Ads not shown when logged in
-
Automated Tracker
Shut up about Barclay Perkins - London vs provincial beer in the 1930's: Mild Ale
Visit the Shut up about Barclay Perkins site
I just love the Journal of the Institute of Brewing. Especially the fact that it's all available online.
I've trawled through it a few times using different search terms. When I find a useful article, I save the pdf and extract the text. I've quite a pile of them, waiting for my attention. Including one on the food value of beer. Which I've finally got around to looking at.
Not that I'm all that interested in the food value of beer. But the article has loads of tables with data taken from beer analyses. And I'm a total tart for any type of beer analysis.
What makes them particularly handy is that there are separate tables of London and provincial beers of different types. Giving me a chance to check something I've seen mentioned but have never found real proof for: that London-brewed beers were stronger. I think originally it was because London brewers, being on the whole quite large, could brew more efficiently. As beer generally sold for the same price everywhere, there wasn't much competition on price. Brewers drew in drinkers by offering a stronger product.
I've combined two different tables from the article, plus added a calculated ABV. First, London Milds:
Composition of London Beers |
|
|
|
|
|
Calories per pint. |
|
Total Solids per cent. |
Absolute Alcohol (by weight) per cent. |
Ratio of Total Solids to Alcohol (T.S.=1). |
ABV |
Solid Matter. |
Alcohol. |
Total. |
Mild Ales. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No. 1 |
4.35 |
3.16 |
1:0.72 |
4.01 |
102 |
126 |
228 |
No. 2 |
5.00 |
2.98 |
1:0.59 |
3.78 |
116 |
118 |
234 |
No. 3 |
3.87 |
3.41 |
1:0.88 |
4.33 |
90 |
136 |
226 |
No. 4 |
6.00 |
3.94 |
1:0.65 |
5.00 |
140 |
156 |
296 |
No. 5 |
4.91 |
3.08 |
1:0.62 |
3.91 |
114 |
121 |
235 |
No. 6 |
4.74 |
3.18 |
1:0.67 |
4.04 |
110 |
126 |
230 |
No. 7 |
5.17 |
2.90 |
1:0.56 |
3.68 |
120 |
115 |
235 |
No. 8 |
4.90 |
4.37 |
1:0.89 |
5.55 |
114 |
174 |
288 |
No. 9 |
4.62 |
2.98 |
1:0.64 |
3.78 |
108 |
118 |
220 |
Average |
4.84 |
3.33 |
1:0.68 |
4.23 |
114 |
130 |
244 |
Source: |
Journal of the Institute of Brewing, Volume 38, Issue 1, January-February 1932, pages 84 - 88. |
That's odd. The average ABV is what I would expect for a London X Ale, a bit over 4% implying on OG of around 1043. But that average has been distorted by the two much stronger examples, Nos. 4 and 8. The relative large proportion of calories which comes from the solid matter implies a fair amount of unfermented material in the finished beer. You'll see better what I mean when I compare Bitter and Mild in a later post.
Now here are the country beers:
Composition of Country Beers |
|
|
|
|
|
Calories per pint. |
|
Total Solids per cent. |
Absolute Alcohol (by weight) per cent. |
Ratio of Total Solids to Alcohol (T.S.=1). |
ABV |
Solid Matter. |
Alcohol. |
Total. |
Mild Ales. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No. 27 |
2.47 |
2.81 |
1:1.13 |
3.57 |
58 |
112 |
170 |
No. 28 |
4.40 |
3.83 |
1:0.87 |
4.86 |
103 |
152 |
255 |
No. 29 |
2.32 |
2.92 |
1:1.25 |
3.71 |
54 |
116 |
170 |
No. 30 |
2.69 |
3.61 |
1:1.34 |
4.58 |
63 |
143 |
200 |
No. 31 |
2.81 |
3.57 |
1:1.27 |
4.53 |
65 |
142 |
207 |
No. 32 |
3.29 |
3.06 |
1:0.03 |
3.89 |
77 |
121 |
198 |
No. 33 |
4.02 |
3.58 |
1:0.89 |
4.55 |
94 |
142 |
236 |
No. 34 |
4.54 |
2.92 |
1:0.64 |
3.71 |
106 |
116 |
222 |
No. 35 |
4.57 |
2.74 |
1:0.59 |
3.48 |
106 |
109 |
215 |
No. 36 |
6.58 |
3.58 |
1:0.54 |
4.55 |
153 |
142 |
295 |
No. 37 |
2.53 |
2.19 |
1:0.86 |
2.78 |
59 |
87 |
140 |
No. 38 |
3.24 |
2.70 |
1:0.83 |
3.43 |
75 |
107 |
182 |
No. 39 |
3.49 |
2.60 |
1:0.74 |
3.30 |
81 |
103 |
184 |
No. 40 |
4.76 |
2.00 |
1:0.60 |
2.54 |
111 |
115 |
220 |
No. 41 |
4.79 |
3.06 |
1:0.63 |
3.89 |
112 |
122 |
234 |
No. 42 |
5.74 |
4.15 |
1:0.72 |
5.27 |
133 |
165 |
298 |
No. 43 |
3.61 |
2.79 |
1:0.77 |
3.54 |
84 |
111 |
195 |
No. 44 |
3.28 |
2.93 |
1:0.89 |
3.72 |
76 |
116 |
192 |
No. 45 |
3.38 |
2.94 |
1:0.86 |
3.73 |
79 |
117 |
196 |
No. 46 |
2.49 |
2.54 |
1:1.02 |
3.23 |
58 |
101 |
159 |
No. 47 |
3.99 |
3.78 |
1:0.94 |
4.80 |
93 |
150 |
243 |
No. 48 |
2.72 |
2.81 |
1:1.03 |
3.57 |
63 |
112 |
175 |
No. 49 |
3.15 |
3.15 |
1:1.00 |
4.00 |
73 |
125 |
198 |
Average |
3.69 |
3.09 |
1:0.83 |
3.92 |
86 |
123 |
209 |
Source: |
Journal of the Institute of Brewing, Volume 38, Issue 1, January-February 1932, pages 84 - 88. |
As you can see, the country-brewed Milds were indeed weaker. But I was surprised to see that to see that they were also more highly-attenuated. That becomes much clearer when you make a direct comparison of the averages:
|
|
|
|
|
Calories per pint. |
|
Total Solids per cent. |
Absolute Alcohol (by weight) per cent. |
Ratio of Total Solids to Alcohol (T.S.=1). |
ABV |
Solid Matter. |
Alcohol. |
Total. |
London |
4.84 |
3.33 |
1:0.68 |
4.23 |
114 |
130 |
244 |
Country |
3.69 |
3.09 |
1:0.83 |
3.92 |
86 |
123 |
209 |
% difference |
-31.17% |
-7.77% |
0.25% |
-7.77% |
-32.56% |
-5.69% |
-16.75% |
The country beers have less of everything: alcohol, unfermented material, calories.
One word of warning. There are at least two different types of Mild in the country beers. Ones around 3% ABV are 4d Ales, while those around 4% are X Ales. There aren't any of the former in the London examples, though such beers were brewed in London.
More...
Similar Threads
-
By Blog Tracker in forum Blog Tracker
Replies: 0
Last Post: 01-02-2014, 07:06
-
By Blog Tracker in forum Blog Tracker
Replies: 0
Last Post: 28-01-2014, 08:54
-
By Blog Tracker in forum Blog Tracker
Replies: 0
Last Post: 20-01-2014, 07:13
-
By Blog Tracker in forum Blog Tracker
Replies: 0
Last Post: 13-05-2011, 19:21
-
By Blog Tracker in forum Blog Tracker
Replies: 0
Last Post: 01-03-2010, 08:53
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules