People, it seems, cannot get enough of exports. Sales of British wine to the United States have surged and the British wine industry is enjoying vintage times. Five million bottles were produced in 2015 and the land planted with vines is expected to double by 2020.
This country has produced wine ever since the Romans grew grapes as far north as Lincolnshire. Free trade was once the enemy of home production. When Lord Palmerston cut the tax on imported wine by 83 per cent in 1860 he devastated domestic production. Now, on the slopes of Surrey, Sussex and Kent, British vineyards are producing wine that can compete on equal terms. However, there is a problem. “Champagne” and “prosecco” describe an array of products. What to use for British wine was on the agenda of the UK vineyards association half a century ago but never settled. Sparkling wine in particular needs a name and the wine industry has at last applied to register one. It is “British Fizz”.
The suggestion of a New York bar owner, we can surely do better. The word “fizz” has a number of connotations, one of which is to display excitement, but that is hard after such an unimaginative choice. It is not as if there were not plenty of alternatives. The Times went to the trouble of asking readers for suggestions and received, as one would expect from such a learned and august body, many excellent replies.
Instead of Fizz the wine could be called Frisson, Jubblis, Whimsy, Pippin or Cobblers. The bouquet went to “Merret” after Dr Christopher of that name, who first recorded the technique of putting fizz into wine in the 17th century. Among the many virtues added to wines through the fizzing process, Dr Merret noted that it would “mend their bad tastes”. Let that process now work its magic on British oenological nomenclature.