[Sca-cooks] Reference to 'stale' ale.

[grizly at mindspring.com]

sca-cooks at ansteorra.org wrote:
> --- Philip & Susan Troy  wrote:
 . . . SNIP . . .  even if we don't know what it
> was), and the fact that there's no really strong
> reason to believe that the ale used in the recipe was even
>remotely bitter.

Bitter ales, IIRC, are a fairly modern (post 1600's)
invention.  This is not to say that earlier
concoctions weren't bitter, merely suggesting that an
*intentionally* bitter ale may not have existed in
period.  At the same time, over pitching of yeast can
cause a bitter flavor in beer, as can using, as
Adamantius indicated, other bitter ingredients.
However, most un-hopped and still ales would have been
comparatively sweet, if I'm not mistaken.  Bear seems
to know quite a bit about brewing history, so perhaps
we should illicit his response? > > > > > >

Actually, the gruits used prior to the hopping was expressly to
add bitterness.  Hops seem to have grown in popularity in 14thish
century on (depending on place) because they bittered AND made beer
last longer before going 'off'.  Unbittered beer is rather cloyingly
sweet in any quantity, though that doesn't mean that ales were heavily
bittered.  Ale and beers are broad categories for wide variety under
the headings.  As beers aged, without filtration to remove yeast,
they would have become drier as the yeast continued to feast on
available sugars.  That could be a clue to the quality of 'stale' ale.

Historical Companion to HouseBrewing gives the distinction in 14c.
England of Ales being gruit bittered whiles beers were hopped.  If
that can follow, then stale ale would have a lower sweetness due to
longer fermentation and _possibly_ lower bitterness due to no hops.
Certainly an herbed quality dependant on gruit composition that would
ass an additional character to the cooked soup.

pacem et bonum,
niccolo difrancesco
(not Bear, but a brewing student of sorts)