4 ms·
Yeah my understanding was that they drank large volumes of low ABV beer in the Middle Ages and did so in part because it was safer than many water sources
by tnecniv 3y ago
Yeah my understanding was that they drank large volumes of low ABV beer in the Middle Ages and did so in part because it was safer than many water sources
- klodolph 3y agoI don’t know where that myth comes from. It doesn’t seem to have foundation in the historical record.
- worthless-trash 3y agoWe have very little evidence the sun rose every back then either, but we can make educated reasoning based on evidence.
- klodolph 3y agoOk… is there some kind of educated reasoning that leads you to believe that people drank beer because it was safer?
- defrost 3y agoIn Ye Olde Days: Beers and Ales used hops and boiled water. Drinking water near large population centres were not boiled or treated. People that mostly drank wines, beers, and ales likely suffered fewer bouts of dysentry and worse.
- klodolph 3y agoThat’s some very D-grade, armchair history work here. Straight out of the D&D handbook, perhaps. Around the D&D table is where I most heard the myth that people, historically, drank beer because it was cleaner than water. Here’s a competing theory—people liked beer, and drank a lot of it. If we want to get past armchair history, we need something more than a patchwork of unfounded speculation. We want something that would lead us to believe that one explanation was better than the other, or perhaps both are good, or neither.
- defrost 3y agoOhhhhhh, you're putting the stress on because. There's no need to be a tosser (see HN guidelines), it's an argument that comes straight out of Medieaval recipe books for make beers and ales, straight from the time of the great miasma, and from the mouths of many UK historians.
- klodolph 3y agoCan you provide some clues or hints so I can find these UK historians that make these claims? It’s frustrating, because I’ve been told off for asking for evidence, even though I didn’t ask for evidence. Every time I try get an answer, all the resources I find contradict the claims here. Water was the most common drink. Communities were built around wells or other water sources. The Romans built massive systems of aqueducts so they could have more water. I did a Google search and found a page full of results directly contradicting the claim that people drank beer because it was cleaner.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- ffhhttt 3y agoIf boiling is enough what’s the point of “wasting” grain if your only goal is to make the water safe to drink? Also medieval authorities to great effort to keep water sources unpolluted with outright draconian punishments for those who did that. Of course they didn’t always succeed.. but still.
- defrost 3y ago> if your only goal is to make the water safe to drink? The point of medieval beer and ale making exercises was to make beer and ale, (which required boiling water as part of the common recipes of the day).. which very likely created a notable difference between those drinking mostly large amounts of low alcohol beer | ale made from boiled water compared to those that mostly drank unboiled liquids.
- flangola7 3y agoAlcohol kills pathogens.
- klodolph 3y agoBeer does not have a strong enough alcohol content to be used as a disinfectant. In order to make beer, you actually have to have clean water, as an input.
- ffhhttt 3y agoDo you also believe in homeopathy? 5% ABV does not kill much. You’d need distilled spirits for that.
- ikekkdcjkfke 3y agoI'd image yeast produces alcohol to gain some advantage over over microbes
- NoZebra120vClip 3y agoWe went around with this at the beginning of the pandemic, when Christians debated whether it was safe to offer the Most Precious Blood as Holy Communion. While silver and other noble metals have antimicrobial properties, the percentage of alcohol in altar wine is way too low to make a difference. When transubstantiated from wine to blood, it retains the accidents of wine, and those accidents will infect you with a disease just as any other. That's the miracle of the Eucharist; our feeble senses can't distinguish it, nor could a microscope or science lab point out which is Eucharist, and which is ordinary wine. Almost all Western churches suspended distribution under the species of wine, even though the odds were very, very low. The Eastern Orthodox couldn't do this, however, and it led to several Greek bishops insisting that no disease could come from this Holiest of Mysteries, and that it is uniquely special and don't worry about COVID-19.
- bernawil 3y agoyeah, such a silly myth. People have known you can make water safe by boiling since forever. This myth also often dispelled along "they drank it for safety and didn't get very drunk because it was very week beer" like they couldn't just drink more of it until they got as drunk as they wanted.
- xvedejas 3y agoIt's actually really difficult to get drunk off of weak beer (about 2%), you quickly reach a pain point when it hurts to drink more liquid. And I suspect the dilution also slows uptake.
- hackermailman 3y agoI do know they were terrified of water during the early Tudor period because of the Sweating Sickness and wouldn't even risk taking a bath, but the large beer intake I suspect would've happened anyway and isn't connected
- klodolph 3y agoThis is exaggerated. People did bathe, and they made soap for washing themselves.
- hackermailman 3y agoTaken from Simon Thurley's book, they washed but avoided baths, and used rainwater only during the sweating sickness outbreaks: A school of though existed at the time that believed that bathing was dangerous and a time that “allowed the venomous airs to enter and destroyeth the lively spirits in man and enfeebleth the body” (Thurley, Pg. 171).
- klodolph 3y agoPeople did believe that, but it’s exaggerated how widespread those beliefs were.
- vintermann 3y agoThe water sources part, maybe a myth. But the weak part, not a myth. Yeasts less aggressively bred for alcohol tolerance, and short brewing times. Somewhat made up for by people having less body mass, though.