[ffhhttt]

> drunk instead of water because the alcohol sterilized it.

No it didn’t. Just think about it, beer is what? 4-10% ABV? That’s not even remotely enough to sterilize anything.

Boiling which is part of the beer making process obviously helped and beer could be stored for longer than some other beverages but people obviously drank water and understood that boiling it made it safer to drink.

[pineaux]

No, this is definitely not true. A lot of water in the middle ages was exceedingly bad quality. Especially in cities. People also have to remember that there was no running water. So people had to collect water. Because there were no sewage systems, the ground water was dangerous to drink. Although cooking water will kill the pathogens, it does not destroy all the poissons. Also they had the miasma theory of disease, so although many old books spoke of the benefits of cooking water, it was not, in fact, known that tiny things in the water were to be killed to make it safe for consumption. Add to that that fuel in cities was expensive and needed to be transported from afar. Also, getting a mug of beer from a vat is a lot less tedious than fetching water, making a fire and cooking it. So no, you are in fact wrong. Especially for city life, but also for around that.

Do remember that untill Pasteur proved the Germ theory in the mid 19th centurys. Many doctors never washed their hands before a surgery. Many, many women died unnecessarily during child birth because doctors helped with labor and did research on corpses on the same day.

[ffhhttt]

I’m sorry, what’s not true?

6% ABV was enough to kill germs prior to their discovery but then suddenly it became 60% in the 1800s? Interesting..

People were boiling “dirty” water to make it drinkable since at least Ancient Egypt. There is plenty of evidence they did that during the middle ages. Obviously people preferred clean water and it generally was obtainable most of the time in most inhabited places:

> Do remember that untill Pasteur proved the Germ theory in the mid 19th centurys.

Ok I will. I’m not sure how is this relevant though. I mean if I understand you correctly you’re arguing that people didn’t understood that boiling water killed bacteria, however they knew that turning it into beer did?

> So no, you are in fact wrong.

About what? Obviously people drank beer and they also drank water, clean water was generally available even if much more difficult to procure than nowadays.

> Also, getting a mug of beer from a vat i

You do know that beer (ale) without hops doesn’t really last that long in room temperature? It can and will go bad in days or weeks. Hops weren’t really used in England for instance until the 1400s..

[bondarchuk]

You do not have to know about germ theory to know that boiling water makes it safer to drink.

(Besides that I won't comment on the "medievals drank beer instead of water" controversy as I always see people on either side talking with equal confidence and plausibility)

[ffhhttt]

> equal plausibility

Not really. It’s a myth created in the early 1900s or maybe a few decades earlier.

[weare138]

Beer isn't boiled or distilled, it's fermented. We quickly pasteurized beer before packaging now but they didn't do that back then.

[ffhhttt]

Is there any way to make beer without having to boil the water at some stage? How do you think beer is made?