Whitbread Double Stout grists 1830 - 1880 - the stacked bar chart

A couple of readers suggested that I produce a stacked bar chart for Whitbread grists.

I'll be honest, I didn't know what they meant by a stacked bar chart. My initial reaction was: "Fuck them. Let them create their own fucking fancy charts." Then I realised that it was a way of spinning out another post from this rather threadbare carpet of data.

So I went into Excel and had a fiddle around. And this is what I came up with:

Is this what you meant? I hope it is. Because I've also done one for the Stout grists:

If you like these charts, I can produce more of them. It is, after all, a piece of piss with Excel.

 

Whitbread Double Stout 1830 - 1880

I'm having so much fun doing these tables and charts that I've done some more.

For a couple of reasons. Most important being that the last Stout data was for two different beers: Single Stout and Export Stout. Which made the bitterness chart look weird. Also because I want to check how closely the grists of the Double Stout and Stout resemble each other.

There's no amber malt, just the same as in Stout after 1816. Most of the big London brewers seem to have eschewed its use. Except for Barclay Perkins, who regularly employed it, especially in their more expensive Stouts.

Biggest difference with Stout is the much more stable brown malt content. Which also leads to the pale malt percentage showing less variation, too. At least until 1870, where some was swapped out for sugar. While the black quantity rose slowly and steadiyl.

First, the data in number form:

Whitbread Double Stout 1830 - 1880
year	OG	IBU	SRM	pale malt	brown malt	black malt	sugar
1830	1076.2	117	17	97.86%		2.14%
1835	1081.7	123	25	83.33%	14.81%	1.85%
1840	1083.4	69	26	84.91%	12.58%	2.52%
1846	1085	75	34	76.53%	20.41%	3.06%
1852	1084.8	90	31	80.27%	16.79%	2.94%
1855	1079.2	80	31	79.83%	16.81%	3.36%
1860	1077	104	31	79.83%	16.81%	3.36%
1865	1080.6	127	32	80.42%	15.38%	4.20%
1870	1080.9	106	30	75.76%	11.36%	3.79%	9.09%
1875	1076.5	123	32	61.55%	17.84%	4.28%	16.33%
1880	1080.3	103	35	67.19%	19.20%	3.84%	9.77%
Sources:
Whitbread brewing records held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document numbers LMA/4453/D/09/024, LMA/4453/D/09/029, LMA/4453/D/09/034, LMA/4453/D/09/040, LMA/4453/D/09/045, LMA/4453/D/09/049, LMA/4453/D/09/053, LMA/4453/D/09/059, LMA/4453/D/09/064, LMA/4453/D/09/070 and LMA/4453/D/09/075.

And now as a pretty chart:

Next I'll be doing a chart of bitterness and colour.

Whitbread Export Stout grists 1860 - 1880

The last set of charts went down so well, I've decided to do some more. Let's face it: they fill up the space nicely and remove the need to write so many words.

I’m using Whitbread as an example to show the trends in grists during this period. 

Whitbread Export Stout grists 1860 - 1880
year	OG	IBU	SRM	pale malt	brown malt	black malt	sugar
1860	1072.9	163	32	67.35%	26.53%	6.12%
1865	1069.5	145	34	74.47%	21.28%	4.26%
1870	1074.2	124	33	70.56%	15.05%	4.52%	9.88%
1875	1067.9	123	32	61.55%	17.84%	4.28%	16.33%
1880	1078.7	105	38	67.72%	16.05%	6.02%	10.21%
Sources:
Whitbread brewing records held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document numbers LMA/4453/D/09/054, LMA/4453/D/09/059, LMA/4453/D/09/064, LMA/4453/D/09/070 and LMA/4453/D/09/074.

Not sure I can pick much out of that. The bitterness and colour numbers are from brewing software calculations and should not be taken as gospel. There does, however, seem to be a trend of declining bitterness. And also, to a lesser degree, of the brown malt content.

And, of course, there’s the arrival of sugar in 1870. No idea what type of sugar it might have been. But it was there.

Note that none of Whitbread’s grists matches any of those suggested by Loftus. A demonstration of how varied and dynamic recipes were. 

Here's that data in chart form:

Combining the data with the last set, I've a chart that spans a large chunk of the 19th century.

Not totally sure what that tells us. But it is a pretty chart. I suppose it does show the slow rise of black malt. And the ups and downs of brown malt.

It does show how dynamic grists were, even at Whitbread. Where the grists were pretty standardised.

Brown malt again

More on brown malt. More specifically: the different types of it.

Having downloaded a copy of William Loftus's "The Brewer" I'm going to make use of it. He writes a little about the different types of brown malt.

First de describes what he calls Porter malt  or brown malt:

"Porter malt, to be proper, should be made from good barley thoroughly malted, and exhibit a sound interior, of a uniform dark chocolate colour; each corn should be separate, and as near as possible of its original size and shape. In this state it contains a large quantity of soluble colouring matter of a superior kind, composed of burnt saccharine and mucilage, which impart an agree able flavour and odour, as well as colour, to the beer with which it is mixed.

Brown malt differs in its preparation from Pale only in the drying on the kiln , which operation is finished at a brisk heat, obtained from beech, or birch, or some other wood, while the grain is laid an even thickness of about two inches, and occasionally sprinkled with water."
"The Brewer" by William Loftus, London, 1856, pages 18 - 19.

That sounds like the type of brown malt not made in Hertfordshire. Which we saw in my earlier post gave an extract not much worse than the best pale malt.

Then there's the Hertfordshire type. Of which Loftus clearly disapproves.

"Blown malt is another variety of Brown. The vegetated is laid in a moist condition about half an inch thick upon a wire kiln, and kept constantly turned, while exposed to an ardent heat produced from fern, straw, or wood. The grain by this process suddenly expands its husk, and acquires an unnatural size, which gives to it its name of Blown malt.

This fictitious malt was, on the introduction of the Saccharometer, found to yield a deficient produce, as compared with Pale, of from 18 to 25 per cent., and the best Brown of from 15 to 20 per cent."
"The Brewer" by William Loftus, London, 1856, pages 19 - 20.

It's interesting that both types of malt were finished with a direct flame.The big difference seems to be how thickly the malt was laid: 2 inches as opposed to half an inch. It also sounds like the heat was more intense.

The other brown malt

I was browsing through Richardson's "Statistical Estimates of the Materials of Brewing" and stubbed my toe on some analyses of malt from the early 1780s.

Great. I thought. These will come in handy when I try to calculate the gravity of beers based on the quantity of malt used. I was amazed at what I saw. Brown malt with an extract of 72 lbs and even 78 lbs per quarter. To put this into context, the pale malts vary between 62 lbs and 82 lbs. In the 19th century, around 80 lbs was standard.

There's one exception: the brown malt made in Hertfordshire. That gives the shit extract I'd expect of 54 lbs and 56 lbs.

Richardson explains the difference in the method of manufacture. The stuff from Hertfordshire being "blown" or popped, like popcorn. And so getting larger in volume. Malt was sold in quarters, a volume measure. Making a quarter of brown malt much lighter than one of pale.

Outside of Hertfordshire, as they didn't pop their brown malt, it would have weighed around the same per quarter as pale malt. So I suppose it makes sense that the extract wouldn't be that much worse.

Great to see all of this in hard numbers. And to see just how different the "other" brown malt was.

London brewers used Hertfordshire malt. The question is: why? Was it all they had readily available in the pre-railway days?

Malt from the barley of 1781.
No.	Colour	Character	Growth of barley.	Average prod. of ferm. matter
1	pale	well made	North Lincolnsh.	82 lbs
2	pale	indifferent	North Lincolnsh.	75 lbs
3	pale	well made	Norfolk	72 lbs
4	pale	well made	Yorksh. woulds	82 lbs
5	brown	well made	Yorksh. woulds	78 lbs
6	brown	well made	Ware, in Herts	56 lbs
Source:
Statistical Estimates of the Materials of Brewing by J. Richardson, 1784, G. Robinson, London, page 67.

Malt from the barley of 1782.
No.	Colour	Character	Growth of barley.	Average prod.
1	pale	well made	Yorksh. woulds	62 lbs
2	pale	well made	Bremen	58 lbs
3	pale	well made	Norfolk	67 lbs
4	pale	indifferent	Norfolk	56 lbs
5	brown	well made	Ware, in Herts.	54 lbs
Source:
Statistical Estimates of the Materials of Brewing by J. Richardson, 1784, G. Robinson, London, page 67.

Malt from the barley of 1783.
No.	Colour	Character	Growth of barley.	Average prod.
1	pale	well made	North Lincolnsh	74 lbs
2	pale	well made	Berwick on Tweed	63 lbs
3	pale	indifferent	Yorksh. woulds	65 lbs
4	pale	well made	Yorksh. woulds	75 lbs
5	brown	well made	Yorksh. woulds	72 lbs
Source:
Statistical Estimates of the Materials of Brewing by J. Richardson, 1784, G. Robinson, London, page page 68.

Was roasting malt banned in WW I?

War brought with it all sorts of restrictions. From which malt wasn’t spared. Though they weren’t the ones often bandied about.

Various writers have asserted that there was a ban on roasting malt. Which finished off Porter, stopped the brewing of Stout and left the UK market wide open for Guinness. Except that never happened.

There were plenty of Orders from the Food Controller relating to malt. None of them mentions roasted or coloured malt. I won't go through the whole lot. They all concern the manufacture, transport and sale of malt. The first Order, in February 1917, forbade all three, without the express permission of the Food Controller.  *

The last Order, in February 1918, only allowed maltsters to produce the quantity of malt required to brew the maximum barrelage set for the first six months of 1918.  **

A cursory glance at the grists reveals that brewers retained access to supplies of roasted malts. Courage are a good example, as they brewed Stout uninterrupted through all of the war years.

There was a big reduction in the roast malt content, particularly in the form of brown malt, in 1917. It still averaged around the 20% level for the latter war years.  

Courage Double Stout/Stout grists 1914 - 1920
Date	Year	Beer	pale malt	brown malt	black malt	total malt	total roast malt
21st Oct	1914	Double Stout	60.22%	19.59%	10.52%	90.33%	30.11%
10th Mar	1915	Double Stout	58.43%	20.22%	10.11%	88.76%	30.34%
22nd Sep	1915	Double Stout	61.48%	20.23%	10.51%	92.22%	30.74%
1st Dec	1915	Double Stout	59.20%	20.62%	11.31%	91.13%	31.93%
10th May	1916	Double Stout	60.10%	20.03%	10.02%	90.15%	30.05%
3rd Jan	1917	Double Stout	64.41%	10.17%	8.47%	83.05%	18.64%
24th Oct	1917	Double Stout	68.69%	9.81%	8.41%	86.92%	18.22%
16th Jan	1918	Double Stout	69.79%	8.82%	11.23%	89.84%	20.05%
2nd May	1918	Stout	68.73%	10.91%	10.91%	90.55%	21.82%
2nd Jul	1919	Stout	67.53%	8.76%	11.34%	87.63%	20.10%
1st Oct	1919	Stout	69.61%	7.84%	9.80%	87.25%	17.65%
21st Jan	1920	Stout	67.30%	9.24%	13.64%	90.18%	22.87%
Sources:
Courage brewing records held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document numbers ACC/2305/08/247, ACC/2305/08/248, ACC/2305/08/249, ACC/2305/08/250 and ACC/2305/08/251.

 I suppose roasting malt was banned in a way. Because making any sort of malt was.

 

* "Food Supply Manual October 1917", pages 68-69.

** "Food Supply Manual April 1918", pages 167-168.

Mid-19th century London Stout

You’ll note that, for once gravities have increased over time. There’s a reason for that: in the early part of the 19th century the Napoleonic Wars meant that the taxes on beer and malt were high. Which in turn drove down gravities.

As the century progressed, a set of Stout styles evolved. Differentiated not just by strength but also by conditioning time. That is, into Keeping and Running. As well as Single, Double and Tripel.

In the table, you can see that most London brewers were sticking to those categories. With Single Stout at an OG of about 1075º, Double Stout at 1088º and Triple 1098º. You could argue that Barclay’s Russian Stout (IBSt) was in a fourth strength category, which I guess you could call Imperial. If only Truman didn’t have a beer in the Triple Stout category called just that. The confusing bastards.

There are a couple of outliers in the Single Stouts. Barclay’s FSt looks like a Porter. In fact, its OG is only 1º higher than their Porter. The other is Truman Running Stout, which looks more like a Double Stout.

Keeping versions are significantly more heavily hopped than the Runners. In the case of Reid, there are around 25% in the stock versions (Crs. Whatever that stands for).  While at Whitbread the difference wasn’t far short of 100%. Though it’s all relative. Every single one of the beers, including Runners, is heavily hopped.

The rate of attenuation is fairly high, especially when many of these beers would have undergone a long secondary Brettanomyces fermentation. Leaving the FG when served much lower than the raking gravity in the table. 

Mid-19th century London Stout
Year	Brewer	Beer	OG	FG	ABV	App. Atten-uation	lbs hops/ qtr	hops lb/brl
1849	Barclay Perkins	FSt	1061.5	1016.0	6.02	73.98%	17.06	4.38
1850	Truman	M Keeping Stout	1073.1	1028.5	5.90	60.98%	11.84	3.87
1845	Reid	S	1073.4				12.05	3.76
1845	Reid	S Crs	1074.8				15.00	4.94
1850	Whitbread	KS	1074.8	1025.8	6.49	65.56%	21.63	6.91
1850	Whitbread	S	1075.1	1027.1	6.34	63.84%	11.83	4.03
1850	Truman	Running Stout	1081.7	1027.1	7.22	66.78%	12.65	4.26
	Average		1073.5	1024.9	6.39	66.23%	14.58	4.59
1845	Reid	SS	1087.3				11.62	4.55
1845	Reid	SS Crs	1087.3				14.92	6.15
1850	Truman	Export Stout	1088.6	1023.0	8.68	74.06%	19.34	8.15
1850	Truman	Double Stout	1088.9	1026.3	8.28	70.40%	14.18	7.63
	Average		1088.0	1024.7	8.48	72.23%	15.01	6.62
1850	Whitbread	SSS	1092.0				11.84	4.31
1849	Barclay Perkins	BSt BI	1093.2	1028.0	8.63	69.96%	16.79	7.40
1850	Barclay Perkins	BSt Expt	1096.3	1028.0	9.04	70.93%	15.34	7.14
1845	Reid	SSS	1097.0	1034.6	8.25	64.29%	12.61	5.94
1850	Truman	Imperial	1099.2	1029.1	9.27	70.67%	13.42	8.20
1850	Barclay Perkins	IBSt	1109.0	1031.0	10.32	71.57%	15.69	9.31
	Average		1097.8	1030.1	9.10	69.48%	14.28	7.05
Sources:
Truman brewing record held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document number B/THB/C/052.
Whitbread brewing records held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document numbers LMA/4453/D/09/043 and LMA/4453/D/09/044.
Barclay Perkins brewing record held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document number ACC/2305/1/540.
Reid brewing record held at the Westminster City Archives, document number 789/271.

Late 19th century London Stout grists

This is what you were really waiting for. Not boring old OGs and rates of attenuation, but meaty chunks of grist.

I've just realised that my talk is the bones of a ittle history of London Stout. As if I didn't have enough projects already. But I could knock it out pretty quickly. Would anyone be interested? 250 years of London Stout. With a few dozen recipes, obviously. And lots and lots of tables.

Getting back to the topic, can you spot the difference with 1850? A lot more black malt. More than twice as much, on average. While the amount of brown malt is down by a third.

Though sugar had been legal ingredient since 1847, none of the London brewers used it in their Stouts in 1850. What a change by the 1890s. Every brewer used sugar of some sort, on average making up 12.5% of the grist. Quite a few different sorts, as you'll see in the table. Most of it probably invert sugar of some type. The adoption of sugar is probably responsible for the reduction in the percentage of base malt. 

Late 19th century London Stout grists
Year	Brewer	Beer	pale malt	white malt	brown malt	black malt	amber malt	crystal malt	total malt
1899	Barclay Perkins	SDP Ex		58.64%	11.17%	5.98%	7.18%		82.98%
1899	Barclay Perkins	RDP		49.26%	8.82%	5.51%	11.03%	7.72%	82.35%
1899	Barclay Perkins	BS Ex		54.24%	11.38%	6.03%	14.06%		85.71%
1899	Whitbread	CS	75.73%		12.62%	8.74%			97.09%
1900	Whitbread	S	51.25%		13.75%	5.00%	20.00%		90.00%
1899	Whitbread	SS	50.00%		16.07%	4.17%	17.86%		88.10%
1899	Whitbread	SSS	50.00%		16.07%	4.17%	17.86%		88.10%
1895	Truman	Single Stout	65.95%		13.39%	7.44%			86.78%
1895	Truman	Double Stout	65.95%		13.39%	7.44%			86.78%
1895	Truman	Imperial Stout	65.95%		13.39%	7.44%			86.78%
	Average		42.48%	16.21%	13.01%	6.19%	8.80%	0.77%	87.46%

Late 19th century London Stout sugars
Year	Brewer	Beer	no. 2 sugar	no. 3 sugar	Garton	black	other sugar	total sugar
1899	Barclay Perkins	SDP Ex	17.02%					17.02%
1899	Barclay Perkins	RDP		17.65%				17.65%
1899	Barclay Perkins	BS Ex	14.29%					14.29%
1899	Whitbread	CS					2.91%	2.91%
1900	Whitbread	S				3.00%	7.00%	10.00%
1899	Whitbread	SS				3.57%	8.33%	11.90%
1899	Whitbread	SSS				3.57%	8.33%	11.90%
1895	Truman	Single Stout			13.22%			13.22%
1895	Truman	Double Stout			13.22%			13.22%
1895	Truman	Imperial Stout			13.22%			13.22%
	Average		3.13%	1.76%	3.97%	1.01%	2.66%	12.53%