Let's Brew - 1910 Lees Bitter

One beer which hasn’t dropped much in gravity is the Bitter. Which is just 2º lower in gravity than in 1884.

It’s pretty much a full-strength Pale Ale. Maybe a few degrees weaker than a top-class London version.

The grist is fairly similar to the two Mild Ales: pale malt, maize and sugar. Though in rather different proportions. There’s a lot more sugar, which here is around 14%. I wonder if that’s to keep the colour as pale as possible? That’s certainly something that happened.

The hopping rate is much heavier than in the Mild Ales. No surprise there. It’s 7.75 lbs per quarter (336 lbs) of malt compared to around 3 lbs. 

The hops themselves were the same as in the Mild Ales: Two types of English hops and one Württemberg, all from 1908 and Californian from 1907. 

1910 Lees Bitter
pale malt	9.75 lb	82.42%
flaked maize	0.33 lb	2.79%
No. 2 invert sugar	1.75 lb	14.79%
Fuggles 125 min	1.25 oz
Fuggles 60 min	1.25 oz
Hallertau 30 min	1.25 oz
Cluster dry hops	0.125 oz
OG	1055
FG	1016
ABV	5.16
Apparent attenuation	70.91%
IBU	44
SRM	8
Mash at	153º F
Sparge at	166º F
Boil time	125 minutes
pitching temp	61º F
Yeast	Wyeast 1318 London ale III (Boddingtons)

 

Let's Brew Wednesday - 1910 Lees XXXP

In this set of beers, there is a Stout. Not a particularly strong one, but a Stout all the same.

This one does have quite a complicated grist, with new fewer than four malts. Pale, brown, crystal and black. Which is pretty complicated for a provincial Stout. Especially interesting is the inclusion of brown malt. Something that was mostly limited to London by this point. All the coloured malts leave the beer pretty dark.

The quantity of flaked maize is much smaller than in the other beers. There’s so little, in fact, that you can’t help but wonder what the point was.

Only two types of hops this time. Both of them English from the 1907 harvest. 

1910 Lees XXXP
pale malt	6.50 lb	50.98%
brown malt	1.75 lb	13.73%
crystal malt 60 L	1.75 lb	13.73%
black malt	1.25 lb	9.80%
flaked maize	0.25 lb	1.96%
No. 2 invert sugar	1.250 lb	9.80%
Fuggles 120 min	0.75 oz
Fuggles 60 min	0.50 oz
Fuggles 30 min	0.50 oz
OG	1059
FG	1019
ABV	5.29
Apparent attenuation	67.80%
IBU	21
SRM	47
Mash at	152º F
Sparge at	168º F
Boil time	120 minutes
pitching temp	61º F
Yeast	Wyeast 1318 London ale III (Boddingtons)

 

Let's Brew - 1910 Lees K

The other Mild at Lees, K, was rather less feeble than U. Though it was still 8º down in gravity since 1884.

There’s not a great deal to the grist. Two types of pale malt, a tiny amount of black malt (“for colouring”), flaked maize and sugar. The latter being rather vaguely described. Once again, I’ve plumped for No. 2 invert. Which is my default sugar, when brewers couldn’t be arsed to note down what it actually was.

Four types of hops: two English and one Württemberg from the 1908 season and Californian from 1907.  Again, not the freshest. But there are enough of them to achieve a reasonable level of bitterness. 

1910 Lees K
pale malt	8.25 lb	79.29%
black malt	0.03 lb	0.29%
flaked maize	1.00 lb	9.61%
No. 2 invert sugar	1.125 lb	10.81%
Cluster 120 min	0.50 oz
Fuggles 60 min	0.50 oz
Fuggles 30 min	0.50 oz
OG	1049
FG	1010
ABV	5.16
Apparent attenuation	79.59%
IBU	22
SRM	7
Mash at	153º F
Sparge at	166º F
Boil time	120 minutes
pitching temp	61º F
Yeast	Wyeast 1318 London ale III (Boddingtons)

 

Let's Brew Wednesday - 1909 Lees U

I would really love to know what the “U” stood for. It’s not a name I’ve seen used by anyone else.

The passage of a couple of decades have seen some significant changes to U. The gravity has fallen by 10º to just 1032º. Which is pretty damn watery for a pre-WW I beer. Now I’ve strayed outside London, I’ve noticed some Mild Ales which look very much like ones from after WW II.

The grist is still pretty simple. Just pale malt, flaked maize and sugar. Though, this time, there are three different types of pale malt. As is often the case in older records, it’s very vague about the sugar. Simply describing it as “sugar”. As a conservative guess, I’v gone with No. 2 invert.

Not quite as many types of hop as in 1884, just four. Two English, one Bavarian and one Californian, all from the 1907 harvest. A bit on the old side, then. Which is reflected in the low (calculated) IBU count. 

1909 Lees U
pale malt	5.25 lb	76.36%
flaked maize	1.00 lb	14.55%
No. 2 invert sugar	0.625 lb	9.09%
Fuggles 65 min	0.67 oz
Hallertau 30 min	0.33 oz
OG	1032
FG	1005
ABV	3.57
Apparent attenuation	84.38%
IBU	12.4
SRM	5
Mash at	153º F
Sparge at	170º F
Boil time	65 minutes
pitching temp	60.5º F
Yeast	Wyeast 1318 London ale III (Boddingtons)

 

Let's Brew - 1884 Lees Porter

I’m quite surprised to see that Lees were still brewing a Porter in 1884. It’s in this period that Porter was starting to become rare outside London.

It’s a good bit weaker than versions from the capital, which had gravities in the high 1050ºs. And were over 5% ABV. The hopping is also much lighter, with London Porters normally weighing in at over 50 IBU (calculated).

Like many Porters and Stouts from outside the capital, Lees Porter had a simple grist of just pale and black malt. Along with an unspecified type of sugar. There’s also half a packet of something called “black juice”. No idea what that was. Possibly a type of caramel.

There are also 3 lbs of something called “Glycyrrhlize” which seems to be another word for liquorice. It appears to have been added to the copper. Liquorice is an ingredient which crops up now and again in Porter and Stout after 1880, when it became a legal ingredient.

Two types of hops were employed. “Ba” from 1878 and “foreign” with no vintage specified. Not the best quality hops. But I suppose, in a Porter hop, hop character wasn’t that important. 

1884 Lees Porter
pale malt	7.75 lb	86.54%
black malt	0.875 lb	9.77%
No. 2 invert sugar	0.33 lb	3.69%
Strisselspalt 180 min	0.75 oz
Hallertau 60 min	0.75 oz
Hallertau 30 min	0.75 oz
liquorice	0.10 oz
OG	1040
FG	1008
ABV	4.23
Apparent attenuation	80.00%
IBU	25
SRM	30
Mash at	148º F
Sparge at	170º F
Boil time	180 minutes
pitching temp	60.5º F
Yeast	Wyeast 1318 London ale III (Boddingtons)

 

The Golden Age of UK brewing

1880 to 1914. Let's get that out of the way at the start. No need to build up any artificial tension.

I'm going to present the arguments for it being the Golden Age. Do I really believe it was? Sort of. And I certainly wouldn't be unhappy if a local pub starting selling a beer range from the period. But I'm still reluctant to unequivocally state that it was the best ever period. I'm sure many would disagree.

The points in favour:

1. A wide range of strengths was available.

While average strength was over 5% ABV, there were beers that were significantly weaker. Down as low as 2,5% to 3%, at least in some parts of the country. And, at the other end, there were beers as strong as 11% ABV. And plenty of 8% ABV and more.

2. A wide range of styles was available. 

In an Edwardian London pub, for example, the following draught beers were available:

X Ale Mild
Porter
Pale Ale
Stout
Burton Ale
Strong Burton Ale (in the winter)

Then you had the bottled beers. There was an explosion in the types of bottled beer at the end of the 19th century. New bottling techniques, which allowed the production of non-deposit beer, prompted a massive growth in lighter types of bottled beers. Things like Luncheon Ale, Luncheon Stout, Nourishing Stout and the like.

Most pubs would also stock some of the the few national brands in bottle. Guinness Double Stout or Bass Pale Ale. Classy, relatively expensive beers.

3. Beers were generally of a good technical quality. By the end of the 19th-century, UK breweries were mostly pretty modern and able to produce beer that was bright and free of infection. A century of technical advances left most UK breweries with fairly decent kit. Especialkly the larger ones. 

4.  Adulteration was mostly a thing of the past. The introduction of local health inspectors in the 1870s saw to that. About the only form left was watering beer down. A practice which was still rife in some regions in the 1950s.

5. Large regional variation. Each are of the country retained its own particular take on the styles of the day. With variations in colour, hopping rate, ingredients and degree of attenuation. Travelling around the country would have been great fun.

I can't really think of any negative points. Other than watering. And that was present in pretty much any period you care to pick. 

Which other periods could I have picked? You might have expected me to go for the 1970s, when I started drinking. But I can remember all the bad points. Lots of dreadful keg beer, badly-kept cask beer and a very limited variety of beers on draught.

I'm sure that some will argue that the 2000s or 2010s were a golden age. Well, maybe if you like evil keg.Or IPA. It didn't do it for me.

Be sure to share your thoughts. When was the Golden Age of UK brewing? 

Let's Brew Wednesday - 1884 Lees Bitter

Interestingly, Lees called this beer Bitter in the brew house and not Pale Ale. Which is what it would have been called in most breweries.

It’s a little bit weaker than a London Stock Pale Ale, but not by much. So was this a stock Pale Ale? I’m genuinely not sure. My guess would be no, but I can’t be sure. Despite the gravity and heavy hopping.

The grist is pretty simple. Just one type of pale malt and an undefined type of sugar. The pale malt came from Newark, from the Gilstrap maltings, to be precise. I’ve guessed No. 2 sugar, just to hedge my bets.

As a Pale Ale, you’d expect the hopping to be heavy. And it is: 19 lbs per quarter (336 lbs) of malt. That’s right up there in IPA territory.

There were lots of different hops. Seven in total. Three English – Farnham, Worcester and Kent, all from the 1883 harvest. American, also from 1883, “Chams” 1882 from 1882, and “Bur” from 1882 and 1883. Not sure where those last ones were from.

1884 Lees Bitter
pale malt	12.75 lb	98.08%
No. 2 invert sugar	0.25 lb	1.92%
Fuggles 190 min	2.50 oz
Fuggles 60 min	2.50 oz
Goldings 30 min	2.50 oz
Goldings dry hops	1.50 oz
OG	1057
FG	1018.5
ABV	5.09
Apparent attenuation	67.54%
IBU	92
SRM	5.5
Mash at	148º F
Sparge at	170º F
Boil time	190 minutes
pitching temp	61º F
Yeast	Wyeast 1318 London ale III (Boddingtons)

 

Let's Brew - 1884 Lees K

There was also a stronger Mild at Lees. With an equally enigmatic name as its weaker sibling U.

This one is very similar in strength to a London X Ale. And relatively dark. Though I’m not totally sure about the colour, as I don’t really know how much black malt was used. The quantity is given as two “canfulls” I’ve guessed that to be about half a quarter. I could well be wrong.

Usefully, the type of sugar is given in the brewing record. Two types, actually. Not that it helps me much. As I’ve no idea what they are. “Audax” and “Burnel” (I think). The second sounds like a manufacturer’s name.

There are lots of hops. An awful lot of hops. Nine types in total. Ba 1878, Ba 1882, Chams 1882, Bur 1882}, Russ 1882, Light 1883, Poperinge 1883, Sussex 1883, Kent 1883. Not sure where they’re all from, though there seem to be quite a few foreign hops. 

1884 Lees K
pale malt	12.50 lb	95.57%
black malt	0.25 lb	1.91%
No. 2 invert sugar	0.33 lb	2.52%
Strisselspalt 180 min	1.50 oz
Hallertau 60 min	1.25 oz
Fuggles 30 min	1.25 oz
OG	1057
FG	1017
ABV	5.29
Apparent attenuation	70.18%
IBU	44
SRM	15
Mash at	149º F
Sparge at	170º F
Boil time	180 minutes
pitching temp	61º F
Yeast	Wyeast 1318 London ale III (Boddingtons)

 

Let's Brew Wednesday - 1884 Lees U

The earliest Lees brewing is, er, rather idiosyncratic. Where sometimes really important is simply left out. Which makes interpreting them and creating recipes rather challenging.

It’s interesting to stray outside London and see the strength of beers in the provinces. U, Lees base-level Mild, is a good bit lower in gravity than an equivalent London beer. Where an X Ale was in the high 1050ºs

The recipe is simple enough. Just pale malt with a touch of black malt and sugar. And no adjuncts. Which is interesting. While sugar seems to have become pretty universal after the 1880 Free Mash Tun Act, it seems to have taken a while for brewers to pick up adjuncts.

There were lots of hops. Six types in all. Of varying vintages. Two types of "Ba" (Bavarian?) from the 1878 season, German from 1882, Russian from 1882, Dutch from 1883 and Poperinge from 1883. 

1884 Lees U
pale malt	9.25 lb	95.48%
black malt	0.1875 lb	1.94%
No. 2 invert sugar	0.25 lb	2.58%
Strisselspalt 150 min	0.75 oz
Hallertau 60 min	0.75 oz
Hallertau 30 min	0.75 oz
OG	1042
FG	1009
ABV	4.37
Apparent attenuation	78.57%
IBU	25
SRM	12
Mash at	149º F
Sparge at	170º F
Boil time	150 minutes
pitching temp	61.5º F
Yeast	Wyeast 1318 London ale III (Boddingtons)

 

Let's Brew - 1909 Maclay PI 48/-

Maclay didn’t content themselves with brewing one watery Pale Ale. They also had a slightly less watery one, in the form of 48/-. 

It wasn’t a beer that was brewed very often. Probably because it wasn’t very much different from 42/- and 54/-. In fact, a lower degree of attenuation leaves the alcohol content exactly the same as in 42/-.

No fewer than five types of pale malt, two made from Oregon barley, and one each from Tunisia, Romania and Scotland. The Scottish accounting for only half a quarter out of 13.5 quarters.

The grist was essentially the same as all the other Pale Ales. Consisting of pale and amber malts, grits and sugar.

As with all the other Maclay beers, there were lots of different types of hops. Hallertau from the 1905, 1906 and 1907 harvests; Californian from 1907, Farnham from 1908 and Worcester from 1905.

1909 Maclay PI 48/-
pale malt	5.25 lb	66.14%
amber malt	0.1875 lb	2.36%
grits	1.50 lb	18.90%
No. 2 invert sugar	1.00 lb	12.60%
Cluster 120 min	0.50 oz
Hallertau 60 min	0.50 oz
Fuggles 30 min	1.00 oz
Goldings dry hops	0.25 oz
OG	1038
FG	1012
ABV	3.44
Apparent attenuation	68.42%
IBU	28
SRM	6
Mash at	146º F
after underlet	154º F
Sparge at	170º F
Boil time	120 minutes
pitching temp	61º F
Yeast	WLP028 Edinburgh Ale

 

Let's Brew Wednesday - 1909 Maclay Strong Ale

Top of the tree at Maclay was their Strong Ale. A beer which, if it were sold in England, would probably have been called Scotch Ale.

In a glimpse of what would happen after WW I, this was parti-gyled with a Pale Ale. 54/- PI, to be precise. Between the wars, everything was parti-gyled together at Maclay. 6d, 7d and 8d Pale Ale and Strong Ale were brewed together in every possible combination.

This was a slightly unusual parti-gyle, in that the hopping is different for the two beers. Implying that the Strong Ale was all first wort. Which, given this beer’s strength, shouldn’t really be a surprise. I wonder if the 54/- PI got any first wort?

Unsurprisingly, the recipe is the same as for the Pale Ales. Pale and amber malt, along with grits and sugar.

This wouldn’t be Maclay if there weren’t loads of hops. Hallertau from the 1907 and 1908 harvests, Californian from 1907 and two English types, both from 1908. 

1909 Maclay Strong Ale
pale malt	13.00 lb	64.20%
amber malt	0.50 lb	2.47%
grits	4.25 lb	20.99%
No. 2 invert sugar	2.50 lb	12.35%
Cluster 120 min	2.00 oz
Hallertau 60 min	2.00 oz
Goldings 30 min	4.00 oz
Goldings dry hops	1.50 oz
OG	1096
FG	1031
ABV	8.60
Apparent attenuation	67.71%
IBU	79
SRM	12
Mash at	146º F
after underlet	154º F
Sparge at	170º F
Boil time	90 minutes
pitching temp	60º F
Yeast	WLP028 Edinburgh Ale

 

 

Let's Brew - 1909 Maclay OMS 63/-

As one of the first Oat Stouts, this is an incredibly important beer. One which inspired a whole generation of beers. This should be interesting.

At just 1062º, it’s not exactly the mightiest of Stouts. It just about scrapes in strong enough for a Single Stout. A pretty poor degree of attenuation – a recurring theme in Scottish Stouts – leaves it only a shade over 5% ABV. Or about the same as a London Porter.

As this was parti-gyled with the DBS which we’ve just seen, I have little to say about the recipe. Other than that, at 20%, the oat content is pretty high. At most brewers, who, admittedly, used flaked rather than malted oats, it was under 5%. Sometimes, not much more than 1%. Purely token amounts. Whereas the quantity of oats in play here would have definitely impacted the character of the finished beer.

The hops are the same as all the other beers. Hallertau from the 1905, Hallertau and 1907 vintages; Californian from 1907, Farnham from 1908 and Worcester from 1905. 

1909 Maclay OMS 63/-
pale malt	7.50 lb	53.10%
black malt	1.50 lb	10.62%
amber malt	0.50 lb	3.54%
malted oats	3.00 lb	21.24%
No. 2 invert sugar	1.25 lb	8.85%
caramel	0.38 lb	2.65%
linseed	0.50 oz
liquorice	0.25 oz
Cluster 120 min	1.00 oz
Hallertau 60 min	1.00 oz
Goldings 30 min	2.00 oz
OG	1062
FG	1024
ABV	5.03
Apparent attenuation	61.29%
IBU	52
SRM	60
Mash at	144º F
after underlet	154º F
Sparge at	170º F
Boil time	120 minutes
pitching temp	60.75º F
Yeast	WLP028 Edinburgh Ale

 

Let's Brew Wednesday - 1909 Maclay DBS 54/-

Now, Scottish Stouts could be pretty weird. Very weird, in fact. I’m looking at you William Younger, with your barely fermented spent hop Stouts.

This Stout is unusual for a couple of reasons. For a start, it’s incredibly weak from something claiming to be a Double Stout. Which I would expect to be around 1070º. The gravity here of just 1044º is pretty pathetic. That’s weak, even for a Porter. And, if it really wholesaled for 54/- a hogshead, that implies a gravity of at least 1050º.

The second area of oddness is in the grist. Which has 20% malted oats. For a beer that isn’t even billing itself as an Oat Stout. There’s a simple explanation for that: it was parti-gyled with their Oat Malt Stout.

In addition to pale and oat malt, there’s also black and amber malt. Rather a lot of black malt. Which is why the colour is so dark.

Lots of hops again. That seems to have been the Maclay way. Hallertau from the 1905, Hallertau and 1907 harvests; Californian from 1907, Farnham from 1908 and Worcester from 1905. 

 

1909 Maclay DBS 54/-
pale malt	5.25 lb	53.16%
black malt	1.00 lb	10.13%
amber malt	0.375 lb	3.80%
malted oats	2.00 lb	20.25%
No. 2 invert sugar	1.00 lb	10.13%
caramel	0.25 lb	2.53%
linseed	0.66 oz
liquorice	0.33 oz
Cluster 120 min	0.75 oz
Hallertau 60 min	0.75 oz
Goldings 30 min	1.50 oz
OG	1044
FG	1013
ABV	4.10
Apparent attenuation	70.45%
IBU	55
SRM	47
Mash at	144º F
after underlet	154º F
Sparge at	170º F
Boil time	120 minutes
pitching temp	60.75º F
Yeast	WLP028 Edinburgh Ale

London Strong Burton Ale hops 1880 - 1899

Logically, now we come to the hops. All of which are reasonably fresh.

A majority of the beers have multiple types of hops, mostly English. Sadly, the region of origin is only mentioned in the Barclay Perkins records. Where they were all from Kent. At least the English ones. There were also some Bavarian hops.

American hops – which were used in huge quantities in the UK in the late 19th century – only appear in the Whitbread examples. That so many fresh, English hops were used is a sure sign that these were expensive beers.

London Strong Burton Ale hops 1880 - 1899
Year	Brewer	Beer	hop 1	hop 2	hop 3
1881	Whitbread	KKK	American 1881	English 1880	English 1881
1891	Whitbread	KKK	English 1890	English 1891	American 1890
1886	Barclay Perkins	KKK	Bavarian 1886	EK 1886	MK 1886
1887	Truman (Burton)	S3	English 1886
1897	Truman (Burton)	CS 3	English 1896	English 1896
Sources:
Whitbread brewing records held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document numbers LMA/4453/D/01/047 and LMA/4453/D/01/057.
Barclay Perkins brewing record held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document number ACC/2305/1/583.
Truman brewing records held at the London Metropolitan Archives, document numbers B/THB/BUR/11 and B/THB/C/327.