The tranche this time is 1090 to 1099. Special Mild, you could call it. They certainly knew how to brew Mild in the old days. Beer that would put hairs on your chest. Possibly on your eyeballs, too.
Here are the numbery things:
| Date | Year | Brewer | Beer | Style | OG | FG | ABV | App. Attenuation | lbs hops/ qtr | hops lb/brl | boil time (hours) | boil time (hours) | boil time (hours) | Pitch temp | max. fermentation temp | length of fermentation (days) |
| 29th Jan | 1846 | Truman | 40/- Ale | Mild | 1090.6 | 1024.7 | 8.72 | 72.78% | 16.0 | 5.95 | 59 | 81.5 | 8 | |||
| 8th Jul | 1845 | Truman | 40/- Ale | Mild | 1090.9 | 1028.3 | 8.28 | 68.90% | 7.0 | 2.73 | 60 | 80.5 | 9 | |||
| 13th Apr | 1841 | Whitbread | XX | Mild | 1090.9 | 1031.6 | 7.84 | 65.24% | 7.53 | 2.89 | 1.5 | 2 | 3 | 60 | 78 | 7 |
| 11th Mar | 1841 | Whitbread | XX | Mild | 1091.4 | 1032.7 | 7.77 | 64.24% | 7.27 | 2.78 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 60 | 79 | 6 |
| 8th Apr | 1841 | Whitbread | XX | Mild | 1091.7 | 1031.6 | 7.95 | 65.56% | 7.29 | 2.68 | 1.5 | 2 | 3 | 60 | 77.5 | 8 |
| 16th Jul | 1840 | Truman | XX Ale | Mild | 1092.8 | 1031.0 | 8.17 | 66.57% | 9 | 4.21 | 60 | 74 | 9 | |||
| 26th Aug | 1840 | Truman | XX Ale | Mild | 1092.8 | 1031.3 | 8.14 | 66.27% | 9 | 3.95 | 60 | 73 | 9 | |||
| 23rd Aug | 1845 | Truman | XX Ale | Mild | 1093.1 | 1030.5 | 8.28 | 67.26% | 9.0 | 4.29 | 58.5 | 78.5 | 7 | |||
| 23rd Sep | 1845 | Truman | XX Ale | Mild | 1093.1 | 1031.9 | 8.10 | 65.77% | 10.0 | 4.62 | 58 | 81 | 8 | |||
| Average | 1091.9 | 1030.4 | 8.14 | 66.96% | 9.12 | 3.79 | 1.67 | 2.00 | 3.00 | 59.5 | 78.1 | 7.9 | ||||
| 9th Mar | 1847 | Younger, Wm. | 100/- | Ale | 1090 | 1040 | 6.61 | 55.56% | 4.00 | 1.70 | 1.17 | 1.25 | 56 | 66 | 10 | |
| 16th Jan | 1849 | Younger, Wm. | 80/- | Ale | 1090 | 1036 | 7.14 | 60.00% | 4.33 | 1.88 | 1.25 | 1.33 | 56 | 67 | 8 | |
| 26th Mar | 1849 | Younger, Wm. | 80/- | Ale | 1090 | 1037 | 7.01 | 58.89% | 4.00 | 1.78 | 1.25 | 54 | 68 | 9 | ||
| 31st May | 1849 | Younger, Wm. | 80/- | Ale | 1090 | 1038 | 6.88 | 57.78% | 7.00 | 2.96 | 1.25 | 1.17 | 56 | 67 | 9 | |
| 7th Sep | 1849 | Younger, Wm. | 80/- | Ale | 1091 | 1038 | 7.01 | 58.24% | 6.00 | 2.61 | 1.25 | 1.25 | 55 | 69 | 8 | |
| 24th Sep | 1849 | Younger, Wm. | 80/- | Ale | 1091 | 1034 | 7.54 | 62.64% | 6.00 | 2.50 | 1.33 | 1.33 | 56 | 71 | 8 | |
| 28th Sep | 1849 | Younger, Wm. | 80/- | Ale | 1091 | 1035 | 7.41 | 61.54% | 6.00 | 2.50 | 1.42 | 1.42 | 57 | 69 | 9 | |
| 18th Apr | 1848 | Younger, Wm. | 100/- | Ale | 1098 | 1036 | 8.20 | 63.27% | 9.00 | 4.23 | 1 | 1 | 54 | 68 | 9 | |
| 19th Jul | 1848 | Younger, Wm. | 100/- | Ale | 1098 | 1039 | 7.81 | 60.20% | 8.00 | 3.93 | 1 | 0.92 | 58 | 69 | 7 | |
| 10th Mar | 1847 | Younger, Wm. | 120/- | Ale | 1099 | 1040 | 7.81 | 59.60% | 9.50 | 4.75 | 1.17 | 1.08 | 55 | 68 | 9 | |
| 10th Mar | 1848 | Younger, Wm. | 100/- | Ale | 1099 | 1040 | 7.81 | 59.60% | 3.87 | 1.88 | 1 | 1 | 54 | 68 | 11 | |
| 20th Apr | 1848 | Younger, Wm. | 100/- | Ale | 1099 | 1036 | 8.33 | 63.64% | 9.00 | 4.36 | 1.08 | 1 | 55 | 68 | 9 | |
| 12th Jul | 1848 | Younger, Wm. | 100/- | Ale | 1099 | 1040 | 7.81 | 59.60% | 8.00 | 3.88 | 0.92 | 59 | 72 | 9 | ||
| Average | 1094.2 | 1037.6 | 7.49 | 60.04% | 6.52 | 3.00 | 1.16 | 1.16 | 0.00 | 55.8 | 68.5 | 8.8 | ||||
| difference | 2.3 | 7.2 | -0.65 | -6.91% | -2.61 | -0.79 | -0.51 | -0.84 | -3.00 | -3.7 | -9.6 | 1.0 | ||||
| Sources: | ||||||||||||||||
| Truman brewing record document numbers B/THB/C/122 and B/THB/C/127 held at the London Metropolitan Archives | ||||||||||||||||
| William Younger brewing record document number WY/6/1/2/3 held at the Scottish Brewing Archive | ||||||||||||||||
| Whitbread brewing record document number LMA/4453/D/01/004 held at the London Metropolitan Archives | ||||||||||||||||
Hopping rates, eh? Are you making any sense of them? I'm struggling. There doesn't seem a simple, discernible pattern. Remember in the gravity range before this that Younger's beers came out on top. This time it's the London beers that are the winners. How do you explain that? On average, the London beers contained three-quarters of a pound more hops. That's about a 20% difference. Looking at individual beers, it's a lot more complicated than that. One of the Younger's beers was the second most heavily hopped. Once again, ther's much more variation in the hopping rates amongst the Younger's beers. One 100/- had 1.7 lbs per barrel, another 4.36 lbs. I think the reason may be partially the time of year. The more heavily hopped version were brewed in the warmer months. My conclusion: in the 1840's Younger's Special Milds were less heavily hopped than equivalent London beers.
I'm starting to like boil times. Because there's a nice, consistent pattern. Though it is unfortunate that I only have the details for Whitbread out of the London brewers. The boil times of the first and second worts were 30 minutes and 45 minutes shorter at Younger. Or 30% and 42% shorter. A simple conclusion: in the 1840's the boil times of Younger's Special Milds were considerably shorter than for equivalent London beers.
Fermentation temperatures are shaping up nicely, too. For all the gravity ranges I've covered so far the pitching temperature averaged about 4º F cooler at Younger. It's the same story again here. There's a bigger difference in the maximum fermentation temperature for this set, a touch under 10º F. It's no great risk to say: in the 1840's Younger's Milds were fermented cooler than equivalent London beers, on average around 7 - 8º F.
Length of fermentation is another friend. On average a day shorter at Younger. Yes, there's a difference, but not a very significant one. Certainly nothing like as large as Roberts claimed. Another confident one: in the 1840's Younger's Special Milds took slightly longer to ferment than equivalent London beers.
Attenuation also follows a pattern we've seen before. The most highly attenuated Younger beer couldn't quite reach the least attenuated London beer. On average, Younger's beers were about 10% less attenuated. Again, the differences aren't enormous. And the ABV and FG of Younger's beers are also lower. A bit over 0.5% ABV less and 7 points FG. Though in the case of the latter account should be taken of the higher average OG of the Younger's beers. Nothing to say but: in the 1840's Younger's Special Milds were slightly less attenuated and lower in alcohol than London Milds of a similar gravity.
That's Mild nearly done. Nearly. It's going to take me all year just to get through the 19th century.
One of the puzzles for me which these tables bring forcibly back, is how these beers could not have been very bitter. Most contemporary, narrative descriptions of mild ales stress the malt, that the malt predominated over the hop, especially for Scots ales. One well-known formulation says, "sweetish, or at least free from bitter".
ReplyDeleteWith an average of almost 4 pounds hops per barrel for these strong English ales, and an impressive 3 lbs for the Scotch ales, how can that be? It can't be just that the full body "hides" the hops, since milds in the next band down also used not much lesser amounts - even 2 pounds per barrel is a lot of hops. And I don't care what anyone says, 2-3-4 pounds leaf hops in a beer, whenever added, you're going taste them!
Even accounting for mixes of older and new hops, or some reboiling of hops, these are daunting figures. And I would think, given the high-class nature of the strong ales, that often the hops were new.
These figures for hops are away higher than most modern IPA and double IPAs. I've seen ads for American IPAs which claim (rightly!) very big hop character, from using large amounts of hops. A typical figure mentioned is 1 pound hops. Only 1 pound. Even allowing that the American barrel is 32 gallons, still this is much less hop usage than for these old milds. Even American ales which use up to 2 lbs per barrel (there are a few which claim >100 IBUs) would be considered hop monsters - yet in 1800's terms, that is the starting point for a beer which is "sweetish or at least free from bitter". Hmmm.
The answer must be, i)sweetness is a relative notion, ii) the hops used in the 1800's must have had notably low AA content, iii) 1800's hop bills typically relied on mixes of old and new hops. Or all of the above.
But still.
Gary