Finally we're there. At the final set of analyses. The very first part of this series, "Was Watney's Mild crap in the 1920's?" was on the 26th January 2014. So I've been at this for just about nine months. Scary to think it's taken as long to form as a baby.
But don't get too carried away yet. I've still a Stout roundup and then an overall league table to compile. There are still a few steps left in our journey.
How appropriate that Whitbread, the people we have to thank for this lovely information, comes last. Just an alphabetical coincidence, but still appropriate. I thought: "What extra crap, sorry background detail, can I stick in?" Why not something about the beers? The grists are an obvious one. But I know so much more about Whitbread beers. A great excuse for lots more tables.
For example, they very handily have tables at the back of their brewing books showing how much of each type of beer they brewed each week of the year, with monthly and annual totals. Which lets me put together tables like this:
Whitbread Porter and Stout output 1921 - 1929 | |||||||||||
P | S | CS | LS | ES | Total | ||||||
year | barrels | % | barrels | % | barrels | % | barrels | % | barrels | % | |
1921 | 15,688 | 6.57% | 58,452 | 24.50% | 133,563 | 55.97% | 30,920 | 12.96% | 238,623 | ||
1922 | 16,562 | 8.59% | 47,530 | 24.66% | 84,703 | 43.95% | 15,340 | 7.96% | 28,582 | 14.83% | 192,717 |
1923 | 14,165 | 8.33% | 39,960 | 23.51% | 68,326 | 40.20% | 20,866 | 12.28% | 26,660 | 15.68% | 169,977 |
1924 | 15,948 | 8.95% | 37,834 | 21.23% | 74,258 | 41.67% | 23,442 | 13.16% | 26,710 | 14.99% | 178,192 |
1925 | 14,943 | 9.12% | 35,396 | 21.59% | 62,357 | 38.04% | 22,262 | 13.58% | 28,974 | 17.67% | 163,932 |
1926 | 13,511 | 8.02% | 34,567 | 20.51% | 20,721 | 12.30% | 69,724 | 41.38% | 29,990 | 17.80% | 168,513 |
1927 | 10,708 | 7.15% | 30,087 | 20.09% | 86,569 | 57.82% | 22,361 | 14.93% | 149,725 | ||
1928 | 10,105 | 7.11% | 30,017 | 21.12% | 85,992 | 60.49% | 16,039 | 11.28% | 142,153 | ||
1929 | 5,558 | 6.48% | 17,284 | 20.15% | 51,624 | 60.18% | 11,313 | 13.19% | 85,779 | ||
Sources: | |||||||||||
Whitbread brewing records held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document numbers LMA/4453/D/09/113, LMA/4453/D/09/114, LMA/4453/D/09/115, LMA/4453/D/09/116, LMA/4453/D/09/117, LMA/4453/D/09/118, LMA/4453/D/09/119, LMA/4453/D/09/120, LMA/4453/D/09/121, LMA/4453/D/09/122. |
It tells us a few things. Like their Porter started its terminal decline in 1926. That Country Stout (CS) had a brief life, at first almost sucking the life out of London Stout (LS) then withering itself away. LS bounces back to over 90,000 barrels a year in 1930. Don't know what happened in 1929, but the following year total Porter and Stout production was over 150,000 barrels again. Overall, Whitbread's Stout sales were in decline in the 1920's. In the 1930's they stabilised at around 120,000 barrels.
Now details of the beers. On the face of it, there were 7 beers: P (Porter) CS (Country Stout), COS (Country Oatmeal Stout), LS (London Stout), LOS (London Oatmeal Stout), S (Stout) and ES (Extra Stout). In reality there just three. As this table shows:
Whitbread Porter and Stout in 1922 | |||||||||||
Date | Beer | Style | OG | FG | ABV | App. Atten-uation | lbs hops/ qtr | hops lb/brl | boil time (hours) | boil time (hours) | Pitch temp |
12th Jun | P | Porter | 1028.0 | 1007.0 | 2.78 | 74.98% | 7.47 | 0.93 | 1.5 | 1.75 | 64º |
12th Jun | CS | Stout | 1045.7 | 1013.0 | 4.32 | 71.54% | 7.47 | 1.52 | 1.5 | 1.75 | 61.5º |
12th Jun | COS | Stout | 1045.7 | 1013.0 | 4.32 | 71.54% | 7.47 | 1.52 | 1.5 | 1.75 | 61.5º |
6th Jun | LS | Stout | 1054.6 | 1015.0 | 5.23 | 72.51% | 7.44 | 1.77 | 1.75 | 2 | 61.5º |
6th Jun | LOS | Stout | 1054.6 | 1015.0 | 5.23 | 72.51% | 7.44 | 1.77 | 1.75 | 2 | 61.5º |
6th Jun | S | Stout | 1054.6 | 1015.0 | 5.23 | 72.51% | 7.44 | 1.77 | 1.75 | 2 | 61.5º |
6th Jun | ES | Stout | 1054.6 | 1015.0 | 5.23 | 72.51% | 7.44 | 1.77 | 1.75 | 2 | 61.5º |
Source: | |||||||||||
Whitbread brewing record held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document number LMA/4453/D/09/115. |
Now the grists:
Whitbread Porter and Stout grists in 1922 | |||||||||
Date | Beer | Style | OG | pale malt | brown malt | black malt | no. 3 sugar | oats | hops |
12th Jun | P | Porter | 1028.0 | 63.96% | 14.15% | 13.02% | 8.30% | 0.57% | Oregon hops |
12th Jun | CS | Stout | 1045.7 | 63.96% | 14.15% | 13.02% | 8.30% | 0.57% | Oregon hops |
12th Jun | COS | Stout | 1045.7 | 63.96% | 14.15% | 13.02% | 8.30% | 0.57% | Oregon hops |
6th Jun | LS | Stout | 1054.6 | 64.69% | 14.93% | 12.09% | 7.58% | 0.71% | Oregon hops |
6th Jun | LOS | Stout | 1054.6 | 64.69% | 14.93% | 12.09% | 7.58% | 0.71% | Oregon hops |
6th Jun | S | Stout | 1054.6 | 64.69% | 14.93% | 12.09% | 7.58% | 0.71% | Oregon hops |
6th Jun | ES | Stout | 1054.6 | 64.69% | 14.93% | 12.09% | 7.58% | 0.71% | Oregon hops |
Source: | |||||||||
Whitbread brewing record held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document number LMA/4453/D/09/115. |
The recipes are elegantly simple: pale, brown and black malts, No. 3 invert sugar and a handful of oats for legal reasons. I should say recipe rather than recipes, because, though P, CS and COS were parti-gyled together, as were LS, LOS, S and ES, the same basic recipe was used for both sets. If I'm honest, Whitbread's records are terribly dull in this period.
One odd feature: 100% Oregon hops. It's really unusual to see all American hops in a beer. It implies to me that these are all early additions. They would normally use US hops for later additions. British brewers weren't keen on the flavour of American hops.
The ingredients are the same as they had been 50 years earlier. Look:
Whitbread Stout grists in 1870 | |||||||
Date | Beer | Style | OG | pale malt | brown malt | black malt | Sugar |
8th Aug | SS | Stout | 1080.9 | 73.11% | 13.71% | 4.57% | 8.61% |
8th Aug | SSS | Stout | 1098.3 | 73.11% | 13.71% | 4.57% | 8.61% |
4th Nov | xp S | Stout | 1070.4 | 68.59% | 18.29% | 4.57% | 8.55% |
19th Jan | K | Porter | 1055.6 | 70.00% | 25.00% | 5.00% | |
Sources: | |||||||
Whitbread brewing records held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document numbers LMA/4453/D/09/063 and LMA/4453/D/09/064. |
A little more pale malt and less black malt, but not really that much different.
That was fun. Now finally to today's beer, Whitbread draught Stout. Or London Stout, as it clearly was. It terms of spec, it's a touch stronger than average. Oh, and it's the more expensive 9d type of Stout. But what about its performance?
Whitbread Stout quality 1922 | ||||||||
Year | Beer | FG | OG | ABV | App. Atten-uation | Flavour | score | Price |
1922 | Stout | 1011.9 | 1055 | 5.61 | 78.36% | good | 2 | 9 |
1922 | Stout | 1018.2 | 1055.7 | 4.86 | 67.32% | good | 2 | 9 |
1922 | Stout | 1014.2 | 1055.2 | 5.33 | 74.28% | v . fair | 2 | 9 |
Average | 1014.8 | 1055.3 | 5.27 | 73.32% | 2.00 | |||
Source: | ||||||||
Whitbread Gravity book held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document number LMA/4453/D/02/001 |
We're ending on a high note. Only three samples, but all get an impressive 2 score. I could work out the average without the benefit of a computer.
Whitbread pubs will (or should that be were?) be full of time-travelling Stout lovers.
You know there were people arguing over whether LS or LOS was the superior beer.
ReplyDeleteHi Ron!
ReplyDeleteI was reading Porter last night (finished with Guinness) and today at Morrisons I bumped into these!
http://m.thegrocer.co.uk/buying-and-supplying/new-product-development/guinness-to-go-beyond-stout-with-craft-beer-inspired-porters/371229.article
Not sure if they're any good, but worth a try.
J. Karanka,
ReplyDeleteI'd heard about those. Both are too weak. And the 1799 Porter can't possibly be brewed to the original recipe because it would have contained diastatic brwon malt.