How was wine made hundreds of years ago without all the chemicals we have today?

Winemaking Talk - Winemaking Forum

Help Support Winemaking Talk - Winemaking Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

WineStream

Junior
Joined
Feb 16, 2013
Messages
4
Reaction score
2
Hi all:

I have been reading at this site for some time now, searching as well. I haven't found any answer to my conundrum, so here goes:

Something that has bothered me about wine making since I started (which wasn't long ago in the relative scheme of things) is the number of chemicals that one is supposed to use when making wine. Some hundreds of years ago, I can't imagine that wine makers had Campden, metabisulphate, sorbate, acid testers, pH testers, hydrometers, acid blend, clarifying agents, let alone sanitizers! So how did they do it?

I've done the kit thing, and yeah, it turns out OK to great, but I hate that I'm dumping packs of things into the wine that makes me cringe because I'm not sure if I can even pronounce the chemical(s).

What am I missing? Why is the common method of wine making so chemically intensive? I do not envision the people of 500 or so years ago washing out their barrel, bucket, or whatever with sanitizer. The primary fermentation was probably done with a cloth laid over the top of the bucket, likely a wooden bucket. Secondaries might have been glass with an airlock, but I'm sure they didn't have a degassing paddle on a drill. I'm thinking their siphon was a hose made of canvas or some animal's entrails and it was likely started but sucking on the low end. Bottles were probably hard to seal with a cork (if they had corks) because the glass would have been manually blown. We're sure they were eating, drinking, and being merry and we're sure it included wine. So how could they make it with out "modern technology"?

Has anyone else contemplated this? What have you found? Why can't wine be made "simply"?
 
With the advent of wood barrels, coopers would bend the planks of the barrel with coal fire.

Would the smoke of coal fire add sulfates to the wine?

Wine and beer was also safer to drink than the water because, of the alcohol in the wine and beer.

Hence the toast...To good health!
 
Last edited:
You are right, none of the things you mentioned are NECESSARY for wine making.

Just like seat belts, power brakes, fuel injection, dual clutch transmissions, and air bags are not NECESSARY when making a car.

Are 1952 cars better than 2013 cars, are 1952 wines better than 2013 wines?????

Science has simply made winemaking easier for us all, just like science has made almost everything easier for us all.
 
Basically wine making is the same now, as it was ages ago. The only thing that has evolved is the the need to mass produce this stuff to supply the world. The science of todays time only insures, that your wine stays fresh and bacteria free. However you can still make wine as they did ages ago without any of the chemicals we use.

If you place juice in a vesal it would decay and ferment into wine, without the addition of anything. The natural yeast, which is present on all fruit will do it's thing. However would you think it safe to drink? How soon after fermenting before it spoils? How long would you wait until it's cleared enough to drink? ect.

All of these questions fast forward to today's time...hence the things we now know and do to wine to make it great.
 
It can be made "simply", but it comes with some limitations/restrictions.

Yes, they drank wine ages ago - this we've all heard - but what you dont hear much about is how much wine went bad, or how many winemakers found better livings in the vinegar business.

Wine can still be made "traditionally", and we've all heard stories on this forum of someones uncle/father/grandfather/friend who makes wine the old-fashioned way, and some of them turn out decent/nice wines... But it doesnt last, the wine that is... Maybe a year, tops - but definitely not long enough to "peak"

And you dont hear much about the menagerie of things they DID add to the wine - oak being one of the few that actually worked out... Lead, animal entrails, among a few that didnt..

When you go back in history, they didnt always store their wine in glass with corks... Wasnt really until the last few centuries for that, i'm sure - wine used to be kept in clay jars, such as amphora, that were sometimes lined with beeswax.. Most were sealed with organic stoppers that didnt survive but archaeologists have removed fragments of ancient wines from inside some amphora - in greece, egypt, etc...
 
There are alot of factors. The use of chemicals allows for more tailoring of tastes. For instance, if I want to back sweeten (and store my wine for any length of time) I have to add potassium sorbate and sulfites. Back then, they wouldn't have done that.

Also, if we're speaking about sulfites, they pretty much guarantee a product won't spoil. A commercial winery can't afford to have their product spoil, so they're going to do whatever it takes to ensure that won't happen.

Having said that, I think we go too nuts with that stuff (sulfites in particular, and even sanitation). We have super hot water and detergents that they never had back then, and I would be willing to bet that more times than not, they ended up with wine instead of vinegar (or else the tradition would be vinegar making, and not winemaking), even without sulfites, and a proper sanitation regimen.

I've been making wine for 7 years. The last few years, I never use sulfites or sanitize anything when I'm making wine from grapes (I just made the dragon blood recipe and used all the recommended chemicasl). I've never made vinegar or had wine spoil. Yes, I drink my wine within a couple of years. And my wine is very good. Not great, but very good.

I have a friend who's been making wine without sulfites (or using "proper" sanitation techniques) for over 40 years. In all that time he's made one batch of wine that was so bad he wouldn't give it away, and that was because he let the grapes sit too long before he crushed and they were getting moldy.

So, sulfites and chemicals ensure a product that won't spoil. They are also used to "improve" wine, or at least tailor it to individual preferences. They are not necessary, and hundreds of thousands of people continue to prove that, but you usually won't find that type of person on an internet forum.
 
What you are referring to as Traditional Winemakers were in fact, just winemakers using the latest techniques to make the best wine they could. They weren't intentionally leaving things out in the name of the art. In fact, they probably put some horrifying things in their wine in attempts to make it better/keep longer. Since they didn't know about sulfites, they could not choose to use them. That is very different from intentionally following old methods.

They didn't know about sulfites, but if they did, I guarantee you the vast majority would have used them, just as they do today.

The same things that spoil wine today existed then, and my guess is that they tried everything they could think of to protect their wine. Sure, there were probably a few who weren't sure about the latest development (using beeswax as a seal for example), and decided in favor of using the old method (whatever that might have been). But in general, winemakers have always used the latest technology, and always will.
 
You are right, none of the things you mentioned are NECESSARY for wine making.

Just like seat belts, power brakes, fuel injection, dual clutch transmissions, and air bags are not NECESSARY when making a car.

Are 1952 cars better than 2013 cars, are 1952 wines better than 2013 wines?????

Science has simply made winemaking easier for us all, just like science has made almost everything easier for us all.

Given that my career is in the automotive industry and being a car guy, I can totally relate to this analogy. It's ironic that you mention double clutch transmissions since this is specifically the sub-industry that I work in :h

Using your analogy, I can understand better. Based on the quantity of wine that my wife, friends, and I consume; we need the mass quantity wine that comes from chemical-infused commercial wine. This would be the "daily driver" car, something average, family car, made in the last 10 years. Then there's the special, homemade wines; limited supply, not something you drink everyday. This would be akin to say, a 71 Corvette that spends most of it's life under a cover in the garage and only comes out when the weather is nice. At some point though, it's all gone and it has to wait until a new batch is ready. At least for those of us in the north, it's like putting the 'Vette away for winter.

Thanks for the excellent clarification.
 
Having said that, I think we go too nuts with that stuff (sulfites in particular, and even sanitation). We have super hot water and detergents that they never had back then, and I would be willing to bet that more times than not, they ended up with wine instead of vinegar (or else the tradition would be vinegar making, and not winemaking), even without sulfites, and a proper sanitation regimen.

I've been making wine for 7 years. The last few years, I never use sulfites or sanitize anything when I'm making wine from grapes (I just made the dragon blood recipe and used all the recommended chemicasl). I've never made vinegar or had wine spoil. Yes, I drink my wine within a couple of years. And my wine is very good. Not great, but very good.

This is perhaps my current status as well. I didn't elaborate on it in the IP because I didn't want to taint people's responses by thinking that I have too much of a predisposition. Over my 1.5 years of wine making (thanks to a 1 gal. kit from my wife as a Christmas present!), I've made kits, fruits, juices, and straight-up grapes direct from the vine; and of course I now have a whole host of primary buckets, carboys, siphons, etc. I've had some epic fails (apple cider), and one batch from grapes that got poured out. But I've had some really great stuff, too. But, aside for the kits, I try to use very little chemicals if any at all. I do use a sanitizer on my carboys, bottles, and corks. But, when I'm using the thief or racking, I typically just rinse the tools with the hottest possible water. For me, fermentation is done when the yeast dies or there's no more sugar. I was very surprised when I first started reading in this forum that there's not a lot of discussion of such natural winemaking.

Perhaps the biggest factor for why I wonder why natural winemaking isn't discussed more is what's been mentioned here already: time to consumption. I'm impatient by nature. People write about storing wine for months in carboys and years in bottles. That doesn't happen for me. If my wine is in a carboy for more than a month it's because I've been too busy to put it into bottles. Consumption in our house is about a little over 1L per day. If we want some homemade stuff, I go downstairs with a carafe and draw off a liter. If I had a batch of wine still around after a year, I'd probably pour it out on principle because it would mean I didn't like it enough to have drunk it in that time.

Thanks to all for the input here. It has clarified some things for me. I will continue to enjoy reading and hopefully contributing here.
 
...

They didn't know about sulfites, but if they did, I guarantee you the vast majority would have used them, just as they do today.

...

Sulfite has ALWAYS been part of the winemaking process! Just b/c winemakers didn't know about it, doesn't mean it wasn't there.

SO2 is a natural byproduct of alcoholic fermentation :)
 
Winestream,
Yes, I think we are similar. I want to drink good wine. I know the way I make it from grapes (no sulfites and I don't add yeast) is good. I have no problem serving it to guests or giving it away. It's a great table wine. Having said that, it's not fine wine, and it's not wine that I will age for more than 2 years. Most of my wine is gone within a year.

I'm very happy with that, and I've proven (as has my friend who's made wine for about 40 years) that hot water and detergents do a very adequate job of removing bacteria that will cause spoilage. I just like using little to no chemicals. Do I think those chemicals are horrible, dangerous things? No. I do use them for other types of wine I make. I just enjoy having my grape wines as pure as is reasonably possible.

I think our methods aren't discussed more on forums because as I mentioned, a lot of the guys using these methods don't spend their time on forums. They might just be simple old-fashioned guys. Also, the reality is, there isn't much to discuss when talking about traditional ways: crush, ferment, rack, rack some more, bottle. Not much to talk about.

I enjoy this forum because despite my simple ways of making wine, I really benefit from the knowlege of the people here and it helps me understand (and remedy) some problems when I run into them.
 
Necessity is the mother of all invention, but that being said I agree with a lot of what is being said here. Tools are easily under stood: crushers were simply stomping feet, presses were wood planks with weights for pressure or even sacks like our strain bags, and corks were wood plugs driven in by mallets. As for airlocks, i know from my family that italians used to pour olive oil on top of thier wine in the barrels. This was their airlock. As the wine level lowered the oil remained on top blocking out oxygen. As equipment began being manufactured, olive oil also became their "food grade grease". Since they were making wine from fresh fruit and not kits there was no preservation of juice needed. The acidity, tannin, and alcohol were their main means of preservation. Also we use sulfites to kill off or stun wild yeasts so that we may reinoculate with a cultured strain. Since these strains only began production after Louis pastuers discovery of their involvement in wine making, wild yeast was a necessity to them. Now I assume clarification was of little concern to early winemakers but when it did become the norm.....who the heck suggested they try ox blood?!!! Must be the same guy who suggested we start eating prairie oysters! Lol
 
I also tend toward less additives. Although I will not make wine without added sulfite.

In the "old" days they drank the wine as it was fermented - usually dry. If they wanted it sweet they sweetened it when they served it or used other methods to stop fermentation like alcohol addition (e.g. Port).

As many people like sweeter wines the use of stabilizers (sorbate) has become an important part of winemaking. People somehow have an aversion to adding some simple syrup to their wine when they pour it. But you can do that and not worry about trying to stabilize. Keep the wine dry. Of course that makes it more difficult to control the sweetness level. On the other hand it allows each person to have the sweetness level they like.

Just some thoughts. There are some good articles about how wines have changed with modern techniques - for the better.
 
If I had a batch of wine still around after a year, I'd probably pour it out on principle because it would mean I didn't like it enough to have drunk it in that time.
You should know by now after reading this forum, it may take one to two years of aging; before some wine even begin to taste good. Think about that the next time you pour out a wine, that is just still too young to taste good. Flavor improves with age. Look at it this way. Say to yourself...ok I don't want to drink it this year, I'll sample it again next year. Give it a few years of bulk aging.
 
Last edited:
Are 1952 cars better than 2013 cars, are 1952 wines better than 2013 wines?????

WineStream, Craiger, tingo and GreginND:

I agree, it would be nice to have a forum where "old school" wine making could be discussed, but I am not sure that any of the current "old timers" would have much input. I found out first hand last fall, that even modern equipment does not compute with an old school wine maker. I wanted to make Concord wine from someone who would have the old recipe. I found out that recipes did not exist. As I was told by one old guy, I make it as I go along. Things change from one batch to the other and there is nothing that I can write down for you. He also insisted that I have a clay crock, an oak barrel. When I told him that I have a plastic bucket and a carboy, he didn't have any idea of what I was talking about and he never offered to help any after that. He used no yeast and had no idea of what a campden tablet would be used for.
I will say one thing, whenever this old school topic is brought up, it sure stirs up a hornets nest. I guess it would be like if I was interested in restoring 1952 model cars, that would be a waste of time. Why invest the time and money in a '52 car when I could go out and buy a new car for the same price that the '52 would cost to completely restore. Yeah, I think that there are a lot of things that where better 50 years ago, beginning with our pride and life style. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=550154135009477&set=vb.100000446875683&type=2&theater
 
I found out that recipes did not exist. As I was told by one old guy, I make it as I go along. Things change from one batch to the other and there is nothing that I can write down for you. He also insisted that I have a clay crock, an oak barrel. When I told him that I have a plastic bucket and a carboy, he didn't have any idea of what I was talking about and he never offered to help any after that. He used no yeast and had no idea of what a campden tablet would be used for.

I would have to agree with your "old guy". When I get my juice straight from the local grower, I ask them not to kill the wild yeast. When I get the juice home, I add nothing to it. I use a plastic bucket and carboys of plastic and glass, but I wish I had oak barrels. I have to say that I have a little plastic bottle with campden tablets, but I don't know when I've used one.

Sounds like his "recipie" is good.
 
WineStream,

Yeah, the only thing that honked me off about him was, he was after me to get grapes and then he would show me how he, his father and his grandfather had always made wine. After buying the grapes and driving six hours round trip to get them, he didn't offer any help once he found out that I didn't have a clay crock and that I planned on using a plastic bucket and then I just had to have a barrel. I could not age wine in a carboy. When I picked the grapes up from the vineyard, they told me that I would need to add sugar to increase the brix and he flipped out, since he didn't use any extra sugar. Oh well, some day I will give old school a try.
My grandfather died back in 1973 and he had been making Concord wine since 1936. He had a vineyard out on the farm and his wine making room was a dirt floor room in the basement of this 100 year old farm house. There was no running water down there. In fact, the only running water he ever had came from a cistern and for drinking water, he would go out a get a bucket of water from the old hand pump well. There was one light bulb in this room and he used no yeast that I know of. He had two old, dusty wine barrels and a wood framed wine press and of course a large clay crock. He never bottled his wine, it just stayed in the barrels, but that was the best Concord that I have ever had. I have never found anything that has ever come close. Some day, I will make his wine and when I do, it will be a proud moment for me. I only wish that I would have learned from him on how to grow grapes and make wine, but when you are young and stupid, you don't give any thought to these things. Now that I'm old and stupid, I kick myself for not learning a lot of things that he did out on the farm. If any of you ever hear of any old school Concord recipes, please keep me in mind.
 
I never add sorbate, even when backsweeting. I have now reach the point of not using K Meta as an additive art all either. I have some wonderful wine 3 and 4 years old and a lot of mead with nothing in it as well. You need to boil most of your equipment and allow time for wine to age before bottling. To control oxidation, I control O2. I age in corny kegs that I bleed off O2 and fill dead space with CO2. I still have not had a untreated wine go bad and can not say same about wines I made while still adding chemicals. It is as simple as control the micros and control; the O2. When wine is finished the alcohol will control the micros, I still have to prevent oxidation. No, you dont have to add chemicals, but you will need to be a bit anal and have a willingness to allow more aging time before bottling. I am bulk aging about a year and 1/2 these days
 

Latest posts

Back
Top