Alan McLeod asked a question a while back that, to be honest, points to a liberty I probably should not have taken in For the Love of Hops.
A question about “landrace” however. I understand it represents as a word the division between husbandry and wild. A word of the 1700s perhaps. When you looked at Cluster and described it as a landrace, would you only use the word if the hybridization occurred in the wild as Dutch plantings met their New York forest cousins? Or does it include the potential for intentional 1600 Dutch hop breeding in the Hudson?
His question resulted from a) others he has related to Albany Ale and the Dutch settlement of the Hudson Valley, and b) a headline I wrote on a sidebar in FTLOH: “Cluster: America’s Landrace Variety?” Bad headline, because who notices the question mark? It was a mistake to go beyond what I wrote in the body: “in a sense selection was much like the landrace varieties on the Continent and in England.”
A mistake because there’s enough lack of clarity looking backward, trying to sort out the origins of hop varieties, that mucking with the definition of landrace only makes it worse. Obviously, there’s more detail in the book, but here are the basics in short order:
Breeding and landrace hops
From the time hops were first cultivated more than a thousand years ago farmers chose to grow varieties, first found growing in the wild, based on their brewing and agronomic qualities. They were simply clonal selections, but different varieties emerged as plants naturally cross-pollinated. The best endured and are called landrace varieties by hop geneticists. The short list includes Saazer types, Hallertau Mittelfrüh, Fuggle and Golding. An argument could be made for others like Hersbrucker and Strisselspalt, but that is tangential.
What’s important for clarity is that these are all hops of European origin. The plant has been around at least six million years, likely originating in Mongolia. European types diverged from the Chinese varieties more than a million years ago, American types more like a half million years ago. American varieties contain compounds that may create odors that result in aromas and flavors once considered undesirable but now highly sought after.
Modern hop breeding, that is hybridization, did not begin being until the twentieth century. Research by the Austrian monk Gregor Mendel in the mid-nineteenth century (which went unrecognized until about 1900) established that, contrary to Charles Darwin’s theories, certain traits may occur in offspring without any blending of parental characteristics. His principles laid the foundation for plant breeding programs that created entirely new varieties, including hops.
Perhaps it would have happened anyway, but we can point to a time when hop breeding changed and therefore hops themselves. Not long after E.S. Salmon took charge of the program at Wye College in England in 1906 he set out to combine the high resin content of American hops, including some found growing wild, with the aroma of European hops. This eventually resulted in hops with more than 20 percent alpha acids, compared to four percent common at the beginning of the century, and a much wider range of aromas.
Clearly the Dutch and others growing hops in America in the 1600s were not breeding in the modern sense. But they were doing just what farmers were in England and on the Continent — always trying to identify the best plants and further propagate them. These likely were a mixture of imported European varieties and wild American types. None persevered, however, unless as part of the Cluster variety.
Cluster hops
Here’s what Steiner’s Guide to American Hops had to say about Late Cluster in 1973:
“The Late Cluster is the oldest American variety grown continuously in the Northwest. Known as the Pacific Coast Cluster, it was widely grown at the turn of the century and was the leading cultivar, until the decline of acreage in California and Oregon was counter-balanced with the growth of the hop industry in Washington, where the Early Cluster became dominant. The origin of the Late is obscure, but it was probably originally derived from the native North American hop.1 It may have been a selection from these, or resulted from a cross with introduced varieties brought over by colonists, or from a cross of native western varieties with stock brought by settlers who established hop growing in the Pacific Northwest. The Late Cluster was similar to but more vigorous than the Milltown, and other strains of Cluster grown in New York State, after the Prohibition Era.”
One other important note from Steiner: “Any cultivar grown widely and continuously over a long interval of time, will, if not occasionally reselected, accumulate a large number of mutations. … Thus the Late Cluster is actually a collection of similar clones rather than a distinct homogeneous cultivar.” Early Cluster, given that name because it matures earlier, likely was a mutation of Late Cluster, and more widely grown. Together the accounted for almost 80 percent of American hop acreage forty years ago.
I suggested calling it an “American landrace” variety because it resulted from clonal selections and remains around today (amounting to less than 2 percent of the American crop). In that way it is much like Fuggle, itself shrouded in some mystery, or Saaz. However, genetically, it is much different. And that’s a difference to pay attention to.
*****
1 Genetic studies since proved that Cluster is a cross between European and American varieties.
Excellent work Stan.
I need to stop asking questions. Since I asked that one, I’ve read that at least in the first two decades of the Dutch West India Company’s adventures in the Hudson, hops may well have been a controlled item that was not to be grown there. The colony depended on hops from the fatherland. Textile making was also barred. That is not to say that after, say, 1643 there was a change in policy and that is not to say I have it right. Trying to figure out the nature of the economics of the overall colonial agricultural enterprise is a bit of a puzzle. I am not even sure where I came across the reference. Make sure you treat me accordingly! 😉
There are also numerous references to “English Cluster” in early American husbandry and other writings, a quick Google Books search limited, say, to 1800-1870 will show this. This suggests to me what it does on its face: some of the background to the hop is English. I’d guess a cross between an English hop and a native variety. The term itself is English and is known in botany, such as a grapes cluster and so forth. The Dutch connection is possible but less likely IMO.
Recently in Toronto I had a beer which used Cluster and also Nugget. It was very interesting, I think I could detect a slight funky vegetal taste from the Cluster but it was faint, most of the flavour was herbal and very pleasant. This beer was a pale ale made by Six Pints, the craft beer brewpub owned by Molson Coors in Toronto which makes first class beers. (It prepares little cards to distribute describing the malts and hops used for each beer). It made me wonder why Cluster doesn’t feature more prominently in craft brewing, but perhaps penury of supply explains it if only 2% acreage is grown and most of that (I’d think) is taken up by large brewers.
Gary
Like Styrian Goldings?
Gary – In 2009, when some smaller brewers couldn’t get even Cascade they returned to Cluster with sometimes pretty pleasant results. Acreage is up a bit recently and it is mostly small brewers looking for something just a bit different.
Alan – Not sure what your question is, but Styrian Golding is genetically the same at Fuggle. Most of it is grown in Slovenia. Doesn’t grow the same, say, in Colorado.
“Styrian Golding is genetically the same at Fuggle.”
It is true, you learn something new every day — and I honestly can’t believe I’d never heard that before.
Nice writeup Stan.
One question I have is about the native North American hops having a high resin content.
“… in 1906 he set out to combine the high resin content of American hops, including some found growing wild,,,,”
I was told years ago by folks at the USDA that, prior to my breeding the native hops, almost no neomexicanus hops had been found above 5%AA.
Any thoughts about the high resin content hops that Salmon bred with and where they came from?
Todd – Looks like you need a copy of the book ;>) The key plant was a wild hop collected in Manitoba. It did not last long in the Wye yard, but was the mother of both Bullion and Brewer’s Gold.
Yes. That was an observation on the hazards of taxonomy, Stan.
Stan, I do need a copy of your book! I didn’t realize the Manitoba plant was the one in this story. Do you think that plant was a fluke? Other than some of the native neomexicanus hops I breed, do you know of any other neomexicanus hops that were/are above the 5%AA? Do we really know if that Manitoba plant was full blooded neomexicanus?
Because that plant is long gone it can’t be said for sure if it was strictly neomexicanus. They key going forward, obviously, has been mixing the varieties has created much more, well, variety.
Wouldn’t hops have “sports” like apples? Variant generated by natural mutation? Has breeding increased variation or just adapted it?
Yes, natural variation. Hybridization focuses creating hops with particularly qualities. These include both the agronomic side and the brewing quality side.
Yes, one is aware of the purpose of hybridization.
One of the more interesting thing about heritage apples is they are mainly discoveries of pleasing sports. I expect, as with the greening, the exploration for and cultivation of tasty varieties would have been known in the 1600s. In a 1642 journal entry, it states that the beer was as good as in the Netherlands “for hops grow in the “woods” connecting goodness of taste and availability. But the degree of quality may have just been colonization PR.
Did colonization PR include occasional reference to “passion” as another ingredient?
More “opportunities for aching starvation and risk of novel death” as a motivator than passion! 😉
In apples, I remember the “sports” as being also called “pippins”. Folks would hunt for these as a method to fame and potential fortune. Finding a “pippin” and cloning/grafting it up took time, dedication, desire, and I’d bet some passion. 😉 It happens in hops too. Some hop plants from seed are freaks more often than “sports” or “pippins”. Cloning hops up to commercial status and quantity is not only “voted” on by breeders, but by potential farmers as well as end users. If it takes quite a bit a human lifetime to develop a plant that’s to become commercially viable, whether it’s passion or dedication, quite a few people had to care.
A couplefew years past, Amnesia Brewing hosted a small single-hop fest and the folks at Double Mountain brewed Clusterf**k. In one of those especially lucid moments I have more and more, I saw owner Charlie Devereux and asked which hop they used. He gave me a combo sad/withering look. I did redeem myself by asking whether it was early or late cluster, and he had no clue. They had gotten some “Cluster” from Yakima and that was good enough for their purposes.
This is instructive to me. As we look at this historical record, we sometimes overvalue our forensic capacity I think. Very few brewers are scholars or much interested in scholarly matters. They do a rubbing, ask the grower what the hop is, give it a try, and they’re good. I can imagine a future historian looking back and imputing a lot of meaning into the beers of the late 20th/early 21st centuries. Genetic tests are probably a lot more reliable.
Speaking of genetics, what about this legendary Wild Manitoban Stock? When you look through the USDA catalog, it’s everywhere. I’ve always felt like whatever landracy hops came from North America would have to look back to that ancestor. Seems like s/he was a very important hop.
Jeff – That’s the hop otherwise known as BB1, mother of both Brewer’s Gold and Bullion. When you start looking at the heritage of most of the hops grown today they’ve got some Brewer’s Gold or Bullion in them, and that’s why you see the Manitoban mention. Heck, Citra is 3% Brewer’s Gold.
Here in this old English source, you see an explanation that the “grape hop” (I’ve read this is a member of the Golding family) is so-called because the strobiles hang together like a cluster of grapes. One can envision that another name for them was simply cluster hops. Thus, I’d think it is quite possible the English grape hop came over and by open pollination or selection or some process, became the Cluster of today (I recognize there are different forms of Cluster). I wonder if the European side of the Cluster genomes bear any connection to that of Golding…
http://books.google.ca/books?id=mixAAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA632&dq=cluster+hops&hl=en&sa=X&ei=VokiUZOIJKyE2QWO84DgBg&ved=0CFsQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=cluster%20hops&f=false
Gary – According to a 1937 USDA yearbook New York farmers grew several varieties in the mid-nineteenth century. These included English Cluster, Grape, Canada Red, Palmer Seedling and Humphrey Seedling.
That English Cluster and Grape are listed separately indicates to me that at least somebody considered them perceptibly different.
But I certainly agree it is possible that Cluster has a bit of Golding in it.
Stan, true enough about the Grape-English Cluster duality, I saw it myself in some of the later 1800’s American books on hop culture (again, all on Google Books). This could indicate a separate origin, but also, I feel English Cluster may be the hybrid and the Grape the pure English variety – clearly the Grape Hop was a recognized variety in England. From what I read, the English Cluster was more vigorous and climbed faster, which could suggest vitality from a mix with native strains. By the way a small black grape was also known in England as the Cluster-Grape and there was also a Cluster-Potato (in Ireland) and Cluster-Nectarine. Why not a Cluster Hop? 🙂 Anyway just some thoughts.
Gary
Hop breeding only really got going with Professor Salmon in the early 1900s. Before that it was selection of ‘bud sports’ that improved hop varieties.
‘Grape’ was a term used to describe a few English hop varieties, and the earliest ‘Golding’ variety I could find, the Farnham Whitebine was knowns as the White bine grape hop at one point.
It is also important to not over emphasize the introduction of the scientific approach to agriculture which hit the US after the War of 1812. Breeding and husbandry occurred in an organized manner for centuries in many aspects of agriculture even if it was not necessarily undertaken under the umbrella of the scientific method. The analogy to engineering is apt in that respect. Trial and error and understanding all existed as did the marketplace where the best was prized and therefore provided.