As you can see, it looks like it's preparing to eat the bottle beside it. That's because it holds a whopping five liters of wine - the equivalent of 6.67 ordinary bottles.
So what's with big wine bottles? Well, you've come to the right blog post.
The first question is how we decided what counts as "big." How did 750 ML turn into the worldwide standard for bottle size? The answer, like most things wine-related, is shrouded in mystery. Explanations range from convenience for independent glassblowers (whose lungs could scarcely push out more) to suitability as a single serving for the average male drinker (who was clearly a heartier fellow than I). The most plausible rationale, though, is the most prosaic: after a wide range of bottling experimentation in 18th century, a size between 700 and 800 ML simply became the most popular among consumers for its heft and versatility. (True standardization finally arrived in the 1970s, when the Imperial "fifth of a gallon" reverted to the metric "750 ML.")
So why, if these standard bottles were the crowd favorite, did larger ones persist? For one thing, larger bottles are better for the wine inside. Wine ages in proportion to the ratio of air on top (called "ullage," I've learned) to liquid on the bottom; the larger the bottle, the lower this ratio. Hence a fine 5L bottle will age far more gracefully than its smaller, 750 ML twin .
But let's face it: I didn't buy that massive bottle of wine to age it. I bought it because it looks cool. (Also it was on deep discount, but that's another blog post.) And my strong suspicion is that the persistence of big, honkin' bottles of wine has more to do with people like me wanting to arrive at parties looking like a boss than with connoisseurs chasing the finest for their cellars.
Supporting my point is the delightfully absurd naming convention for these plus-sized beauties. After the James Bond-evoking "Magnum" of a double bottle, we reach a string of increasingly amusing Old Testament kings:
There are all kinds of theories for how these names got going. But if you ask me, there's one reason they live on: people like me, deliberating over an absurd purchase at Costco, and ultimately swayed by the knowledge that a "Bordeaux Jeroboam" will soon adorn their kitchen counter. It's workaday snobs like us who keep the useless nooks and crannies of gustatory culture alive for us all. You are most welcome.
Sources:
http://www.thewinecellarinsider.com/wine-topics/wine-educational-questions/size-matters-explanation-large-bottle-formats/
http://www.wineloverspage.com/wlp_archive/wineadvisor2/tswa20080616.php
http://winefolly.com/tutorial/wine-bottle-sizes/
Amazingly enough, sizes above a magnum of champagne are filled by pouring magnums or traditional bottles inside the "big bottle", once the wine has matured (missing technical term here) in the smaller bottles. Except for the appearance factor (which I do find very attractive), there is no reason to buy big bottles.
ReplyDelete"Because most of the large bottles are filled by transferring the wine and are usually stored upright, the shelf life of the wine is drastically curtailed. The large sizes should be used within six months of purchase.
For these reasons, Gerard Yvernault of Kobrand, the importer of Taittinger, said, ''We do not encourage people to buy the big bottles.'' "
http://www.nytimes.com/1987/12/23/garden/the-added-sparkle-of-champagne-in-large-bottles.html