Ale and Porter Preserved. - In order to save ale and porter in good condition for a considerable length of time it is, for the most part, kept corked down in bottles; and though this method answers exceedingly well, yet it is subject to this inconvenience, that it causes, where a small quantity, as one draught, for instance, is only required, all the rest of the ale or porter in the bottle to go to waste, which must prove both expensive and inconvenient. It is pressure that is the main cause of keeping ale, &c., so well in bottles, and an apparatus is in use by which liquids may be constantly under pressure in casks as well as in corked bottles. The vessel is made in the form of a cask of strong tin, strongly braced by iron hoops, which stands on its end. At the upper end is a cock, soldered to a tube, which is immersed to within an inch of the bottom of the cask. At the same end is a condensing syringe, by means of which air can be forced into the cask; and whenever this is effected it is obvious that the liquor will have a tendency to escape through the tube and out at the cock with a force proportionate to the degree the air is compressed by the action of the syringe. If the cock be then turned the liquor will rush out with violence, foaming, at the same time a great quantity of froth, or what is usually termed a cauliflower head. Every time the ale is drawn from the cask, the air it contains is not exposed to the atmosphere, whilst the liquor is kept under pressure, and no vent peg is necessary. It is said all the advantages of bottling are obtained by the above process, without one half of the waste and inconvenience attending on the former system.
Friday, 6 December 2024
A Shot of Beer History #7 - How Old Are Beer Kegs?
Thursday, 21 November 2024
A Shot of Beer History #6 - The Irish Reinheitsgebot
VIII. And be it further enacted by the authority afore said, That from and after the twenty fourth day of June one thousand seven hundred and seventy eight, no common or retailing brewer, or other retailer of beer or ale, shall make use of any madder, molosses[sic], sugar, honey or composition or extract of sugar, or make use of any broom, wormwood, gentian root, or any drug or herb, or of any ingredient whatsoever in the brewing, making, or working of any beer or ale, other than water, malt, hops, and barm; and that all beer or ale brewed or mixed with any ingredients other than water, malt, hops, and barm, shall be forfeited; and that every such common or retailing brewer, or other retailer of beer or ale offending therein shall forfeit for every such offence the sum of ten pounds.
IX. Provided that no penalty or forfeiture herein mentioned shall extend or be construed to extend to the infusing of broom, wormwood, ground ivy, or other ingredient into beer or ale by the retailer, after the same is brewed and tunned, for the purpose of making purl or jill, or broom or wormwood beer; or to the using any ingredient or ingredients necessary for the making of porter in making brewing the same.
So we can see that fines were to be levied onto brewers who used adjuncts in their brewing (a relatively common occurrence in the 18th century according to the scant recipes available at the time) as this would presumably have an effect on the tax revenue garnered from malt and hops, and it was probably enacted for that reason more so than any concerns regarding the quality of the beer or the risk of poisoning. The act did not apply to the brewing of porter (or if any adjuncts were added to other beers post brewing) so it could be brewed with whatever the brewer wanted to use.
If this act was never repealed* then there are quite a few Irish brewers that need to forfeit their beers and pay up that ten ponds, or its equivalent!
Liam K
* It was, see John reply below.
Please note, all written content and the research involved in publishing it here is my own unless otherwise stated and cannot be reproduced elsewhere without permission, full credit to its sources, and a link back to this post. The above information was sourced via Google Books. DO NOT STEAL THIS CONTENT!
Tuesday, 29 October 2024
A Shot of Beer History #5 - Tankard Theft
It is now some time ago since the licensed trade suffered great loss by the disappearance of pewter tankards, and now the tankard thieves have again made their appearance. They re-started on the North side of the city on Wednesday, and confined their unwelcome attentions to Upper Dorset street. The modus operandi is as follows:- Generally a man and a woman enter the "snug." the man calls for a tankard of porter, and the woman a bottle of stout. They occupy the "snug" for some time, and then leave, the woman having hid away the empty tankard, and leaving a pint tumbler in its place, the assistant in his rush forgetting, when he sees the two glasses, that he supplied a tankard.The tankards are melted down along with the tops of soda water syphons and made into counterfeit coin, which is generally freely circulated after a tankard raid. the coins are very neatly turned out, and have a very good ring, but the bright colour will be detected if closely examined.
As alluded to in the report, this was a relatively common practice but it is interesting to see the 'modus operandi' here in print. So, it appears that the theft of drinkware from pubs isn't a new phenomena - not that we really thought it was - although the reasons for said theft appears to have changed through the years to one of collecting. Although there is no mention of where the ladies mentioned in the report hid their soon-to-be-swapped tumblers and stolen tankards, it is possible they were tucked neatly into the folds of a dress but it is probably more likely a bag of some description was used. Anecdotally, that practice still exists, with glassware generally disappearing into a handbag these days - often at the gentleman's prompting - but without the switcheroo. (That's not to say that women don't steal glassware for their own use of course!)
It's 'nice' to see that there is equality and partnership when it comes to this exercise, although it must also be said that then - as like now - the gentleman can have plausible deniability as to the theft, as the stolen item is in the possession of the lady, and therefore perhaps the alliance is not quite what it seems ..?!
Liam K
PS. Don't steal stuff from pubs!
Please note, all written content and the research involved in publishing it here is my own unless otherwise stated and cannot be reproduced elsewhere without permission, full credit to its sources, and a link back to this post. Newspaper research was thanks to The British Newspaper Archive, who have kindly let me share the above image from The Freeman's Journal of the 16th May 1913. DO NOT STEAL THIS CONTENT!
Friday, 4 October 2024
100 Years of Irish Brewing in 50 Objects: #22 – Macardle’s No. 1 Beermat (1973)
If there is one still-existing beer brand that elicits a wave of nostalgia when mentioned in certain company it’s Macardle’s ale. The ‘Large Mac’ from the shelf, or the cooler depending on your tastes and the weather, has a small but important cult following, who against all odds seem to be keeping the ale alive and stocked in certain bars and off licenses across the country, with a bias towards north Leinster sweeping down towards the southeast of the island. The draught version appears to have vanished entirely from the pub counter even in its literal homeland of Dundalk, gone the way of the Small Mac and the six-pack of dumpy half-pint bottles. Now this once well-known and important brand is only offered in a pint bottle, and by default is normally served with a half-pint, trumpet-shaped pilsner glass. Along with bottled non-nitro Guinness, it is the default choice for many drinkers who prefer the fuller flavours of microbrewed beers and find themselves in a pub in Ireland which only stocks ‘The Usual’ line-up of taps serving the somewhat anodyne output of larger breweries. In its current form Macardles is a well-carbonated, amber coloured ale with a pronounced bitter hop bite and a relatively decent malt aftertaste. It would be difficult to compare it to any other ale currently available in Ireland, so it’s perhaps best described as being somewhat reminiscent of a throttled back English bitter, especially when served at ‘shelf’ temperature and from a fresh-brewed batch.
-o-
Like most Irish mainstream beers, Macardle’s has been reduced to a brand owned and produced by a multinational corporation, but the brewery history behind the name goes quite far back, and was once a huge part of the now-lost brewing history of the island. The history of most Irish breweries can be quite complicated and the origins are often lost and muddied by oft-repeated errors and marketing-friendly white lies, but looking back at the early period when our brewery was called Macardle, Moore & Co., and using as a starting point an advertisement for the enterprise which was published as a part of The Freeman’s Journal’s series on Irish industries in June 1920, a short, early history and status of the brewery can be gleaned. The headline over the full page advertisement read ‘A Famous Irish Brewery’ and it also included some images of the brewery buildings and workings which sadly didn’t print too well at newspaper quality, so are not too noteworthy here. The advertisement states:
The firm was established by the late Mr. E. H. Macardle [who] took over, jointly with the late Andrew Thomas Moore […] an old brewery, carried on in the Napoleonic era by Duffy, Plunkett & Co. and afterwards by Jas. Mc Allister. [The] brewery was established in Dublin Street, Dundalk, but it was subsequently transferred to Cambricville, where the industry is now carried on in the most pleasant surroundings, the windows of the vat room, for example, looking out over a wooded demesne. Cambricville was originally a Huguenot settlement, where the exiles carried on the manufacture of Cambric, according to the processes which had made Cambrai famous. The De Joucort family founded the industry in 1740.
Although a good starting point, this is a somewhat succinct history of the business, and we might need to delve into other sources - mostly newspapers from the period of the brewery’s birth - for clarification, especially as any dates and details seem a little scarce in the above piece.
In 1860 or possibly the year before, Edward Henry Macardle entered into a partnership with John Charles Duffy to greatly improve the existing brewery on Dublin Street in Dundalk. John C. Duffy had probably owned the brewery along with other family members - James and Arthur Duffy and his uncle Patrick Wynne - since at least the early 1830s, and perhaps prior to that it was owned by Patrick Wynne alone. After John Duffy’s death in 1863, Andrew Thomas Moore, a cousin of E.H. Macardle, became his partner in that enterprise on Dublin Street, and so started Macardle-Moore reign as brewery owners in (and just beyond) the town.
Meanwhile, the brewery at Cambrickville, just outside Dundalk but quite close to the Dublin Street brewery, was possibly set up c. 1804 by a Simon Loraghan who is named as living at a house on the brewery site when it is up for sale in 1807, the brewery was ‘only three years at work’ at that time according to a newspaper advertisement. (Modern references to the brewery mention that this was the site of an earlier brewery in the 18th century owned by a William Stuart, of which there is no mention in commonly available sources from this time. Mr Loraghan may have had nothing to do with the brewery and may have just been a caretaker for the site, or an agent for its sale. Plus the 'three years at work' could refer to a rebuilt brewhouse on the site.) A James Duffy and Edward McAlister are later in partnership - with others - at the brewery up to 1822 when the partnership appears to have been dissolved. This was around the same time that a bankrupted Richard Darley lost his share in the venture, having seemingly surviving a similar fate in 1816 and 1819, when it was noted he was a quarter partner in the brewery. (This may have been just a protracted delay in resolving the issue of his bankruptcy, and it would be of interest if Richard Darley was related to Henry Darley who had a brewery in Stillorgan, and Bray, in the 19th century but that seems difficult to prove.)
A James McAlester (the surname spelling seems to vary) was running the brewery there alone from 1824 when the partnership called Duffy, Plunkett & Co. comprising of McAlester, John Duffy and Patrick Plunkett was dissolved, although it appears Plunkett had already left the business in 1821. The enterprise was known as ‘Cambrick Ville Brewery’ at this time. McAlester was still brewing there in 1846 according to Slater’s Directory, although four years earlier in 1842 barley, brewing utensils as well as furniture and livestock was being sold at an auction to pay off some debts, and the brewery was certainly unoccupied by the 1850s as referenced by council records in newspaper at this time. So Slater’s may have been listing it as an existing brewery structure even though it was not currently in production.
But in 1863 it was being advertised to be let, had been completely refurbished and was in ‘first rate order and repair’ after a ‘considerable sum’ had been spent to bring it up to working order, with applications to be made to the owner James McAlester, according to an advertisement late that year. As well as the brewery itself, there was an onsite malt house with 8,000 square feet of flooring that was capable of producing 300 barrels of malt weekly. A substantial 6-bedroom dwelling house with a parlour, drawing room and library was also included in the letting. So all in all an impressive site.
In late 1865 the partnership of Macardle, Moore & Co. agreed to buy (or let) the brewery from McAlester, with advertisements for its sale at this time particularly noting the quality of its water for brewing ‘pale long keeping ales.’ The brewery appears to have begun production of ale and porter there in 1866 with the plan at the time to keep both breweries in operation, but it appears that the Dublin Street brewery closed soon afterwards. Malting continued at the Dublin Road site for a number of years, with the old site being called ‘the old brewery’ in newspaper mentions into the early 1870s. It should be noted that the spelling of the new brewery has now changed to Cambricville Brewery, although the spelling does seem to vary through the years.
The article from 1920 continues:
The Firm has also a number of modern maltings and branch grain warehouses, where the grain is stored and subsequently transferred to the brewery, where there is a branch line and siding which connects with the Great Northern Railway system.
One of these maltings, which is in Dundalk, is known as the Butter Crane Maltings, because it was used as a storehouse for butter and bacon and other Irish produce during the Napoleonic Wars, when the British Government drew a large portion of their supplies from Ireland.
[…] the stout and porter and ale brewed in this famous Dundalk Brewery have achieved a national reputation, and the firm are now extending their connection right through the country, and are appointing agents where not already represented. Their beverages have long been in great demand in Army canteens at home and abroad, and the directors believe that their products have only to be tested to command the widest approval and support.
The piece goes on to emphasise the ‘purity and wholesomeness and really palatable flavour’ of its beverages, and although it reads very much like the advertisement it is, it certainly shows the importance of the brewery at this time in Ireland, and - like most Irish breweries - how it brewed a range of beers, not just one product, from its earliest time on Dublin Street, in fact it won a medal at the Irish Exhibition of Arts and Manufacturing in 1882 for its porter, not its ale as is sometimes reported. The military connection mentioned above was a huge part of their business, as was an export trade, and as were their tied houses in Dundalk and surrounding area, with some being as far away as Belfast. It was one of the best know breweries in the country for many years before - after some changes in ownership and being turned into a bottling plant with minimal brewing - it finally closed in 2001.
-o-
But what of the last remnant of this brewery’s drinkable history? The last remaining format, the pint bottle with its red, white and black label showing the words ‘Macardle’s’ along with ‘Premium Quality’ and ‘Traditional Ale,’ a label which is less than iconic but more than just plain familiar to many drinkers. The one on the back of the bottle states ‘Originally brewed in Dundalk in 1863 with the finest raw materials of Irish grown barley, hops, water and yeast. Macardle’s is known for its distinctive flavour which is often described as nutty in character by ale aficionados’ and interestingly that first sentence could apply to the 1863 beer or the current one, depending on how you interpret it. It is also proclaimed it to be 4.0% alcohol by volume, and the name of the brand owner and current brewer, ‘Diageo Ireland, St. James’s Gate, Dublin 8’ also features here.
Prior to the current rebrand, which occurred in two steps in the mid-1980s and which focussed on tradition and quality, the labelling featured the term ‘No. 1 Ale’ prominently on its bottle labels and caps. Advertisements in the 1960s read ‘Number one for quality. Number one for strength. Number one for flavour,’ and that byline regarding its strength goes right back to the early 1920s when it was being advertised as ‘Macardles No. 1 Strong Ale.’ This was when it was being first advertised under the ‘No. 1’ ale in newspapers and there is even an implication that it was a new brew with advertisements stating that ‘every effort is being made by [the brewery], by using the choicest material, regardless of cost, and the best skill in manufacture to produce an ale second to none’ (1923) and that the brewery ‘was glad to note that our efforts in producing this famous ale have been so highly appreciated by the public’ (1926). This could be just down to interpretation but it could be read as being a new product at this time.
Regardless of the date it first appeared, a look at this ‘No. 1’ ale from its advertised traits in the 1920s through to its current, renamed form appears to flag something amiss. Even in a country that had barley-wines at 5.5% alcohol by volume in the second half of the 20th century it is highly unlikely that a 4% ale would be called a ‘strong’ ale, as Macardle’s No. 1 was in the 1920s and 1930s, nor could it be beer of ‘strength’ as it was promoted as during the 1960s, which hints at a recipe change, or perhaps just a dumbing down in alcohol from this period. ‘No. 1’ ales were generally the strongest of the ‘normal’ ale output of a brewery. There appear to be no brewing records available for public viewing for Macardle-Moore but we can look at a brew that was made by them in 1911 to mark the kings visit which had been supplied to soldiers at the time and was probably around 5% abv or more based on an advertised original gravity of 1.053. This was a 'Pale Bitter Ale' originally supplied to troops so possibly not their strongest-brewed effort, and although this is a decade or so before the ale called ‘No. 1’ appears it would seem unlikely it would be weaker than it. For reference, down the road in Drogheda, rivals Cairnes were brewing their eponymous Cairnes ale (which is listed in early brews as a ‘No. 1’) in 1928 to 5.5% abv and Perry’s in Rathdowney had an XX ale in 1933 that they marketed as a ‘No. 1’ ale which was also 5.5% according to brewing records available for those breweries. (And that is without mentioning the English brewed and hugely popular Bass No. 1 ale.) All of this would make one assume that the Macardle-Moore ‘Strong Ale’ was at least this strength, or possibly a little higher in alcohol, and perhaps – like some of those mentioned from other breweries - it fell slightly through the 1940s and 1950s before eventually dropping by the 1980s to the now 4% abv. (The quotation about the increase in ale prices at the very start of this piece implies that No. 1 ales were stronger and more expensive too.)
Both of the ales mentioned above from Cairnes and Perrys were pale ales, as no caramel, dark malt or roast barley appear to be used in them at this time. Bass and Smithwick No. 1 ale were also pale ales so it is certainly more than possible that Macardle's No. 1 was also a pale ale at this time, although without access to brewing records we cannot be sure, as there were certainly some darker ales available in Ireland in the past.
For reference, in the mid–to-late fifties the brewing output of the brewery was Macardles No. 1 Strong Ale, Macardles Export, as well as their brewing Double Diamond. The latter being pasteurised and filtered, and the others appearing to have been bottle conditioned, another small if significant change from the present day, according to a newspaper report that mentioned its bottling of other ales too.
Also of note is that in the 1990s the recipe was said to included flaked maize which was unlikely to have been used in earlier brews (although not impossible of course), and if this beer dated back to 1863 then it would certainly not contained such a fermentable as Macardle-Moore took out advertisements in newspapers in the latter part of the 19th century where they were at pains to state their porter and ales included just barley malt and hops (Pacific hops at times!), along with water and yeast. This inclusion of maize would also hint at a reformulation at some point, perhaps in the 1980s when the newer branding and the dropping of the ‘No. 1’ occurred.
Lastly, a presentation given to The Old Dundalk Society in 2019 contains a slide regarding the head brewer Bernard Rodgers, who was head brewer from the 1920s until 1952 claims he was the 'first brewer to brew Macardle Ale.' Unfortunatley no further information is given.
-o-
The question is whether, as is claimed on the bottles, it is the same ale – or any ale - that was brewed in 1863, presumably in the Dublin Street brewery as it could not have been brewed in Cambrickville.
This seems highly unlikely, if not impossible.
Although, ‘Traditional’ is one of those word that means many things to many people, and so it could be argued that it was brewed traditionally with a base at least of hops, malt, water and yeast.
But the barley variety and how it was malted will be different, as will the hops – and they are probably in pelleted form. The mash and brewing regime have probably changed and been curtailed, and perhaps the yeast and water profile are different – although the latter would be the easiest to replicate. The colour of the beer has possibly changed too, darkened to fit in with the false ‘Irish Red Ale’ history. The beer is no longer bottle conditioned as it was in the past, and lastly, we can see that the alcohol amount has also probably changed. It may be roughly based on a recipe from 1863 but it’s difficult to track a continuous unbroken path to the present for such a beer.
But, it may certainly be the beer that was brewed in the 1980s in Dundalk, and perhaps fifty odd years is tradition enough?
Liam K
There is more information on the Macardle Historical Society website here, including the presentation and slide mentioned above. New information is being added all the time.
There is a wonderful collection of aerial photographs of the brewery from 1956 here on the NLI site.
(Newspaper references available on request.)
Please note, all written content and the research involved in publishing it here is my own unless otherwise stated and cannot be reproduced elsewhere without permission, full credit to its sources, and a link back to this post. Newspaper research was thanks to The British Newspaper Archive and the Macardles beermat image is from the author's own collection. The Cairnes' brewing record mentions is held in The Guinness Archive and the Perry's records are in the Portlaoise local studies department of the local library. DO NOT STEAL THIS CONTENT!
Friday, 13 September 2024
A Shot of Beer History #4: On Beer Festivals - Irish Provincial Narrowness vs. English Degrading Eccentricities
The wit and ingenuity of the world would seem to be on the side of frivolity and wickedness. The efforts made to entice men and women to the profane, the foolish, the enervating, and the contemptible, are far greater and more intense than the efforts to regenerate, to restrain, to correct. The follies of our day are characteristics almost superior to the genuine achievements which we can really boast. Fashion in itself is a sufficient indictment against us. The attractions of life are usually foolish in act or seeming, and sometimes they are wicked and pernicious. Any bad play put upon our stage is certain to attract attention and to gain applause. Any novel contemptibility is hailed as a stroke of genius; and the man who invents such a monstrosity as a barmaid show, a baby show, or a beer show, is instantly elevated to the rank of a benefactor. The lower senses are invariably appealed to in these clever designs; and we are sorry to see that success is often achieved by the assistance of those whose duties should preserve them from such a foul abuse of power. The latest sensation is, as we have hinted, a beer show. Babies, barmaids, pugs, and monkeys having had their year, the folly of the age finds relaxation in beer. It is needless to say that the scheme is due to the brain which originated these splendid absurdities; and it is also needless to say that the brains of those who assist at the show will be none the better for the exercise. In Woolwich Gardens [London] there are just now some five and thirty specimens of the national beverage. The visitor pays for a tasting order, and having made up his mind, or as much of that guide as remains after the discharge of a solemn duty, he votes for a particular beer. If we remember that even half a glass of beer all round will give the taster a gallon of intoxicating liquor, we can estimate his judgment, his sagacity, and his condition. To the ordinary mind there is a leering impudence in this scheme which is at once disheartening and irritating. The audacity which enables a man to submit to this sort of pastime to a civilised people is very suggestive of the spirit of the age. But the truth of the case is humiliating, indeed. These things succeed. Thousands of young men will visit the gardens and taste the beer and record their votes, and the proprietor, who is rapidly gaining a reputation for unequalled cleverness, will probably make more money in a month than a man of genius and industry can in a year. In a community like ours, where religion and morality have a real influence, a beer show is happily an impossibility. The idleness of wealth is one of the curses of England, for idleness is ever wicked or inane. In Ireland what is sometimes called our provincial narrowness saves us from many of the degrading eccentricities of our rich neighbours, and preserves for us that stern regard for decency which is one of our it most praiseworthy qualities.
There are lots of quotable terms in this diatribe on beer festivals and their visitors, I think my favourite is 'leering impudence?'
Regardless, enjoy your next splendid absurdity - wherever, however and whatever that may be ...
Liam K
Please note, all written content and the research involved in publishing it here is my own unless otherwise stated and cannot be reproduced elsewhere without permission, full credit to its sources, and a link back to this post. Newspaper research was thanks to The British Newspaper Archive, who have kindly let me share the above image. DO NOT STEAL THIS CONTENT!
Wednesday, 4 September 2024
100 Years of Irish Brewing in 50 Objects: #21 - Murphys of Clonmel Flip-Top Bottle (c. 1910)
On Saturday night between 11 and 12 o’clock the Clonmel Brewery was broken into and a quantity of porter and of the new ale manufactured at the brewery, known as “B.B.”, was stolen. The thirsty visitors effected entrance to the brewery means of a disused hayloft which looks out on Dowd’s Lane in the quay direction. The door of the hayloft, which is about eight feet from the ground, was shut-to but not locked. Several dozen of porter and “B.B.” were taken, and it is certain that there must have been at least two disciples of Bacchus concerned in the affair. Sergeant Booth is looking the matter up, but so far no arrest has been effected.Further inquiries show that the circumstance of the door being open was due the fact that they hay in the loft, which was ordinarily piled up against the door, thus keeping it closed, had been removed. This would go to show that it was some parties with intimate knowledge of the inner arrangements of the brewery who committed the depredation. Suspicion was first aroused by the fragments of two or three bottles, which were found in the street, underneath the hay loft, next morning.The Cork Examiner - Wednesday 27th July 1910
Flip-top bottles are often thought of as a relatively modern idea as a bottle closure device, and not something which is generally associated with Irish brewing. But the object shown above shows that they have certainly existed here in the past, and were not developed and exclusively used by the Grolsch beer brand of which they are most associated. Their use by German breweries is also know by those who partake of beers from some of the relatively smaller companies of that country too, and Germany appears to be where the origin of this precise type of closure begins – way back in the 1870s.
In 1878 Nicolai Fritzner of Berlin was granted provisional patent for the bottle closing device using a porcelain stopper with an Indian rubber or leather washer and a wire clasp. He had already patented something similar in 1876, and a year earlier than that a Charles de Quillfeldt from New York had registered a very similar method of closure, although the bung used to close the bottle was made completely of rubber so isn’t quite the same as the version today’s beer drinkers are familiar with, and even prior to this there were other wire and bung bottle closing inventions but again they were not quite the same design. The true inventor is open to interpretation, and there were court cases and complicated debates regarding copyright infringement that we won’t go into here, suffice it to say that these general types of bottle closures have been around since the mid-1870s at least, and the ceramic stoppered version we are familiar seems to appear near the end of the decade.
This bottle was made by the firm of Charles Borron & Co., as shown by the letters CB&C which stand proud of the base. That company operated in Newton-le-Willows in Merseyside in England from the mid-1860s until it closed in 1925. The glass used itself is dark green and the volume it holds is exactly one half pint. The words ‘T. Murphy & Co. Ltd. Brewers Clonmel printed on the ceramic stopper and the same wording - with the ‘T’ extended to the name ‘Thomas’ - is in relief around the base of the bottle itself. The date of the bottle is tricky to ascertain to any precise degree of accuracy but it must fall between the very late 1870s when the closure mechanism was invented and 1925 when the glass bottle manufacturer ceased trading.
But we can perhaps be a little more accurate based on an advertisement for the aforementioned ‘B.B.’ ale that was produced for the Thomas Murphy brewery which shows our exact bottle design complete with a handsome label and a pale drink poured into glass. The words ‘Drink Murphy’s B.B.’ are printed above the image. The ale was described as new in 1910 in the above report on the theft, and it was still being advertised in newspapers in 1915, so this gives us, perhaps, a better indication of the date of our object notwithstanding that the bottles could have been used for other beers and ales prior to this period. There is no record of what style of beer ‘B.B.’ was and it would be obvious to suggest Best Bitter, although perhaps a better guess would be ‘Bitter Beer’, a term used by others. Adverts say it was ‘a genuine refreshing drink’ but very little else is mentioned about it.
-o-
What became known as Thomas Murphy & Co. appears to have started as a partnership with Thomas Greer and Thomas Murphy, both Quakers - as were many of our Irish brewing hierarchy - in the late 18th century, although some sources suggest it was started just by Greer alone with Murphy coming into the business later. Their foundation date seems to be a little vague, with later sources claiming it was 1798 but advertisements in newspapers and guide books give the date at 1797 and 1799. The earliest mention, in a newspaper from 1863, states the 1797 date so it is possible that the 1798 date was adopted because of the importance of the rebellion that occurred in that year. It is also possible, and likely that there was a year or two in between the sourcing of the brewery site, its fit out, and when it commenced its first brewing which could also account for the variously used years.
Dubious dates seem to be a minor issue with the brewery’s purported history, as another major event – or calamity – that occurred was when the entire brewery burned down. The date given in every available history for the brewery states that this was in 1829. It wasn’t. It was in 1825 as attested by a few newspaper reports that sate that on the morning of Saturday the 8th of October a fire was spotted in the brewery and that the entire premises (measuring 200 ft by 500 ft at this time)was soon engulfed in flame, the fire having started when a kiln became overheated and burst through its protective tiles, causing huge flames to escape into the brewery itself*. Luckily no one was injured and after the insurance pay out the brewery was rebuilt and began expanding, eventually stretching from Nelson Street across Dowd’s Lane and down to the quay. The main building itself was and is a handsome six storey structure and it can be seen in its prime in this illustration from c. 1889, although no doubt with some artistic license applied. At this time the site stretched to 2 acres and it employed 200 people if write-ups of the day are to be believed, plus there were coopers making casks and carpenters building drays – it was a large and important endeavour for the town and surrounding area.
In 1829 the brewery of Greer and Murphy were producing Double Strong Ale, Pale Butt, Ale, Porter and Table Beer** and in 1833 Thomas Greer dies and in that same year the brewery can be seen to be exporting its beers to England. The partnership was officially dissolved in 1838 and the brewery was now known as Thomas Murphy & Co. By the 1860s and 1870s they were brewing East India Pale Ale, and Strong Ales and Mild Ales as well as Brown Stout according to various newspaper advertisements. The pale ales in particular were attested to be as good as any of those produced on these islands at the time.
-o-
As an aside, in 1887 the following incident occurred, which is worth noting:
A curious occurrence took place here on Wednesday. It appears that on Sunday last a champion football match, between a Carrick team and one in Clonmel, was played on the ground of the latter, and that at the termination of the play a serious row took place. On Monday six of the Carrick contingent were arrested and fined £2 each by the Mayor of Clonmel. On the same day a drayman named Patrick O'Neill, in the employment of Mr Murphy, brewer, Clonmel, arrived in Carrick with some barrels of beer, ale, and porter. He was hooted through the streets by a large crowd, the publicans refusing to deal with him. So serious did things turn out that the police had to escort him out of the town for some miles. On Wednesday he returned only to meet much the same treatment. Not a trader in the town would purchase, nor could he get stabling for his horse or refreshments for himself. He left, after been hooted about, under police protection.The Dublin Daily Express - 3rd June 1887
If nothing else, this shows that sport will trump beer every time, and the passion - and resentment - of its supporters is something that hasn’t changed to this day.
-o-
The brewery struggled in the early part of 20th century due to losing of the lucrative contract to supply army canteens as well as increased competition, well-publicised strikes, and raw material supply issues before finally closing in 1925 - the very same year as the maker of our bottle - with a portion of the extensive premises becoming a shoe factory and other parts becoming the cider factory for new firm of Magner’s, now known as Bulmers and a brand owned by C&C.
The brewery building erected on the quays still stands as testament to the once great brewery and employer in the town, as do other buildings previously owned by the firm, and if you stand with your back to the river you can see to the left of the imposing stone and brick façade of the brewery, the archway where once drays loaded with casks, and perhaps our bottle, left the brewery for parts unknown.
It's important to remember that once upon a time, we had another Murphy’s brewery…
Liam K
Wednesday, 7 August 2024
A Shot of Beer History #3: Macardle's Coronation Brew ...
MACARDLE'S CORONATION BREW
Which was supplied under Contract to the Troops while encamped in the Phoenix Park during the King's Visit, has been so much appreciated that Macardle, Moore & Co Ltd, the Irish Army Brewers, Dundalk, have arranged for Special Brews of this Pure Pale Bitter Ale (1,053°), which they can deliver, carriage paid, to any Canteens or Messes in the Kingdom, at usual prices.
THE TRADE SUPPLIED.
The supply of ale and porter to the army by Irish breweries is far from unusual, as canteens were regularly supplied with local beers, but what is of interest here is that this this appears to be a specific ale brewed for the soldiers of the 'Irish Army' on duty - or more accurately, perhaps, off duty - during the visit of King George V to Ireland on his post coronation tour. What is also of interest is that we are told it is a pale bitter ale and that the original gravity was 1,053°, which depending on how well it fermented meant was probably between 5% and 6% alcohol by volume.
So if we are ever asked did an Irish brewery brew an ale to commemorate - in a way at least - the coronation of a British monarch we can say yes, Macardle, Moore & Co. certainly did, and we even know its style and alcohol content ...
Liam K
[Image from The Dundalk Examiner and Louth Advertiser -15th July 1911]
Please note, all written content and the research involved in publishing it here is my own unless otherwise stated and cannot be reproduced elsewhere without permission, full credit to its sources, and a link back to this post. Newspaper research was thanks to The British Newspaper Archive, who have kindly let me share the above image. DO NOT STEAL THIS CONTENT!
Tuesday, 23 July 2024
A Shot of Beer History #2: The 'Nearly' & Others ...
Up in the north of Ireland, in Bangor County Down in 1933, a hotel owner was charged with serving something other than the pint or half pint of beer that the law required. In the Marine Hotel a customer called for and was served a 'Nearly' by the barman - an amount which was 'nearly a pint'. The reason being that due to recent taxation, a pint of beer had gone from 6d to 7d, but 'for a few working-men who really could not afford to buy the whole pint' a pint glass was filled to 1 inch of the brim and sold for 6d. This, it was reported, was a common practice in Bangor and this size of pour was also called a 'Blue', a 'Royal' and a 'Schooner,' the latter being a size of pour also familiar to any Australian readers, although not a short pour.
The charge was proven but the case was discharged without a conviction or fine.
Liam K
Here's my long piece on the Meejum and the Loop-Liner - again!
[Image and report from The North Down Herald and County Down Independent - Saturday 28th January 1933]
Please note, all written content and the research involved in publishing it here is my own unless otherwise stated and cannot be reproduced elsewhere without permission, full credit to its sources, and a link back to this post. Newspaper research was thanks to The British Newspaper Archive, who have kindly let me share the above image. DO NOT STEAL THIS CONTENT!
Thursday, 18 July 2024
A Shot of Beer History #1: The Real Baby Guinness ...
It was quite an English thing and didn't seem to make it back to Ireland, but it was Guinness stout in a third-of-a-pint bottle and was certainly an important size of serve if newspaper mentions are anything to go by. It was certainly around from the early 1900s to the 1960s, and possibly before and after. By the way, that same size of bottle was used here in Ireland for our relatively low alcohol barley-wine ...
Liam K
[Image from The Portsmouth Evening News from 2nd June 1956]
Please note, all written content and the research involved in publishing it here is my own unless otherwise stated and cannot be reproduced elsewhere without permission, full credit to its sources, and a link back to this post. Newspaper research was thanks to The British Newspaper Archive, who have kindly let me share the above image. DO NOT STEAL THIS CONTENT!
Tuesday, 18 June 2024
Parted
Sat in Silence, all alone
In the darkened bar.No wise words to say.Thoughts closing, from afar,No ears to listen anyway.All quiet, except for Him.A hum. A sigh. A clink.Flows fast into the glass.Left down, but not to drink,Not yet, he lets time pass.Wet circles on Old wood.Drooped shoulders shake now.A worn-out hand’s embraceOf Glass Is calming somehow.Raised high as if in Grace.
Lips licked and eyes shutThat first taste, shocked,New tears squeezed out.Old memories unblocked,Shaking, a breached Redoubt.Gone. Passed. Left. Parted.An empty stool, seat cold,But pulled close, just in case.He sits there fighting old,Lost in Sorrow’s harsh embrace.
Liam K
Thursday, 13 June 2024
Opinion: A Closer Look at Ireland's Oldest Pubs
First came those skinny hardcover books such as The Little Red Hen, Rapunzel, and Puss in Boots et al published by Ladybird, which were soon followed by the outlandish rhythmic writing of Dr. Suess and others. Even back then, books were for me a form of escapism on wet and dreary weekends, or dark weekday evenings. I’d sit in an armchair in the kitchen beside the always-lit stove, reading them repeatedly as my mind drifted into the scenes depicted on the pages, where I became a participant in whatever story was unfolding in the pages. Growing older I never lost that ability to fall into a book, even when the illustrations disappeared and were replaced by fanciful descriptions - my imagination coping admirably with the scene being painted as I read all of those well-chosen words. For a good few years I practically lived and dreamed in the world of Tolkien’s Middle Earth, as the incredible tales in all of his books had me wandering over shires and scrambling up snow-capped peaks, or getting lost in deep-dark places. That world, and others, were places to escape into and perhaps even exist in, however briefly. I quickly became a fan of science fiction too and I was strangely drawn to the worlds literally created by Bob Shaw for one. Alan Dean Foster, Terry Pratchett and other purveyors of pure and perfect fiction also graced my bookshelves over the years although in recent decades my fiction tastes have moved on - or perhaps evolved - towards those of a more historical bent, or those by writers such a John Connolly or James Lee Burke, whose books occasionally waver wonderfully into the world between the real and the supernatural, but I still occasionally dip back in the realm of pure fantasy in all of those books from my teenage years, most of which I still possess, as is the affliction of the Collector-stroke-Hoarder.
Fiction and fantasy have their place in our lives as a source of entertainment and diversion, they are useful for many of us as a form of escapist therapy and a way to cocoon yourself in the words and worlds of comfort and imagination. But they are only stories. For sure, some may be loosely based on fact or are anchored back to a real-life event, even though the story itself wanders to a made-up world where dragons take flight, elves and goblins are at constant war, and unicorns do, well, whatever unicorns do in these places, which is usually just to exist. But we know these stories and fairytales not to be true, as they are outlandish by nature, or speak of things we know to be false, and we are all okay with that and can easily discern the facts from the fiction. These are tales, and not mistruths.
The issue is with narratives that purport to be true, stories that are based on some fact but sadly don’t contain those dragons, unicorns or elves, which would mark them as pure fantasy. These are the stories which began as a misunderstanding or a little marketing-driven truth-stretching, and which are then repeated so often that they become fact to most people, or to a point where people don’t really question them or care if they are true or not.
Add to this the fact that we Irish have a wealth of old stories and ancient sagas both in print and in the oral tradition of storytelling, and we love to repeat and revel in them, as we really, really love a good mythical tale. Perhaps this goes part of the way to understanding the acceptance and non-questioning repetition of the tales and legends that surround Irish brewing, its output, and of course our public houses.
-o-
I know. We’ve been here before many times. I’ve repeated - although I’d argue for the word reinforced - much of it to a small if patiently attentive audience previously. I’ve rattled a sabre and gnashed my teeth on how we really don’t care about our true brewing and pub history in this country, although that’s probably a little unfair as we have been fed those same stories for a few generations in some cases so they are now just ingrained. It also means that newer beer-related enterprises are happy enough to create a story around a brand as long as there is a hint of truth to it – fakelore has become the norm. I’m sure that similar issues exist in other countries but Ireland’s recorded brewing and beer history doesn’t appear to go back as far as that of other countries, so it therefore left a smaller mark on our social timeline and written works. Although some of our commercial breweries were established in the 1700s, many were formed in the mid-1800s, and our now remaining beer brands are a good deal younger. Prior to that I think our drinking history was quite attuned to wine and strong spirits, with commercial brewing being encouraged in this country from the 18th century to wean the native population off the latter. (That’s a bit of a generalisation and not to say we didn’t have a huge amount of beer here in the previous centuries, we probably did, but our love for it seems to have gone through in waves perhaps?) Many other countries appear again to have had more a longevity of commercial brewing as well as a greater number of actual breweries that survived up until relatively recently, where we have not. Plus, with the serving of that beer the history of their hostelries and inns presumably has a longer timeline than ours, with more recorded history too given larger populations and more publications. Very early drinking establishments here seem to have been fonder of serving beverages other than beer (although the obviously served some) thanks perhaps to the legacy of the Norman’s fondness for wine and our own need for whiskey, plus possibly the lack of decent beer at that time? It is certainly an area for separate research and study for a later date, but this might explain place names such as Winetavern Street in Dublin and why our public house organisation is known as The Vintners Association. (Even what I’ve written here is splattered with question marks and words like 'perhaps' to as there are certain things I can't say with 100% authority, mainly because I am not one.)
That depth of knowledge and the records that exist in other countries means that research and therefore the writing of their brewing history is a little easier than here. I’m sure many beer writers elsewhere would say there is not enough in their countries either, but in relative terms it appears (yet again) at least that it is easier to trace the history of breweries, pubs and beer in general elsewhere than on the island of Ireland. Here we have very few viewable brewing records, very little written history on breweries with the exception of the few bigger ones, and almost nothing with any detail on the history of inns and public houses apart from a couple of notable exceptions. Irish breweries have been reduced to a dubious brand within larger organisations, and the actual range of their output in the past has been forgotten or sometimes just ignored. The same is true of much of the beer retailing side of the sector, including the history and provenance of our public houses. Perhaps in other countries, the depth of their recorded history and facts means there’s less of a need to generate a heritage around a beer brand, recreate the past of a brewery, or embellish the history of a public house - although in truth the latter clearly seems to be an issue in other places as well as here, as I’m sure many will attest to.
Post-truth seems to many of us to be a new phenomenon in our culture and most think it has been forced upon us by social media and ersatz news feeds, but post-truth as a concept appears to have been around for quite a long time in regard to Irish brewing, and its ancillary dependents.
-o-
I’ve dealt with the stories generated around Irish brewing before, and specifically with those surrounding the now - sadly - closed Smithwick’s brewery in Kilkenny for example. A short summation of my findings based on the available (to me) information is that I can find no definitive published source to prove the assertion that John Smithwick started a brewery in Kilkenny in 1710, I fact I can only find evidence to the contrary. There is little doubt that there was a John Smithwick in Kilkenny at this time, he’s even buried there, but - for example - his descendant Walter Smithwick in a talk given the local archaeology society in 1960 stated that ‘there are no records to show his precise business’ in 1710 when he arrived in the city. The famous lease that is talked about with regard to the partnership between Richard Cole and John Smithwick does not appear in any common source, and the lease of the land by Cole (only) that is on display at the Smithwicks’s Experience clearly is for a site nowhere near the purported site of the brewery at that time, as it is for a site near the Black Abbey close to the Breagagh river. The well-respected history writer Thomas Halpin stated in 1989 in an article for the Old Kilkenny Review that here was ‘no evidence available as to how [a] mercantile partnership between Messrs. Cole and Smithwick progressed.’ We can also note that the famous 1710 date only appeared at the end of the 19th century, which seems late for such a date to be first mooted, especially considering the stored and accumulated knowledge within the family. The first mention of a Smithwick’s brewery is when Edmond acquired the site near St. Francis Abbey - although not the actual abbey itself - in 1827 and converted it from a distillery, which is what it was according to advertisements for its sale, into a brewery and began brewing beer there. There is often mention of the penal laws but Edmond and his father John before him (a grandson of the original John) were merchants and owned property without any issue up to this time. There is also evidence to suggest that the original John wasn’t a catholic anyway, so the penal laws would not have impacted him depending on when and if he converted of course. If we are looking for published proof about their being a Smithwick’s brewery in or since 1710 it appears to be entirely lacking.
The reason I bring this up (Again!) is because if there were definitive proof would it not be in the public realm? Instead of talking portraits on a wall of there would be, the less entertaining and marketable I’ll admit, peer-reviewed papers on the history of the brewery, or fully referenced books on the subject. If there are then I can find none, which doesn’t mean they don’t exist admittedly. Is the absence of evidence enough to say something isn’t true? That’s a question for wiser minds than mine to debate …
Now, what if we applied the same criteria for public houses and their founding dates? What are the facts, as published or recorded or reported, that the now-told history was originally anchored to? We need to base the discussion on those published facts as we know them, excluding those used purely for marketing purpose where there is no commonly known source or reference for said information. I am assuming that if there was a defined historical source for any of this information it would be being linked to and touted by those responsible for the marketing, there would surely be clearly referenced articles and probably books written about the history of these places too. I am not setting out to disprove anything I should say, I'm more so trying to lay out the information I have found for you to make up your own mind or continue the research from where I leave off. I will also make a few suggestions on what I think may have happened earlier in a buildings life but I will try my best to not gallop through the facts on a unicorn. As you have seen, I use the word 'perhaps' quite a lot ...
But first we - or I - need to set the criteria for what constitutes ‘oldest pub’, and for this exercise I can keep it as relatively simple as having much of its structure dating from the period it purports to be from, and to have been in pretty much continuous use as an establishment that served beverages from that date to the present day. The name can have changed, as can its general purpose, so an inn, tavern, hotel, etc. can all be taken as a place that served alcoholic drink. These are my criteria for this exercise although I am sure that others would have differing opinions, and 'much of its structure' is very much open to interpretation admittedly, but it can be assessed case by case. Either way it would be impossible to argue a point without some rules, and those seem the best compromise to my mind at least.
Perhaps an interesting analogy for my thought process is that if you plant a tree on the site of one you cut down or died, does it take on the years of the previous tree? Or is it in fact a new tree with its own growing to do ...
-o-
There is that grey area for many as to the question of whether a rebuilt pub is the age of its first founding versus the age it is from its last rebuild, and it can be seen as subjective in truth. A good example of this conundrum would be The Palace Bar in Dublin, which, by the way, is a wonderful example of an Irish urban pub. That establishment was completely rebuilt in 19001, with the then owner Patrick Hall operating from 1 Burgh Quay while it was being erected. The ‘complete transformation of the old establishment’ was done by July of the following year2 and it reopened ‘after rebuilding’ on the 10th of July 19013, making it Edwardian if one was to be a pedant about it, but certainly of late Victorian design and fair to be classed as that. This public house recently celebrated its bicentenary, and I don’t know of its complete earlier history, although there are plenty of mentions of it being a public house in the 19th century, and a Thomas Corcoran was letting it as ‘A Public House’4 as early as 1828 so the date of 1823 could well be correct for the site, even to there also seems to be a piano seller at that address at that date (But we must remember that these sites had more than one floor, so multiple business could exist at the same address.) Could it be argued that a centenary celebration in 2001 would have been more appropriate - and accurate - where the architecture and fittings from that truly wonderful era at the turn of the century could be justly highlighted, celebrated and appreciated? Maybe, and indeed it is no doubt because of these ‘airy, lofty, palatial’ alterations as they were called in a newspaper’s ‘obituary’ to the old building, that the premises gained its moniker5, and this should be a story in itself. (By the way, there seems to be an obsession in this country with giving the label ‘Victorian’ to our pubs, when it could be argued that those of the Edwardian era are by far the more detailed, interesting and salubrious, to my eye at least.)
Given how that business changed hands and the relatively recent ability to search online records and old newspapers at ease, it’s more that possible that there was no awareness of this significant date of 1901 in the recent past, so if the general story passed down was that the premises, or indeed the license, dates from 1823 and the plot of land is the same then there are those who could certainly argue that the age of the pub as an entity is from that earlier date. And in fairness, even the National Built Heritage Service6, is a little vague on the buildings date, giving it as 1880 to 1900, which is close, although they state ‘c.1890’ which it clearly is not and as we can see, a reminder that the term ‘circa’ should be taken as that, and not as a verbatim date. But none of this takes from the bar itself, which I freely admit now is one of my favourites in the city. I say all of this just as an example of things can become more than a little confused without researching and knowing the full history of a premises, and it seems that even such excellent sources as the NBHS can be slightly wrong in some cases. (As another example, I have previously spotted7, that The International Bar is stated to having built in 1911 by the NBHS when according to newspaper reports that seem quite iron clad it was built in 1898, unless it was torn down and rebuilt a little over a decade later, which is possible but doubtful?)
The truth is that with all of this confusing information we need to thread carefully, with or without carrying a big stick. All I can do is look at the information that exists for the armchair researcher, based on online sources, and published books and newspapers available to me with ease. As mentioned already, what has changed in the last few years is the ability to do real research from that armchair given the huge volume of online material now available, with some publications going back centuries. It is possible now to find information that was lost or missing just a few years ago, so certain omissions or confusions from the past were understandable and almost acceptable in many cases, and I'm not here to point fingers in any direction.
-o-
So, back to the oldest pubs in Ireland discussion and we shall stay in Dublin, and venture to The Brazen Inn, which claims on its website has been a ‘hostelry’ since 1198, although it does state the present building was built in 1754 as a coaching inn, but that The Brazen head appears on documents back to 1653, and adds that a Christopher Quin fitted out the inn with rooms and a large cellar in the 1750s – and that would appear to be its full history as given by the business online. It is also commonly reported that the words ‘John Langan halted here 7th August 1726’ are etched into a window on the premises but I cannot see an image online for verification although it is mentioned quite often, as are other comments stating that it actually says ‘John Lonergan’ and ‘1786’ so we can’t base anything on these dates, and we can immediately see how confusion can reign in these cases, as well as the limitations of home research - I can’t quickly nip out with a magnifying glass and check the inscription! – but the later dates seems more accurate perhaps, given that that coaching inn dates from the 1750s according to the pub itself.
A lot has been written about The Brazen Head both online and in paper-published form, and much of the more recent pieces on the internet and social media seem to just regurgitate something written by others, or just quote the pubs website. But luckily there are quite a few works with historical notes and commentary too. One of the best I have found is a paper called The Brazen Head Re-Visited by Timothy Dawson8, which he read to The Old Dublin Society in 1971 before it being subsequently published. It goes into great detail with regard to the site where the pub now stands and mentions that the name The Brazen Head dates to at least 1613, but also states that this is in a legal claim from 1700 which just references the older date. There is no mention of the words ‘The Brazen Head Inn’ until 1754 in that Timothy Dawson piece, when it is referenced in a lease description. Plus, a year later it was mentioned as ‘the new Brazen Head Inn’, a quotation which could be taken to mean a new inn or a new version of the inn in fairness.
‘The Brazen-Head in Bridge-Street’ is mentioned in newspapers as early as 1705 where a Mr. Hollingsworth seemingly kept a ‘hard-ware-house’ there9 and although it certainly wasn’t unusual for individuals to operate temporary businesses from inns, a hardware supplier is strange, although he seems to have dealt in smaller items like knifes, buckles, and ‘cizzars’! But it was more likely that he operated from a warehouse at the front of the premises, as there were certainly such a structure there around that era, and later - keep in mind that the original building is set well back from the street. (Seemingly, there was also a Brazen-Head on Dames Street in Dublin in 1711 so care must be taken on references.10)
The earliest mention I can find in newspapers for an inn on the site is for a James Rose of the city of Dublin who …
… at very great expense, has furnished, in the genteelest and most commodious manner, the Brazen-Head Inn in Bridge-Street, Dublin, it being a most compleat new-built House, containing thirty rooms, and stables for an hundred horses; he has also laid in a large stock of the best of wines, and all sorts of spirituous liquors of the neatest kinds; and as he intends that no care, diligence or expense shall be wanting on his part, to render his accommodations agreeable, hopes that all gentlemen, merchants and others, who will be pleased to favour him with their custom, shall meet with the greatest satisfaction; and as it will be for his own interest, so it shall always be his constant endeavours to merit continuance of their favour.11
Fine words indeed and the words new-built ring out, although the dates don’t quite match up with the prescribed history it is possible and likely that Mr. Rose took over the business from that Mr. Quin, who built the building a couple of years previously. (Online newspaper sources tend to miss out certain years, including that one unfortunately - and frustratingly!)
The building has been altered and added to over the years but the structure of the original inn appears to remain. That first 1750s structure is set back from the street, as mentioned, and there was still that warehouse in front of it in the mid-1800s. The inn itself seems to have been expanded and ‘much improved and enlarged' in 1890 when it was called the Brazen Head Hotel and comprised numbers 19, 20 and 21 Lower Bridge Street12 although this was split soon after with 19 and 20 becoming Doherty’s Hotel and the Brazen Head, the 'back portion of the concerns’ being given up by Mr. Doherty – so it appears that two separate inn-like businesses operated on and around the site at this time, which is a good example as to how the architecture and provenance of these buildings can be confusing, (Indeed the numbers on the street move around a bit too, something that was common enough but meaning that the establishment can be found in connection with two street numbers, as number 31 became number 20 in 1844.)
Interestingly, in Irwin's Historical and Descriptive Guide to Dublin published in 1853 an advertisement for the hotel sets the established date as 1710, although sadly no history is listed. I’ve also seen the date 1668 quoted as well as 1666 and that it was originally called the Standfast Inn with a date of 1210. In Rare Old Dublin: Heroes, Hawkers & Hoors Frank Hopkins states that the first mention was in 1613 in a fine levied on the property, which is the mention already noted above although as stressed it is a reference to 1613 made at a later date. Although both Frank Hopkins and Timothy Dawson call the building an inn he quotes from a court paper in 1703 that clearly states it was ‘a large timber house’ which given this was an area of merchant’s house as per the same source, it sounds like it may have been just that, a house and not an inn at that time? Although at this period some houses were beginning to convert their lower floor for shops and other similar uses and, confusingly, inns were also just called houses so it's difficult to assess in any definite way.
One of the most prolific statements is that the present structure dates from that 1668 date, but we can clearly see that this isn’t the case, a William Withering or Witherington or Witheringham was the alleged owner at that time but, frustratingly, I can find no original sources for this claim, just repeated mentions - which doesn’t mean they don’t exist of course, it just means I cannot find them!
Nor can I see any reliable, definitive evidence for the 1198 claim other than there is an implication that there would have been an inn somewhere around there give that this was seemingly a place where the Liffey was crossed and was just inside the city walls? There is mention of the Steadfast Inn I referenced above existing in 1210 and another in the general area, but I can’t see any proof of location or even there actual existence.
There is no doubt that there was a structure on or near the site but I can’t find evidence as to what it was apart from being a building called The Brazen Head, whether this was an inn, a private house or a completely different business - most business back then used signs, not just inns. Even the mention by Jonathan Swift in a published letter written in 1727 mention, ‘Here only, at the sign of the Brazen Head, are to be sold places and pensions: beware of counterfeits, and take care of mistaking the door,’ which is extremely unhelpful. Plus if this is the basis for the suggestion he frequented the place as an inn it seems pretty unreliable.13
But much of this is irrelevant in any case, as based on my original criteria of the date of the structure being key to my interpretation of the age of the pub, it dates from at least 1756 when it was listed as new built, or more likely 1754 if I could see the lease that is mentioned or the quoted advertisement. It is certainly a place of huge interest and of historical note, especially the original structure to the rear - as the stone castle-like structure to the front is much more recent. There was certainly another structure on Bridge Street called The Brazen Head before this time but I sadly couldn’t find mention from first-hand sources that that building was also definitely an inn, although it is quite possible it was, or became one. But regardless, from the information I have gleaned during this research even the later building has a fascinating, enthralling and real story that could and should - and perhaps is - being told. Its 250 year old history is certainly of huge significance to both historians and the more curious members of the general public.
-o-
The other hyped oldest Irish pub is of course Sean’s Bar in Athlone, and whereas there is the world of information about the site of The Brazen Head there is very little written information on Sean’s Bar prior to the last few decades. This is partly due to the huge population differences and interest in Dublin and its specific built heritage versus Athlone's (although there is a lot of general writing about the town itself) and also because Sean’s Bar’s claim is relatively new. It proves how frustrating it is to track down and confirm information about certain structures and businesses in this country without trawling through deeds and other lists of information in record offices, which is what an actual historian would do of course! What can be very exasperating is the lack of information from independent sources, and in the case of this bar it all seems to revolve around repetitive write-ups, fairly recent interviews and the very basic information given by the pub itself rather than historical records.
(For clarity, James Wright of Triskele Heritage has written a piece about the bar which I will link to at the end of this piece, and I will try to add to, and not derive, information from that article although there is obviously a little overlap with my findings.)
From ground floor level Sean’s Bar doesn’t seem very old, especially given the name and the relatively plain facade, unadorned apart from some modern signage and those pillars that were - fun fact - moved from Gill’s bookshop in Dublin and stuck to the front of the building in the 1970s by the then owner Sean Fitzsimons, who took over the bar from original Sean who the place was named for - Sean O’Brien.14 That appearance is certainly in its favour as it hasn’t plastered a faux old-world look onto the frontage to make it appear old in a contrived manner. The bar is just one side of a larger, complete, asymmetrical building, which we will look at later, and it sits on Main Street on the Roscommon side of Athlone, quite close to the castle site.
The older name most associated with the building is that of The Three Blackamoors Heads Inn or various versions of the same name. (Please note that I use name not to cause offense, but for descriptive historical accuracy.) A Jacob Jacques or Jacob James15 appears to have had an inn or hotel on that side of the river in the late 1600s although no exact location or name for his inn is given in any sources I have come across so he must be ignored as a previous owner of this inn, but in 1719 a James Begg had an establishment called The Three Blackamores [sic] Heads’16 according to a newspaper mention from that year. Other names are also associated with an inn of that name, such as (probably) Mark Begg15 , James Begg, Margret Lorcan (or Lorcon) a widow in 1748, and Thomas Nolan, who married Mrs Lorcan later. Dillon Naughton had the premises17 in the 1756 and it was in the possession of Pat Donolly in 1808 when it was called The Three Blacks and when he vacated it it was to be let quickly or it would ‘be converted into shops, and let to solvent tenants, with convenient apartments, and stabling if required.’18 The final mention I can find is by the same truncated name when it was being ran by John and Isabella Dowd in 1843.19 The name appears to die out after that and it would be extremely difficult for me to track or trace any owners to the site after that without having access to deeds or similar records, or unless new information comes to light. There is a prominent publican called Patrick Cullen mentioned as having a public house in the second half of the 19th century, as well as a Mrs. Cullen – probably his widow - when he died. I have no idea if that was the same premises, although The Slater’s Directory from 1846 gives no inn on Main Street and just one public house owned by a Patrick Cullin (Cultin?). Griffiths Valuation map and ledger list an Ellen Cullen occupying the property that is now Sean’s Bar but not owning the site, although confusingly she appears to have owned the two sites next door, closer to the river end of the street. I wonder did the Cullens take over the license when the Dowds finished up? If provable then that would give continuation for the site - or part of it more probably as we shall see - being the original Blackamoor Heads Inn. With the exception of Mark Begg, the modern bar in question hasn’t published much information on previous owners that I can find, which would hopefully link back to some of these names, so my trail runs cold - or is luke-warm at best - here. (There was also an inn called the ‘Head Inn’ on the other side of the river on Church Street in the early 19th century which surely must have caused confusion!20 I’m not sure if it was a play on words or whether it referenced something else, there was a Crown Inn close by or on the same site in the late 18th century so perhaps it was a derivation from that. It's also quite frustrating that mentions of an inn on the 'main street' often meant a premises on Church Street on the other side of the Shannon, as this was the main street of the town! Also worth mentioning is that the name, The Three Blackamoors, was a relatively common name for an inn or tavern and there are quite a few mentioned around the country, which makes research a little tedious at times.)
But where precisely was The Blackamoor Inn on Main Street? As this would help us pick up the trail, although in reverse fashion.
Maps prior to the Ordnance Survey versions are unhelpful to our quest to pinpoint the exact location of the original inn, with many showing streets but no detail to buildings, or just streets. For example The Irish Historic Towns Atlas (IHTA)21 for Athlone has a map from the Sherrard’s survey of 1784 but doesn’t show the inn although it positions others on the Leinster side of the town, even though we know it was in existence at that time (That street was possibly out of Sherrard's brief?), and other maps from the 17th century also lack detail to be of any real help. The IHTA has no mention of the current establishment although it does mention the Three Blackamoor Heads, but sadly with no detail apart from a reference to deeds I have no easy access to at this point.
But we have some clues, as when the Pat Donolly mentioned above had vacated it in 1808, it was being described as an ‘extensive inn’ and having ‘an abundance of house room, with stabling to accommodate 60 horses, and a passage for water to the River Shannon, at the rear of the concerns.’ It was also said to be ‘in the centre of the main street.’ This is an interesting comment, because prior to the erection of the new crossing in c. 1844, the bridge over the river was situated quite some meters to the south and lined up with our Main Street making it the main thoroughfare west – which is how it got its name of course – and the houses and other building on the street ran right down to the bridge before some were demolished or altered to make way for a quay for navigation and boat mooring purposes. If playing Devil’s Advocate and one looked at where the ‘centre’ of the street was it would be somewhat removed from the existing bar by some margin, although the ordnance survey map (6” OSI) from the late first half of the 19th century shows the gap in the buildings on the street where there was access to the stables mentioned perhaps? This was clearly built over at a later period, possibly when there was an extra floor added to the premises, before being completely blocked up then or at a later date. This also accounts for the strange positioning of the windows with a larger space on the left than on the right if you look at the complete façade of the building that incorporates the bar. This would lead us to assume that this opening was part of that building and the current site – which incorporates a separate business to the pub now – and therefore even without looking at deeds or any other information it does feel right that this was indeed the site of the Blackamoor Inn, although there isn’t any definitive proof I can find so we are in the area of 'possibles' and 'probables,' which is never a comfortable place to be, as it may be where those unicorns reside.
Interestingly, one source gives the road frontage of the site that contained the original inn as 66 feet17, if this is correct and in Irish feet more so than Imperial feet it would include exactly the facade as discussed plus the peculiarly narrow building on the left as we look at the building. (Measurement was taken from the recent OS map online.) That whole frontage was owned or leased as three properties by Ellen Cullen at the time of the Griffiths valuation c. 1855. This of course may be meaningless but if we think of an inn with an archway/opening for carriages then it would make sense that it would include a building on the other side of the arch also, perhaps for security or for accommodation for stable hands or coach drivers, etc.? It would also help with the comment that the site was in the middle of Main Street as this would pull the whole site closer to the bridge. I think it is very possible that the then owner did split up the frontage into three separate entities after 1808, with the current public house becoming a smaller part of the whole at that time and still called The Three Blacks, later ran by the Dowds and then the Cullens. All of that is a stretch granted, although it is based on maps and the visible streetscape, although I am acutely aware of not wanting to drift down the road of fiction and become part of a problem instead of helping with solutions, so as you can see this is just pure guesswork, if vaguely educated perhaps? Although I do feel the nuzzle of that unicorn on my shoulder ...
So what age is the building? The National Built Heritage Service22 state 1700 – 1750 before plumping for the average which is ‘c.1725’ but as we have seen this can be a little out and should not be taken as an exact date, nor is it expected to be of course. There were a couple of significant events in Athlone’s history that might shed light on a closer date, and that was the great siege of Athlone where ‘the east town was burnt in 1690, and when the west town and the castle were reduced to rubble by '12,000 cannon bullets, 600 bombs, nigh 50 ton of powder and a great many ton of stones' fired off by the Williamite artillery’21 the following year. With its close proximity to the castle it would be hard to see how any building on this site would have survived such an intense bombardment, and add to this that in 1697 a bolt of lightning hit the castle and ignited ‘260 barrels of [gun]powder, 1,000 charged hand-grenades, with 810 skains(sic) of match [Flammable cord used to fire cannons, etc.] which were piled over them, 220 barrels of musket and pistol balls’23 and tools, horseshoes and nails, which caused destruction and fire throughout the town and one would assume that Main Street took the brunt of the damage given its proximity to the castle. Indeed in 1819 Rev. Stean quotes from a source from just after the calamity occurred - ‘the lighted match forcing the thatched houses burned to the ground the greatest part of what the thunder and blast had left standing yet little remained of the whole town but a few poor cottages without the gates …’23 (As an aside, the good reverend also states that ‘there is one very bad inn’ on this side of Athlone in 1819 but sadly he refrains from giving the name or position!) So, although this is pure conjecture, it very possible that the inn was newly built by the above-mentioned James Begg prior to his newspaper mention in 1719. The town was supposed to have recovered rapidly from the destruction so it is certainly conceivably that the building was erected in the very, very late 1690s or the first decade of the 1700s. Again, I have no proof of this but I would suggest that the building dates from closer to 1700, which ties in with the range given by the NBHS too, and if it is the same building as owned by James Begg mentioned above then it must be prior to 1719 at the very least.
Of course there is mention of it dating back further, much further. For example there is reference to a selection of old coins and a section of ‘wattle and wicker’ (surely it should be wattle and daub?) that dates back to ‘the ninth century.’ Notes on the excellent Historic Environment Viewer24 for the site state the following, ‘'Sean's Bar' was originally a two storey high building with thick walls, an additional third storey in brick was added later. Preserved on the premises is a section of wattle partition removed from a first floor wall. This could be of seventeenth century date [my emphasis] but it is not securely dated (Bradley et. al. 1985, 28).’ (Were there any two-storey buildings like this in the 9th century? That would seem odd, as surely any structures of a commercial type were single storey? I'm not sure of course.) It is also worth noting that the letter taped on to the wattle and daub display from the National Museum of Ireland, sent to Anna Fitzsimons and dated 1972, says in what appears to be a reply sent back to Mrs. Fitzsimons that wattle a daub was used from very early times to the present day before going on to mention the excavations being carried out at that time in Dublin around Winetavern Street, and that the wattle work there was dated between the 9th and 13th century.25 It doesn’t mention anything about the date of the wall on display, so perhaps there is confusion around the meaning of the letter? I'm really not sure again. When contacted, the National Museum of Ireland said they had no records to support any claim that the dates were verified by them, and they know of no record of the wattle and daub being sampled and dated. They did say that they have around thirty trade tokens that relate to Athlone on their database, but they are 17th century and they had no information that they related to this pub. I have no idea why they have no record of the finds but sadly I have once again reached a dead-end in my research in this direction with this avenue closed to me. (Incidentally, I discovered that oft-mentioned old fireplace on the site was relocated there from a completely different structure, as per another note on the Historic Environment Viewer which states, ‘On the premises of Sean's Bar, 13 Main Street, is a late medieval stone built fireplace from a house on an island in Lough Ree (Bradley et. al. 1985, 28).’ This is fascinating and I'm sure there's a good story being told about how it came to be placed in its current spot, as well as the history of the house from which it came!)
Of the story about Luain and his tavern from 900ad I can sadly find no trace in historical records, a person called Luain or Luan is indeed mentioned in sources but many older mentions of the meaning of 'Athlone' state that Luain came from the Irish for moon and that the name comes from the Ford of the Moon, while other various sources mention it comes from the word for ‘swift’, signifying the rapids at the ford or early bridge. The IHTA gives two derivations, one from the story The Táin’ mentioning the haunch (lon) of the white-horned bull of Mág Ai that was dropped into the river here having been killed by the brown bull of Cúailnge, but also mentions that it may refer to Luan who was shot along with his lover and died on the ford of the river, or another Luan who was slain there in battle. There is a mention in ‘The Fate of the Children of Tuireann’ of - in Irish - ‘Ath-Luain-mic-Luighdheach’ being the crossing at Athlone, so perhaps the source is that myth but we can clearly see here we have drifted into the realms of fantasy and storytelling we discussed at the start, and has far as I am aware these legendary stories are set in prehistory of the 1st century? As with so many place names in Ireland its true derivation may remain lost to time, language changes and the repetition of erroneous material - so sadly this was another dead-end! More modern references do certainly mention the Ford of Luan and many say that it is named after a person called Luan but don’t generally go much further than that comment.
There is also mention of the Guinness Book of Records certificate for the oldest pub in Ireland but the publication now distances itself from these types of certificates, and indeed Dan from the Twitter/X account for the Guinness World Records wrote in reply to a query on this very bar in 2017 that, 'The record for the 'Oldest Pub' was rested in 2000 when it became clear that it was not possible to verify it in full.'26 So without being able to contact GWR to ask more about the certificate I've ended up at yet another dead-end! It really feels like I'm an unwanted entity ...
From what I’ve researched and admittedly surmised at times (but with sound reasoning) some of the complete building that Sean’s Bar’ is a part of seem to date from around 1700 BUT I have absolutely no proof of that. If I could be sure that the site was definitely The Blackamoor Inn and that is the early 18th century frontage of the structure (although I do believe it very probably is given what I’ve seen and read) then it might make it one of the oldest pubs in Ireland still operating within (some of) its own walls, and it pips The Brazen Head by 50 years or so IF this is the case, even if the later has grown in size and the former shrank, or so it appears from the architecture. And, I admit that this is not a very good conclusion or assessment but I have been frustrated by dead-ends and lack of first hand accounts as you have seen.
-o-
So, based on all of that information and factoring my own criteria for what constitutes the age of a pub – structure, etc. – there are still a lot of grey areas and unanswered questions. I’m an awful lot wiser but it would be great if both establishments could publish detailed books or well referenced write-ups in order that their claims can be better researched, verified and lauded. But this is true for all of our older pubs in fairness.
And this all raises the question of whether there are other older pubs in Ireland that have operated out of the same structure since opening? I have no idea, although there are some other less famous contenders ...
As mentioned already, I set my own personal criteria for this exploration and they might not concur with yours, or other’s findings. I can't say that yours - or theirs - are erroneous, as it depends on the criteria set and other evidence that is still be found. Unfortunately for me, many of the avenues I thought would be of help ended up being closed off, but I will revisit all of this again as new information is always coming to light.
-o-
Why does any of this matter? Well, it doesn’t really and I’m not sure that anyone really believes the foundation dates of any pubs, breweries or businesses prior to the end of the 19th century anyway. Do they? I have previously discussed pubs being seen as repositories and keepers of our past brewing7, and not long after that piece a large multinational drinks company started to do just that. But there needs to be some independent and ‘proper’ museum-based oversight so that we know the right information is being communicated and has been verified by critical, knowledgeable historians.
As always, we need marketing-free honesty and factual accuracy in our brewing history. Keep the fiction to those sci-fi and fantasy books we all enjoy - unicorns and all ...
Liam K
The link to my Smithwick's post is here.
The link to James Wright of Triskele Heritage's piece is here.
(The image used at the start is called 'The 'Scene of the Last Struggle in Athlone - Connaught Side' and is via Google Books from Here and There Through Ireland Part 1 by Mary Banim -1891 and shows Main Street with the Sean's Bar site just out of view on the left.)
1 Evening Herald (Dublin) - Monday 14th May 1900
2 Sport (Dublin) - Saturday 13th July 1901