4 ms·

But if you're just trying to sterilize water wouldn't you skip the beer making process for price reasons? Couldn't they just boil the water and then bottle it

But if you're just trying to sterilize water wouldn't you skip the beer making process for price reasons? Couldn't they just boil the water and then bottle it and you'd have clean water for much cheaper? Or is the idea that they didn't know that the boiling is what made it safe to drink?

etothepii 5y ago
I think it's more the if you've made beer I know you've boiled it. If you tell me you've boiled it you might cut costs even further and just say you've boiled it.
- neaden 5y ago
  Who is the you in this instance? The typical person in this time period lived in a small rural village, their water would have been fetched from a well, stream, or other source by themself or another family member. If you are dealing with a professional cook then it is someone who was employed by another person/organization as an employee, in which case trying to cut costs like this would be pretty easy to find out.
mywittyname 5y ago
They didn't understand germ theory at the time. They had no clue that boiling water would make it potable. If they had known that, so many lives would have been saved. What they did understand was, if you made beer the "wrong way", it would go off. Turns out the "right way" to make beer is to eliminate any competition for the brewers yeast.
cwkoss 5y ago
It was also probably easier to smell/taste beer and tell that it is safe. The scent of yeast fermentation is distinctive, and if contaminated before fermentation the off scent can be quite apparent. So if receiving a liquid from an unknown/untrusted source, beer may have been safer than clear water.
SmellTheGlove 5y ago
I think they didn’t know. Pasteurization didn’t come about until the mid 1800s. Maybe they suspected heating played a part - Wikipedia says it was a known method of preservation in China since the 1100s, but I think it took longer to get to Europe.

etothepii 5y ago

I think it's more the if you've made beer I know you've boiled it. If you tell me you've boiled it you might cut costs even further and just say you've boiled it.

neaden 5y ago
Who is the you in this instance? The typical person in this time period lived in a small rural village, their water would have been fetched from a well, stream, or other source by themself or another family member. If you are dealing with a professional cook then it is someone who was employed by another person/organization as an employee, in which case trying to cut costs like this would be pretty easy to find out.

mywittyname 5y ago

They didn't understand germ theory at the time. They had no clue that boiling water would make it potable. If they had known that, so many lives would have been saved. What they did understand was, if you made beer the "wrong way", it would go off. Turns out the "right way" to make beer is to eliminate any competition for the brewers yeast.

cwkoss 5y ago

It was also probably easier to smell/taste beer and tell that it is safe. The scent of yeast fermentation is distinctive, and if contaminated before fermentation the off scent can be quite apparent. So if receiving a liquid from an unknown/untrusted source, beer may have been safer than clear water.

SmellTheGlove 5y ago

I think they didn’t know. Pasteurization didn’t come about until the mid 1800s. Maybe they suspected heating played a part - Wikipedia says it was a known method of preservation in China since the 1100s, but I think it took longer to get to Europe.