Author: Will Lovell
A few years back, while judging a local homebrew competition, I had the opportunity to try a beer style that, outside of reading about it, I was unfamiliar with – Pre-Prohibition Porter. While I’ve certainly consumed my fair-share of the various modern examples of Porter, Pre-Prohibition Porter is unique in several ways, though as one might presume by its name, it’s quite uncommon these days.
Characterized by the 19th-century transition from top-fermented ales to bottom-fermented lagers, Pre-Prohibition Porter is a distinctively American evolution of the English original. To adapt to the high protein content of native 6-row barley, brewers introduced corn as an adjunct and utilized Porterine, a dark sugar syrup, for color and body. This created a smooth, drinkable dark beer that dominated the Northeast until Prohibition forced a shift toward lighter styles, leaving only a few historical survivors. The BJCP offers the following description of this style:
A historical American adaptation of English Porter by German immigrants using American ingredients, including adjuncts.
Having enjoyed the Pre-Prohibition Porter I sampled during the aforementioned day of judging, I was keen to brew a version myself. While designing the recipe, it occurred to me that this style threw certain brewing traditions to the wind, which led me to thinking it’d make a great candidate for the Short & Shoddy approach.
| BREWING THE BEER |
Since Porterine is unavailable nowadays, and I didn’t feel like buying Sinamar for this batch, I relied on good ol’ grains to achieve the color in this recipe.
Short & Shoddy Pre-Prohibition Porter
Recipe Details
| Batch Size | Boil Time | IBU | SRM | Est. OG | Est. FG | ABV |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5.5 gal | 30 min | 25.7 | 21.8 SRM | 1.054 | 1.011 | 5.64 % |
| Actuals | 1.054 | 1.011 | 5.64 % | |||
Fermentables
| Name | Amount | % |
|---|---|---|
| Pilsner Malt | 11 lbs | 75.21 |
| Munich I | 2 lbs | 13.68 |
| Caramel Malt 80L | 8 oz | 3.42 |
| Pale Chocolate Malt | 8 oz | 3.42 |
| Caramel Malt 40L | 6 oz | 2.56 |
| Chocolate Malt | 4 oz | 1.71 |
Hops
| Name | Amount | Time | Use | Form | Alpha % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Northern Brewer | 45 g | 30 min | Boil | Pellet | 6.1 |
| Fuggle | 15 g | 15 min | Boil | Pellet | 4.3 |
Yeast
| Name | Lab | Attenuation | Temperature |
|---|---|---|---|
| Augustian Lager Yeast | Apex | 78% | 32°F - 32°F |
Notes
| Water Profile: Ca 90 | Mg 10 | Na 0 | SO4 168 | Cl 64 |
Download
| Download this recipe's BeerXML file |
After collecting the full volume of filtered water at 12:31 PM and flipping the switch to get it heating up, I added a measured amount of salts to achieve my desired mineral profile.
As the water was heating up, I weighed out and milled the grain.
When the water was properly heated, I stirred in the grist then checked to make sure it was at my target mash temperature.
During the mash rest, I prepared the kettle hop additions.
Once the 30-minute mash rest was complete, I removed the grains before bringing the wort to a boil, at which point I added the hops as listed in the recipe.
At the completion of the 30-minute boil, I quickly chilled the wort then took refractometer reading showing it was at 1.054 OG, for a brewhouse efficiency of 55%.
I then transferred the wort to my Delta Brewing Systems FermTank.
Next, I direct pitched a vial of Apex Cultures Augustian Lager Yeast into the 68˚F/20˚C wort.
The filled fermenter was connected to my glycol rig set to 68˚F/20˚C and left for a week. With no signs activity present, I took a hydrometer measurement indicating FG had been reached.
At this point, I cold-crashed the beer overnight then pressure-transferred it to a CO2 purged serving keg that was placed on gas in my keezer. After 3 weeks of conditioning, it was clear, carbonated, and ready to serve to tasters.
| RESULTS |
A total of 20 people of various levels of experience participated in this Short & Shoddy evaluation. Participants were informed of the specific beer style and provided the BJCP description prior to completing the survey. Tasters were then instructed to rate how hoppy, malty, and dry they perceived the beer to be on a 0-5 scale where a rating of 0 indicated “not at all” and 5 indicated “extremely.”
Tasters were provided a list of common hop, malt, and yeast characteristics then instructed to select from each the one they perceived as being most prominent in the beer.
Hop Characteristics
Malt Characteristics
Yeast Characteristics
Next, participants were asked to indicate whether or not they detected any off-flavors in the beer; those who did were provided a list of common off-flavors and instructed to select the one they perceived as being strongest. Not a single person identified this beer as possessing any off-flavors.
Tasters were then asked to rate how well the beer represented the intended style, based on the provided BJCP description, on a 0-5 scale where 0 meant “not at all” and 5 meant “exactly.”
Finally, tasters were asked to rate how much they enjoyed the beer on a 0-5 scale where 0 indicated not at all and 5 indicated extremely.
My Impressions: To put it bluntly, this beer was delicious. The heavy-handed use of crystal malt lent a really nice burnt sugar/molasses note that I found really delightful, while the lager yeast helped keep those flavors in focus. There was nothing about this beer I didn’t like.
| CONCLUSION |
Similar to other styles that made their way to the United States from the European regions where they were first created, Pre-Prohibition Porter was unique enough that it didn’t quite fit the expectations of the classic English Porter. Fermented with lager yeast and often made with a decent charge of corn adjunct, Pre-Prohibition Porter was known for putting the malt on display without being overly cloying or roasty.
Despite the use of a lager yeast, I opted to fermented this Short & Shoddy Pre-Prohibition Porter at standard ale temperature, which is widely believed to create undesirable esters. However, while a number of tasters felt the most prominent fermentation character was esters, it was only one more than the number who thought it was cleanly fermented. Moreover, not a single taster endorsed any off-flavors, a majority felt it was a good representation of the style, and even more reported enjoying the beer quite a bit.
In my opinion, this Short & Shoddy Pre-Prohibition Porter was a homerun, and the blind taster data is validating. I can definitely see myself brewing this recipe again in the future, though now I’m curious to see what some flaked maize might bring to the table.
If you have thoughts about this Short & Shoddy brew, please feel free to share it in the comments section below!
Support Brülosophy In Style!
Follow Brülosophy on:
FACEBOOK | INSTAGRAM
If you enjoy this stuff and feel compelled to support Brulosophy.com, please check out the Support page for details on how you can very easily do so. Thanks!
