which was a joint venture between Heineken and Fraser & Neave, a local soft drinks company. Both were established in the 1930s. MBL is now wholly owned by Heineken.

The Heineken connection is why I have these analyses and come from a sort of Heineken gravity book. Which lists, in addition to beers from their own breweries, products of rivals. Hence beers from both ABC and MBL.

Typically, for breweries in this part of Asia, there were two products: Pils and Stout. Which is what you still tend to find today. The successor to MBL, Asia Pacific Breweries still brew Anchor Stout, though, at just 6% ABV, it's a good bit weaker than the immediate post-WW II version. 

The Pilseners are about what you would expect, at around 1048º, 5% ABV and 75% apparent attenuation. The Stouts, on the other hand, are extremely dry. With over 95% apparent attenuation. That's drier than modern Guinness, but from a much higher starting gravity. They must have been pretty interesting beers. 

Singapore beers 1948 - 1950
Year	Brewer	Beer	Style	OG	FG	ABV	App. Atten-uation	package	Colour
1948	ABC	Pilsener	Pils	1049.64	1012.22	4.68	75.39%	bottled	0.48
1948	ABC	Pilsener	Pils	1033.68	1009.59	3.10	71.52%	bottled	0.2
1949	ABC	Pilsener	Pils	1049.64	1009.01	5.29	81.86%	bottled	0.35
1950	ABC	Anchor	Pils	1049.90	1010.73	5.07	78.50%	bottled	0.33
1950	ABC	Stout	Stout	1067.94	1002.15	8.67	96.84%	bottled	4 * 13
1949	MBL	Pils	Pils	1047.75	1011.04	4.74	76.88%	bottled	0.30
1950	MBL	Tiger	Pils	1049.69	1010.37	5.10	79.12%	bottled	0.48
1950	MBL	Stout	Stout	1068.20	1000.77	8.89	98.88%	bottled	4 * 14.5
Source:
Rapporten van laboratoriumonderzoeken naar producten van Heinekenbrouwerijen in binnen- en buitenland en naar producten van andere brouwerijen held at the Amsterdamse Stadsarchief, document number 834 - 1794.