20 comments

[ 2.6 ms ] story [ 46.3 ms ] thread
Was there ever a serious belief that nobody drank water? That seems a bit much.

I can think of a fiction book that rather heavily pushed the idea, but it seems like a few minutes of thought would show that there's no way to produce/transport/store enough beer-type liquid for people working on a farm.

Conversely, an aristocrat/noble who travelled to a different continent might conceivably attempt to only drink beers/etc.

Interestingly enough this is my first time hearing about this whole drinking alcohol theory and its whimsical
I always thought it quite weird that somehow by virtue of being in beer, that the water somehow becomes sterilised.

If you've ever tried home brewing, you'll know that non-sterile conditions lead to foul rancid filth due to all the bacteria etc.

I'd find it odd if the people then knew to sterlise the water and equipment to make beer, but then not do the same to drink it.

I always though it was after the middle ages that alcohol was consumed for safety reasons. I also remember hearing it wasn't really the general population, but sailors on ships because water on long voyages wouldn't stay fresh very long?
It's more about the vitamins beer provides.
The relevance of beer with regard to water conservation and safe consumption is _not_ because the alcohol sterilizes the fluid. It's because successfully brewed and unfiltered beer forms a relatively stable ecosystem of unproblematic yeasts and lactic acid bacteria which prevent other unsafe micro organisms to take over and multiply. The hop is actually contributing to chemical conservation, though.
I'm not clear what you mean by "contributing to chemical conservation". They don't conserve anything, really.

Hops are antibiotic and antifungal in nature. That, combined with their mild flavor (compared to things like wormwood), is why they are synonymous with beer production today.

hops being "antibiotic and antifungal in nature" "contributes to chemical conservation". (?)
My favorite joke derived from this misconception is that the introduction of coffee and it displacing beer as a preferred drink caused the end of the Dark Ages.

I’ll die on this hill, just because I love it so much.

This isn't really a slam dunk debunking. I get that medieval people knew about good and bad water, and that they had other reasons to prefer small drinks. But it doesn't change the facts that:

- Medieval people DID drink constantly (mostly in the form of small drinks)

- SOME medieval didn't have access to consistently good water.

- Even good water supplies can be tainted

There are cases were it was noted that a disease would outbreak from the local water supply, but no one from the brewery next door would get sick. This was not lost on most people, so water was drunk but with some risks assumed.

And most notably, we still see this exact dichotomy today in the third world where dysentery and diarrea are still common causes of death. And people with the means or preference towards prepared drinks often fare better.

This seems like an example of black and white thinking. Did they never drink water? beer? wine? Of course not. A better question - under what circumstances did they prefer beer? wine? cider? water? And later on tea? coffee? Etc?
Yes. But many myths are based on such black and white thinking.
Something to ponder

Beer and wine, watered down, are medieval forms of soft drinks. People simply got tired of just drinking boring water. On top of that, you got a little buzz or it made you feel good like a soft drink might

Ironically, you almost can't get a buzz from small ales. I drank nothing but a homebrew small ale one hot August day, to test the theory. No buzz.

Now, beer consumed for recreational purposes certainly had effects!

Nice data point!

Maybe it’s just like a soft drink then

I always assumed that it was more a case of behavior selection:

Yes, people did drink water frequently, but those societies and groups that regularly consumed fermented drinks like wine or beer, had on average a lower chance of consuming polluted water.

As a result behavior that favored drinking slightly alcoholic drinks became more widespread by selection.

This doesn’t require that people actually knew their water sources were polluted.

The article mentions streams as being a safe source of drinking water for rural communities — as most of the population were during the medieval period.

My mother from rural north-west Ireland drank water from a stream for the first 25 years of her life. There was no running water in her home-place until the late 70s (after she had moved out). Rain water was collected from the gutters in barrels for washing and other uses but water for drinking had to be carried by bucket from a stream 1km away across fields on the side of a hill that were muddy when it rained. I’m guessing drinking water from a stream would have been even more common in the preceding decades and centuries.

>> Why are people who have little or no firsthand knowledge of the Middle Ages absolutely convinced they know the facts on this issue?

I used to have these arguments with an older relative, some acute, some chronic, about a) whether the edible part of an urchin is eggs or genitals [1], b) whether urchins with little pebbles and bits of seaweed on them are males, ornamented thusly to attract females [2], c) whether cypress tree sex can be determined by how open wide are their branches [3], d) whether the ruins discovered by Heinrich Schleimann on the coast of Asia Minor are really the ruins of the mythical Troy [4], and, e) whether ascent blackout during free-diving is a thing or not [5].

I've given up. People know what they know, either because their mother told them so when they were young, or because everyone knows, or because they know better than you. If someone's made up their mind that they're right and you're wrong, then they're right, you're wrong and you can't change their mind.

_______________

[1] Genitals.

[2] No, sea urchins do not have eyes.

[3] No, cypress trees have both male and female parts.

[4] Undetermined.

[5] It is.