1948 Dow

This forum is for discussing all things Port (as in from PORTugal) - vintages, recommendations, tasting notes, etc.

Moderators: Glenn E., Roy Hersh, Andy Velebil

Post Reply
Moses Botbol
Posts: 5943
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 7:38 am
Location: Boston, USA

1948 Dow

Post by Moses Botbol »

Was poking around online and some reviewers said the 1948 Dow was undeclared, but 1947 Dow was?

Wine Spectator, "This undeclared wine is very close in quality to the '47, which was declared. Lovely aromas of custard, berry and cherry follow through to a medium-bodied, soft and velvety palate, with just the right amount of sweetness.--Dow vertical. Drink now."

Yet there are pictures of bottles with the Traditional Dow label that say 1948 Vintage Dow...

So, which is it? 1948 is correct, 1947 or both? Seems odd to have back to back vintages?
Welsh Corgis | F1 |British Cars
User avatar
Andy Velebil
Posts: 16644
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 4:49 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California, United States of America - USA
Contact:

Re: 1948 Dow

Post by Andy Velebil »

I don't know if both were "officially" declared but I know they did produce both vintages, in addition to a 1948 Dow's Quinta do Bomfim. It is very possible that the 1948 was bottled then it was decided not to release it and it was retained for in-house use only.
Andy Velebil Good wine is a good familiar creature if it be well used. William Shakespeare http://www.fortheloveofport.com
User avatar
Tom Archer
Posts: 2789
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Near Saffron Walden, England

Re: 1948 Dow

Post by Tom Archer »

Very occasionally, post-war bottles of Dow appear in dealer lists, tasting notes, and at auction; with unexpected vintage dates.

I believe some of the early Bomfim SQ's were bottled with just the word 'Dow' on the capsule, and possibly the cork also. As labels were often fixed after the bottles had been laid down, this may have resulted in some Dow Bomfim bottles being labelled simply as Dow.

I want to gather more information on this.

Another curiosity arises with the labelling of early Malvedos SQ's.

I have yet to find a bottle of Malvedos with an early (pre Symington) label, other than bottles labelled as Malvedos Crusted port.

My suspicion is that this was a labelling idiosyncrasy by the Graham family, but again, more information is needed.

Tom
Henrik Lilja
Posts: 89
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 1:08 pm
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

DOW vintage port 1947 - is it really LBV?

Post by Henrik Lilja »

I've seen the 1947 DOW vintage on auctions - became to expensive :(

On the lable it said "Bottled in 1950" - 3 years after the vintage - not 2 - so in principle - is the DOW vintage port 1947 by definition an LBV?

Quite wierd...

Best regards
Henrik Lilja
Best regards
Henrik Lilja
The Danish Port Wine Club est. 1981
Vicepresident
Eric Menchen
Posts: 6393
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:48 pm
Location: Longmont, Colorado, United States of America - USA

Re: DOW vintage port 1947 - is it really LBV?

Post by Eric Menchen »

Henrik Lilja wrote:I've seen the 1947 DOW vintage on auctions ... On the lable it said "Bottled in 1950" - 3 years after the vintage - not 2 - so in principle - is the DOW vintage port 1947 by definition an LBV?
In my 30 second search, I couldn't find the regulations, but I think an LBV is 4-6 years. And while most people think of vintage being bottled 2 years after harvest, I did find this at the IVDP web site:
Vintage Port ... Produced from the grapes harvested during a single year and bottled two to three years after the vintage ...
Eric Menchen
Posts: 6393
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:48 pm
Location: Longmont, Colorado, United States of America - USA

Re: 1948 Dow

Post by Eric Menchen »

O.k., I found it in what I believe to be the current regulations:
http://www.ivdp.pt/pt/docs/legislacao/213.pdf
This states that initial samples must be supplied to the IVDP between January and June in the second year after the harvest, and all bottling must be completed by July 30th of the third year. I don't know what the regulations were in place in the 1940s, but expect something similar.
Moses Botbol
Posts: 5943
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 7:38 am
Location: Boston, USA

Re: 1948 Dow

Post by Moses Botbol »

I thought 3 year aging before bottling was common then?
Welsh Corgis | F1 |British Cars
User avatar
Tom Archer
Posts: 2789
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Near Saffron Walden, England

Re: 1948 Dow

Post by Tom Archer »

I thought 3 year aging before bottling was common then?
Never common, I think, but not that rare. In the post-war period, maybe 5-10% of VP's have been third year bottled.

However, that requires the text on the cork being taken as gospel. I believe that many (possibly most) corks used by the UK bottlers were shipped from Portugal ready branded, doubtless with the assumption that the wine would be bottled soon after it arrived.

When sales were slow, some wine would probably have been bottled a little later than expected, and, quite possibly, not in the year indicated on the cork..

Tom
User avatar
Roy Hersh
Site Admin
Posts: 21436
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 1:27 am
Location: Porto, PT
Contact:

Re: 1948 Dow

Post by Roy Hersh »

Tom is correct. :clap:

As to regulation changes, when the most recent nomenclature for the special categories of Port changed a few years back, the first place it ever appeared in English, was in the :ftlop: newsletter, translated from the Portuguese by Mario Ferreira. You can find it in the article archives or by checking back in the .pdf files for the old newsletters.
Ambition driven by passion, rather than money, is as strong an elixir as is Port. http://www.fortheloveofport.com
Elyas Beria
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2008 2:58 pm
Location: Brooklyn, New York, United States of America - USA

Re: 1948 Dow

Post by Elyas Beria »

According to the Vintage Port Site http://www.thevintageportsite.com/decla ... tages.aspx (which I believe is run by the Symington family) 1948 is rated 99 out of a 100 point scale and is classified as a classic vintage. Seems to be a declared vintage according this is site.
Post Reply