Let's Brew Wednesday - 1914 Hancock Stout

Has Stout followed the trend of the other Hancock beers and had its gravity reduced? Of course, it had. None of their beers were immune. Though it’s only 3.5º lower.

The gravity is not where the big changes are. They are in the recipe. The 1897 version was a simple beer, consisting of just pale, crystal and black malt. Three new ingredients have been added, two of them types of sugar: Durax and oatine. The other was flaked oats.

What does this tell us? Well, obviously, they were selling at least some as Oatmeal Stout. It’s interesting that the style had already made it to the Southwest. The first oat Stout, from Maclay of Alloa, had been brewed less than 20 years earlier.

The sugar content is pretty high, just shy of 30%. Which makes it all the more annoying that neither of them exists any more. I’ve substituted No. 3 for both, but who knows how close that might be. You may want to add extra flaked maize for the oatine.

There were two types of hops, one from Oregon and the other English. No harvest date is given for either.

1914 Hancock Stout
pale malt	5.75 lb	47.92%
crystal malt 60 L	1.50 lb	12.50%
black malt	0.50 lb	4.17%
flaked oats	0.75 lb	6.25%
No. 3 invert sugar	3.50 lb	29.17%
Cluster 120 mins	0.50 oz
Goldings 120 mins	1.00 oz
Goldings 30 mins	1.00 oz
OG	1062
FG	1015
ABV	6.22
Apparent attenuation	75.81%
IBU	34
SRM	32
Mash at	152º F
Sparge at	170º F
Boil time	120 minutes
pitching temp	58º F
Yeast	White Labs WLP099 Super High Gravity

Let's Brew - 1914 Hancock SBA

SBA wasn’t exempt from the general drop in gravity amongst Hancock’s beers. Though in its case the fall was relatively small, just 3º.

There have been quite some changes to the recipe. The most obvious, is that it’s no longer all malt. Leaving the grist pretty similar to that of XXB. With the exception that the sugar here is No. 1 invert rather than glucose.

Two thirds of the base malt were made from Californian barley, the rest from English. That’s something you wouldn’t see for much longer, as the war cut off supplies of Californian grain.

The hopping rate has fallen from around 9 lbs per quarter (336 lbs) of malt to 6 lbs. This is reflected in the lower (calculated) IBUs.  Most of the hops were English, topped up with a few Oregons. No harvest gate is listed for either type of hops.

1914 Hancock SBA
pale malt	7.00 lb	72.73%
No. 1 invert sugar	2.50 lb	25.97%
malt extract	0.125 lb	1.30%
Cluster 90 mins	0.50 oz
Goldings 90 mins	1.00 oz
Goldings 30 mins	1.50 oz
Goldings dry hops	1.00 oz
OG	1050
FG	1011
ABV	5.16
Apparent attenuation	78.00%
IBU	42
SRM	7
Mash at	152º F
Sparge at	170º F
Boil time	90 minutes
pitching temp	60º F
Yeast	White Labs WLP099 Super High Gravity

 

 

Let's Brew - 1914 Hancock XXB

As with all Hancock’s other beers, XXB has seen a substantial drop in gravity since 1897. In this case, 6º. Leaving it at just 1040º.

Neither has the recipe remained unchanged. Out go the No. 1 and No. 2 invert sugar and in come glucose and malt extract. The base malt this time was two thirds Californian and one third English. Which is completely different from 1897.

Just one type of English hop was used. I’ve guessed Goldings. Annoyingly, Hancock had given up recording the age of the hops in the brewing book. So, I’ve assumed they were all pretty fresh. The dry hopping is very heavy: 45 lbs compared to 63 lbs copper hops.
 

1914 Hancock XXB
pale malt	6.00 lb	76.19%
glucose	1.75 lb	22.22%
malt extract	0.125 lb	1.59%
Goldings 90 mins	1.00 oz
Goldings 30 mins	1.00 oz
Goldings dry hops	1.50 oz
OG	1040
FG	1010
ABV	3.97
Apparent attenuation	75.00%
IBU	27
SRM	3.5
Mash at	151º F
Sparge at	175º F
Boil time	90 minutes
pitching temp	60º F
Yeast	White Labs WLP099 Super High Gravity

 

 

Let's Brew Wednesday - 1914 Hancock XXX

Mild month is over, so back to Hancock recipes. Though maybe this was a Mild. Or maybe not. 

I’m becoming more convinced that XXX was marketed as a Strong Ale. Mostly because of its gravity compared to X.

Though, ironically, this version was parti-gyled with X. In the earlier years, everything was brewed single-gyle. Which remained the case with their other beers. Though there had been a reduction in the number of different beers brewed.

The gravity is 10º lower than in 1897. Which isn’t a huge surprise. A tax increase to help pay for the Boer had seen many brewers reduce the strength of their beers.

There have also been changes to the recipe, which was all malt in 1897. For more details about the recipe, see the X I posted earlier.

1914 Hancock XXX
pale malt	10.50 lb	83.67%
glucose	1.75 lb	13.94%
malt extract	0.25 lb	1.99%
caramel 1000 SRM	0.05 lb	0.40%
Cluster 90 mins	1.00 oz
Strisselspalt 60 mins	0.75 oz
Fuggles 30 mins	0.75 oz
OG	1061
FG	1015
ABV	6.09
Apparent attenuation	75.41%
IBU	33
SRM	8.5
Mash at	152º F
Sparge at	170º F
Boil time	90 minutes
pitching temp	60º F
Yeast	White Labs WLP099 Super High Gravity

Let's Brew - 1914 Hancock X

Seeing this beer was a bit of a shock. A pre-WW I X Ale with a gravity more like one from after WW II.

1035º is pretty feeble compared to London X Ales of the time, which were still over 1050º. I’ve based the FG on the 1897 version, where for once the brewing log actually recorded it. The degree of attenuation is pretty high, though that does reflect the few FGs that appear in the logs.

The base malt was split 50-50 between English and Indian. Unfortunately, this particular log doesn’t list the costs so I can’t compare the price of the two malts. I’d expect the Indian to be cheaper. The small quantity of malt extract I assume was for extra diastatic power, as it came in the form of EDME.

New to the party are the three sugars. Interesting that they’ve moved away from invert sugar to simple glucose. Though, as we’ll see, some of their other beers did still include numbered inverts.

The hops were a combination of Oregon, Poperinge and English, sadly with no mention of the harvest year.
 

1914 Hancock X
pale malt	6.25 lb	84.40%
glucose	1.00 lb	13.50%
malt extract	0.125 lb	1.69%
caramel 1000 SRM	0.03 lb	0.41%
Cluster 90 mins	0.50 oz
Strisselspalt 60 mins	0.50 oz
Fuggles 30 mins	0.50 oz
OG	1035
FG	1004
ABV	4.10
Apparent attenuation	88.57%
IBU	23
SRM	6
Mash at	152º F
Sparge at	170º F
Boil time	90 minutes
pitching temp	60º F
Yeast	White Labs WLP099 Super High Gravity

 

Let's Brew Wednesday - 1897 Hancock Stout

The Porter might have been discontinued, but Hancock continued to produce a Stout. It was, however, quite different from the 1888 version.

Surprisingly, the gravity has increased by a couple of points. But the really large changes come with the recipe. Out is brown malt and in is crystal malt. Also, the proportion of black malt has trebled. Which is more than enough to compensate for the other big change. At least in terms of the colour.

That other big change? The elimination of sugar. This version being all malt. The base malt, by the way, was 50% English and 50% Chilean. I’m surprised at how small the price difference was between the two: 35s per quarter for the former. 33s 6d for the latter.

As seems to have been the case with all their beers in this period, only English hops were employed. Half Worcester from the 1895 season, half East Kent from 1896.
 

1897 Hancock Stout
pale malt	12.50 lb	80.65%
crystal malt 60 L	1.50 lb	9.68%
black malt	1.50 lb	9.68%
Fuggles 150 mins	2.50 oz
Goldings 30 mins	2.50 oz
OG	1065.5
FG	1017
ABV	6.42
Apparent attenuation	74.05%
IBU	39
SRM	41
Mash at	152º F
Sparge at	175º F
Boil time	150 minutes
pitching temp	59º F
Yeast	White Labs WLP099 Super High Gravity

 

 

Let's Brew - 1897 Hancock SBA

Now here’s a confusing beer. I’m assuming SBA stands for “Special Bitter Ale”. So, you would expect it to be stronger than BA. But it isn’t. Instead, it’s exactly the same OG.

What makes it “special”, then? Well, there is one big difference with BA: SBA is all malt. Just like BA, it’s a combination of Chilean and Ouchak. But there’s no No. 1 invert sugar. As the invert sugar only cost 15s a quarter and the malt was 30s and 33s 6d per quarter, SBA was more expensive to brew. BA cost 14s 6d per barrel, while SBA was 15s 9d per barrel.

There was also extra cost in the hops. Both beers used all 1896 East Kents. But BA had two types, one at 56s and the other at 88s. SBA opted for 100% of the latter.

All in all, the difference between SBA and BA is the use of classier ingredients. The same quantities and the same gravity. I dearly wish I’d been able to find a Hancock’s pricelist so I could see how much more was charged for SBA.

1897 Hancock SBA
pale malt	12.26 lb	100.00%
Goldings 120 mins	2.25 oz
Goldings 30 mins	2.25 oz
Goldings dry hops	1.00 oz
OG	1053
FG	1012
ABV	5.42
Apparent attenuation	77.36%
IBU	57
SRM	5
Mash at	154º F
Sparge at	175º F
Boil time	120 minutes
pitching temp	58º F
Yeast	White Labs WLP099 Super High Gravity

 

Let's Brew Wednesday - 1897 Hancock BA

I’m on much steadier ground with this beer when it comes to style. I’m certain that this is a Pale Ale. With the name presumably being “Bitter Ale”.

As with XXB, the malt was all from foreign barley. Again, Chilean and Ouchak. Which does strike me as strange. But there must have been some reason as it’s the same for all Hancock’s Pale Ales.

This time the sugar is what you would expect: No. 1 invert. And slightly more of it than in XXB, being 18% compared to 15%. Unsurprisingly, the resulting colour us paler, despite the gravity being higher.

This time there are two types of hops. Though both are East Kent from the 1896 season. And there a quite a few more of them than in XXB: 9.33 lbs per quarter (336 lbs) of malt compared to 6.3 lbs. Rather surprisingly, BA wasn't dry hopped.
 

1897 Hancock BA
pale malt	8.75 lb	81.40%
No. 1 invert sugar	2.00 lb	18.60%
Goldings 120 mins	2.25 oz
Goldings 30 mins	2.25 oz
OG	1053
FG	1012
ABV	5.42
Apparent attenuation	77.36%
IBU	57
SRM	7
Mash at	155º F
Sparge at	175º F
Boil time	120 minutes
pitching temp	58º F
Yeast	White Labs WLP099 Super High Gravity

 

 

Let's Brew - 1897 Hancock XXB

We’ve now come to Hancock’s Pale Ales. Or at least I think we have. I’m fairly sure that the “B” stands for Bitter. But I’m not totally sure.

The hopping rate per quarter (336 lbs) of malt is slightly lower – 6.3 lbs compared to 7 lbs – than X. If XXB is a Pale Ale, you’d expect it to be the other way around. On the other hand, it is dry hopped and the water treatment, with a large amount of gypsum, is the same as for another Pale Ale, BA. On balance, I’d call this as a Pale Ale.

None of the base malt was from English barley. Just over half was Chilean, the rest Ouchak (spelt Ushak in the brewing record), that is, Middle Eastern. Quite a contrast with X, which was all English. It’s unusual to see all foreign barley. Usually, at least some was English.

It’s rather strange to see No. 3 invert sugar in a Pale Ale. The result is a colour which is pretty dark for a Pale Ale. No. 2 invert is a more normal sugar to see in this type of beer.

A single type of hop – East Kent from the 1896 harvest – was used in the copper. I’m guessing that’s also what was used in the rather heavy dry hopping.

1897 Hancock XXB
pale malt	8.25 lb	84.62%
No. 2 invert sugar	0.75 lb	7.69%
No. 3 invert sugar	0.75 lb	7.69%
Goldings 120 mins	1.25 oz
Goldings 30 mins	1.00 oz
Goldings dry hops	1.00 oz
OG	1046
FG	1005.5
ABV	5.36
Apparent attenuation	88.04%
IBU	30
SRM	10
Mash at	155º F
Sparge at	175º F
Boil time	120 minutes
pitching temp	58º F
Yeast	White Labs WLP099 Super High Gravity

 

Let's Brew Wednesday - 1897 Hancock XXXX

And here we are at the strongest of Hancock’s beers, XXXX. The same question marks apply here as with XXX. Was it a Strong Mild Ale or was it a Stock Ale? Without a price list or some other indication from another source, there’s no way I can arrive at a definitive answer.

It’s an even simpler recipe than that of XXX. Just two types of English base malt and a single type of hops. Not quite a SMASH recipe, but not far off. That the hops were all relatively fresh East Kents (from the 1896 harvest) is a good indication that this was an expensive beer.

The cost is confirmed by the pricing included in the brewing record. XXXX cost £1.25 per barrel for ingredients and duty. While X cost a mere £0.52. Inevitably, this difference would have been reflected in the retail price.

1897 Hancock XXXX
pale malt	18.50 lb	100.00%
Goldings 120 mins	2.50 oz
Goldings 30 mins	2.50 oz
OG	1080
FG	1020
ABV	7.94
Apparent attenuation	75.00%
IBU	53
SRM	6
Mash at	155º F
Sparge at	175º F
Boil time	120 minutes
pitching temp	58º F
Yeast	White Labs WLP099 Super High Gravity

Let's Brew - 1897 Hancock XXX

Next up the Mild strength pole is, logically enough, XXX. Another beer which doesn’t appear in the 1887 brewing records.

For its strength, it’s surprising just how much of XXX was brewed. It’s also pretty strong for a Mild this late in the century. While a simple X Ale might have been a similar gravity in the 1830s, stronger Milds had mostly disappeared by this point.

I’m not 100% sure that XXX was a Mild Ale. It might well have been marketed as a Strong Ale or Old ale. Pointedly, the water treatment is different to that for X and XX. With five times as much gypsum, no kainit and two extra minerals, in the form of calcium chloride and sulphate of magnesia. Though the lower hopping rate compared to X and XX goes against it being a Stock or Old Ale.

It’s another very simple recipe. Just a single type of English base malt. Along with two types of English hops, East Kent from the 1896 harvest and Worcester from 1895.

1897 Hancock XXX
pale malt	16.50 lb	100.00%
Fuggles 120 mins	1.75 oz
Goldings 30 mins	1.75 oz
OG	1071
FG	1015
ABV	7.41
Apparent attenuation	78.87%
IBU	37
SRM	6
Mash at	155º F
Sparge at	175º F
Boil time	120 minutes
pitching temp	58º F
Yeast	White Labs WLP099 Super High Gravity

Let's Brew Wednesday - 1898 Hancock XX

In 1887, XX was by far Hancock’s most popular beer, accounting for 75% of their production. Not so a decade later. When XX was only brewed occasionally and was greatly outsold by X and XXX. I’ve no idea why focus was switched away XX.

It’s a good bit weaker than in 1887, having lost more than 5º. And was only a few degrees stronger than X.

Not much has changed with the recipe, other than the proportion of pale malt increasing at the expense of No. 3 invert sugar. Nothing very dramatic. Its presence is enough to guarantee that XX a good bit darker than X. Though it’s a good bit paler than in 1887.

Fewer hops were used, but this was counterbalanced by a longer boil time. Leaving the calculated IBUs almost unchanged. Three English hops were used: East Kent from the 1896 harvest, Kent from 1894 and Sussex from 1895.

1898 Hancock XX
pale malt	8.00 lb	86.49%
No. 3 invert sugar	1.25 lb	13.51%
Fuggles 120 mins	1.00 oz
Goldings 30 mins	1.00 oz
OG	1044.5
FG	1008
ABV	4.83
Apparent attenuation	82.02%
IBU	25
SRM	10
Mash at	156º F
Sparge at	170º F
Boil time	120 minutes
pitching temp	59º F
Yeast	White Labs WLP099 Super High Gravity

Hancock water treatment

The importance of water chemistry had been highlighted by the experiences of brewing Pale Ales in Burton.  At first brewers simply set up shop there or somewhere else with similar water. But as the chemistry became better understood, brewers realised that they could treat their water to resemble that of Burton. Or anywhere else, for that matter.

Which is what brewers started to do. Not only did they Burton up their brewing water with gypsum for Pale Ales, but they used different treatments for other styles. It all ended up being quite complicated.

Hancock, a medium-sized brewery in the Southwest of England, had multiple different water treatments.

The only constant was gypsum, which was used in varying amounts for every beer. Unsurprisingly, rather more in Pale Ales than Mild Ales. Other than the two strongest Milds, XXX and XXXX, which received the most of all.

Next most popular was kainit, which was hydrated potassium and magnesium sulfate-chloride, KMgSO4Cl·3H2O. That was applied to all but the three strongest beers. Instead, those three beers were given a small quantity of calcium chloride.

Sulphate of magnesia – or magnesium sulphate – pops up only in the two strong Mild.

Only one beer was brewed from untreated water: Stout. 

Hancock water treatment in 1897 (per barrel)
beer	style	gypsum	kainit	calcium chloride	sulphate magnesia
Ale	Mild Ale	0.63 oz	0.63 oz
X	Mild Ale	0.64 oz	0.64 oz
XX	Mild Ale	1.20 oz	0.45 oz
XXX	Mild Ale	3.79 oz		0.69 oz	0.73 oz
XXXX	Mild Ale	3.79 oz		0.70 oz	0.73 oz
XXB	Pale Ale	2.53 oz	0.95 oz
B Ale	Pale Ale	2.85 oz	1.07 oz
SBA	Pale Ale	3.92 oz		0.71 oz
Stout	Stout
Source:
Hancock brewing record held at South West Heritage Trust Somerset Archive, document number DD/HCK/5/2/3.

Let's Brew - 1897 Hancock X

I’m not quite sure what had been going on at Hancock. It was odd that in 1888 they were only brewing XX. No X Ale, as well as no XXX and XXXX. But a mere 9 years later they were brewing a full set of X Ales. It’s all a little odd.

Compared to a London X Ale, the gravity is much lower: more than 10 points. Though a very high degree of attenuation means that the ABV isn’t that much lower.

It’s not just the range of Mild Ales which has changed. The recipes were quite different, too. And, against the usual trends, had become simpler rather than more complicated. This X Ale is almost, but not quite, a SMASH beer.

There was just a single type of malt, described simply as “English”. And while most 1888 recipes contained massive amounts of sugar, this X Ale is all malt. I wonder what caused their change in mind. It’s a pretty massive change in how they brewed.

Two types of hops were used, East Kent from the 1896 harvest and Kent from 1894.

1897 Hancock X
pale malt	9.25 lb	100.00%
Fuggles 90 mins	1.00 oz
Goldings 30 mins	1.00 oz
OG	1040
FG	1004
ABV	4.76
Apparent attenuation	90.00%
IBU	27
SRM	4
Mash at	155º F
Sparge at	175º F
Boil time	90 minutes
pitching temp	59º F
Yeast	White Labs WLP099 Super High Gravity