Brown malt again

More on brown malt. More specifically: the different types of it.

Having downloaded a copy of William Loftus's "The Brewer" I'm going to make use of it. He writes a little about the different types of brown malt.

First de describes what he calls Porter malt  or brown malt:

"Porter malt, to be proper, should be made from good barley thoroughly malted, and exhibit a sound interior, of a uniform dark chocolate colour; each corn should be separate, and as near as possible of its original size and shape. In this state it contains a large quantity of soluble colouring matter of a superior kind, composed of burnt saccharine and mucilage, which impart an agree able flavour and odour, as well as colour, to the beer with which it is mixed.

Brown malt differs in its preparation from Pale only in the drying on the kiln , which operation is finished at a brisk heat, obtained from beech, or birch, or some other wood, while the grain is laid an even thickness of about two inches, and occasionally sprinkled with water."
"The Brewer" by William Loftus, London, 1856, pages 18 - 19.

That sounds like the type of brown malt not made in Hertfordshire. Which we saw in my earlier post gave an extract not much worse than the best pale malt.

Then there's the Hertfordshire type. Of which Loftus clearly disapproves.

"Blown malt is another variety of Brown. The vegetated is laid in a moist condition about half an inch thick upon a wire kiln, and kept constantly turned, while exposed to an ardent heat produced from fern, straw, or wood. The grain by this process suddenly expands its husk, and acquires an unnatural size, which gives to it its name of Blown malt.

This fictitious malt was, on the introduction of the Saccharometer, found to yield a deficient produce, as compared with Pale, of from 18 to 25 per cent., and the best Brown of from 15 to 20 per cent."
"The Brewer" by William Loftus, London, 1856, pages 19 - 20.

It's interesting that both types of malt were finished with a direct flame.The big difference seems to be how thickly the malt was laid: 2 inches as opposed to half an inch. It also sounds like the heat was more intense.

The other brown malt

I was browsing through Richardson's "Statistical Estimates of the Materials of Brewing" and stubbed my toe on some analyses of malt from the early 1780s.

Great. I thought. These will come in handy when I try to calculate the gravity of beers based on the quantity of malt used. I was amazed at what I saw. Brown malt with an extract of 72 lbs and even 78 lbs per quarter. To put this into context, the pale malts vary between 62 lbs and 82 lbs. In the 19th century, around 80 lbs was standard.

There's one exception: the brown malt made in Hertfordshire. That gives the shit extract I'd expect of 54 lbs and 56 lbs.

Richardson explains the difference in the method of manufacture. The stuff from Hertfordshire being "blown" or popped, like popcorn. And so getting larger in volume. Malt was sold in quarters, a volume measure. Making a quarter of brown malt much lighter than one of pale.

Outside of Hertfordshire, as they didn't pop their brown malt, it would have weighed around the same per quarter as pale malt. So I suppose it makes sense that the extract wouldn't be that much worse.

Great to see all of this in hard numbers. And to see just how different the "other" brown malt was.

London brewers used Hertfordshire malt. The question is: why? Was it all they had readily available in the pre-railway days?

Malt from the barley of 1781.
No.	Colour	Character	Growth of barley.	Average prod. of ferm. matter
1	pale	well made	North Lincolnsh.	82 lbs
2	pale	indifferent	North Lincolnsh.	75 lbs
3	pale	well made	Norfolk	72 lbs
4	pale	well made	Yorksh. woulds	82 lbs
5	brown	well made	Yorksh. woulds	78 lbs
6	brown	well made	Ware, in Herts	56 lbs
Source:
Statistical Estimates of the Materials of Brewing by J. Richardson, 1784, G. Robinson, London, page 67.

Malt from the barley of 1782.
No.	Colour	Character	Growth of barley.	Average prod.
1	pale	well made	Yorksh. woulds	62 lbs
2	pale	well made	Bremen	58 lbs
3	pale	well made	Norfolk	67 lbs
4	pale	indifferent	Norfolk	56 lbs
5	brown	well made	Ware, in Herts.	54 lbs
Source:
Statistical Estimates of the Materials of Brewing by J. Richardson, 1784, G. Robinson, London, page 67.

Malt from the barley of 1783.
No.	Colour	Character	Growth of barley.	Average prod.
1	pale	well made	North Lincolnsh	74 lbs
2	pale	well made	Berwick on Tweed	63 lbs
3	pale	indifferent	Yorksh. woulds	65 lbs
4	pale	well made	Yorksh. woulds	75 lbs
5	brown	well made	Yorksh. woulds	72 lbs
Source:
Statistical Estimates of the Materials of Brewing by J. Richardson, 1784, G. Robinson, London, page page 68.

Brown malt yet again

I just can't get enough of that wonderful Duff. No, of that wonderful brown malt. Such a fascinating topic. And one where there is so much contradictory evidence.

My main source today is H. Stopes, author of the classic "Malt and Malting", published in 1885.

"The Manufacture Of Black, Amber, Crystal, And Other Special Malts.Hitherto we have been considering one class of malt only, viz. that technically known as pale malt. Several other varieties exist. Under this heading we shall consider those only which depend upon the conditions already explained, but with a variation of the final process of drying, such variation being chiefly a comparatively slight difference of temperature.

Amber, porter, blown, or imperial malt can be made in any ordinary malting, the
differences to which they owe their names being almost entirely effected upon
the kiln. The scope they afford to the engineer for employment or improvement is
infinitesimal. They deserve mention only for the impressive fact, that the difference in temperature which will convert pale malt into amber or imperial is actually less than is to be found in the vast majority of kilns, between the temperature of that pale malt lying upon the surface of the tiles or wire, and of the upper surface exposed to the air. There is probably no kiln in Great Britain having only a single floor in which this difference is less than 50°. Pale malt next the tiles will be at 200° Fahr., and upon the surface 150° or less; and malt heated to 240° would make amber or imperial malt.

Blown or porter malt has the further difference that considerable heat is applied with suddenness before it has become dried. It is well known that any given temperature over 100° Fahr. will give much more colour to malt if still moist than a much greater heat if dry. Blown malt is exposed to the flare of fast-burning oak faggots or billet wood, and gains much colour and increase of size in consequence. Its use is an absurdity that is dying out, for the colour and flavour so gained are found to be very costly.

Crystal malt is green malt not fully grown, taken straight from the floor, and placed in a woven wire cylinder over a fire, and rotated. The curious sweetness of crystal malt to the palate may be readily accounted for by the mode of its drying. Sufficient
moisture is present at considerable temperature to enable the diastase to convert a portion of the starch into sugar.

Black or patent malt is pale or other malt dried in the ordinary way, and then placed in a cylinder over a fire, and rotated. The starch and saccharine constituents are speedily caramelised, and a splendid deep colour is obtained, which is communicated to porter and stout. The chief difference in the appliances used in the manufacture
of these (crystal and black) malts is the construction of the furnaces and cylinders. They have to be made in such a manner that free inspection of the malt can take place during roasting. They must also admit of ready lateral movement to facilitate filling and emptying; and appliances for proper cooling are of importance."
"The Engineering of Malting" by H. Stopes, 1885 an article in "Transactions" journal of the Society of Engineers.

What interests me about this passage is Stopes' dismissal of adding wood to increase the temperature of the kiln as an absurd and expensive practice that was disappearing. Though, it seems as if the practice survived into the lat 20th century. This is what Guy Horlock of French & Jupps has to say about making brown malt:

"We produced Brown Malt until 1980, but due to the dangerous nature of the
manufacture, nobody would insure us after that date. I have been working for F&J since 1949 and I was involved quite heavily in the production of Brown Malt."

"All my period with the production, we have never used anything other than Hornbeam, both poles and faggots and I know that Taylors at Sawbridgeworth (later to become part of ABM) did the same. However I know that Swonnels at Yarmouth did use offcuts of Oak, simply because they has a woodyard (Jewsons) next door, but I have never heard of anything else in the production and never coal."
Extract from a letter written by Guy Horlock, curator, French & Jupps Museum, Stanstead Abbotts, Hertfordshire.

So it looks like the archaic practice of finishing roasted malts with faggots of wood didn't die out as Stopes expected. Anyone have any idea how they make brown malt nowadays?

French (presumably short for French & Jupp) and Taylor are names that frequently crop up in the brewing logs of Whitbread and other London breweries. Usually it was either brown or black malt that they supplied.