Oh yeah, I forgot all about the magic stick.....That was an early form of yeast ranching.
Did ancient cultures drink infected beer?
- Thread starter jlanier01
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
Oh yeah, I forgot all about the magic stick.....That was an early form of yeast ranching.
I also think we need to define some terms here if this is going to be a useful discussion.
To say that something does or doesn't taste like Ass isn't very useful because I'm sure it's a delicacy somewhere. The point is (and this is true today), "What was the brewer's intention?"
Having never been able to taste a clean single strain Octoberfest, the ancients could never have had that as their intention. So in relative terms, what they made was good, but I think it would not compare favorably to what can be achieved today.
To somehow deny that things don't have the potential to get better over 5 thousand years is to somehow put beer in some sort of mystical Neverland.
Beer is a technology and follows the same progression as other technologies. Sometimes there are baby steps backward, but for the most part things move forward.
To say that something does or doesn't taste like Ass isn't very useful because I'm sure it's a delicacy somewhere. The point is (and this is true today), "What was the brewer's intention?"
Having never been able to taste a clean single strain Octoberfest, the ancients could never have had that as their intention. So in relative terms, what they made was good, but I think it would not compare favorably to what can be achieved today.
To somehow deny that things don't have the potential to get better over 5 thousand years is to somehow put beer in some sort of mystical Neverland.
Beer is a technology and follows the same progression as other technologies. Sometimes there are baby steps backward, but for the most part things move forward.
justflow1983
Well-Known Member
Technology generally moves towards efficiency, consitency, and convenience. This doesn't necessarily mean it moves forward. For instance agriculture is in the process of returning to its roots, but bringing with it the lessons of the past century. History is mostly a case of lateral steps that link up in new ways, not necessarily some ladder progression towards continual improvement.
We can now understand beer enough to easily replicate and control all stages in the process, and that understanding allows us to get the outcomes we desire. Whether or not that means it has improved is up the the drinker.... Coors Light is a pretty hard beer to replicate and I would rather survive on dirty pondwater if I had to choose.
I wouldn't call what we make now better, not having spoken to anyone 3,000 years old. I'm sure it is much more consistent and better adapted to our current tastes. I like escargot, but since people don't have to resort to land mollusks for nutrition anymore most people never acquire the taste for them and think they're gross.
Edit: Just wanted to add that I'm pretty sure my tastes are oriented to today's beer and that I'd like it better. In our context, today's beer would be "superior" and I don't dispute that we shouldn't put ancient beer on a pedestal. I'm just questioning whether we ought to consider a process less relevant or advanced just because its different from our own understanding of it. A handmade chair is much more advanced than one from ikea, even though each ikea one is consistently the same.
We can now understand beer enough to easily replicate and control all stages in the process, and that understanding allows us to get the outcomes we desire. Whether or not that means it has improved is up the the drinker.... Coors Light is a pretty hard beer to replicate and I would rather survive on dirty pondwater if I had to choose.
I wouldn't call what we make now better, not having spoken to anyone 3,000 years old. I'm sure it is much more consistent and better adapted to our current tastes. I like escargot, but since people don't have to resort to land mollusks for nutrition anymore most people never acquire the taste for them and think they're gross.
Edit: Just wanted to add that I'm pretty sure my tastes are oriented to today's beer and that I'd like it better. In our context, today's beer would be "superior" and I don't dispute that we shouldn't put ancient beer on a pedestal. I'm just questioning whether we ought to consider a process less relevant or advanced just because its different from our own understanding of it. A handmade chair is much more advanced than one from ikea, even though each ikea one is consistently the same.
I think its right to mention here that people have been making wine for thousands of years as well. I think its safe to say that just because they didn't scientifically know the reasons for everything that happened doesn't mean they couldn't make good beer/wine that would satisfy even our modern tastes. People generally don't eat or drink things that taste bad. That's one of our built in defense mechanisms to avoid foodborn illness. So its fair to assume it tasted good to them! Someone at some point had to test and make the inference it was the boiling that made it safe, not the grains. They didn't know why boiling made water safe, but they knew it did! So why continue to make beer and wine? Bottom line... it tasted good and made you feel good!
To expound on this... Again, what is the intent?
You are correct that a handmade chair *might* be superior in quality but if the intent is to seat 1000's or even 1 quickly or cheaply, then IKEA wins. The point is that we have the option to choose among these two (and countless others) to solve problems, but the pre-industrial guy has only one option.
BrewRI
Well-Known Member
My guess would be probably, at least for a little while.
justflow1983
Well-Known Member
Yea thats true the intents are different. I was actually thinking more advanced in construction, not just superior quality. The joinery in a fastener-less chair is much harder to do by hand, and ikea most uses bolt-together methods that have been around in similar forms since roman times but were usually considered inferior. Also, joined woodwork is advanced from the perspective that it gets a lot more strength out of less material and uses fewer components for the same style.
In the same vein, are we comparing craft or industrial brew with the ancient beers. Craft brewing is probably pretty similar to older methods, even if its more automated.
flyangler18
Well-Known Member
Rob, I don't disagree with a single thing that you've said thus far; however, my intent in participating in this discussion was to try and clear up some historiographical errors that pop up again and again when discussing this subject. The fact of the matter remains that brewing is a learned trade - a protected one at that - in many societies of the past, and as such, that technology was cutting edge for that particular time in history. I think much of the negative reaction to historic receipts is more along the lines of taste rather than a criticism of technique and process.
I don't put historic brewers on a pedestal, but I must certainly tip my hat at their gumption in producing a consistent product relying on their senses and cumulative experience rather than automation. There's certainly something to be said for that!
The same apples and oranges thing happens on the other side of the equation.
Compare what some ancient king might have had to what 99.99999% of the world was drinking at the time.
Compare what some ancient king might have had to what 99.99999% of the world was drinking at the time.
justflow1983
Well-Known Member
There are some interesting comparisons between mechanical vs. human effort and how most of our transition to mechanized production for consumer goods has to do with increased profit potential than any real advances in quality, durability, or construction. This doesn't apply to electronics obviously.
In the same way, the mechanized production of a lot of our beers etc has to do with the fact that is cheaper to buy a $100 auger than to pay someone to shovel malt. In the end, science has improved our beers, but I don't necessarily know if that is also technological. I make some pretty good brew in my kitchen using nothing that wouldn't have been available to Arthur Guiness other than a gas stove.
I wonder what some Sumerian laborer would think of SNPA?
In the same way, the mechanized production of a lot of our beers etc has to do with the fact that is cheaper to buy a $100 auger than to pay someone to shovel malt. In the end, science has improved our beers, but I don't necessarily know if that is also technological. I make some pretty good brew in my kitchen using nothing that wouldn't have been available to Arthur Guiness other than a gas stove.
I wonder what some Sumerian laborer would think of SNPA?
Technology is also ideas and is not solely defined by things.
Decoction Mashing is a technology.
First Wort Hopping is a technology.
Decoction Mashing is a technology.
First Wort Hopping is a technology.
justflow1983
Well-Known Member
Technology, science, or a hybrid? I do agree with you actually, but I think a bit of devil's advocate brings out the best in a discussion. Without a doubt new technologies for making beer have been developed, that's not in question... The question is does it necessarily make a better vs different drink.
I also think that the idea of continuous improvement (not just with beer) is somewhat of a myth and in all things it is usually a case on continuous change that feels like improvement in the prevailing circumstances.
Don't you think that maybe some of you guys are being a bit too sensitive? I highly doubt that a Babylonian brewer, that's been dead for over 6000 years, is going to be offended if you say his beer probably tasted like ass.
Ancient brewers didn't practice good sanitation, and they didn't even know that yeast existed. The only way to get fermentation would be to allow the wort to be "infected" by wild yeast, and God knows what else. I have no doubt that ancient brewers made drinkable beer, but I highly doubt it was has good has beer made nowadays, or within the last 3 centuries.
Ancient brewers didn't practice good sanitation, and they didn't even know that yeast existed. The only way to get fermentation would be to allow the wort to be "infected" by wild yeast, and God knows what else. I have no doubt that ancient brewers made drinkable beer, but I highly doubt it was has good has beer made nowadays, or within the last 3 centuries.
Watch it man. That's our GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG grandfather you're takin' 'bout
Edcculus
Well-Known Member
I don't know if its been mentioned cause I'm too lazy to read through 5 pages of arguing.
Its probably safe to say that even up until the last 100 years, a lot of beer probably included what we now consider beer spoilage organisms like brett, lacto, pedio, and even acetobacter. While we consider that a flaw in most beer now, its just how beer tasted.
In kind of the same vein, I thought it was interesting to note that in Designing Great Beers, Daniels mentions how a lot of styles, even Porter which was the first industrial beer had much lower attenuation than we see today.
Its probably safe to say that even up until the last 100 years, a lot of beer probably included what we now consider beer spoilage organisms like brett, lacto, pedio, and even acetobacter. While we consider that a flaw in most beer now, its just how beer tasted.
In kind of the same vein, I thought it was interesting to note that in Designing Great Beers, Daniels mentions how a lot of styles, even Porter which was the first industrial beer had much lower attenuation than we see today.
Beer was food. In most cultures, you did not waste food, no matter what color, or how it smelled. Also, until recently, you made your beer and drank it in a very short time frame. I have a traditional African beer recipe that's less than a week from start to drunk.
Whats the recipe? How does African recipes differ from the European recipes we are all familar with?
I know almost nothing about non-western brewing history.
Dalarast
Well-Known Member
Just to add my 2 cents to this I think if someone tasted a beer of todays standard back in the day they would probably believe it tasted like crap or was weak in their standards.
There should be an archaic brew off; but then I believe it would turn into a beer fueled renaissance festival.....
There should be an archaic brew off; but then I believe it would turn into a beer fueled renaissance festival.....
I don't know. I think a Viking would have drank fermentated cow piss if it would get them good and drunk.
Life in the dark ages sucked, that's probably why they invented the still. I guess beer and wine couldn't quite get the job done for them.
Similar threads
