Let's decide right away what not to do with champagne. You shouldn't bathe in it – that's pointless nouveau riche chic. You shouldn't spray yourself with it – unless you're a Formula 1 driver about to take a shower right after a successful race. Finally, you shouldn't serve fruit dumplings in it, in the manner of carousing merchants. It should simply be drunk. Preferably from thin-stemmed "flute" glasses at a table covered with a snow-white crisp tablecloth. Though, by and large, the setting is not so important. The pop of the cork from an uncorked bottle of champagne in itself means the arrival of a celebration.
Cherchez la femme!
In principle, champagne started with women. With them, not with the Benedictine monk Dom Perignon, the talented manager of the wine cellars of the Abbey of Hautvillers (according to other versions, not talented but shifty, and not in Hautvillers but in Saint-Maur), who supposedly discovered the process of champagnization in 1668 (or 1677). This character is rather mythical, and the brand Dom Perignon of the largest wine house Meet et Chandon (it accounts for every fourth bottle of champagne crossing the French border) appeared only in the last, 20th century.
First and foremost, to the famous widow Clicquot. She became a widow quite early, at 28. Her husband, who died in 1805, left her a small vineyard and a winery in Champagne. And the enterprising Parisian woman – at a time when women were practically not allowed into "big business" at all – very skillfully promoted her business. Including firmly establishing herself on the Russian market: after 12,000 bottles of "widow's" wine were delivered to St. Petersburg in 1814 "for tasting by high-ranking persons and merchants," Veuve Clicquot became our most famous brand. And in England, the greatest success was enjoyed by champagne from another widow, Madame Pommery. And finally, in the 20th century, the banner that had fallen from their husbands' hands was taken up by the widows of the owners of such glorious wine houses as Louis Roederer and Bollinger. To the greater glory of the latter.
Blends and Vintages
Women "promoted" champagne, and women drink it – from demimondaines, regardless of geographical and national characteristics, ordering it "to their rooms" and only it, to great society lionesses, for not a single half-decent reception is complete without champagne. But this does not at all mean that champagne is exclusively a ladies' drink, entirely unworthy of men's attention.
Even such a symbol of masculinity as James Bond did not disdain Dom Perignon of particularly successful years, forgetting for its sake his favorite cocktail, "Vodka Martini." This reveals in the British super-spy a fine connoisseur: by all canons, champagne is a blended wine, that is, it is obtained by mixing 30-40 grape varieties from different harvests and from different vineyards. Accordingly, one bottle of classic champagne of a certain brand resembles another: it maintains the flavor "style" of one house or another, but is completely devoid of individuality.
And only if the producer believes that the year was particularly successful and the wine promises to give an exceptional taste and bouquet with the prospect of improvement through aging, surpassing the classic blended mixture, can he set aside a batch of champagne from grapes of a single harvest (sometimes also from a specific vineyard). Such champagne is called vintage. Its share in total sales does not exceed 10%, but enophiles (gourmets of winemaking) value only it, considering "classic" a prestigious and image-driven drink – but nothing more.
The most aged vintage champagne gets the name Milesime. Although, in principle, aging champagne for too long is dangerous: the taste of the wine may spoil. The optimum is 7-12 years. So champagne from the most successful harvests of recent years, according to most experts – 1988-1990 – should be finished as quickly as possible. Otherwise, there is a risk of being too late!
Well, as for the vintages that so worried Sean Connery in the role of James Bond, one can simply forget: that Dom Perignon has long since turned into a trivial sweet fizzy drink... Returning to the masculine theme: apart from Agent 007, champagne has more than enough fans among the stronger sex. Otherwise, they wouldn't use it to "christen" ships at their launch from the slipways. Or to spray the winners of the Formula 1 Grand Prix.
By the way, many people have probably noticed that racing car drivers "spray" from oversized bottles. Such bottles are called "magnums," their capacity is 1.5 liters. And they are by no means the largest.
There are also "Jeroboam" – a three-liter bottle, 4.5-liter "Rehoboam," 6-liter "Methuselah," 9-liter "Salmanazar," 12-liter "Balthazar," and finally, such a monster as "Nebuchadnezzar," with a capacity of ten "magnums" (or 15 liters). Apparently, recently "Nebuchadnezzars" are no longer produced. And the full set of champagne bottles also includes capacities of a quarter and a half of the standard 0.75 liters.
Standard everywhere – whether in France, Italy, or Russia. Whether for Moet et Chandon Brut Imperial Milesime, or for "Soviet Champagne."
Vintners' Lawlessness
Yes, yes, precisely – Soviet. And precisely – champagne. The cumbersome definition of champagne as "a sparkling wine produced in the province of Champagne by the method of secondary fermentation in bottles with aging of at least one year from grape varieties 'Pinot Noir,' 'Pinot Meunier,' and 'Chardonnay,' grown in Champagne," let us leave to the snobs.
The word “champagne” long ago ceased to indicate the geographical origin of the drink and came to denote its type. And even a certain “originality” inherent, say, in Portuguese port wines or Malaga from Malaga does not work here. Because they began making sparkling wines in Champagne rather late; here is what a certain Jean Godinot from Reims wrote in 1722: “For more than twenty years the French have been going crazy over sparkling wines. Therefore many wine merchants are testing every means to make their wines fizzy. To do this they add all sorts of additives, for example, wine spirits and pigeon droppings.” On the question of the “original” taste...
And in the Greek colonies at the mouth of the Don, the secret of a wine that was primitive but quite sparkling was known already in the 6th–5th centuries BC! “Foamy wines” – most likely the same as sparkling wines – are found in Homer, Virgil, Shota Rustaveli, Omar Khayyam...
And even closer to our time, after the invention of the process of champagnization (secondary fermentation of white dry wine, for which syrup from cane sugar or liqueur and yeast are added to the wine), the French did not have a monopoly on champagne. They acquired it only in 1883, when eleven states signed the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property.
In fact, a quiet redivision of the world took place: each of the major powers tried to grab for itself as many recognizable “brands” as possible, so that no one else would even dare to touch them. And since the convention was signed, as its name implies, in Paris, the French got a substantial piece of the pie – in particular, exclusive rights to the words “cognac” and “champagne”. Since then they have actively used these rights, tirelessly suing everyone who dares to encroach on the sacred.
And the French can be understood: even the most mediocre champagne from Champagne costs more than a few dozen euros, while, for example, our “Abrau-Durso”, which has repeatedly won Grand Prix at international wine competitions, gold and silver medals, cannot be sold in France for more than 8–10 euros a bottle.
However, winemakers from other countries are no fools either. The Spanish renamed their (mainly Catalan) sparkling wine “cava”, the Italians – “spumante”, and both calmly enter various markets with them (including the French one). True, the Italians also experimented with technology – in some brands of “spumante”, secondary fermentation is combined with artificial carbonation of the wine. This, of course, by all standards is no longer champagne.
To be continued.