[163] ] In the Journal des Savants.
‘Vieux Bourguignon, jeune Champagne
Font l’agrément de nos festins.’
From La Critique, an opera of Panard’s, produced in 1742.
[165] ] ‘With what vivacity,’ he exclaims, with a strange blending of poetry and science, ‘does this divine liquid burst forth in sparkling foam-bells! And what an agreeable impression it produces upon the olfactory organs! What a delicious sensation it creates upon the delicate fibres of the palate! ... It is fixed air which, by its impetuous motion, forms and raises up that foam, the whiteness of which, rivalling that of milk, soon offers to our astonished eye the lustre of the most transparent crystal. It is this same air that, by its expansion and the effervescence it produces, develops the action of the vinous spirit of which it is the vehicle, in order that the papillæ of the nerves may more promptly receive the delicious impression.... Vainly calumny spreads the report on all sides that the sparkle of our wines is injurious; vainly it asserts that they have only a hurtful fire and a worthless flavour. Incapable of hiding under an insidious appearance a perfidious venom, they will always present a faithful image of the ingenuousness of their native province.’
[166] ] Max Sutaine’s Essai sur le Vin de Champagne.
[167] ] Henderson’s History of Ancient and Modern Wines. Pluche, in his Spectacle de la Nature, notices the controversy regarding the respective merits of the wines of the Marne and the Côte d’Or in the following terms:
‘Count: If we will be determined by the finest palates, the Champaign wine is much preferable to Burgundy.
Prior: It is a sufficient honour for Champaign to be admitted to the same degree of estimation with Burgundy; and it may very well dispense with the priority. I always thought Burgundy had some similitude with a solid understanding, which affects us with lasting impressions, and that Champaign resembles a lively wit, which glitters more upon the imagination, but which is not always serviceable to its possessor.