The making of modern champagne: how and why the taste for and the taste of champagne changed in nineteenth century Britain

ABSTRACT

Between 1800 and 1900, the taste of and for champagne in Britain changed entirely. From a sweet, and often, still wine it became both universally sparkling and extremely dry. Its usage also changed; drunk on its own or with sweet desserts in 1800, an accompaniment to savoury dishes and roast meats by 1900. How and why did these changes occur? Letters exchanged between the champagne houses and their London agents document changing styles of production whilst the changing nature of British taste can be tracked from the British press, from the many contemporary wine books and the records of the dominant distributive firm of W. & A. Gilbey. Using the Social Practice Theory of Shove and Pantzar and building on Leibenstein’s ground-breaking 1950 article on “snob” and “bandwagon” effects this article suggests a framework for understanding taste changes in British society.

KEYWORDS:

• Taste
• marketing
• branding
• champagne
• consumption

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes on contributor

Graham Harding returned to the study of history after a professional career in publishing, advertising and brand consultancy. He has written extensively on wine, in particular the history of champagne in Britain, the subject of his 2018 doctoral thesis. He is now an Associate of the Oxford History Faculty.

Notes

1 The term “dosage” refers to the level of sugar added to the wine before final bottling. It is measured in grams per litre and often expressed as a percentage: 5% equals five grams of sugar per litre.

2 The Gilbey material is held at two separate venues: the Diageo Archive in Menstrie (mainly corporate material) and the Bishop’s Stortford Museum (material from the personal collection of Sir Walter Gilbey). Between them, these archives have extensive collections of price lists for Gilbey’s and its competitors, promotional material, scrap books and some early letterbooks.

3 The marketplace focus expressed by Shove and Pantzar and supported by Skandalis (Skandalis, Bannister, and Byrom 2015) leads me to prefer their formulation to that of other scholars; e.g. ideas, ways of doing and materials (Arsel and Bean 2013, 901) or understandings, procedures and engagements (Magaudda et al. 2011).

4 See, for example, the advertisement from Hedges & Butler, showing champagne as the most expensive wine in their advertised range. Morning Post, 15 August 1851, p. 1.

5 See, for example, Oxford Journal, 1 August 1863, p. 6.

6 London Society, 116 (August 1871): 170–5.

7 For Hetty King lyrics see http://monologues.co.uk/musichall/Songs-F/Fill-Em-Up.htm.

8 The Examiner, 26 December 1863, p. 821.

9 Sir Wilfrid Lawson, quoted in Carlisle Patriot, 29 December 1871, p. 6.

10 Daily Telegraph article on champagne’s link to “diamonds […] and bill-discounting” reprinted in the Dundee Courier and Argus, 28 August 1865, p. 3.

11 There has been considerable controversy over who “Walter” might have been. The most recent study concludes that he was Colonel William Haywood, a highly-regarded London civil engineer.

12 For the social consequences of using the wrong glass, see Anonymous (1876), p. 98.

13 Between 1860–75, there were over 4500 advertisements for the Moët & Chandon brand and over 500 for Veuve Clicquot. BNA analysis conducted May 2017.

14 See Ridley’s Wine and Spirit Circular, 12 July 1898, p. 499 for a retrospective on the success of champagne and consumers’ knowledge of pricing.

15 See letter of 24 September 1890 in the unpublished Compilation de la Correspondance de Hubinet (CCH) held in the Pommery archives in Reims.

16 Ridley’s, 11 July 1868, p. 12.

17 CCH, 1 August 1861; 23 March 1863.

18 Ridley’s, 12 February 1886, p. 74; 12 September 1898, p. 649.

19 Hull Packet, 12 July 1814, p. 4.

20 The Times, 18 November 1840, p. 2.

21 The Times, 10 July 1851, p. 5.

22 Illustrated London News, 21 June 1851, pp. 596–7.

23 Archives Perrier-Jouët (APJ), 9 A 009 “Factures,” 1859/1864.

24 APJ, 9 A 009, “Factures,” 1859–64.

25 APJ, 9 A 009, “Factures,” 1859-64.

26 Contemporary Review, no. 69 (June 1896), p. 894.

27 Archives Pol Roger (APR), Livres de Ventes, 1877–1915. The last entry of every page was sampled for the analysis.

28 Fraser’s Magazine, September 1845, pp. 584–93. Subsequently quoted in at least five other British newspapers. See, for example, the London Standard, 22 November 1845, p. 2. Other papers included the Cork Examiner, Cambridge Independent Press, Derby Mercury and Blackburn Standard.

29 The Times, 24 September 1860, p. 9.

30 For the evolved Victorian matching of wine and food, see, for example, Manchester Times, 5 January 1900, p. 7.

31 Note that the champagne-only dinner dated by Ottomeyer as 1883 in fact took place in 1873.

32 South Shields Gazette, 26 January 1880, p. 4.

33 Saturday Review, 3 May 1879, p. 552.

34 CCH, 11 May 1867.

35 London Standard, 21 May 1885, quoted in Ridley’s, 12 June 1885, p. 238.

36 Ridley’s, 12 August 1892, p. 451.

37 CCH, 28 December 1867.

38 Leeds Times, 30 June 1860, p. 6.

39 Ridley’s, 12 November 1884, p. 3.

40 John Bull, 24 December 1869, p. 895.

41 Ridley’s, 8 April 1911, p. 282.

42 Saturday Review, 3 May 1879, p. 553.

43 Kentish Independent, 16 September 1865, p. 6; Leeds Mercury, 17 May 1870, p. 6.

44 See, for example, Salisbury Journal and Wiltshire Gazette, 23 August 1879, p. 5.

45 London Standard, 11 June 1896, p. 9.

46 See Manchester Weekly Times Supplement, 10 January 1874, p. 16.

47 Hampshire Telegraph, 8 January 1881, p. 6.

48 CCH, 13 July 1878, 11 November 1871.

49 The Examiner, 26 December 1863, p. 821.

50 CCH, 14 June 1871.

51 Ridley’s, 12 April 1893, p. 217.

52 No surviving data give specific dosage levels for these wines.

53 The Times, 9 June 1882, p. 4.

54 Ridley’s, 8 December 1908, p. 1076.