First a word on how I've compiled them. I've used the figures for number of bushels of malt used to calculate the number of barrels. I've assumed 2 bushels to one barrel of beer, which averages out at an OG of around 1056º. The figures for volumes I do have are for the whole of the UK. For the year 1849, it was 14,691,734. My guesstimated total for the UK is 14,626,587. Pretty damn close.
There's one thing that jumps right out. The dominance of London breweries. In 1851, the population of London was 2,362,200 and of England 17,932,400. I make that 13.17% of the English population living in London. But, as you'll see from the table below, London brewers were responsible for 23.14% of English beer output.
That situation was to change. As Porter fell out of fashion in the second half of the 19th century and Burton became the centre of brewing fro the new, trendy Pale Ale. I wish I knew which collection Burton fell under. Stafford would be my guess, as Burton is in the county of Staffordshire.
Second behind London is Manchester. But it's an awfully long way behind, at just 3.61%. Though its population was just 303,400 or 1.69% of the UK population.
Anyway, here's the table for your delectation, fascination and erudition. And any other tions you fancy.
Estimated beer output in England, year ending October 1849 | |||
Collections | Bushels of malt consumed | estimated output (barrels) | % of output |
Barnstaple | 158,281 | 79,140.5 | 0.58% |
Bath | 679,127 | 339,563.5 | 2.50% |
Bedford | 399,513 | 199,756.5 | 1.47% |
Bristol | 461,372 | 230,686.0 | 1.70% |
Cambridge | 624,064 | 312,032.0 | 2.30% |
Canterbury | 310,169 | 155,084.5 | 1.14% |
Chester | 221,332 | 110,666.0 | 0.81% |
Cornwall | 154,368 | 77,184.0 | 0.57% |
Coventry | 542,648 | 271,324.0 | 2.00% |
Cumberland | 195,148 | 97,574.0 | 0.72% |
Derby | 564,541 | 282,270.5 | 2.08% |
Dorset | 259,871 | 129,935.5 | 0.96% |
Durham | 247,514 | 123,757.0 | 0.91% |
Essex | 286,576 | 143,288.0 | 1.05% |
Exeter | 240,101 | 120,050.5 | 0.88% |
Gloucester | 345,719 | 172,859.5 | 1.27% |
Grantham | 385,106 | 192,553.0 | 1.42% |
Halifax | 488,975 | 244,487.5 | 1.80% |
Hants | 433,576 | 216,788.0 | 1.60% |
Hereford | 113,781 | 56,890.5 | 0.42% |
Hartford | 554,992 | 277,496.0 | 2.04% |
Hull | 208,463 | 104,231.5 | 0.77% |
Isle of Wight | 463,658 | 231,829.0 | 1.71% |
Lancaster | 507,852 | 253,926.0 | 1.87% |
Leeds | 615,724 | 307,862.0 | 2.27% |
Lichfield | 305,345 | 152,672.5 | 1.12% |
Lincoln | 306,665 | 153,332.5 | 1.13% |
Liverpool | 763,123 | 381,561.5 | 2.81% |
London | 6,289,908 | 3,144,954.0 | 23.14% |
Lynn | 640,092 | 320,046.0 | 2.36% |
Manchester | 979,907 | 489,953.5 | 3.61% |
Newcastle | 404,183 | 202,091.5 | 1.49% |
Northampton | 325,441 | 162,720.5 | 1.20% |
Northwich | 392,040 | 196,020.0 | 1.44% |
Norwich | 372,053 | 186,026.5 | 1.37% |
Oxford | 337,695 | 168,847.5 | 1.24% |
Plymouth | 345,250 | 172,625.0 | 1.27% |
Reading | 496,466 | 248,233.0 | 1.83% |
Rochester | 443,088 | 221,544.0 | 1.63% |
Salisbury | 297,956 | 148,978.0 | 1.10% |
Salop | 266,350 | 133,175.0 | 0.98% |
Sheffield | 492,019 | 246,009.5 | 1.81% |
Stafford | 638,268 | 319,134.0 | 2.35% |
Stourbridge | 799,499 | 399,749.5 | 2.94% |
Suffolk | 328,776 | 164,388.0 | 1.21% |
Surrey | 846,841 | 423,420.5 | 3.12% |
Sussex | 465,762 | 232,881.0 | 1.71% |
Wales, East | 375,006 | 187,503.0 | 1.38% |
Wales, Middle | 91,150 | 45,575.0 | 0.34% |
Wales, North | 151,606 | 75,803.0 | 0.56% |
Wales, South | 112,835 | 56,417.5 | 0.42% |
Worcester | 205,813 | 102,906.5 | 0.76% |
York | 241,106 | 120,553.0 | 0.89% |
total | 27,176,714 | 13,588,357.0 | 100.00% |
Source: | |||
"Statistics of British commerce" by Braithwaite Poole, 1852, page 4. |
More in the next few days. If I don't start wittering on about my Bavarian holiday again.
Nothing from Nottingham? I thought that Nottingham was renowned for its beer.
ReplyDeleteMarquis - as I commented on one of Ron's earlier tables excise districts didn't correspond to counties. Nottingham was quite likely included under Derby. Burton was included under Lichfield.
ReplyDeleteThis data is just asking to be made into a map. It would be easy if there is already a map outlining the excise districts.
ReplyDelete