Actually, that is not necessarily accurate Derek.
One at a time though:
Roy, I really don't understand how you can be so adamant that any port of the age being discussed has never been refreshed with younger juice. Refreshing tawny ports with younger wines was common and accepted practice for centuries. The paranoia of "is it what it says on the label?" is a very, very modern thing in comparison to the wines we are discussing. In the middle of the 19th century anyone who did not refresh their casks with some younger wine would probably have been considered to be insane!
You are generalizing with the word ANY. I was not referencing ANY Port of the age, just the Scion. I also can't say for sure that it has NOT been refreshed, nobody can unless they owned the casks and had documentation as to how they were handled. Yes "refreshing" was common, but there were companies that frowned on that practice and made sure NOT to refresh with younger wines, as they felt it was "cheating" and would ONLY use topping off with the same wines, even though more expensive ... to insure the contents were kept "pure" or in another term, not mixing different vintage dated tawnies. Krohn is just one example of that mentality, but there are other companies we've visited that have said the same thing, that they did not refresh their Colheitas, simply topped them off. Others openly admit to refreshing, it is really a company by company philosophy.
At the end of the day, I could care less whether any Colheita was "refilled" by refreshing or topping off ... as long as they disclose which process they've used. The issue people have focused on with Scion from v. early on, with severe skepticism discussed on forums and in private is exactly HOW those casks were treated, or not and the questioning of its true age. Like I said earlier, having just tasted casks that were very similar in age, known to have been topped off( but not refreshed), it seemed apparent at that moment, that there were certain similar organoleptic qualities that I tasted which made me think of that ... right then and there and I said it to the group, too. Could I be wrong? Absolutely. However, for my tastes at the time, it seemed very similar in its freshness of acidity as the key factor, which was something I noted from these topped off barrels and distinctly remember noting in Scion too.
To your second point:
I have tasted both Scion and the wine that Andy mentioned. Both were great wines. I really, really, really don't care whether or not either or both contain a proportion of younger wines that were added through the ages to compensate for the angel's share. Bhe fact is that both of them probably do because that is how tawny ports were made in those days. If Taylor Fladgate believed or could reasonably claim otherwise then Scion would have 1855 on the label. But it doesn't.
Sorry Derek, I'm not sure that you are correct there my friend.
![Huh? [shrug.gif]](./images/smilies/shrug.gif)
I believe that there would have had to be old records authenticating the dates of the casks, and these would have had to have been recorded back in the day. It is not necessarily the method of making up the angel's share that prevented the date of 1855 from appearing. Adrian has made it clear that the casks were "from a cool Douro cellar in Prezegueda" so there goes the 4% evap theory too. If it was a cool cellar, it likely could have ranged between 1-3% and likely 2% or so, depending on where the casks were stored in that cellar. Additionally, we have heard no specific mention that there was proof of 1855 date, but from memory, 150 years old and pre-Phylloxera were mentioned quite often.
I just tried to find proof of the 1855 since writing my last sentence, and found this from Mr. Bridge: “This exceptional wine, which dates back to the time of the Crimean war, may be one of the only wines in the world to survive in faultless condition since Phylloxera ravaged the vineyards in the 1860s,” stated Bridge.
Well given that we saw several casks of 1863 (see FTLOP #70 for photo proof) and tasted the wine ... I can assure you they're not the only ones. Also, a few days after the recent Fortification Tour, I visited with another producer in Porto who let me know of a project to launch another pre-Phylloxera Colheita from a specific year that is 100% known to exist with papers and all. A limited bottling will take place later this year. All I can say is that it too, absolutely rocked and was positively not refreshed with younger Port EVER. Again, to your quote above: it is not
the refreshing/topping off ... but evidence of the specific year of harvest which must be 100% beyond question, in order to have something called a Port of the Vintage, Port of the Harvest, Reserve Tawny, Single Harvest Tawny Port, Reserve ... or simply, Colheita. Obviously some of those older names no longer apply.
Fun discussion.
![Friends [friends.gif]](./images/smilies/friends.gif)