Being slow

Did I mention that I found four Truman Stout brewing books from the 1880s that I hadn't processed? It made me feel rather dozy. Why hadn't I done anything with them? 

It was sort of understandable. Because these were the records that I'd photographed the most recently. I had been working my way through their records. My first sweep was every 10 years - 1820, 1830, 1840, etc. Then 1835, 1845, etc. The final sweep - which remains incomplete - was to fill in the remaining years. Starting with the 1880s. It's these years that I'd left untouched.

No biggie. I hadn't really needed those years until now.More annoying was my discovery yesterday of another untouched set. Covering the years 1814 to 1817. Just about the most crucial years in the development of Porter and Stout. How on earth had I ignored these?

It's not as if I'd photographed them recently. The images are dated 3rd October 2009. More than twelve years I've had these things.

These records are different to later Truman's ones. These cover two pages, the second page including notes.

Like these:

That's part of a brewing record for a Stout on 2nd January 1815.

Transcribing these this morning, after a bit of a struggle with the handwriting and water damage, I noticed something very significant. Which has turned something I believed right on its head. See if you can spot it.

We intended this to have been a Runner, so ordered the 6th Sqr ready, but as we are going to make 3 Stouts this week should have been obliged to cleanse them in Rounds, if we had not brew'd Stout to day, which being the Case, want 5 Square after cleansing which was not until the 1st Wort was 50 Dgrs - 2nd Wort 59 - Last Do. 66 Dgrs --

Average of raw worts was not strong enough so are too weaker last wort less than expected - Vat 2 being poor and unlined - inclined to must, will be stacked upon this in No. 1. Cleansed at 83 12 o'clock, Table 64, had it filld up 1.5 hour after cleansing and every 2 [illegible] this tank Friday morning all out by 3 o' clock [illegible].

{No Drawings off}

Did you spot it? This is the phrase: "Vat 2 being poor and unlined". That implies that the vats were generally lined. Which is not what I believed. I thought UK barrels and vats weren't usually lined.

I need to do more digging. After I've finished transcribing these records.

I got that totally wrong. It all makes much more sense now Cristoph Riedel has pointed out it says "inclined to must". That is, likely to get mouldy. Which makes sense it it's an old vat. Panic over.