tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5445569787371915337.post4371316993281773985..comments2024-03-28T06:20:10.699-07:00Comments on Shut up about Barclay Perkins: Fredrick AccumRon Pattinsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03095189986589865751noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5445569787371915337.post-16721452460134561612007-10-31T07:08:00.000-07:002007-10-31T07:08:00.000-07:00I wanted to write a bit on the history of porter f...I wanted to write a bit on the history of porter for my modest little online column. Then i found your posts and now I have a headache. <BR/><BR/>You say that Obadiah doesn't mention "three threads" or publicans mixing from different casks, yet he does say that some customers drank old and new mixed and that some drank a mixture of 3 varieties. so that doesn't seem to rule out the three threads story at all. He may not mention the term, but he does mention the practice. Even if he was involved in the trade, he was writing some 40-60 years after the events in question. As to what TT means, your explanation is as good as any. <BR/><BR/>i'm still confused about how porter was prepared. Obadiah seems to suggest that a new beer was created that by ageing for a moderate amount of time had the characteristics of old mixed with new, but Accum, writing 60 years later, says that porter is generally made by mixing old and new ("the same liquor in 2 different states"). St Peters says that their porter is made the traditional way by blending old and new. But obviously some porters, even in the 18th century were made as a single beer. Then there is the whole entire butt issue, which i don't understand. Were the breweries not selling these as blends of different beers? It seems that they were, in fact, blends. So again, this is evidence that at least those porters sold as "entire butt" were not simply pre-aged beers, but blends. <BR/><BR/>The driving force, it seems, was the public demand for beers with different qualities (and different price points) like they could get at the pub from mixing at the taps (call it the Quick Trip beverage center phenomenon). The breweries were trying to recreate that, either by making a single beer with those qualities or actually mixing them at the brewery.<BR/><BR/>Forgive me if my ignorance shows; i have only scratched the surface of all the material on the topic, and I am just going on the original records that you and others have presented. Keep up the good work.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5445569787371915337.post-46053310745455084162007-10-18T06:48:00.000-07:002007-10-18T06:48:00.000-07:00Stephen, purely for research purposes, it would be...Stephen, purely for research purposes, it would be interesting to recreate such an Entire to see how it tasted. Just so I could drink a mouthful or two. I'm not sure that I would swallow, though.Ron Pattinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03095189986589865751noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5445569787371915337.post-18709586199215693922007-10-18T06:45:00.000-07:002007-10-18T06:45:00.000-07:00zythophile, once again you've come up with more in...zythophile, once again you've come up with more information than I had. It's interesting to hear that Entire was just 10% of the Porter they sold. I'm just going from memory here, but I'm sure that Keeping Porter was more than one brew in 10 in the period 1830 - 1860. Certainly in the Truman and Whitbread logs. It's difficult to tell with Barclay Perkins because all the beers have weird brewhouse names - what hell are Hhd, EI and FSt? All have about the same OG as the Porter.<BR/><BR/>Unfortunately, keeping track of how much of each beer was brewed when browsing the logs is quite time-consuming. Unless, like Whitbread logs, they have totals for each week, month and year at the back.<BR/><BR/>Getting back to the subject, from memory I would say that the ratio of mild to stale in the pre-1860 Truman logs is about two or three to one.Ron Pattinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03095189986589865751noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5445569787371915337.post-53105056598321507952007-10-18T06:22:00.000-07:002007-10-18T06:22:00.000-07:00Fascinating. I think I would have written that las...Fascinating. I think I would have written that last sentence, "Happily, I think health inspectors might prevent a faithful recreation."Stephen Laceyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10985763302279648129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5445569787371915337.post-33694188466095528762007-10-18T03:14:00.000-07:002007-10-18T03:14:00.000-07:00Accum's quotes are taken in part from Charles Barc...Accum's quotes are taken in part from Charles Barclay's evidence to a House of Commons committee in 1818/19 on the alleged adulteration of beer in London - see Jeffrey Patton's excellent Additives, Adulterants and Contaminnts in Beer pp49-50 for a fuller version, which reveals that Barclay told the MPs "entire" formed only one tenth of the porter sent out to publicans at that time, the rest being mild porter ... people would order a pint and ask the barperson to "pull it mild" or "pull it stale" depending on their preference ...<BR/><BR/>Beer nut, you're partly right, about the "high cask" (fresh, carbonated) and "low cask" (old, flat) methods of serving stout (not just Guinness) in Ireland, but I believe the "two part pour" was a technical necessity with the nitrogenated casks to get a proper head, rather than a hark-back to earlier methods of serving ...Zythophilehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07169961035352165436noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5445569787371915337.post-41967095913365176762007-10-18T03:01:00.000-07:002007-10-18T03:01:00.000-07:00The story goes that this process of pouring two-th...The story goes that this process of pouring two-thirds of a pint of fizzy fresh stout, waiting for the head to subside, and topping up with stale, came to an end in Ireland the late 1950s when Guinness replaced it with nitrogenation. The company insisted that the new nitrogenated Guinness be poured in two parts for no reason other than because customers were used to this and wouldn't trust a poured-in-one pint. And so it continues to today.The Beer Nuthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14105708522526153528noreply@blogger.com