A member of the Robert Parker forum expresses the idea to make a dinner in Brussels with old Chateauneuf-du-Pape. The idea sounds good to me. We exchange emails. I read among the emails that one person intends to bring a 19th century bottle but does not want to say which one. I do not read every message; I choose two bottles in my cellar. Here we go.
When I realise that the definition of old wines is not the same for everybody, and that the 19th century bottle will not come, it is too late. But I do not regret, as I have spent a truly friendly dinner in a very pleasant atmosphere, with nice wines.
I arrive early by restaurant Folliez in Mechelen, Nord of Brussels, and I have time to open many of the bottles which had already been delivered. The decoration of the place is very nice, as it is often the case in Belgian, and I could see that the chef, who has got one Michelin star, made a very intelligent and sensible cook.
We begin with a champagne Dom Pérignon 1998 which is very delicate, and evokes flowers and soft fruits. Then the Condrieu La Bonnette Rostaing 2005 is made of spices, bacon, litchi, and green vegetables. The Condrieu Les Terrasses de l’Empire of Georges Vernay 2005 is suppler with a peppery final. It is very different and evokes orange blossom. The Rostaing is more brutal, the Vernay flows more easily. I prefer the more brutal, but the easier is nice too. On tuna fish nearly raw, the Vernay expands. These two interesting wines will gain personality with age.
The series of reds will consist of three wines. We begin with Châteauneuf-du-Pape Arthur Barolet négociant in Beaune 1979, a Châteauneuf-du-Pape Raymond Usseglio 1986 and a Châteauneuf-du-Pape Château de la Gardine 1973. The 1986 has a nose of petrol. The 1979 looks like an old Burgundy wine, with a taste of old brown prunes, and burnt red fruits. The 1973 that I had brought is already an old wine. I like it a lot on the fish (flétan in French). My ranking is 79, 73 and 86, for this series which is not really convincing.
Then we have a Châteauneuf-du-Pape La Bernardine Chapoutier circa 1960 (the year cannot be read), the Châteauneuf-du-Pape J. Mommessin 1933 that I had brought (it is the Burgundy house founded in 1865, famous for its Clos de Tart) and a Châteauneuf-du-Pape Domaine de Beaucastel red 1954 whose bottle hand blown and very heavy has probably a century. This series is very great. The Chapoutier is very pleasant. The 1933 which had a perfect fill and an unusually perfect cork was amazing, shining, largely younger than the Beaucastel 1954 which was anyway very interesting. The 1933 is impressive, nice and young colour, with a very direct expression.
We change now for younger wines. Three Châteauneuf-du-Pape Clos des Papes, the 1988, the 1983 and the 1985. The 1988 is a little strict, limited, severe. The 1983 is brilliant. The 1985 is in-between, but improves in the glass. The three are rather dry, with a taste of pepper and tobacco. They represent what a Chateauneuf du Pape should be in its maturity.
Then, three Châteauneuf-du-Pape Domaine du Pégau Cuvée Laurence, the 1983, the 1995 and the 2001. This Domaine is very famous on many forums, but I remember the difficulties that I had two times to drink the da Capo 2003 which is at a stage which is impossible for me. The density of the 1983 is superb. This wine is nice, dense, frank, made of pepper, blackberry, tobacco and wood. The 1995 is strictly in the same definition, but has a little more red fruit. The 2001 is a promise of a great wine, but for me, it is really too young. The 1983 is magnificent on the veal meat.
The last series is Châteauneuf-du-Pape Bonneau 1996, Châteauneuf-du-Pape Beaucastel 1989 and Châteauneuf-du-Pape Clos du Caillou 1998. The 1996 is a little tight, the 1989 will open later, and the 1998 is magnificent, with a very precise structure. When the 1989 is open, it is above the two others.
I make my ranking on a sheet of paper, and one of our group of 8 people, counting 5 Belgian, 2 British and 1 French asks that we vote for 3 wines.
The 1933 Mommessin gets 3 votes of first, 2 votes of second and 2 votes of third. The 2001 Pegau gets 3 votes of first and 1 vote of third. The 1983 Pégau gets 1 vote of first, 2 votes of second and 2 votes of third. The 1989 Beaucastel gets 1 vote of first, 1 vote of second and 1 vote of third.
The final ranking is :
Mommessin 1933
2001 Pégau
1983 Pégau.
To be fair play I had not voted for my 1933 as first. It would have ameliorated its result.
I am extremely happy that this sympathetic group of wine lovers, more used to modern wines, has decided to give the first place to the oldest wine. So, the oldest and the youngest have been the two winners of this dinner. What has pleased me is the atmosphere extremely opened during the dinner, no one wanting to show his science to the others. It was pure friendship.
I will make two comments.
1 – as a joke, we said : “this Mommessin 1933 is so nice that there is surely Burgundy wine in it”. It is very nice, as in this period, it is the contrary which happened. So, it is a big compliment to one of the old CdP that I have collected.
2 – I have adored the Pegau 1983. And for me, it is very important. Because, reading all the reports about this Domaine, I was wondering if this is a mode, a capriccio of this moment. If a 1983 is so great, it proves that this not the effect of a mode, but a true “grandeur” of this property which I do not know.
This dinner with Belgian wine lovers was extremely friendly. And the wines were good.