It's a nice article indeed! Good read! Unfortunatly it is quite difficult to link to the article, so I placed the whole article below.
Source:
http://www.whiskyfun.com/
December 4, 2010
Malternatives: tasting three pre-whiskies for the weekend
(let’s get hyster… I mean, historical!)
Pre-whiskies? Well, if you’ve ever read a good book about the history of Scotch or attended a masterclass where the engaging Richard Paterson was waving a giant plastic bug, you already know that the rise of Scotch whisky occurred because of an American insect called Phylloxera vastatrix that ravaged the French and European vineyards during the second part of the 19th century.
At the time, both the English and the Scots (at least in the cities) used to quaff cognac as if there was no tomorrow and the rustic Scotch whisky was mainly consumed where it was produced: in the Highlands. Phylloxera vastatrix was first spotted in Cognac in 1872 and by 1895, it had destroyed 85% of the vines, causing a severe blow to the cognac industry. The Scots, in the meantime, had built no less than thirty new distilleries and Scotch simply started to replace cognac in many British pubs, clubs and households. In other words, Scotch became the new cognac. Now, what’s also quite interesting is the fact that pre-phylloxeric cognacs used to be distilled out of the high quality but fragile grape called ‘folle blanche’, while the post-pylloxeric cognacs were and are still made out of the more robust but more mundane ‘ugni blanc’, which is the main variety that was replanted after the devastation. Today, ugni blanc represents 97% in cognac.
Cognac
Anyway, I’ve always wanted to do a vertical session with some pre-phylloxeric cognacs, especially after having read what the good people at Finest & Rarest have written (‘pre-phylloxera cognac has a unique quality, not found in modern cognacs’), and now’s the time! Please note that all three original bottles have been opened one week ago so that the very old spirits could breathe a bit before tasting.
AE Dor
A.E. Dor Hors d’Age ‘Réserve N°9’ (40%, OB, +/-1985) Four stars and a half Amédée Edouard Dor (A.E. Dor) started to collect casks of cognac in 1858 and, as some independent whisky bottlers do today, let them further mature at his own place until they were deemed ready. Then he decanted some of them into demijohns that were sealed with wax, some of these demijohns still existing today in A.E. Dor’s ‘paradise’. According to the company’s website, the Réserve N°9 comes from demijohns that were filled in 1964 with Grande Champagne and Fins Bois that had aged for one whole century in oak casks, which should make them pre-philloxeric indeed. This one is an older bottle but A.E. Dor still does new bottlings of the Réserve N°9, under a slightly different label. It’s to be noted that the ABV is natural, as no water has been used at times of filling or bottling.
AE Dor Paradis
A well known picture: A.E. Dor's paradise
Colour: deep amber. Nose: doesn’t this smell… young? There’s some varnish and even hints of nail polish remover at first nosing, which was certainly unexpected. It all gets rather smoother after a little breathing, with distinct notes of strawberry syrup and something like orange blossom water and even rosewater. It’s rather sweet globally, not too far from some old sherried malt even if it’s less grapy. Gets then more and more complex, with added layers of tobacco-like scents, smoked tea, roasted nuts (pecans, yes, pecans!), old rancio (de rigueur in old cognacs!), walnuts, sugar cane and finally these whiffs of menthol and pine sap that are to be found often in very old golden spirits. Again, what’s surprising is the relative absence of grapiness or vinosity in this old cognac. Beautiful nose! Mouth: it’s tad rougher at this stage and the rancio is bigger, hinting at old walnuts and Madeira. You have to like this style, I believe true Cognac Maniacs do. It’s kind of fino-ish, slightly leathery, maybe a tad too tannic for my taste but still beautiful. I’m sure it’s state-of-the-art cognac, but I don’t believe all whisky lovers would fall in… love with this one. Finish: shortish, nutty and slightly leathery/cardboardy. Notes of Madeira again in the aftertaste, with even a wee saltiness and a dry tarriness. Comments: as much as I love all old golden spirits, I remain, first and foremost, a whisky enthusiast and while this nose was fantastic, the palate was a little less convincing. But it’s still a very great old spirit, mind you! SGP:362 - 88 points.
Last minute: I’ve seen that unofficial sources (websites) claim that it’s a 1914 vintage instead. I tend to rather believe the official websites and yes, of course, I tried to email the company but they haven’t replied yet. When you own Napoleonic cognacs, why bother answering stupid emails (or blogs or forums)? So pre-phylloxeric indeed or not? I’ll keep you posted.
Rouyer
Rouyer, Guillet & Co 1865 (No ABV, Cognac Grande Fine Champagne) Five stars The house Rouyer Guillet was founded in 1801 in Saintes. It had large vineyards and, at some points, 37 stills (albeit much smaller ones than Scottish-style pot stills)! The name was big in the 19th century and very successful in the UK. Today, the distillery is dismantled but the brand still exists, even if it seems that it’s lost a bit of its lustre. Not too sure when this 1865 was bottled, maybe around 1920? What’s sure is that the driven cork was in great shape.
It is to be noted that I opened the bottle using a ‘double-blade opener’ (not sure how you call this in English) and I urge you to do the same whenever you want to uncork a very old bottle of spirit or wine, as any corkscrew will simply wreck an old cork, even when it’s in good shape like this one.
Bilame
Colour: dark amber. Nose: sweet Jesus! It’s the greatest old rum I’ve ever nosed! Yes, I wrote rum. So much ‘resinous’ honey (rather honeydew), sugar cane, maple syrup, pine needles, fresh mushrooms (brand? Say boletus), fern, banana skin, cigar humidor, pipe tobacco, prunes, sultanas, coffee, coal smoke… Better stop here or I’ll quote Merriam-Webster’s complete works.
This nose is utterly s-t-u-n-n-n-i-n-g, absolutely not oldish and certainly not tired, quite the opposite. To tell you the truth, I don’t think many Scotches – or rums, or calvados, or armagnacs, or other cognacs - could compete with this utter beauty. It’s not spirit, it’s a miracle. Mouth: it’s Puccini’s Missa di Gloria. At times quiet and whispering and at times roaring with mint liqueur, bananas flambéed, walnut liqueur (Nussswasser!), toffee, khakis… It’s really fantastic, even if the ABV’s probably around 36 or 37%.
Rouyer
Gets more and more resinous and sappy, mainly on cough medicine. Finish: not really long, of course, but amazingly firm, and fading out very slowly and not as abruptly as many ‘short’ spirits. Leaves touches of grape skins in the aftertaste.
Comments: a surprise, really a surprise. The nose was totally out of this world, it lets you touch the stars and be on familiar terms with the angels. The palate was more than great but, as expected, a tad less mesmerising because of its probable low strength. SGP:462 - 95 points.
Stills
Rouyer Guillet's old stillhouse
Bisquit
Bisquit Dubouché & Co 1830 (No ABV, Cognac Grande Fine Champagne) Five stars Another name that used to be big in the 19th century and during the first part of the 20th century, especially in the UK where this magnificent little bottle came from. Imagine what was happening when this one was distilled… In the US, it’s the Indian Removal Act; Louis-Philippe replaced Charles X (a Bourbon) as the King of France; the first regular railway in the world was in function between Liverpool and Manchester and Belgium became independent from the Netherlands (but will that last!)
The Bisquit Dubouché brand name still exists even if it’s now little known, I’ve just seen that they won commendations at the International Spirits Challenge 2010 (ha, awards!) I’m not quite sure about the current links between Bisquit Doubouché and the famous Bisquit brand but in the old days, Bisquit was one of the brands of Bisquit Dubouché. By the way, the appellation ‘Grande Champagne’ means that the grapes came only from the two ‘1er Crus’ of Cognac, which are Grande Champagne and Petite Champagne. This old appellation ‘Grande Fine Champagne’ means that the grapes came only from the Grande Champagne, hence the right to use the words ‘Fine Champagne’ as well. Of course, nothing to do with the region of Champagne where the famous bubblies are made.
Mucha
Poster by Alfons Mucha for Bisquit Dubouché, late 19th century.
Colour: even darker amber. Nose: oh no, it’s another stunner. Maybe it hasn’t got the 1865’s immediate in-your-face brilliance and maybe it’s just a tad more, say ‘aromatically narrow’, but these whiffs of forest after the rain, moss and mushrooms, coated with some milk chocolate, mocha and long-forgotten orange liqueur are absurdly beautiful. And I love these hints of old leather, horse sweat, old steel (old guns) and pipe tobacco…
‘Finishes’ with more candy sugar and, just like the 1865, quite some honeydew. Excuse me, but ‘wow again’. Mouth: look, this was distilled 180 years ago and it’s fantastically fresh, curiously bolder than the 1865, rather grapier as well and more on brown sugar and blackcurrants, rather reminding me of some very, very old armagnacs that I could taste in the past. There’s some mint liqueur, Corinthian raisins, a little orange juice (another flavour that was unexpected), notes of blackcurrants, blackberries and in the end touches of grape skin/pips. It’s probably got something a tad more ‘rural’ than the Rouyer and it could have been a very old Calvados as well at this point (notes of cider). Finish: medium long, longer than the 1865, more and more on old calvados, with obvious notes of overripe apples in the aftertaste. Comments: it’s not spirit, it’s a journey. Quality is extremely high after all these years and it just wouldn’t let you not think of all what was happening almost two hundred years ago. I hope I’ll be able to taste a 1811 next year, that’ll be the ultimate session! (tasting the Year of the Comet, two centuries later!) SGP:551 - 93 points.
Charles X, king of France until 1830 ->
Bisquit
Charles X
Oh and lastly, just one word about a slightly famous whisky writer who once wrote about a particular Aberlour, as I just remembered: “It is sold primarily in France, and one can assume only that this is God’s way of making amends for that pretentious, over-rated, caramel-ridden rubbish called Cognac they’ve had to endure for the last couple of centuries”. Sure only little men are afraid of little writings, as Beaumarchais once said, but instead of using a four-letter word, I’d reply that maybe there’s quite some caramel in some cognacs (just like in some Scotch), but there’s one thing which is really different indeed: at least cognac makers aren’t allowed to mature their spirits in just any kind of oak cask. By law, they can only use new oak or oak that had previously contained cognac. Oh, and let’s not forget that according to some old Scotsmen, some of the best malts used to be enhanced with cognac in the old days!
(With heartfelt thanks to Mike, Nick and Olivier
for having made this session possible.)
WAIT!
There’s something bothering me, how would some current high-end cognac compare with the oldies we just had? Aren’t these stories around folle blanche only a myth? What was the importance of bottle maturing in these stunning old cognacs? There’s only one way to find out: trying a current cognac of high quality. Let’s check what I have at hand…. Right, how about a…
Paradis
Hennessy ‘Paradis Extra’ (40%, OB, +/-2010) Four stars One of the most famous ‘above XO’ cognacs by today’s largest cognac house, Hennessy. The word ‘extra’ doesn’t mean anything, it’s most probably the same quality of cognac as the earlier ‘Paradis’ version. It’s composed with many vintages, some being very old (but as in similarly composed Scotches, probably only a few drops of them are involved) and said to be around 30 years old on average. Retails at around 350-450 Euros.
Colour: amber, a little redder than the oldies. Nose: hey-hey, this baby almost stands the course! Granted, it’s a tad rougher around the edges, less polished and certainly more grapy than the oldies, but it’s far from being ridiculous. We have more varnish, more red berries, more straight orange marmalade and more… cognacness.
It isn’t really complex but it’s perfectly balanced and I think it avoided any excessive smoothness. In short, very nice nose that, if you dig comparisons, reminds me a bit of the older Macallans 18yo. Mouth: it’s more difficult now. More power for sure but also more sugariness, which makes it a tad both dull and turgid after the magnificent oldies. Don’t get me wrong, it’s high-end spirit, it’s just that instead of adding it to this session at very last minute, I’d rather have had it first. Orange liqueur, sweet ginger, grenadine and old sweet wine. Little rancio, but rancio there is. Finish: medium long, rather clean. Some honey. Comments: maybe I didn’t do this one justice. I’ll try it again in the future, with more fitting i.e. easier company. SGP:541 - 85 points.
Have a nice weekend!
"If drinking Cognac is not allowed in heaven, then I shall not go.
