I just don't get it...

[BeerNoob]

So my last 3 batches of beer have become infected and undrinkable. I found out where the sanitation issues were probably stemming from, corrected the issue and my newest beer seems to be doing great.

All that said... how on god's green earth have brewers for THOUSANDS of years been making beer and avoiding contamination issues??

We are in an era of sterilization with chemicals, filtered water, clean houses and all our comforts and somehow I manage to get 3 infected batches in a row!

I just think it's freaking amazing and extremely humbling that they were able to do that...

 

[oldmate]

I try to avoid contamination to an extent, but there is always something that goes wrong (like forgetting to spray down an instrument then dropping it into the bottom of the fermenter by accident) and yet I have never, ever gotten an infection.

 

[arturo7]

I have also thought about this. I'm certain they had infections out the yang.

 

[Catt22]

Most of of the ancient beer was likely contaminated in one way or another and they drank it anyway. Much of the beer was probably so bad that you could not tell the difference regardless, but it was better than the local water, so they drank it up.

 

[CalmYourself]

What Catt22 said. My brewing history includes 3 batches which I thought were awesome and all BJCP folks thought were disgusting. Don't think BJCP was around all those years ago

 

[BargainFittings]

You will unfortunately or fortunately acclimate to your own "house" flavor over time.

They did have boiling water and could clean their equipment. The biggest downfall is the repitching of yeast back then. I imagine the good and bad grew batch to batch.

Blending of old and new beer to make it palatable was common from what I've read.

 

[IrregularPulse]

I understand they had boiling water, but I doubt they understand using it for sanitizing. They were under the impression, if it was too small to be seen it didn't exist. You wouldn't boil water to kill something you didn't know existed.
*edit* interesting fact, bacteria was discovered in 1660. It was another 2 centuries before they knew that these bacteria could cause any problems.

 

[BargainFittings]

I think they did understand that the method of boiling was better than not boiling. Even without the knowledge of microbes, they understood cause and effect.

Drinking ale was healthier than drinking water is the biggest example of this.

I really was not saying that they used boiling as a sanitizer. My point was that boiling water existed and its likely that they cleaned their equipment once in awhile. In addition a lot of beer was made and drank fresh so they did know the difference in good and bad beer.

 

[Cpt_Kirks]

It had alcohol, so they were happy with it.

Probably, the better part of it tasted like it had been run though a horse.

 

[Catt22]

It had alcohol, so they were happy with it.

Probably, the better part of it tasted like it had been run though a horse.

I suspect this was probably the case all the way up through the 18th century and beyond in some areas. They did have soap way back in ancient times, but I don't have any idea of how available it was or how widespread the use was:

http://thesoapcafe.blogspot.com/2009/02/who-invented-soap.html

It would be near impossible to sanitize a wooden vat or barrel, and un-glazed pottery was almost as bad. I think they banked on out-numbering the bad bugs with the yeast, much the same as we do today. I also think they consumed the beer very quickly before it became undrinkable. Any beer is better than no beer at all I suppose. I've often wondered what the American Colonial beer tasted like. I'll have a whiskey, thank you very much!

 

[Cpt_Kirks]

I suspect this was probably the case all the way up through the 18th century and beyond in some areas. They did have soap way back in ancient times, but I don't have any idea of how available it was or how widespread the use was:

http://thesoapcafe.blogspot.com/2009/02/who-invented-soap.html

It would be near impossible to sanitize a wooden vat or barrel, and un-glazed pottery was almost as bad. I think they banked on out-numbering the bad bugs with the yeast, much the same as we do today. I also think they consumed the beer very quickly before it became undrinkable. Any beer is better than no beer at all I suppose. I've often wondered what the American Colonial beer tasted like. I'll have a whiskey, thank you very much!

Yeah, I was about to make the point about drinking it fast, before the infection could take hold.

From what I have read, Colonial beer was terrible. That is why rum and whiskey were the drinks of the land.

Plus, concentrated alcohol was MUCH easier to transport when the roads were paths through the woods.

 

[Catt22]

I've read where the most popular alcoholic drink was apple cider. I think it had to do with apples being in abundance and malt not so much. I think whiskey and rum were probably highly sought after, but also very expensive and scarce. I'm just guessing at this.