• Please visit and share your knowledge at our sister communities:
  • If you have not, please join our official Homebrewing Facebook Group!

    Homebrewing Facebook Group

Did ancient cultures drink infected beer?

Homebrew Talk

Help Support Homebrew Talk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Very interesting. Both sides have logical arguments. I personally can not accept the fact that people brewed crappy beer just becaused they lacked starsan. Seriously? Now understand that their perception of "tastes" good and ours might be totally different, but I'd still be willing to bet that I could safely get through a pint of historic beer.

These people might not have had the tools necessary to prevent all types of infections and probably had more beers with sour character. Fast forward several hundred years and brewers are tying to intentionally infect their beers to get a certain flavor profile.
 
:off:

I hate when people make that argue....because we humans, no matter whether it was 40 million years ago, or yesterday, can choose what they like and dislike. And the stuff that we dislike, often dissapears from our awareness and our culture.

Its not beer related, but I think you'd be interested in reading "1000 Years of Nonlinear History" by Manuel DeLanda. Its a really interesting take on the philosophy of history and historical bias.

Sorry about the useless post for anyone not interested.
 
There is nothing in that article that tells us about the source of the recipe or technique.

They recreated, but who is to say what modern ideas about brewing they injected into the process. For example they achieved an optimum temperature of 60-70°C but thermometers weren't yet invented for 3000 plus years.


and

That's pretty easy in Ireland... the outside temp is 55-65F for most of the year. Its rare to break 70F
 
Maybe an experiment is in order; brew a simple low-gravity bitter and ferment it in a visually clean but unsanitized vessel. Consume it young at the tail end of the ferment (as in the case of the aforementioned medieval ale). A healthy pitch of yeast does a lot for keeping unwanted microbial action at bay.

I'm speculating here, but I suspect 'laying down' of beer wasn't the norm; consumption would have taken place well before any significant staling or souring was expressed. Open fermentation ain't just for sour beers, BTW. ;)
 
:off:



Its not beer related, but I think you'd be interested in reading "1000 Years of Nonlinear History" by Manuel DeLanda. Its a really interesting take on the philosophy of history and historical bias.

Sorry about the useless post for anyone not interested.

Oh wow, I'm reading reviews and stuff about it now....looks fascinating. Thanks!!!!!!
 
By the idea "no bacteria that can hurt a human can live in beer" who knows if they just drank what they had. Think about trying a new beer from the grocery store. I have had a few that I thought where horrible on the first bottle, but a couple weeks later, that was all that was left in my fridge. I drank those horrible beers and found that I loved them the second time around. Maybe each batch of beer was slightly different than the last because of infection or yeast strain, but it gave them variety. This is clearly just my thory.
 
I have one of these going now. I have been feeding it with random wort for about two years now. It is made with my ambient yeast from under a crabapple tree in my yard. It has a funkiness but is not sour. I will be kegging it in a couple weeks. I am not sure if I will drink it all, but it was a fun experiment. It is a lot how I picture ales brewed with random wild yeast. Fine and you can drink it, but it is not a good clean yeast fermentation like we are used to (aside form the obvious fact that the flavor profile is pretty crazy with over 10 different styles of beer in there).
 
I am interested in old-timey beer, myself, although I've done only a little reasearch on the matter. Just by that little bit, though, I've had a few thoughts on the matter.

Ancient Stuff ---

There is no doubt that the truly ancient beer (i.e., the stuff that started out in the Near and Middle East and during the B.C. times) was "truly awful" by today's standards. However, that is not necessarily because it was spoiled. Rather, it was a very different beverage.

Just like today, beer begins with the grains. They did use, pretty much the same grains (i.e., barley, wheat, and oats, and I understand they also used millet fairly often). However, malting was a different process, and most of the grains were nowhere near "fully" modified. Of course, that's after they actually developed malting. I'm pretty sure everyone is fairly familiar with the lack of "pale" malt, as well, although that may not have been the case with the very ancients, since they may not have even kilned all their malt in the first place. In any event, efficiencies likely were very poor, which was no big deal, since beer was consumed largely for nutrition. As a result, folks went for the thick, starchy stuff.

Beer was a much weaker beverage, as well. Of course, there is absolutely no way to know what the alcohol content was, but many believe the common beers probably clocked in somewhere in the 3% range, with a great deal of variance that depended on the brewer, the area, and the occasion for the beer. It also seems that much beer probably was consumed with even less alcohol, as much of it was consumed before it was fully attenuated. Again, beer was mostly for nutrition. Yeast provided that nutrition. Fermenting beer also may have been preferable to fully fermented, as the carbonation from the fermentation would provide a pleasing mouthfeel and the CO2 in the fermenting vessel (likely an open vessel) would prevent oxidation.

Another large change, as some have pointed out, was that the beer had no hops in it. There are no hops around those parts, so they used other spices to preserve the beer. You might have seen beers spiced with cardamom, ginger, anise, black pepper, fenugreek, or any number of other spices in order to preserve the beer and balance the sweetness.

So, was it "spoiled" or "sour" or "infected," as we think of beer, today? Sure, it was. However, it very likely was not at all wretched. First, again, much of it was consumed very young (if even fully attenuated), so the yeast barely had a chance to take hold -- much less the bacteria that tend to act more slowly in beer. Not only that, but the lower efficiencies did not provide as fertile an environment for the bugs.

Further, as many above have pointed out, beer was not necessarily fermented wildly. Much in the same way the ancients carried out some fairly sophisticated selection among crops without understanding molecular genetics, they also carried out some fairly sophisticated yeast selection without understanding microbiology. Folks used the "magic" stick, or they used the same fermenting pot that made a good batch. They may have innoculated wort with krausen from a "good" brewer or with some of the unfiltered beer from a good batch. They weren't just setting the wort out somewhere and praying for the best. They were working at it.

Just to wrap up the story, as beer moved into Europe, much of the same practices were adopted. However, the Europeans used what they had (i.e., more hops and barley, but less other spices and millet; cooler climates for different fermentation). As European brewing developed, the more eastern beers vanished as Islam spread through the region.


TL
 
Further, as many above have pointed out, beer was not necessarily fermented wildly. Much in the same way the ancients carried out some fairly sophisticated selection among crops without understanding molecular genetics, they also carried out some fairly sophisticated yeast selection without understanding microbiology. Folks used the "magic" stick, or they used the same fermenting pot that made a good batch. They may have innoculated wort with krausen from a "good" brewer or with some of the unfiltered beer from a good batch. They weren't just setting the wort out somewhere and praying for the best. They were working at it.

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.
 
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.
 
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!
 
A handmade chair is much more advanced than one from ikea, even though each ikea one is consistently the same.

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.
 
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.

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.
 
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.

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! :D
 
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.
 
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?
 
Technology is also ideas and is not solely defined by things.

Decoction Mashing is a technology.
First Wort Hopping is a technology.

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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
hmm... according to mosher the ancient sumerians had fifty words relating to yeast... i would assume they knew what it was just not scientifically why it worked....
 
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.....
 
Back
Top