My history is rusty on this, but didn't things like scotch and whiskey ultimately come as a byproduct of beer development?
I would imagine that the difference between the two in age--"beer" was basically Mesopatamia, I think; spirits were many generations later, and further north and west?--and that beer was generally fermented in clay flasks or pitchers, in small batches for so long, it's either not likely or very hard to show such a connection?
I dunno, really. But the process is generally the same...idea, just wholly dependent on your local resources for fermentable products (wheat vs fruits vs...uh, gross stems and shit, and maize and whatnot) and the local climate, that this was just a long series of refinements that likely had some sort of overlap in processing, but the difference between yeasty grain beers and grain spirits...I'm thinking that transition was more sporadic or simply, very different regions of the planet, separated by serious climate differences (Eastern/Asian haplotypes typically have only one copy of the ADH gene--for metabolizing alcohol, where they get the flush, and is also the part of the world that is tied mostly to teas and weaker alcoholic beverages; vs western European haplotypes, that have 2x copies of ADH, and have been generationally attached to strong ales, wine and spirits (beer was actually more like 6-12% prior to the Depression, Prohibition--especially Prohibiition). That's a pretty solid allele, planted in very specific haplotypes, with marked boundaries to this day. It's pretty set...however, I guess the knowledge could have freely passed over a very short period of time between cultures, that wouldn't implant itself in our modern genome based on simply being separated geographically for like, 30k years.
Anyway, "beer" came first. More like Mead. ...something very similar to mead, anyway. so.....maybe?