hist-brewing: Hi

Owenbrau1 at aol.com Owenbrau1 at aol.com
Wed Jan 6 10:51:27 PST 1999

some of the brews pre-pastuer probably were "sketchy", but that may not have
been a problem in most cases. after all, if it were really bad, i doubt they
would have drunk it!

as an example, Caeser once complained of the gaulish beer, sayinf it tasted of
goat. sounds like lambic, to me! and i love lambics.... 
 some sourness was probably common, but it can be an enjoyable part of the

another point to consider is that although they didn't know what yeast was,
they knew it was something important, and would have taken great care with it.
Markham mentions cleaning, and keeping your brewhouse away from certain other
parts of the farm/household; other sources did as well. they would harvest
yeast from one batch to brew the next; if the beer tasted bad, they wouldn't
use the yeast anymore, therby selecting for good, clean, strains. aside from a
better understanding of cleanliness and microbiology, the biggest differences
from then to now is the mashing process; we typically use a "running sparge",
instead of "parti-gyle", which is simply draining the mash tun, and refilling
it, getting 2 or 3 smaller batches, of varyong strengths, instead of one big

i think its safe to say that wecan recreate the beers using modern sanitation,
because they would have tried to be as clean as possible. i don't think we
need to risk bad batches like they did, in order to recreate the good ones.

Owen ap Robert

mka Owen Hutchins
The General Lafayette
Inn & Brewery

To unsubscribe from this list, send email to majordomo at pbm.com containing
the words "unsubscribe hist-brewing" (or unsubscribe hist-brewing-digest, if
you get the digest.) To contact a human about problems, send mail to
owner-hist-brewing at pbm.com

More information about the hist-brewing mailing list