Beer in Belgium in WW II (part three)

The situation was continuing to deteriorate rapidly. Seing what happened even in the early war years, I'm surprised the brewing industry survived at all

Beer strengths were being cut far more than in Holland. Where Lagerbier gravity was reduced in January 1941 to 7.8º Balling and Pils to 10.3º Balling. Compare that to the pitiful gravities below.

"VI. SITUATION IN BELGIUM.
Mr Stikker points out that the raw material position of the Belgian breweries is very bad. With effect from 1 January this year the gravity has been reduced again; only 6 days were given for its preparation. There are currently 3 beer types:

inn beer 1st category of 2° or +-5% Blg
" 2nd " “ 1.4° ” +-3.5% Blg
table beer " 0.8° " " +-2% "

It is to be expected that the Belgian breweries will be completely dry by April next.

Beer is only available for bread coupons in Belgium.

The free association of all Belgian breweries has been abolished and its place has been replaced by an official corporation within the framework of the Reichsnahrstand with compulsory membership and regulatory authority. At the head of this is Mr. Breedam. This body has recently introduced the above-mentioned gravity reduction. In addition, no more beer may be brewed of a higher quality than has been determined for sale."
Minutes of the management of the CBK on 21st January 1941, held at the Amsterdam City Archives, document number 31121-1, page 264. 

The first gravity figures - 2º, 1.4º and 0.8º are Belgian degrees. The strengths would have been approximately 2% ABV, 1.4$ ABV and 0.8% ABV, Basically, not worth drinking. Even worse, some beer could only be obtained with bread coupons which the public was reluctant to use in this way. 

"In Belgium, the system of dispensing beer on bread coupons would have been abolished, but this only applies to beer with a 2% original wort content. The breweries have large stocks of beer, but cannot sell it, as the public will not give up bread coupons."
Minutes of the management of the CBK on 5th March 1941, held at the Amsterdam City Archives, document number 31121-1, page 243.

The combination of higher taxes, bread coupons and low gravities was starting to seriosly damage the whole industry.

"The speaker pointed out that here in the Netherlands one should not be faced with the situation as in Belgium; there the breweries had little stock, while the coupon system makes it impossible to sell beer, so that the breweries are unable to afford the large reclaim due to the sharp increase in beer excise duty. The consequence of this is that the brewing industry has been damaged in a very serious way in Belgium, while the gravity there is particularly low. Some things resonated with Mr. Biel."
Minutes of the management of the CBK on 26th March 1941, held at the Amsterdam City Archives, document number 31121-1, page 229.

Six months later and gravities were cut again with the elimination of the strongest category of beer.

"B. Belgium.
The maximum gravity is currently still there, but the levels will be reduced to 3.5% and 2% as of July 15th. Despite the presence of the occupying troops, turnover amounts to only 60% of that in 1940. In. Some Belgian circles are of the opinion that the reduction in turnover is a result of the series of reductions in gravity which have taken place which render the beer undrinkable and turn the public away from the beer."
Minutes of the management of the CBK on 4th July 1941, held at the Amsterdam City Archives, document number 31121-1, page 110.

Consumption of beer had collapsed and was continuing to fall. In contrast to Holland, where production had increased, albeit at lower gravities than before the war.

One of the committee disagreed that the low gravities were responsible for the marked decline in beer consumption.

"Mr. van Marwijk Kooy believes; that the reduced beer consumption in Belgium is not the result of the poorer beer quality, but of a lack of money on the part of the Belgian population, which has to spend much more money on food due to its very poor food position. A reduction in volume would be at the expense of the public, as the armed forces will continue to claim their normal quantum. For this reason, the Speaker considers a reduction in gravity, which is technically possible, to be preferable to a reduction in volume. In these times the public does not attach so much importance to quality; The main thing is that a product is still available."
Minutes of the management of the CBK on 4th July 1941, held at the Amsterdam City Archives, document number 31121-1, page 111. 

My guess is that it was a combination of ridiculously weak beer and lack of money. Why waste cash on beer that was hardly worth drinking?

Beer in Belgium in WW II (part two)

Back with the disaster that was Belgian brewing during WW II.

Over the two world wars, the Belgian brewing industry was probably more damaged them any other in the world. Including Germany. In WW I, most breweries were either blown to pieces by artillery or looted of their copper by the Germans. In WW II, they just ran out of war materials. It's a wonder that brewing survived at all.

Just as in the UK, bottles and casks were in short supply. Brewers couldn't afford to lose packages. With losses concentrated in the south of Holland, a finger was pointed at their closest neighbour.

"XII. LOSS OF CASKS AND BOTTLES
Mr. van Reede points out that the loss of bottles is great in the south of the country, while it is practically non-existent in the north.

Mr Stikker does not consider it impossible that bottles will disappear to Belgium.

Mr. Chambille says that it is not only a question of losing bottles, but also of barrels. It is therefore advisable to instruct the representatives of the breweries not to deliver casks that can be transported to Belgium and France."
Minutes of the management of the CBK on 14th November 1940, held at the Amsterdam City Archives, document number 31121-1, page 300.

Meanwhile, a lack of raw materials was really hitting home in Belgium:

"Mr Stikker agrees. In Belgium, too, beer gravity has been further reduced, with effect from 1 January to 7.5 and 2.5%. Nevertheless, Belgian breweries will probably run dry in about May. The result of this will probably be a redistribution of raw materials, at the instigation of Mr. Breedam, leader of the breweries on the agricultural front, who seems to feel more in favour of redistribution of raw materials than beer. At the moment a lot of German beer is sold in Belgium. With regard to possible further measures in the Netherlands, Speaker considers that an attempt should first be made to induce the authorities in Berlin to import malt into the Netherlands, for which purpose Speaker may possibly go to Berlin."
Minutes of the management of the CBK on 10th December 1940, held at the Amsterdam City Archives, document number 31121-1, page 281. 

That's a reduction from around 3% ABV - just about intoxicating for the determined drinker - to 1% ABV. A beer you could safely give to a toddler.

In comparison, Holland was doing fairly well. Pilsner had fallen in strength, but was still 3.5% ABV. A decent session strength.

Beer in Belgium in WW II

The minutes of the CBK (Dutch brewers' organisation) aren't just packed with useful stuff aboput Holland. There's plenty about their southern neighbour, Belgium.

It's fascinating to see how different the situation was in the two countries. Unlike Holland, Belgium didn't seem to grow much malting barley. Even in early 1940, before Belgium was officially participating in the war, the country's brewers were trying to import barley. Itt looks like their supplies were drying up. Where had they imported their barley from previously? It it was anything like the UK, the USA, Chile and the Middle East would have been the biggest suppliers.

"III. MALTING FOR EXPORT.
Mr Stikker announces that at the N.A.C. has been urged to have any malting barley to be exported be malted in the Netherlands.

De Heer Swinkels believes that the N.A.C. has already exported 6,000 tons of malting barley to Belgium.Minutes of the management of the CBK on 16th January 1940, held at the Amsterdam City Archives, document number 31121-1, page 379.

Rather than just buy it outright, the Belgians were offering to exchange feed barley for malting barley:

"The N.A.C. announced that it has to export 7,000 tons of Zeeland malting barley to Belgium in exchange for feed barley in the ratio of 100 : 155. In Belgium, the Assbra (Association of large Belgian breweries) offers this barley at frs.185- (± f.11 .50) to breweries or malthouses. In addition, Belgium is also considering importing Moroccan barley at frs. 150.- "
Minutes of the management of the CBK on 13th February 1940, held at the Amsterdamse Stadsarchief, document number 31121-1, page 367.

We're now into the summer of 1940, after the Germans had occupied both Belgium and Holland.

"V. BEER GRAVITY AND BREWING INDUSTRY IN BELGIUM.
Mr Stikker announces that the beer gravity in Belgium since 20th July may not exceed 10%; the use of rice is prohibited, only malt and sugar are allowed; Furthermore, it is forbidden to malt barley. Belgian breweries would receive 55,000 tons of barley for the next season, which is very little in relation to their needs.

The two brewery associations existing in Belgium, namely the Assbra and the Federation, have united to form an association which has regulatory authority for the brewing company.
Minutes of the management of the CBK on 30th July 1940, held at the Amsterdam City Archives, document number 31121-1, pages 339 - 340.

Immediately beer gravity was cut and restrictions imposed on the use of certain materials. Unlike in Holland, there was immediately a shortfall in barley supplies. In Holland not much changed in the first six months of the occupation as malt and barley stocks were sufficient.

Things only got worse.

"IV. SITUATION IN BELGIUM.
Mr Stikker says that it has recently been forbidden in Belgium to give a Belgian beer names that indicate a foreign origin, such as "Pilsen", "Baviere", "Munich", "Dortmund".

Regulations have also been given with regard to gravities. Three qualities of beer are allowed with a gravity of +- 10%, +- 6.25% and +- 5.75%.

The recently issued ban on processing the raw material stocks of the breweries has now been lifted again.

Beer consumption has recently fallen by about 30 to 40%."
Minutes of the management of the CBK on 14th November 1940, held at the Amsterdam City Archives, document number 31121-1, page 297. 

The Belgians weren't even allowed to keep their beer names. And the strengths of some types of beer were already getting frighteningly weak. Those gravities equate to about 4%, 2.5% and 2.3% ABV. What a contrast to Holland, where beer production increased in the first couple of years of the war.

All this was just a taste of the bad times to come.

Style Nazis

Actual real Nazis. Not just people I disagree with. Ones with swastika armbands and NSDAP membership cards.

Because in the countries occupied by the Nazis, they really did start interfering with style names. They weren't happy with German-derived names being used for Dutch beer. In particular, Dortmunder.

XVII. USE OF THE NAME "DORTMUNDER".
Mr Stikker says that the Ausfuhrgemeinschaft requires the Phoenix brewery to stop using the name "Dortmunder". The Phoenix brewery has asked the C.B.K. to take up this matter with the Ausfuhrgemeinschaft.

The C.B.K. has, however, advised the Phoenix to send to the Ausfuhrgemeinschaft a copy of the judgment concerning the procedure, which was won in 1928 on this matter. The C.B.K. thought it desirable not to come to the fore in this matter at this time.

The board agrees with this state of affairs.
Minutes of the management of the CBK on 10th December 1940, held at the Amsterdam City Archives, document number 31121-1, pages 287-288.

Basically, the CBK (the Dutch brewers' organisation) wanted to keep its head down. Probably not a bad idea given the nutcases they had to deal with.

Intermediate beer was something between Lagerbier and heavy beer strength. At this point, 8.8º to 9.1º Plato.

XXIII. DISPENSATION CONCERNING THE CASE DORTUUNDER,
Mr. Ivens says that four breweries have applied for the above-mentioned dispensation for beer in the intermediate category. In view of the possibility of action against German beer names, it is desirable to reserve the name Dortmunder for beer of a higher quality.

Mr. Smits van Waesberghe sees the merits of this, but nevertheless points to the commercial objections that arise from this for the breweries concerned.

After some discussion, the board decides that the dispensation for the name Dortmunder for intermediate beer will only be granted to those breweries that until now regularly sold such beer under that name, which dispensation will expire on July 1, 1941.
Minutes of the management of the CBK on 21st January 1941, held at the Amsterdamse Stadsarchief, document number 31121-1, page 271. 

OK to call your beer Dortmunder, then, but only for a few more months. That's very generous of the occupiers.

In Belgium, it went even further, banning even more style names.

"Mr Stikker says that it has recently been forbidden in Belgium to give a Belgian beer names that indicate a foreign origin, such as "Pilsen", "Baviere", "Munich", "Dortmund"."
Minutes of the management of the CBK on 14th November 1940, held at the Amsterdamse Stadsarchief, document number 31121-1, page 297.

Didn't they have more important things to worry about than beer names? Like that war they were busy losing.

Belgian brewing 1929 - 1935

I'm sticking with my favourite Polish trade magazine, Which is certainly delivering in terms of numbers. Lovely, tempting numbers. Drawing me away from what I should really be doing, the seductive little devils.

As you should have guessed from the title, these statistics are for Belgian brewing. Let's see what they tell us.

Belgium had a shitload of breweries between the wars. 1,631 might sound impressive, but that's way down on before WW I. Back then there were more than 3,300. It was the war that did for many of them. The Germans knicked most copper vessels to make munitions and many small breweries simply never reopened. I guess many didn't have the capital to replace the equipment.

The effect of the Wall Street Crash and the recession which followed it is clear to read in the production figures. With a steep decline after 1931. A drop in sales seems to have reversed the trend in output per brewery increasing. An average of around 10,000 hl is very low. If you look in the second table, you'll see that in the UK the average was almost treble that.

The trends in the UK were very similar to in Belgium - really bad sales in 1932 and 1933, with a slight improvement in 1934. You can see that a high percentage of the beer imported into Belgium came from the UK.

Belgian brewing 1929 - 1935
year	number of breweries	production in 1000 hl.	imports 1000 hl.	exports 1000 hl.	consumption in 1000 hl.	output per brewery hl
1929	1,631	15,377	196	19	15,553	9,536
1930	1,556	16,662	228	10	16,880	10,848
1931	1,494	18,377	212	10	18,579	12,436
1932	1,484	15,558	156	8	15,707	10,584
1933	1,457	14,667	113	6	14,774	10,140
1934	1,372	14,717	95	5	14,806	10,792
1935			92	7
Source:
Przegląd Piwowarsko-Słodowniczy: organ Związku Piwowarów w Polsce 1936 wrzesień R.2 Nr3, page 67.

UK brewing 1930 - 1935
year	number of breweries	production hl.	output per brewery hl	exports to Belgium hl
1930	1,418	41,015,395	28,925	129,841
1931		39,113,784		134,414
1932	1,286	34,025,411	26,458	106,884
1933		29,376,748		85,428
1934	1,197	33,029,558	27,594	60,270
1935	1,144	34,146,520	29,848	58,203
Sources:
Brewers' Almanack 1955 p.68
Brewers' Almanack 1955, p. 50
BBPA Statistical Handbook 2003, p. 92
Brewers' Almanack 1955, page 57.

The Beer Trade of Belgium

More fun from Holmes' Brewing Trade Gazette about Belgian brewing in the late 19th century.

First a little something about Belgian beer imports. I was surprised to see what the source of the majority of those imports was.

"The Beer Trade of Belgium
From statistics recently published concerning the commerce of Belgium it appears that the importation of beer into that country continues notably to increase. During the first half of the present year, that is to say, from January 1 to June 30, the total amount of beer imported from Germany was 35,983 hect., as against 29,651 hect. in the corresponding period of 1880, and 24,162 hect. in the corresponding period of 1879. The importation in 1880 for the whole year was 71,890 hect.; in 1879, 47,457 hect.; and in 1878, 52,082 hect. The largest quantity of beer imported into Belgium is drawn from Prussia, the imports of such beer having latterly largely increased. Whilst the importation of English beer remains almost stationary, beers of German origin continue to increase in popularity, and their consumption is very large. At the same time it must be mentioned, that in spite of this constant augmentation the importation of foreign beers into Belgium compared with the general consumption of the country, is insignificant, and does not represent anything like a formidable total."
Holmes' Brewing Trade Gazette - Tuesday 01 November 1881, page 7.

Surprising to see Prussia listed for two reasons. First, because it wasn't a big beer exporter. But more importantly, because Prussia no longer existed as a country.What they probably mean is that the imports came from the Brausteuergebied - basically the North of Germany. I wonder when this trade dried up? Before WW I or as a result of it?

Belgian brewing in 1880
Output (hl)	9,239,000
imports (hl)	71,890
% imports	0.78%
Sources:
Holmes' Brewing Trade Gazette - Tuesday 01 November 1881, page 7.
European Statistics 1750-1970 by B. R. Mitchell, 1978, page 283.

I assume that these imports were principally, if not exclusevely, bottom-fermenting beer. While imports of UK beer were definitely 100% top fermenting. The UK's export trade with Belgium was more extensive in the 20th century, espewcially after WW II, peaking at 215,874 barrels in 1965.* Which amounted to over 50% of all UK beer exports.

Next we move on to hops and barley.

"With regard to the importation of hops, statistics show that during the present year a decreased quantity of hops has been imported into Belgium In the first half of 1881, 349,673 kilogs. of hops were imported into that country, while in the corresponding period of 1880 the total was 525,785 kilogs., and in the same period of 1879, 503,675 kilogs. According to official statistics Prussia sends by far the largest quantity of hops into that country although the total this year is, so far, much less than that in the two previous years. The imports of hops from England into Belgium also show a notable falling off this year as compared with the first half of last year. With reference to the exportation of hops from Belgium the figures do not denote any remarkable fluctuations. This exportation in the first half of 1881 amounted to 588,485 kilogs., as against 675,04O in the same period of 1880, and 633,171 kilogs. in the same period of 1879. France receives the largest quantity of hops from Belgium and a considerable quantity are also sent to this country. The imports of barley into Belgium in the first half of this year amounted to 50,317,263 kilogs., as compared with 60,977,203 in the same period of 1880, and 73,270,864 in the same period of 1879, It will thus be noted that for the first half of this year these figures show a diminution. The exports of barley from Belgium have also decreased in the half-year ending June last, the total being 8,437,158 kilogs., as against 18,096,090 in the corresponding period of 1880."
Holmes' Brewing Trade Gazette - Tuesday 01 November 1881, page 7

Belgian hops were popular in the UK. Not because anyone thought they were any good, but because they were dirt cheap. Overall, Belgium was a small next exporter of hops, by about 100,000 kg.

On the other hand, Belgium was a big net importer of barley, bringing 41 million kg more than it sent out.



* “1971 Brewers' Almanack”, pages 53-54.

Brewing in Belgium

The last set of bosts about 19th-century Belgian brewing went down well. So here's another, rather smaller, article.

Though this one isn't quite as snide, it does point out the ridiculous nature of the Belgian tax system

"Brewing in Belgium.
Brewing is one of the most important branches of Belgian industry, and the average annual quantity of beer manufactured in the country amounts to about 105,668,000 gallons. Notwithstanding such a relatively large production, Belgium exports a very small quantity of beer. The introduction into France of the light and cheap beer produced in Belgium is prevented by the French customs tariff laws, which do not establish any distinction for any particular quality of beer imported, but prescribe a fixed rate of duty of four cents. per gallon. Besides this, the Belgian excise duties hinder the manufacture of strong and well-fermented beer. The Revenue tax being levied according to the size of the mashing tubs employed, the brewers are interested in getting the most they can from the mash, and they neglect the quality in order to obtain the quantity; yet, considering the advantages placed at its disposal, it is believed that Belgium would be able to compete with any other nation, if there was a thorough fiscal reform. From England beer is exported to the amount of two millions sterling. Brewing is an industry which in Belgium contributes a good deal to the advancement of the national fortune and to the physical development of the working community. Throughout the country there are about 2,700 breweries, which produce annually 214,821,687 gallons of beer. "
Holmes' Brewing Trade Gazette - Friday 01 April 1881, page 9.

This is something modern drinkers might be surprised by: "Belgian excise duties hinder the manufacture of strong and well-fermented beer". Nowadays Belgium is associated with strong beers, but that wan't the case in the past. Almost all Belgian beer was pretty weak in the 19th century.

The numbers for Belgian beer production don't seem to match up. First it lists 105,668,000 gallons, then later 214,821,687. The later number, which is the ewquivalent of 5,967,269 barrels looks like the correct figure. As a very similar number is confirmed by another source.

To put that Belgin beer production figure into context, here are the numbers for some neighbouring countries:

Beer production in 1880 (barrels)
UK	30,742,649
Belgium	5,635,790
France	5,048,970
Germany	23,638,720
Sources:
Brewers' Almanack 1928, page 109.
European Statistics 1750-1970 by B. R. Mitchell, 1978, page 283.

It's amazing that Belgium, a tiny country, produced more beer than France. And most of that French beer was produced jsut south of the Belgian border.

Belgian beers 1839 - 1898

This is a sort of companion post to my recent series about Belgian beers in the 19th century.

Turns out I have rather more Lambic analyses than I thought. Though, sadly, only three give the level of acidity. Unsurprisingly, it's pretty damn high in all three examples.

What is a shock is the strength of some of the examples of Lambic. Only two of the seven are below 6% ABV. Even all the Faro is above 5% ABV. The strongest Lambics are almost 10% ABV - way, way stronger than any modern version.

Knowing how it was produced, the extremely high level attenuation is to be expected. All the bugs would have eaten through just about anything fermentable. The attenuation is particularly impressive if you know that before 1900 most continental beers were below 70% apparent attenuation.

Gerstenbier, in case you're wondering, is the same as Bière d'Orge. It's just the Dutch-language version of the name.

Belgian beers 1839 - 1898
Year	Brewer	Beer	OG	FG	ABV	App. Atten-uation	Acidity (%)	pH
1839	Unknown	Lambic	1085.1	1011.5	9.72	86.49%
1850	Unknown, Brussels	Lambik	1058.4	1013.2	5.89	76.39%
1850	Unknown, Brussels	Faro	1051.2	1011.2	5.20	77.17%
1850	Unknown, Louvain	Petermann	1069.6	1015.6	7.06	76.47%
1870	Unknown	Faro	1055.1	1013.5	5.41	75.50%
1871	Unknown	Lambic	1070.7	1008.7	5.60	86.95%	1.06	3.37
1872	Unknown	Lambic	1059.7	1003.3	7.42	94.47%
1889	Unknown	Lambic	1088.2	1011.1	9.71	86.46%	1.11	3.36
1889	Unknown	Faro	1055.9	1012.6	5.41	76.47%	0.9	3.4
1890	Unknown	Lambic	1061.4	1003.3	7.43	94.63%
1890	Unknown	Faro	1055.4	1013	5.41	76.54%
1898	Unknown	Lambic	1059.4	1003	7.43	94.95%
1898	Unknown	Faro	1054.5	1012.9	5.41	76.32%
1898	Unknown	Gerstenbier	1048	1002.5	5.96	94.79%
Sources:
"Bericht über die Entwickelung der chemischen Industrie während des letzten Jahrzehends" by August Wilhelm von Hofmann, 1877, page 382
Handwörterbuch der reinen und angewandten Chemie by Justus Liebig, Johann Christian Poggendorff, Friedrich Wöhler, 1858, page 1038
"Bericht über die Entwickelung der chemischen Industrie während des letzten Jahrzehends" by August Wilhelm von Hofmann, 1877, page 382
American Handy Book of the Brewing, Malting, and Auxiliary Trades by Robert Wahl and Max Henius, Chicago, pages 823-830
"Handbuch der chemischen technologie" by Otto Dammer, Rudolf Kaiser, 1896, pages 696-697
Brockhaus' konversations-lexikon, Band 2 by F.A. Brockhaus, 1898 http://books.google.de/books?id=oZ5PAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA999&dq=bierdruckapparat+konversationslexikon#PPA1000,M1

A British brewer describes Belgian beers in the 1880s (part five)

The final part today. With some more desriptions of Belgian brewing methods. His contempt for which the aouthor makes no attempt to conceal. While also bigging up British beer. I suppose he couldn't help himself.

We start with a piece of of brewing equipment I've never come across before: Rechauffeur. Which literally means "reheater" in Frenvh.

"The first runnings are conducted into what is termed a Rechauffeur, a vessel heated with steam, so that the wort can be gradually raised to a temperature of about 158° Fahr. When this is attained, and when all the worts have been gathered in this vessel, the temperature is kept constant for about an hour, when the wort is pumped into the copper and boiled for about three hours.

This extraordinary procedure is the rule and not the exception in Belgian breweries and, upon consideration it will not cause suprise that this method of manufacture should fail to produce an article equal in quality to those to which we have, fortunately, become accustomed."
Holmes' Brewing Trade Gazette - Wednesday 01 July 1885, page 14.

I guess that's sort of raising the worts to mashout temperature. Though the author is clearly unimpressed.

Some more details of the brewing methods.

"When two mash-tuns are erected it frequently happens that brewers openly evade the law by refusing to convert their first runnings into a return wort, by causing it to pass over the grist in the second tun. By so doing they can effect a very considerable saving in duty. Curiously enough, they seem to make no secret of the evasion. Whether this be attributable to the fact that the Excise officers are susceptible of manipulation, I am not prepared to say; but several brewers with whom I conversed made no secret about the matter, but freely admitted that a large proportion of their profits were made in this manner."
Holmes' Brewing Trade Gazette - Wednesday 01 July 1885, page 14.

If you remember my last post, The first wort from mash tun 1 had to be used for mashing the grains in mash tun 2. That's what "return wort" means. A wort - in the UK usually the last runnings with an OG of 1005º or so - used as mash water.

Were Belgian excise officers easily corrupted? Who knows. It does seem odd that the law was so blatantly broken. Not sure why this should have made brewers' operations more profitable.

The next bit is rather vague:

"As a rule the cleansing, not the skimming system is pursued; and the remainder of the process greatly resembles our own. The manufacture is altogether so unique, and so interesting from certain points of view, that it would be a mistake for any visitor to the Antwerp Exhibition to neglect paying inspection to some of these Belgian breweries. It is to be hoped that the above explanations may be of service to them, in forming some conception of the rationale of a very involved and clumsy process."
Holmes' Brewing Trade Gazette - Wednesday 01 July 1885, page 14.

Cleansing was a process for removing yeast from beer. The best known system being Burton unions. But there were others, such as the dropping system or pontoes.

Overall, this article has convinced me more that tax is one of the biggest driving factors in the development of beer styles.

A British brewer describes Belgian beers in the 1880s (part four)

We now get onto the precise reason why Belgian beer was so bad. It waws all to do with their excise laws.

I did already know a little about this. Partly because the system in The Netherlands was the same, I think dating from when Belgium and Holland were a single country. It was the main reason why Lager-brewing didn't take off until quite late.

A change in the Dutch tax system in 1867 helped Lager-brewing more financially viable. Until then tax was charged on every time the mash tun was filled. For top-fermenting beers which were brewed by the infusion method, the mash tun was only filled once. With a decocted Lager, it was filled two or three times, thereby multiplying the amount of tax due. After 1867 brewers also had the option to pay tax based on the quantity of malt used. By opting for this new method of taxation, it was possible to brew bottom-fermenting beer much more cheaply.

It seems that such a choice wasn't an option in Belgium. Which could explain why so little bottom-fermenting beer was brewed there.

"The principal fault is to be traced to the ridiculous complexity of the fiscal laws, which would seem to have been devised with a view to absolutely prevent the brewer from producing a glass of wholesome ale; and the wonder is that it should have been found at all possible to cultivate a taste for the beer among the community. It is admitted on all hands that the Excise laws are attended with results disastrous to the production of really good ale, and it is further conceded that they do not constitute such a source of profit to the revenue as they might be made to do; but with an amount of red-tapeism, not altogether unknown or unrecognized in this country, they have remained practically unaltered for many years, and I was informed that there is but a slight chance of their speedily receiving any material amendment."
Holmes' Brewing Trade Gazette - Wednesday 01 July 1885, page 14.

The author was clearly unimpressed. He explains exactly why the tax system encouraged the brewing of crap beer:

"The radical evil of the whole system is traceable to the fact that the brewer pays duty upon the contents of his mash-tun, not upon the amount of beer he may choose to produce. If he were to produce ten or one hundred barrels of wort from one brewing, he would have to pay just the same amount in duty, provided he use the same mash-tun to produce it. This being the case, it is obviously to his interest to extract as much as possible from the malt, so as to produce the maximum amount of beer from one charge of the tun. This he proceeds to do in the following remarkble manner:— The mash-tun is filled quite to the brim with grist, and in this condition is examined by the Excise officers. Liquor at a temperature of about 104° Fahr., is next introduced from below, and the rakes are started and are kept revolving during the first three hours. The temperature of the liquor is gradually raised to boiling, and once that temperature has been reached it is continued during the remainder of the mashing, which occupies the day. Upon the average no less than twenty sparges are made at the temperature indicated, so that it will readily be conceded that the brewer extracts as much as possible from his goods. It will generally be found that Belgian brew-houses are provided with two mash-tuns, both of which are filled with dry grist at the same time. When this is the case, the first runnings from the first tun are used to wet the grist in the second tun. This arrangement is demanded by law, though what possible advantage can result from it either to the brewer or the government, is a matter which is certainly not apparent upon the first blush."
Holmes' Brewing Trade Gazette - Wednesday 01 July 1885, page 14.

Basically, the tax system encouraged brewers to overfill their mash tun with grain and to use too little water. Hence the need for a ridiculous number of sparge.

Not sure why the weird shit with two mash tuns was demanded by the government. Who knows? Belgium has always been a wacky place.

A British brewer describes Belgian beers in the 1880s (part three)

Our British brewer friend is far from done with sticking the boot into Belgian beer. He really doesn't have a good word about anything top-fermented.

He gets the knife to several more classic Belgian styles:

"What most puzzles an outsider is to account for the intellectual twist which must have actuated the brewer who first took so much trouble to produce a beer so horribly nauseating. The majority of the Belgian beer is what is termed "coupee" - or turned, and strange to say, it is preferred by the consumer, when in that condition. This remark applies to the true running ale or Biere d'Orge, which, as a type of high fermentation ale, would undoubtedly lead to the dismissal of any one responsible for its production in an English establishment. Biere Brune is is very mild, and is not "coupee." Saison is a similar mild ale, if possible somewhat more nauseous than all the others, with the exception of lambic. Uytzet is similar to orge, and is equally nasty."
Holmes' Brewing Trade Gazette - Wednesday 01 July 1885, page 13.

In this context, I think "coupee" means sour. While some aged British styles had a certain degree of tartness, they weren't out and out sour. Unlike in Belgium. Strange that Biere Brune shouldn't be coupee, as the name automatically makes me think of the sour Brown Beers found in parts of flanders.

British styles already had some degree of popularity, presumably on account of imports. Local brewers also took these types of beer on. Obviously, not to the satisfaction of our author.

"So-called "pale ale" and "stout" are made in Belgium and supplied under those names the various estaminets, but it certainly needs the name to recall the favourite beverages of England, and they would pass unrecognized, as such, by the most expert of our British brewers."
Holmes' Brewing Trade Gazette - Wednesday 01 July 1885, page 13.

It doesn't sound like brewing science had advanced very far in Belgium:

"It may be necessary to assert that there is not a trace of exaggeration in any of the above statements. I have tasted the various beers for myself, and I invite your readers to do the same, but venture to warn them that it would be well to do so upon homoeopathic principles. In truth it must be allowed that in Belgium brewers have much to learn, They would seem to have devoted some attention to the perfection of plant, and have in several instances, produced machinery which we should do well to imitate; but they have scarcely recognized the fact that brewing is a science, and that false ferments should be checked in their growth, rather than encouraged. I went over a good many breweries in Belgium, but in no case could I discover that there was a microscope within reach of the brewers, and in every case I was informed, upon inquiry, that they did not possess one."
Holmes' Brewing Trade Gazette - Wednesday 01 July 1885, page 13.

 Next we'll see the explanation for why most Belgian beer was dreadful. That'll be fun.

A British brewer describes Belgian beers in the 1880s (part two)

We're back with that very unimpressed British brewer taking a look at Belgian beer.

He lays out his opinion of Belgian brewing very clearly and frankly in the opening sentence:

"THE beer produced in Belgium may be conveniently, and accurately, divided into two classes: that which is fit to drink, and that which is not. The former class is exclusively composed of low fermentation beer, manufactured upon a system, which is practically the same as that in vogue in Germany; and it should at once be stated that the Belgian lager-beer will compare very favourably with that obtainable in other continental countries. Low fermentation beer, however, constitutes but a small fraction of the total quantity of the malted beverage consumed; and the various concoctions, passing as beer, collectively recognized as the national beverage, are to state the case mildly, somewhat peculiar preparations. Lest it should be imagined that the brewer is altogether responsible for the quality and flavour of the many varieties of beer which can be tasted at the Antwerp Exhibition; it is but just to add that he brews to suite the public palate, and if we may judge by the amount of beer consumed, he is successful enough in this respect."
Holmes' Brewing Trade Gazette - Wednesday 01 July 1885, page 12.

That's a pretty strong condemnation of the traditional Belgian beer styles. Not really unexpected, though. Belgian styles were too different and weird to be apprciated by someone used to English beers. This quote pretty much sums up his view: "the various concoctions, passing as beer". Ouch.

The author, on the other hand, clearly had a very high opinion of British beers:

"Belgium being one of the very few countries in which the high fermentation system still prevails, it is possible to institute a comparison between the brewing products of that country and our own, and I cannot but think that those gentlemen who recently visited us with the object of inspecting our leading establishments and sampling the best of our beer, must have returned not a little astonished at the superior quality of the article produced in England. It is possible, however, that the English working man has still to be educated up to a standard, which in many cases would certainly be a convenient one, but, to which he, at present, can scarcely be said to aspire; and it may possibly be that beer which is absolutely sour, scarcely ever bright, always devoid of condition, and with a flavour approximating to that of flat zoedone, may, to to those who have been duly initiated into its advantages, be deemed preferable to a glass of sparkling, mild, or bitter beer. However, this may be, it is certain that the Belgian beer corresponding to our ordinary running ale would, in this country, be scornfully returned both by the publican and his customer."
Holmes' Brewing Trade Gazette - Wednesday 01 July 1885, pages 12 - 13.

If you're wodering, Zoedone was some sort of non-alcoholic drink. The comparison with it I don't think is meant to be a compliment. This is pretty damning: "our, scarcely ever bright, always devoid of condition". He makes it sound lovely, doesn't he?

A British brewer describes Belgian beers in the 1880s

I love those descriptions of British brewers' and drinkers' encounters with Belgian beer. They're unanimous in their views: they taste dreadful.

To be fair, their opinions mirror my own on first encountering Belgian beer. Many years ago at a Great British Beer Festival in the late 1970s. "Is it supposed to taste like this?" was my reaction to Lambic. It just tasted like beer which had gone incredibly off.

While we're on the topic of Lambic, let's see what the authore thought of it:

"A beverage in great demand in the neighbourhood of Brussels, and which is also regarded in a very favourable light in Antwerp, and more especially at the Salon de degustation in the Exhibition is known as Lambic. The chief peculiarity, but certainly not the principal recommendation of this very remarkable ale, is to be found in the fact that not less than three and and sometimes as many as five years are required for its preparation. It is very low in gravity, and in that respect its consumption is possible to be commended; no yeast is added to the wort after it has been boiled, but it is allowed to undergo a spontaneous fermentation by storage iu unbuuged casks, in a cellar probably more remarkable for the number and variety of fortuitous germs floating about it, than for its cleanliness. That some stray yeast-cells find their way into the casks, and alighting upon a favourable medium, multiply with rapidity, is easily conceivable; but it will scarcely be urged, that the fermentation is purely alcoholic. Indeed, the difficulty, from an English brewer's point of view, will probably be to decide as to whether the aroma be attributable to casks winch have grown musty in the service, to butyric acid, to acetic acid, or to genuine putrefactive fermentation. In any case the combination is nasty; and it would be easier to induce an English farmer to cultivate a taste for olives than for lambic."

Holmes' Brewing Trade Gazette - Wednesday 01 July 1885, page 13.

Not exactly a ringing recommendation. Interesting that he says it's very low gravity. I've only a couple of analyses of 19th-century Lambic and one is 6.5% ABV.

Now he takes his axe to Faro:

"The second runnings of lambic wort are probably designed to develop a liking for this extraordinary article, for they are retained for the preparation of a beer known as Faro, which is practically intermediate between the running ale of the estaminets and lampic. Faro is not entirely fermented spontaneously, but has a small quantity of yeast added to it. When finished, it very much resembles a weak solution of hydrochloric acid. It may be tonic, but is not palatable, at least from our point of view."

Holmes' Brewing Trade Gazette - Wednesday 01 July 1885, page 13.

Not sure I've ever seen it mentioned before that some yeast was added to Faro. I don't think comparing Faro to hydrochloric acid is meant to be a compliment.

"A still more extraordinary product is that known as Biere Blanche. To the uninitiated it is not unlike workhoouse gruel in appearance, and, if one may judge by reports, there is not such a very great dissimilarity between the flavour of the two articles. If white beer be bright it is considered worth the drinking; but so long as it remains thick, it is consumed with evident relish. Your readers will not be surprised to learn that white beer is not adapted for store purposes, when they are told that it is with scarcely any hops, and that only half the wort is boiled, the remainder being conveyed direct from the mash-tun to the cooler preparatory to fermentation. Before pitching, it is mixed with the half that has been boiled, and to which a few hops have been added. This unique beverage has the colour of ginger beer, but is somewhat thicker in consistency. It is no exaggeration to state that the teetotal party might render good service to their cause by introducing white beer into England."
Holmes' Brewing Trade Gazette - Wednesday 01 July 1885, page 13.

Fair to say that he wasn't impressed with Witbier. Workhouse gruel: what a lovely description.

Amazing to think that some of these beers are so highly regarded nowadays.

Army rule dims Brussels Gaiety

The newpaper archive is such a great resource. I keep finding fascinating insights into various aspects of WW II.

Like this little article about British troops on the town in Brussels. They certainly hadn't wasted any time. This article was published on 29th September, just a couple oif weeks after the liberation of Brussels on 4th September.

""11.20 bed” Army rule dims Brussels Gaiety
From HILDE MARCHANT Brussels, Thursday.
THE great call in Brussels last night was "Teem, gentlemen, plees," for by order of the supreme military command all cafes, restaurants and night clubs are to close sharp at eleven o'clock.

This order came into force last night, with a heavy penalty for troops who broke it and were not back in billets at 11.20 p.m.

So this capital, which normally has the gayest night life of any in Europe, goes quietly to bed at an hour when it would usually be just getting lively.

The proprietors of these night life places are quite angry at the order, mainly because they make money hand over fist on any of our boys who want a night's leave dancing and drinking.

For this town, like Paris, is enjoying a glorious, dizzy drunk on the franc. Prices are incredibly inflated, and in spite of the kindness and hospitality, one of the embarrassments of being a liberating army in this area is that you pay three and four times the normal price.

Our boys on leave have little enough money to spend and it does not go very far when you consider the franc at 175 to the pound and a glass of inferior, vinegary wine at 43 francs.

I was not surprised, when last night met two boys from Durham — Sergeant Fred Young and Private George Tomkinson - rather disillusioned about the bright night life of the continent. Said Fred Young: “When I was in Durham I always wanted to come to these places over here. And now I'm here I want to be Durham.”

But take the day these boys have had on leave. They got twelve hours. They queued for hour to check in with the military police. Then they queued for two and a half hours at the Paymaster's office in a bank to draw a few francs to get about.

This is one of the troops greatest irritations. There is one clerk to handle hundreds of men who want leave money.

I went to the bank myself  yesterday and saw battle-weary and stained men standing for two hours or more get to the counter.

I have seen British troops counting out their money before they could go into a cafe for a beer. They have their pay all right, but it costs them five shillings for a couple of glasses of beer that an English pub would be ashamed to call lager.

Something must done about the rate of exchange, for while the boys appreciate the flowers and fruit that were pelted on them when they entered the town, they would now appreciate a reasonable rate of exchange to cover the inflated prices they meet everywhere.

So for the most part twelve-hour leave from the front in Brussels means walking round the town, looking at sights, buying few souvenirs and little beer and then returning happily to camp.

I understand that this problem prices and exchange being considered the military authorities, and it is likely that troops will be able exchange their pay for a much higher rale, unless prices are brought down to near normal.

This would mean that military personnel could get a better rate in order to meet the dizzy scale of charges."
Daily Mirror - Friday 29 September 1944, page 5.

 Typical that the British introduced a closing time of 11 PM. Just like back in the UK.

The prices really do look outrageous. 5 shillings for a glass of crap wine is really taking the piss. There probably wasn't much beer around, and what there was wouldn't have been very strong. By late 1944 very late brewing was going on on German occupied territory due to a shortage of raw materials.

UK Beer Exports 1937 - 1949

Between the wars UK beer exports trundled along at between 200,000 and 350,000 barrels  annually. Which was about half the level it had been pre-WW I, when 500,000 to 650,000 barrels were exported each year.

Clearly the war was going to have an impact on exports. Especially as one of the main destination for UK exports, Belgium, had been occupied by the Germans.  In addition, German U-boats made shipping anything across the Atlantic a dangerous enterprise. And in the early phases of the war British shipping in the Mediterranean was susceptible to German or Italian attacks from the air. Plus most shipping capacity was reserved for war material or essential items, such as food.

Given all these negative factors, it’s no shock that beer exports shrank considerably in the early years of the war:

Belgium appears to have been receiving supplies if British beer right up until the Germans invaded. The trade didn’t resume until a couple of years after war’s end. The quantity of beer going to British colonies dried to a trickle between 1942 and 1944. 

Exports hit a nadir in 1942, a year when the war was only just starting turn in the Allies’ favour.

Not all the export markets were as large after the war as they had been before. India and the Straits Settlements, for example, were taking less than half the beer they had done pre-war. In the case of India, this was doubtless due to the withdrawal of British troops and administrators after independence in 1947. Belgium, on the other hand, imported similar quantities as pre-war. While more beer was shipped to the West Indies after the war than before it.

In the 1950s, UK exports stabilised at around 250,000 barrels a year – similar to what they had been in 1939. Though the destinations changed, as the British Empire slowly withered away and with it the former colonial markets.

UK beer exports by destination 1937 - 1943
Destination	1937	1939	1940	1941	1942	1943
Egypt	12,960	26,597	28,857	28,519	3,658	45
Irish Free State	119,763	52,081	35,306	25,843	16,730	14,810
British W. Africa	9,432	12,468	13,873	22,328	15,544	19,161
India & Straits Settlements	75,349	63,186	69,963	62,260	11,523	638
Brit. West India	10,298	10,925	8,499	8,081	5,082	6,629
Belgium	40,637	29,140	13,080
Other Countries	72,318	89,577	97,188	78,521	42,259	65,736
Total	340,757	283,974	266,766	225,552	94,796	107,019
Source:
Brewers' Almanack 1955, page 57.

UK beer exports by destination 1944 - 1949
Destination	1944	1945	1946	1947	1948	1949
Egypt	4,804	2,966	12,536	12,709	7,587	6,999
Irish Free State	4,878	128	221	3,280		6,201
British W. Africa	10,225	1,190	1,574	5,797		34,626
India & Straits Settlements	2,506	38,333	69,278	8,130	27,538	27,750
Brit. West India	1,701	7	251	1,045		14,009
Belgium						33,786
Other Countries	53,483	78,732	97,860	71,642	169,973	130,756
Total	77,597	130,443	187,418	109,680	205,098	254,127
Source:
Brewers' Almanack 1955, page 57.