You may have wondered (or perhaps not - you might well have better things to do than speculate on my actions) why I've not written more about Truman's 20th century beers. There's a good reason. I can't understand the bloody things.
It's bot the handwriting. Though all Truman's brewers seem to have had scrawly handwriting. Nor how the logs are laid out. They changed very little in format between 1850 and 1964. I got the hang of them ages ago. It's more fundamental than that. I've no idea what the beers are.
The first time I looked at the 1964 logs, I couldn't even spot where the beer name was, let alone what it was. But I think I've cracked the codes.
I can't claim the credit for being especially clever. The notes in the corner of one page (see right) told me what many meant. The names are more expansive than in the log headers. There you just see things like S1, P1, P2, etc.
And the barrelage numbers (the second column) are big clue. It's easy to guess what the biggest sellers were in 1964: Mild, Bitter, Best Bitter.
So here's my overview of Truman beers in 1964. I'm convinced that the logs must be from their Burton brewery, as there are no Stouts. In fact, they used no dark malts at all. Just pale malt and caramel.
Don't ask me why such a strong beer should be called "Runner". I've no clue as to what sort of beer it was, apart from being very strong.
Now I have to start working backwards through the years. Until I get to WW I. Won't that be fun?
What Better Beer Analogist Than Gogol? - This post is more for me than you. But the whole blog is really... isn't it? First, consider this: For every man HAS his hobby. One man's may be sporting...
1 hour ago