Belgium Stout?

[PeeBee]

I wrote this tagged onto an ancient thread on that "other" UK forum (THBF). I meant to write a note and save a proper analysis for this forum, but I got a bit carried away. Still, we seem to be having a "quiet" period here, so I'll copy it here almost verbatim to grab a bit more comment (it's buried a bit out-of-sight on the other forum anyway). Apologies if you have already seen it.


On that other site there had been a topic that covered "Belgium Stout". I've got me eye on "Stouts" having just received Ron Pattinson's new book: "Stout!" (Yeap, it's out now!). Now, "Belgium Stout" ... there's something wrong with that! ...

Nope, I'm not talking about my pet hate "Belgium Candi Sugar", although the original posting was going on about that complete boll**** too! It's the word "Stout". It's an English word. Why is a country that has been capable of brewing beers to easily challenge any brewed in Britain, brewing a style of beer closely linked to Britain? The Belgiums have no need to blatantly copy British beer.

The answer was in Ron Pattinson's new book. Whitbread's "Extra Stout" brewed between the wars and after WWII was (in R.P.'s words) "for the Belgium market"!

Just like we Brits are partial to a strong Belgium beer, the Belgians were partial to a London Stout it seems. These post-WWI "Extra Stout" brews did well to keep a 1.055 SG, but I guess the Belgians hankered after the much stronger Edwardian Double and Triple Stouts, making way for the ex-pat John Martin to complete plans with Guinness (he'd had connections with Guinness for over three decades) and release the 1944 "Special Export" (one of my favourites; 8% ABV, and at the time only available in Belgium and some surrounding areas).

So, a potted history of "Belgium Stout" according to PeeBee . Beats some of the nonsense I've read on the Internet (that doesn't even mention London's involvement in "Stout"). Really needs some of R.P.'s trawling over export/import figures to prove ... or perhaps the figures are already in the book for me to find? (Long way to go to finish reading it). But the Whitbread "Extra Stout" goes on the Xmas list (already too late for Edwardian Triples, and probably for the Doubles too?). Certainly no "Belgium Candi Sugar" nonsense (Whitbread were using Invert Syrup No.3 and I've got dead-easy emulations of that ... as has everyone). No "brown malt" emulations, by this time they are using cylinder roasted brown malt (like you buy) as can be seen by the small quantities used (<10% not >20%). And no excessive use of hops and black malt, which the Londoners, nor the Belgians, didn't care for much. (Some of the later Whitbread Extra Stouts were using chocolate malt, not black).

Post WWII recipe from the depths of R.P.'s blog (in case you are unfortunate enough to not have his new book ... hey, I hope he appreciates all this free publicity!), but you can get what I'm claiming from it. The recipe isn't much different from the post WWI ones:

Whitbread 1948 Extra Stout

There are modern Belgium "craft" breweries making "Belgium Stout", but they are creating history for the future, not producing historical beers now (for now, they are just perpetuating the usual "craft beer" boll****). But there may be historical beers that can claim to be "Belgium Stout", but I for one would find it very odd if they did exist.

[Eric]

I don't know what Ron has written on this topic, but on September 4th, 1944, the British took Antwerp from German control. Its value to the war effort was as a port, but the Scheldt Estuary wasn't under allied control until November after a great cost in lives. Among the first cargoes was stout for the local market made by Guinness and possibly others.

[PeeBee]

Thanks Eric. Couldn't understand how the much quoted "1944" could fit in with this beer going to Belgium.

Wellll ... I still can't! There must have been a good bit of speculation involved to have "specially commissioned" beer of 8% ABV ready for rapid delivery to a freshly (within weeks that is) liberated country? There seems to be a lot missing from this bit of the "Guinness story"! Not much help I can find from Ron's scribblings (although I get the impression he does "liberate" the odd bottle for himself).

There's lots of contradiction about it: Like it was the first stout Guinness pasteurised, back in 1930 (eh!). The bottles are pasteurised unfortunately. I originally thought it was brewed in Belgium (there are snippets suggesting that about the Internet), but I am now convinced it's brewed in Dublin (err? Almost convinced?). Guinness seemed to relish the misinformation connected to their operation: Like calling the Nigerian brewed stout "Guinness Foreign Extra Stout" (as sold on Amazon, and it is not like the John Martin stuff ... at 7.5% ABV, not even the same strength!). The John Martin stuff is "Special Export" ... blink and you miss it.

[Eric]

No, the story doesn't fit well with the real history, I think at some point the facts must have been bent slightly to fit.

Didn't Guinness or some other brewery quite recently produce an Antwerp Stout to commemorate the occasion? I seem to recall something, but it might be my own confusion about the actual event. No doubt in the chaos and confusion of war it would be impossible for a brewery to be aware in advance of future happenings. It was a particularly chaotic time in any case.

I don't care for the current Guinness Foreign Extra, isn't it made using sorghum? It has a sickly sweet taste now and once used to delight in the stuff.

[Cobnut]

I too do not like the Nigerian Guinness FE stout. As you say, Eric, too sickly sweet.

I do, though, revel in the mystery of these historic beers.

I’ve done a couple from the Durden Park beer circle “book” (pamphlet would be a more suitable epithet, but that is not to dismiss it, as it is a very interesting publication) and one or two from Peter Symon’s “Guile brews”.

I struggle with a problem if too many beers I’d like to make (re-make, in some cases) and both insufficient time and capacity to consume the resulting beer, but I struggle on regardless!

As Winston apparently used to say “keep buggering on”.

Cheers!

[PeeBee]

No, the story doesn't fit well with the real history, I think at some point the facts must have been bent slightly to fit. ...

Came across this from Gary Gillman (while attempting to secure a couple of bottles of said stout):

Guinness Special Export Stout - Beer Et Seq

So, seems the 1944 referred to the resumption of supplying Guinness Special Export after WWII, and it was the same beer as John Martin had been selling before WWI (and therefore is the stout first pasteurised in 1930). And mentions "Antwerp Stout" in the article too.

[Cobnut]

I think you are getting confused…

Reading your post set me in mind of this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Gilmore's_Eyes

Your link says “Garry Gillman”

[PeeBee]

... ssshh, I don't think anyone else noticed?

[Cobnut]

Phew!

[PeeBee]

Time to get this "Extra Stout" on for Christmas. I'm probably leaving it too late already?

But I have been having some doubts about the recipe translations for Whitbread Extra Stouts after WWII. The hopping rates appear to have dropped through the floor (the calculated IBUs go from the forties - 41 in 1940 - to about thirty - 28 in 1948!). I've switched my plans to the 1940 version, but it does mean getting involved with more complicated hop additions (dry hops even), and even a token Oat Malt addition (<1%) which I'll ignore and bump up the pale malt to cover it.

At first I thought Ron had made a mistake with the 1948 version. But his book almost agrees with the Blog post of over seven years earlier (Whitbread 1948 Extra Stout). Same year but must be a different batch (pale and mild malt proportions differ, No.2 Invert in place of a black caramel but that could be Ron's tinkering with scribbled notes in the records, and Saaz late hops in place of Fuggles), but the amount of hops near enough agree; about 28 IBU (Ron's calculation I assume) for the book version and 32 for the Blog. I'll wait for any comment, meanwhile I've got the 1940 recipe (brewed just before Belgium was invaded, so that Stout batch probably never made it to Belgium).

Crikey, it's better not to look too closely. Now where's that Enigma decoder got to ...

[IPA]

Belgium Stout ????
That's the equivalent of England Bitter
Belgium is a country. Belgian is someone or something coming from Belgium.

[PeeBee]

Belgium Stout ????
That's the equivalent of England Bitter
Belgium is a country. Belgian is someone or something coming from Belgium.

Thank you.

I knew I could count on you to correct any grammar slips I make. I blame it on my spelling checker of course. In fact, let me give that a try ...

Belgian Stout

Wait for it ... wait for it ... Nope? Guess it was a home-grown cockup (entirely down to me). I've double-checked my "of course" 'cos that always gets me. And no "pidgeons" to be seen in this post.

[IPA]

Don't take my comments too seriously PeeBee. The BBC online make the same mistake nearly always.
For example this type of headline.
TURKEY EARTHQUAKE KILLS HUNDREDS.
Correctly this should be written. AN EARTHQUAKE IN TURKEY KILLS HUNDREDS or TURKISH EARTHQUAKE KILLS HUNDREDS;
I love the English language and cannot bear to see it misused.
I have lived a third of my life in France where if you do not obey the rules of grammar or pronunciation a lot of people will stare blankly at you because they have no idea what you are talking about.