vintage port

[DRT]

It is in all likelihood a Colheita, not a Vintage Port, the label's "vintage" notwithstanding. I believe that I have bottles in my cellar labeled "Vintage Reserve" or something similar that are most definitely what we now call Colheitas.

In 2009 a dozen or so ers went to Quinta do Crasto and consumed this bottle. Andy and Julian were both there and, if memory serves me correctly, were never without cameras in hand. My recollection is that the label on that bottle was the same style as the label pictured above and it was most definitely a vintage port.

Andy or Julian, do you have photographs of that bottle? If so please post them here.

[RAYC]

it is probably vintage port (not a colheita)

Even from the photo, this looks very different to other 1920s / 1930s port bottles that i've seen, which makes me skeptical that this is a vintage port. But I'm prepared to be told i'm wrong!

As i speculated above, i also think this is probably a colheita from 1927.

Roy did a blog article on FTLOP which includes information about the 1927 Constantino that might be of interest - it suggests that the only bottling of it was done in the 1940s. I can't recall the rules on cross posting, so apologies if i am breaking rules and mods feel free to edit:

To gain more information on the 1927 Constantino Colheita, I went directly to the source ! well almost. I contacted my friend Miguel at Quinta do Crasto to gain some more insight into his mother’s father’s Port wine. After all, this gentleman was Mr. Constantino and I knew of his connection with Crasto and that he was Miguel’s grandfather. What I didn’t know anything about, was this specific vintage of Colheita that Constantino produced.

Miguel informed me:

"I already had a 1927 Constantino’s Colheita and it was a phenomenal wine. This was done last year with a very good friend that works at Taylor’s and he is also a Port maniac like me and you. From our records this Colheita was only bottled in the late ‘40s but the bottling date is not stated on the label. "

That said, if i were looking at the glass alone, i wouldn't pick it as a 1940s bottle either, but there we go.

However - if this is a bottle from the 40s - it potentially fits the story to its acquisition, but the selo remains unexplained!

[DRT]

Here is an interesting picture taken by JDAW in the Ferriera tasting room in 2008 showing the embossed bottles that were used for both colheita and vintage...

IMG_7800 copy.jpg (236.49 KiB) Viewed 4519 times

[RAYC]

Yes - the OP's 27 label is most similar to the style of the 66VP label.

[g-man]

Yes - the OP's 27 label is most similar to the style of the 66VP label.

but the 66 vp bottle isn't embossed

Oh Constantino, why must you trouble us so!

[DRT]

Yes - the OP's 27 label is most similar to the style of the 66VP label.

but the 66 vp bottle isn't embossed

Which means that the 1927 was bottled before 1968 so perhaps in 1929

[JB vintage]

We have established it has a selo that was put on many years after 1929.
We have established that it uses a typeface that wasn't available until 1957, at which point Constantino labels presumably used a version of the 'handwritten' label archived by Phil here.
We have established that after 1963ish, the typeface used on the label (for that word VINTAGE, and the date) was that seen above.
So, what have we established?

As djewesbury states above we have concluded that the selo does not match the label and the label doesn't match the bottle and non match the story. The only way it can be real is that someone has made several serious mistakes, and in that case it might as well be a Tuke Holdsworth Ruby, or whatever.

How many faults do you need to conclude that it is not right? Judging by all the discrepancies stated by djewesbury above, and for a few others mentioned by other writers, there is no evidence at all suggesting that this is a Vintage. If I were to hazard a guess I would say that this is a cheep Constantino tawny dressed up in a new label to make it look more expensive and a slip taken from another bottle to make it look real.

[DRT]

We have established it has a selo that was put on many years after 1929.
We have established that it uses a typeface that wasn't available until 1957, at which point Constantino labels presumably used a version of the 'handwritten' label archived by Phil here.
We have established that after 1963ish, the typeface used on the label (for that word VINTAGE, and the date) was that seen above.
So, what have we established?

As djewesbury states above we have concluded that the selo does not match the label and the label doesn't match the bottle and non match the story. The only way it can be real is that someone has made several serious mistakes, and in that case it might as well be a Tuke Holdsworth Ruby, or whatever.

How many faults do you need to conclude that it is not right? Judging by all the discrepancies stated by djewesbury above, and for a few others mentioned by other writers, there is no evidence at all suggesting that this is a Vintage. If I were to hazard a guess I would say that this is a cheep Constantino tawny dressed up in a new label to make it look more expensive and a slip taken from another bottle to make it look real.

So how do you explain the fact that the bottle and label of the claimed Constantino 1927 (that you say must be fake because nothing matches) is almost identical (apart from the vintage date) to a bottle photographed in the tasting room of the shipper that owns the Constantino brand?

Look again at what djewesbury actually said and consider the following:

1. "The selo was put on many years after the vintage" - this is true for almost every ex-cellars bottle ever released. It is perfectly normal.

2. "The typeface wasn't available until 1957" - so if the bottle was released ex-cellars after 1957 it is perfectly ok to have that typeface on the label.

3. "After 1963 the typeface [on Constantino labels] was as see above" - so the 1927 label is exactly the type of label we see on Constantino bottles after 1963.

The evidence you are trying to use to point to this being a fake actually points to it being a real Constantino VP from 1927 the was released by Ferreira after 1963. There is no evidence, as in none, that shows this to have been created as a forgery. The only thing in doubt is when the Aunt's husband received the bottle.

[djewesbury]

+1

[Glenn E.]

The evidence you are trying to use to point to this being a fake actually points to it being a real Constantino VP from 1927 the was released by Ferreira after 1963. There is no evidence, as in none, that shows this to have been created as a forgery. The only thing in doubt is when the Aunt's husband received the bottle.

The information about the 1927 Constantino Colheita being bottled in the 1940s could possibly explain the Aunt's date. If it was received in the early 1970s along with a story of having been bottled in the 1940s, that could easily cause confusion and end up decades later with a story of having been received in the 1940s.

Which would make it a Colheita.

Otherwise I'm with DRT. This is a perfectly legitimate bottle that was released after Ferreira bought the stocks (whether VP or Colheita).

[DRT]

I think we need to wait on a picture of the 1941 from Julian or Andy before calling the vintage v colheita debate. We know for sure that the 1941 was a vintage port so if the label is the same as the 1927 and 1947 it would point to this bottle also being vintage.

[djewesbury]

The evidence you are trying to use to point to this being a fake actually points to it being a real Constantino VP from 1927 the was released by Ferreira after 1963. There is no evidence, as in none, that shows this to have been created as a forgery. The only thing in doubt is when the Aunt's husband received the bottle.

The information about the 1927 Constantino Colheita being bottled in the 1940s could possibly explain the Aunt's date. If it was received in the early 1970s along with a story of having been bottled in the 1940s, that could easily cause confusion and end up decades later with a story of having been received in the 1940s.

Which would make it a Colheita.

Otherwise I'm with DRT. This is a perfectly legitimate bottle that was released after Ferreira bought the stocks (whether VP or Colheita).

Except that it couldn't have been bottled in the 1940s. We established that..!

[DRT]

The information about the 1927 Constantino Colheita being bottled in the 1940s could possibly explain the Aunt's date.

My reading of that article is slightly different to yours. I think it is saying that Constantino wine from the 1927 vintage was bottled in the 1940s but it doesn't say that they didn't also bottle some in 1929 as VP. Many houses have VP and Colheita from the same vintage.

[DRT]

Except that it couldn't have been bottled in the 1940s. We established that..!

Not quite. We established that it couldn't have been labelled thus in the 1940s

[RAYC]

As djewesbury states above we have concluded that the selo does not match the label

I do not agree with this at all - for instance, if you had bought any of the 1963s that the Symingtons have released to the market recently (or indeed the 45s they auctioned at Christies), they would come with a fresh, modern selo. In 50 years time, someone concluding that they were fakes because the selo and the bottle were from different eras would be wrong.

I think the most likely explanation is that this is a genuine constantino, probably colheita, that was labelled and selo'd in the 70s before it left the lodge/winery. The labelling was potentially wrong (my opinion, based only on other bottles i have seen from the 20s / 30s so probably unsound), and the story probably got confused over the years.

Now that this thread has run to 3 pages, I'm intrigued and would be willing to take a punt on it at the right price to see what it actually is!

[djewesbury]

Except that it couldn't have been bottled in the 1940s. We established that..!

Not quite. We established that it couldn't have been labelled thus in the 1940s

But then when was it labelled, and when did the aunt procure it? And who left this piece of lead pipe in the library?

[RAYC]

We need Axel to join the conversation and post his photos of the Constantino vertical he went to (which included the 1927 VP)!

[jdaw1]

In 2009 a dozen or so ers went to Quinta do Crasto and consumed this bottle. Andy and Julian were both there and, if memory serves me correctly, were never without cameras in hand.

Sorry not I.

[Glenn E.]

The information about the 1927 Constantino Colheita being bottled in the 1940s could possibly explain the Aunt's date.

My reading of that article is slightly different to yours. I think it is saying that Constantino wine from the 1927 vintage was bottled in the 1940s but it doesn't say that they didn't also bottle some in 1929 as VP. Many houses have VP and Colheita from the same vintage.

Agreed. I didn't mean to imply that a 1927 VP doesn't exist, just that for the story to exist to confuse the Aunt this bottle would have to be one of the Colheitas that was bottled in the 1940s.

[Glenn E.]

Except that it couldn't have been bottled in the 1940s. We established that..!

Not quite. We established that it couldn't have been labelled thus in the 1940s

But then when was it labelled, and when did the aunt procure it?

A perfectly realistic scenario for this bottle:

1. Harvested in 1927
2. Bottled in 1940s but not released
3. Sold en masse to Ferreira in 1963
4. Released (and given a Selo) by Ferreira in the early 1970s
5. Received by Aunt & Uncle in the early 1970s, or late 1970s, or 1980s... along with a story about how it was bottled in the 1940s
6. Decades pass, the story fades and is confused, and a post is made on TPF

Another viable scenario deletes point 2 and the story part of point 5. This allows it to be a VP but doesn't explain why anyone would think it was received in the 1940s.

And who left this piece of lead pipe in the library?

I blame Colonel Mustard.

[DRT]

And who left this piece of lead pipe in the library?

Detective Velebil when he was hiding the evidence of the photos of the 1941 VP.

[DRT]

A perfectly realistic scenario for this bottle:

1. Harvested in 1927
2. Bottled in 1940s but not released
3. Sold en masse to Ferreira in 1963
4. Released (and given a Selo) by Ferreira in the early 1970s
5. Received by Aunt & Uncle in the early 1970s, or late 1970s, or 1980s... along with a story about how it was bottled in the 1940s
6. Decades pass, the story fades and is confused, and a post is made on TPF

Another viable scenario deletes point 2 and the story part of point 5. This allows it to be a VP but doesn't explain why anyone would think it was received in the 1940s.

I prefer your second scenario simply because we know that Constantino produced VPs and labelling mistakes are extremely rare, as is bottling Colheita without shipping it. I don't think the confusion needs to be related to an event involving the bottle. We know that the uncle was in the trade so would have known about things such as this. But the aunt is the wife of a man with a passion for Port. If any of us told our other half a story about a specific bottle of Port today how many of them would remember that story tomorrow, never mind four or five decades from now!

[Glenn E.]

I prefer your second scenario simply because we know that Constantino produced VPs and labelling mistakes are extremely rare, as is bottling Colheita without shipping it. I don't think the confusion needs to be related to an event involving the bottle. We know that the uncle was in the trade so would have known about things such as this. But the aunt is the wife of a man with a passion for Port. If any of us told our other half a story about a specific bottle of Port today how many of them would remember that story tomorrow, never mind four or five decades from now!

True enough.

The most convincing point to me is that Colheitas aren't generally held back after bottling. They might be, but really why bother bottling if you're going to continue holding it afterwards?

My wife can probably remember what all four of us were wearing at Quinta da Pacheca in 2008. I do not question her memory, as I've been made the fool far too often already.

[jdaw1]

The original poster sought advice about a bottle he believes is valuable. Please could his question be answered and then his attention drawn to the answer with a PM, as he might have lost interest some posts ago.

[DRT]

I have sent an email.