The Past on Tap: Ancient Beer in Celtic Europe

Last week I attended a lecture at the Toledo Museum of Art. The event was organized and hosted by the Toledo Society of the Archaeological Institute of America. The title of the lecture was “The Past on Tap: Archaeological Evidence for Ancient Alcohol in Iron Age Celtic Europe”, and delivered by Dr Bettina Arnold, Professor of Anthropology at University of Wisconsin Milwaukee.

Dr. Arnold’s lecture focused on presenting archaeologial evidence and analytical advances used in investigating feasting practices and brewing of malt and honey-based beverages during the period 1200 BC and 600 BC in Celtic Europe. The Celts were a collection of tribes who were unified by a shared culture and language. They originated in central and Western Europe, particularly central and eastern France, southern Germany and the Czech Republic. Subsequent migrations saw them extend their geographical footprint to include the British Isles, the Iberian Peninsula, and northern Italy. Despite their dispersed geography and reputation of being fierce warriors, it is worth noting that the Celts never established an empire (as the Romans did).

In her work as an archaeologist. Dr. Bettina has excavated Celtic burial mounds in southwest Germany. Among other items, Bettina discovered vessels that had been used to hold alcohol. Archaeologists use a variety of analytical techniques in their research, including organic residue analysis (ORA). ORA involves the investigation of organic residues that are trapped in, or adhered to, ancient artifacts. In seeking to understand what ancient peoples drank, the artifacts of interest are vessels that were used to store or consume alcohol. In addition to ORA, Professor Arnold also uses what she calls mortuary consumption evidence. Mortuary consumption evidence refers to the artifacts (e.g., drinking vessels) that are buried or entombed with a corpse. These often provide an indication of the status that the individual held within the society within which they lived.

The research of Professor Arnold and other scholars showed that the Celts made both beer and mead. The ancient beer would have been made with either wheat, barley, and millet. The items discovered by Bettina include a fully intact cauldron used for serving alcoholic beverages. Previous excavations by other archaeologists at a nearby site yielded nine drinking horns, one of which could hold nine pints of ancient ale. At feasts, beer and wine would have been brought to diners in flagons, where it was decanted into drinking horns, which were made of natural horn and often decorated with gold foil bands. The anthropologist Michael Dietler has called the Celts “prodigious drinkers” and “reckless inebriates”, while the Greek historian Diodorus Siculus referred to their “furious passion for drinking”. Their is no doubt that the Celts like to feast and drink, a practice that they hoped to continue in the afterlife, witness the drinking horns and a large bronze cauldron (used to hold mead) found at the grave of a Celtic chieftain’s burial site near Hochdorf in Germany. As Dr Arnold has stated, “the Celts believed in a type of BYOB afterlife. You had to bring alcohol with you and throw a big party when you got to the other side. A sign of a good leader was generosity.” The purpose of feasting and drinking was not just hedonistic pleasure. It had what one might call a political purpose, being a mechanism to strengthen ties with allies. The Celts that Professor Arnold has researched also drank wine, but this was not produced locally, being imported from the Mediterranean region.

A Celtic drinking horn from Tuttlingen in southwestern Germany. Tuttlingen was established as a Celtic settlement (Source: Wolfgang Sauber)

Research by Maxime Rageot and colleagues, published in the online academic journal PLoS ONE, suggests that beer consumption may have been socially stratified with elites drinking beer made from barley or wheat, with warriors consuming beer made with millet. The reasons for these differences are not, unfortunately, reported.

In a 2018 paper in The Journal of Medieval Monastic Studies, Max Nelson suggests that Celtic brewing traditions influenced monastic brewing that became common in parts of Western Europe during the Middle Ages. Written evidence suggests that, during the 9th century, European monasteries introduced hops as an ingredient in the brewing of beer during the 9th century. Nelson, however, cites archaeological evidence which suggests that this may not be the case, and that hops were being used by Celts in northern Italy in 6th century B.C. While hops functioned as preservatives (important in the days before pasteurization or refrigeration) Nelson (p. 59) notes that “besides its preservative function, the bitterness of hops could help balance out the taste of an ancient beer, which might otherwise have been overly sweet from malt, sour from bacterial contamination, or smoky from fire-brewing”. The Greek historian, Dionysius of Halicarnassus, called Celtic beer “a foul smelling liquor made from barley rotted in water”. Based on archaeological evidence found at early Iron Age settlement of Eberdingen– Hochdorf in Germany, Hans-Pete Sitka of the University of Honenheim suggests that this particular Celtic beer was“probably a dark, smoky, and slightly sour. A caramelised taste would have decreased the sourness. Floating yeast sometimes produces a light lemon taste. If flavouring agents such as mugwort and carrot seeds were added, this beverage would have had a very different taste from our typical modern beer.”

Towards the end of her lecture, Professor Arnold described attempts by a number of contemporary craft breweries to recreate ancient Celtic beer. This included Lakefront Brewery in Milwaukee, WI who worked with Arnold, to create ”a recipe inspired by evidence collected from the archaeological remains.” Based on organic residue analysis, the beer they tried to recreate, in addition to yeast, contained four ingredients – barley, honey, mint and meadowsweet. In terms of taste, the final product has been described as “smooth and pleasant — almost like a dry port, but with a minty, herbal tinge to it.” While Lakefront’s Chris Ranson described the ancient Celtic beer as “drinkable”, she doubted that there would be a sizable market for it among modern-day craft beer drinkers.

The Celtic people were not the only ancient society to brew beer. Nor were they the first. For example, around 10,000 BC, various hunter gatherer groups would periodically come together at Göbekli Tepe, a Neolithic archaeological site (home to the world’s oldest known megaliths) in eastern Turkey for the purposes of ritualistic feasting. Brewing vats and images of festivals have been discovered there by archaeologists, with the beer being made from fermented wild crops. In similar fashion, at Qiaotou in Zhejiang Province in China, archaeologists have discovered vessels containing residues of ingredients used to brew beer. The beer, according to the authors, was “likely served in rituals to commemorate the burial of the dead.” The Qiaotou site dates to around 7,000 BC.

Ancient beer may not have tasted much like the beer that we drink today. But it did serve a similar purpose in the sense that it brought people together and provided a mechanism through which people could relax and bond, much like it does today.

Further Reading:

In addition to the readings below you can learn more about the Celts by visiting the website of the Center for Celtic Studies at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. Dr. Arnold is also the founding editor of the electronic journal e-Keltoi: Journal of Interdisciplinary Celtic Studies.

Dietler, Michael. 1994. Quenching Celtic thirst. Archaeology, Volume 47, Issue 3, pp. 44-48.

Nelson, Max. 2018. Celtic and Egyptian beer-production traditions and the origins of monastic brewing. Journal of Medieval Monastic Studies, Volume 7, pp. 47-77.

Rageot, Maxime, Angela Mötsch,  Birgit Schorer,  David Bardel,  Alexandra Winkler,  Federica Sacchetti,  Bruno Chaume, Phillips Della Casa, Stephen Buckley, Sara Cafisdo, Janine Fries-Knoblach, Dirk Krause’s, Thomas Hope, Philipp Stockhsmmer, Cynthiaanne Spiteri. 2019. New insights into Early Celtic consumption practices: Organic analyses of local and imported pottery from Vix-Mont Lassois. PLoS ONE, Volume 14, Issue 6.

Sitka, Hans-Peter. 2011. Early Iron Age and Late Mediaeval malt finds
from Germany—attempts at reconstruction of early Celtic brewing and the taste of Celtic beer
. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences, Volume 3, Issue 1, pp. 41-48.

Dietrich, Oliver Dietrich, Manfred Heun, Jens Notroff, Klaus Schmidt, and Martin Zarnkow. 2012. The role of cult and feasting in the emergence of Neolithic communities. New evidence from Göbekli Tepe, south-eastern Turkey. Antiquity, Volume 86, Issue 333, pp. 674–695.

Wang, Jiajing, Leping Jiang, and Hanlong Sun. 2021. Early evidence for beer drinking in a 9000-year-old platform mound in southern ChinaPLOS ONE, Volume 16, Issue 8.

Don’t Mention Santa Claus

Earlier this week, I was in Salt Lake City International Airport. I had flown in from Detroit, MI and had a couple of hours layover before catching my flight to San Jose, CA. As per my normal operating procedure when I have an airport layover, I sought out somewhere to have a couple of beers. My search landed me in the taproom and restaurant of Red Rock Brewery. Established in 1994, Red Rock has been a pillar of Salt Lake’s craft beer scene for close to 30 years. Their main establishment is in downtown Salt Lake City.

Red Rock Brewpub and Restaurant at Salt Lake City International Airport

I found an empty seat at the bar and perused the beer menu. I opted for a beer called Monkey Mind, a Hazy IPA. As I was looking at the menu, something stood out; all ten of the beers on draft had an identical ABV – 5%. Yet, the Red Rock beers that were available in cans had ABVs ranging from 5.5% to 11%. I quickly figured what was going on, which my bartender quickly confirmed. Under Utah law, it is illegal to sell any beer on draft whose ABV exceeds 5%. Another fun fact regarding alcohol in Utah is that, at 0.05%, it has the strictest DUI limit in the country. Anyway, as I was enjoying my beer at the bar, I quickly discovered another quirk of Utah law. A young couple sat down next to me. The female member of the duo was interested in something light and refreshing. The bartender described two Lagers/Pilsners they had on draft. However, when she asked if she could sample them to aid in her decision making, she was stymied by Utah law – free samples are prohibited.

All beers on draft at Red Rock Brewery were 5% ABV, while the ABV of beers in bottles and cans ranged from 5.5% to 11% ABV

Had I been making this trip five years earlier, the strongest draft beer I would have been able to buy in a bar or brewery taproom in Utah would have been 4% ABV. This limit had been in place since the end of Prohibition in 1933. New legislation, however, passed in 2019, raised this limit to 5%.

Utah, of course, is home to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, whose members take many of their rules for living from the Book of Mormon. Estimates of the share of the state’s population who are Mormon range from 42% to 67%. The Mormon faith prohibits the consumption of a range of unhealthy substances, including alcohol, coffee, and tobacco. According to an article written by Kathy Stephenson in the Salt Lake City Tribune, “the government-controlled liquor system has always walked a fine line between providing alcohol for legal adults and being fully separate from the beliefs of the predominant religion: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, whose members (including a majority Utah officials setting the state’s liquor laws) are taught to abstain from alcohol.”

The alcohol industry is highly regulated in the United States, with almost all of that regulation being overseen by state agencies. In the case of Utah, that agency is the Utah Department of Alcoholic Beverage Services (DABS). Created by the Utah State Legislature in 1935, DABS’ is charged with “the responsibility of conducting, licensing and regulating the sale of alcoholic beverages in a manner and at prices which reasonably satisfy the public demand and protect the public interest, including the rights of citizens who do not wish to be involved with alcoholic beverages.”

I should point out that in writing this blog. I am not picking on poor old Utah. I could easily have written about the state of Indiana. On a recent trip there, I was aghast to discover, upon arriving at my hotel, that I could not buy a cold can of beer to take to my room to enjoy. You guessed it, Indiana law prohibited it. And it was not only my hotel where I was unable to purchase a cold beer to go. The same law applied to gas stations, grocery stores and pharmacies across the state. A 2023 lawsuit, in which plaintiffs tried to have this law overturned, failed. At the time of writing, Indiana is the only state in the union where buying cold beer to-go is illegal. That could soon change, however. A bill currently making its way through the Tennessee legislature would see the same restrictions regarding cold beer sales coming into effect in that state. The hope is that, by passing such a bill, the number of alcohol-related automobile accidents will be reduced – who wants to drink a warm beer behind the wheel? Meanwhile, in my own state of Ohio, it is illegal to “represent, portray, or make any reference to Santa Claus” when advertising alcohol.

Craft Beer and The Paradox of Choice

A recent article in the New York Times suggested the emergence of a new trend in the world of craft beer. In an industry where brewers have provided consumers with an almost endless choice of beer styles and variations thereof, Joshua Bernstein suggests that brewers and retailers are cutting back on the number of different beers they offer. As an example, Bernstein cites Suarez Family Brewery in Livingston, NY who used to offer its customers eight different beers. That was pre-COVID-19 pandemic. Post-pandemic they have shrunk that number to two craft beers. Indeed as I started writing this blog entry I visited the Suarez website and, sure enough two beers were available for taproom visitors to purchase – Qualify Pils and Hecto Hoppy Pale Ale. Retailers such as Whole Foods have also been reducing the number of different beers they offer customers, partly to be able to devote more shelf space to faster growing segments such as Ready-to-Drink cocktails.

In making the decision to produce only two beers, the owners of Suarez Family Brewery are partly inspired by “the model of traditional European taverns and breweries that serve only one or two beers at a time”. On two recent trips to Europe I experienced this phenomena. In Osnabrück, Germany I spent an evening in Rampendal Brewery where my choice of beers were a Dunkel, a Weizen, and a Helles Lager. At Brasserie du Molard, a nice little brewery in the heart of Geneva, Switzerland, I was similarly offered a choice of three beers – a Witbier, a Lager, and an Amber Ale.

Rampendahl Brewery in Osnabrück, Germany where my choice of beers were Dunkel, a Weizen, and a Helles Lager

Craft breweries who have opted to downsize (or who never upsized in the first place) offer a number of explanations. According to Dan Suarez of Suarez Family Brewery, too many beers on tap can cause customers “a lot of agony over choosing”. This is an interesting observation, and one supported by Barry Schwartz, a Professor Emeritus in Social Theory and Social Action at Swarthmore College. One of his areas of research, sitting at the intersection of psychology and economics, is consumer decision making. In 2004, Schwartz published a book titled “The Paradox of Choice”, which carried the subtitle “Why More is Less”. It is a fascinating read. The basic premise of Schwartz’s thesis is Americans have too many choices, whether that be when purchasing a breakfast cereal, a coffee maker, or an automobile. Intuitively, we think of choice as a good thing and more choice as better than less choice. Schwartz, however, suggests that while some choice is good, too much choice is bad. It is bad because it generates anxiety for the individual making the choice.

As noted by Schwartz (p. 5), “autonomy and freedom of choice are critical to our well being, and choice is critical to freedom and autonomy. Nonetheless, though modern Americans have more choice than any group of people ever has had before, and thus, presumably, more freedom and autonomy, we don’t seem to be benefiting from it psychologically”

We are victims of and suffering from what some have termed choice overload. Too much choice taxes our cognitive systems. We feel overwhelmed. We second-guess ourselves, wondering if we made the best decision. The more choices we have, the more likely we are to be less satisfied with the decision we make, perhaps even regretting it. Anyone who has stepped into a Home Depot and picked out a new paint color for their master bedroom will know what I mean. If a company offers a product (say a coffee maker) with a large number of feature variations and in a wide variety of styles/colors consumers may struggle to figure out which one is best for them. Choice overload can cause us to feel overwhelmed and even delay decision-making.

Interestingly (at least I find it interesting) the term choice overload was coined by Alvin Toffler in his 1970 book Future Shock. Not only did he coin it, but he predicted it. Looking to the future Toffler suggested “the people of the future may suffer not from an absence of choice, but from a “paralyzing surfeit of it.” (p. 264). While Toffler was primarily focused on information overload, his basic premise also applies to products.

The Paradox of Choice by Barry Schwartz

In their 1998 Annual Report, the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas provided data on the overwhelming number of choices facing consumers. They did so by comparing the early 1970s to the late 1990s. For example, in the early 1970s Colgate offered consumers the choice of two different toothpastes. By the late 1990s consumers could choose from 17 different toothpastes. Over the same period, the number of television screen sizes increased from 5 to 15, McDonalds’ menu items from 13 to 43, and Frito Lay chip varieties from 10 to 78.

What about beer? In same report the Dallas Fed reported the number of SKUs (aka Stock Keeping Units) for a variety of retail items. An SKU code is a “unique code consisting of letters and numbers that identify characteristics about each product, such as manufacturer, brand, style, color, and size.” For example, if a manufacturer introduces a new product (e.g., a new breakfast cereal) or the same product in a different size (e.g., 36oz in addition to 24oz) it is assigned its own unique SKU. Between 1980 and 1998, the number of SKU codes for beer increased from 25 to 187. This was, of course, before the craft beer revolution went into overdrive. Between 2008 and 2015, the number of craft beer SKUs increased from 2,274 to 7,400. While the number of craft beer SKUs have dropped in recent years, the amount of choice availability to craft beer drinkers remains extensive.

The increasing number of craft breweries (there are now over 9,000 in the United States) and SKUs definitely give the craft beer drinker more choice. But is it too much? Carlos Brito seems to think so. In 2016 interview, the then CEO of Anheuser Busch suggested that craft beer consumers were “tired of choice”. Hardly a surprising statement from the man whose company was seeing their market share being eroded by increasing consumer demand for craft beer. As Bob Pease, President and CEO of the Brewers Association suggested, “It’s a hypothesis being willed into existence for the greater good of one brewery.”

Most craft beer drinkers disagree with Mr. Brito’s assessment. Indeed, a survey conducted in the same year found that 58% of craft beer drinkers craved even more flavor options than were available to them at that time. A 2013 study examining the behaviors of craft beer drinkers noted that a large number of craft beer drinkers “find satisfaction in discovering new beers and breweries” For such drinkers, “loyalty to one brewery will be difficult . . . if new products are not constantly being offered.” This is why most craft breweries offer patrons to opportunity to try five or six of its beers by purchasing a flight. The growth of beer tourism is another indicator that craft beer drinkers yearn choice. A 2016 study by Jennifer Francioni and Erick T. Byrd found that the main reason individuals engage in beer tourism is to taste new beer.

A flight of beer at Ill Mannered Brewing Company in Powell, OH

An interesting exception to choice overload are individuals who consider themselves to be ‘experts’ with regard to the product they are choosing. A 2014 paper by Alexander Chernev and his colleagues note that “it has been shown that for consumers who are unfamiliar with the product category, choices from larger assortments are more likely to lead to choice deferral and weaker preferences for the selected alternative than choices from smaller assortments. In contrast, for expert consumers, the impact of assortment size is reversed, leading to greater likelihood of choice deferral and weaker preferences for the chosen alternative in the context of smaller rather than larger assortments”. In other words, people with product knowledge may have a tougher time choosing when they have a smaller number of options from which to choose.

Choice abounds at Yellow Springs Brewery in Yellow Springs, OH

The extent to which craft beer drinkers are ‘experts’ when it comes to the product they consume can, I am sure, be debated. Some craft beer drinkers are undoubtedly more knowledgeable than others. Indeed, in the aforementioned 2013 study of the behaviors of craft beer drinkers, the authors identify four types of craft beer drinkers – enthusiasts, explorers, loyalists, and novices. Of the four types, enthusiasts are the most knowledgeable craft beer drinkers, priding “themselves on trying all the different beers from different breweries and seek to acquire knowledge about how the beer is made and the ingredients that are used in the process.” I know a lot of people who drink craft beer on a regular basis. Most of them, I would consider fairly knowledgeable. And if not knowledgeable, then certainly very interested in the product and sampling ones they have not tried before.

The examples of breweries cutting back on the number of beers they brew in the New York Times article are small in number, anecdotal even. I seriously question how widespread this phenomenon is. I visit a lot of breweries throughout the year. I can’t recall one that I have visited in the last twelve months that has what I would consider a small number of beers on tap. Indeed, one of the most popular craft beer bars in Toledo, OH (where I live) is an establishment called The Casual Pint. It regularly has at least 25 different beers on draft. It is a very popular venue for local craft beer drinkers. No one I see in there looks particularly stressed or anxious when they are selecting which beer to purchase. In all honesty, most seem quite happy and relaxed and, if anything, appear to find the extensive beer list as a benefit and not a burden.

Further Reading:

Chernev, Alexander, Ulf Bockenholt, and Joseph Goodman. 2015. Choice Overload: A Conceptual Review and Meta-Analysis. 2015 Journal of Consumer Psychology, Volume 25, Issue 2, pp. 333–358.

Schwartz, Barry. 2004. The Paradox of Choice: Why More is Less. HarperCollins Publishers.