https://www.guildsomm.com/research/expert_guides/w/expert-guides/2552/champagne-part-i-introductionWed, 08 Jul 2026 13:49:00 GMT8277e151-5ba9-4335-93f0-6f497ffb8dc4:4500a670-766f-4047-a32a-60af49caeae8Jonathan EichholzContents Location The Champagne Appellation Land and Climate The Grapes of Champagne Champagne Districts Grands and Premiers Crus Champagne Categories Storage Serving Selected Resources Situated 145 kilometers (90 miles) east of Paris is Champagne, a region spanning 35,208 hectares across chalk and limestone soils. Champagne produces over 300 million bottles of sparkling wine each year and brings in 20% of France’s wine revenue, though it accounts for only 4% of all French vineyard land. From the Massif de Saint-Thierry in the north to the upstart Aube in the south, there are over 36,000 landowners within the AOC, with 56% owning less than one hectare. By numbers, prestige, and popularity, this is one of the world’s most important winemaking regions. This guide will dive into the grapes, places, and styles that make Champagne so special. Location Champagne is the most northerly major wine region in France. It is located approximately 300 kilometers (185 miles) southeast of the United Kingdom. This position determines Champagne’s climate, the most important factor of terroir when distinguishing Champagne from the rest of the sparkling wine world. Nowhere else can Chardonnay, Pinot Noir, and Meunier grapes be grown on such a vast scale and achieve ripeness at a low ABV and a high level of acidity. Champagne’s position in France The low alcohol and high acid of Champagne’s base wines result in a lean structure ideal for bottle fermentation. Because of the fresh, crisp, undeveloped flavors of these wines, Champagne can seamlessly soak up the slowly evolving, yeast-complexed aromas of autolysis. Of all the factors contributing to Champagne’s terroir, climate and location are by far the most important. The height and slope of Champagne’s vineyards, and even its famous chalk soil, are secondary, as important as they may be in defining differences in relative quality. Throughout history, Champagne’s boundaries have at times extended north into modern-day Belgium, south into Burgundy, west and southwest into the Loire Valley, and east into Lorraine. The boundaries of Champagne’s sparkling wine appellation itself have been fought over as recently as 1911 and were shrunk by the Institut national de l’origine et de la qualité (INAO) in 1951. Today, Champagne is separated from Belgium by the forested hills of the Ardennes, and its vineyards are spread across five departments: Marne (66% of Champagne’s vineyards), Aube (23%), Aisne (10%), Haute-Marne (0.002%), and Seine-et-Marne (1%). The Champagne Appellation The Champagne appellation consists of three zones: the zone de l’élaboration , the zone de production , and the zone parcellaire de production de raisins . The zone de l’élaboration marks the outer limits of the region, the rough-hewn area one might visualize on a map of French wine regions. This is the only part of the region where it is legal to vinify Champagne, or to transport Champagne grapes, juice, and wine, in bulk and in bottle, that have not yet been commercialized. Most of this zone cannot be planted. It is composed of 637 communes. The zone de production is the next largest, consisting of entire villages in which vines may be cultivated. It is composed of 319 communes covering approximately 300,000 hectares. The zone parcellaire de production de raisins consists of a lacework of delimited viticultural parcels, representing only 35,208 hectares (of which, in 2019, 34,267 hectares were planted and 33,828 hectares were in production), a fraction of the surface area of the zone de production. It is also composed of 319 communes. Land and Climate Though Champagne has various soils, it is best known for its chalk. On the slopes, belemnite chalk subsoils, derived from the fossilized remains of cephalopods, are sometimes exposed at the surface, helping retain heat and provide good drainage for the vines. Micraster chalk, composed of fossil material from an extinct genus of sea urchin, is found to a lesser extent, generally in the flatter valley vineyards. A thin layer of clay and sand covers much of the chalk in Champagne. In the Aube, the dominant soil type is not chalk but clay. Champagne’s climate makes for an entirely unique growing region, one that is, in many ways, unsuited to viticulture. Frost or hail destroys an average of 5% of Champagne’s vineyards every year, while Atlantic-driven rain can impact flowering, makes the control of fungal diseases difficult, and has ruined many promising harvests. Yet these conditions allow producers to make great sparkling wine in significant volumes most of the time. To navigate the challenge of producing the requisite volume or quality, or both, the Champenois historically developed their own economic strategy by storing wines in times of plenty and blending different years. No other region has been able to valorize nonvintage wines to the extent that Champagne has, and no other region comes close to producing the same proportions of its wines (85% to 90%) in this format. Viticultural Twilight Zone Comparing Champagne’s climatic norms with the minimum levels required for commercial viticulture demonstrates that Champagne is not just a cool-climate region; it is very cool and, even with the threat of global warming, on the edge of practical viticulture. The growing season daily mean temperature has risen from 14.3 degrees Celsius (57.7 degrees Fahrenheit; the average over 40 years from the 1950s to the 1980s) to 15 degrees Celsius (59 degrees Fahrenheit) in the 1990s. There has been a much sharper rise, to 16.6 degrees Celsius (61.9 degrees Fahrenheit), in the new millennium. The number of sunshine hours has increased 9.3% since the late 1970s, when it averaged 1,537 hours, which was barely over the assumed minimum. This low sunshine was especially acute as the angle of sun at 49 degrees latitude is only 65 degrees at the height of summer and drops to 49 degrees in the winter. Champagne’s climate is dictated by its northerly location, between the 48 th and 49 th parallels, and by the oceanic effect of the Atlantic and the continental effect of the European landmass. Here, the last vestiges of a continental climate counter the ocean’s wet and windy impact. The Atlantic Ocean is often said to have a moderating effect, but it could equally be said that the continental climate has a moderating effect on the amount of wind and rain generated by the Atlantic. Champagne is precariously positioned, existing in a slightly shifting climatic corridor that is not truly dominated by either oceanic or continental influences. When a high-pressure system on the western edge of Europe is weak, or a low-pressure system heading in from the Atlantic is strong, Champagne will receive days of prolonged downpour. The most powerful low-pressure systems to hit western Europe are the remnants of Atlantic hurricanes, and the peak of the Atlantic hurricane season is from mid-August to late October, which coincides with the harvest and its immediate lead-up in Champagne. Diurnal shift—the difference between the highest daytime temperature and lowest nighttime temperature (most often induced by nightly downdrafts of chilly air)—is key in any sparkling wine region, as a significant diurnal shift ensures acid preservation. In Champagne, the diurnal difference is extremely dependent on the time of year, with a classic September or October harvest delivering a diurnal difference of 10 to 15 degrees Celsius (18 to 27 degrees Fahrenheit), whereas an August harvest will benefit from only 5 degrees Celsius (9 degrees Fahrenheit). Because this reduced diurnal difference is insufficient to halt the vine ’ s metabolism, ripening continues and acids plummet. The first August harvest in the history of Champagne was in 2003, and there have been no fewer than five August harvests since, which is clear evidence of the region ’ s warming climate. The reduced diurnal difference does not mean that August harvests cannot produce high-quality Champagne, but it does not make high quality easy. The Grapes of Champagne Although rarely seen today, Gouais Blanc is the parent or direct ancestor of more than 80 different European grape varieties through natural or spontaneous crossing, including Chardonnay (with Pinot Noir) and Petit Meslier (with Savagnin Blanc), making it part of Champagne’s DNA. Gouais is also a cousin of all the Pinot varieties, but most surviving examples are restricted to the Haut-Valais, in Switzerland (where it is known as Gwäss), and Piedmont, in Italy (under the name Preveiral or Liseiret). Despite its often-illustrious offspring, Gouais itself typically makes ordinary wine. Clonal Research The Comité interprofessionnel du vin de Champagne (CIVC) began its clonal research program in the 1960s. The intent was to develop a clone of Pinot Noir that could resist the frosts in the Marne Valley and, as the more noble variety, be used in the replanting of the district’s predominantly Meunier vineyards. By the 1980s, a more pragmatic view of Meunier acknowledged that this grape was not just an asset to Champagne but essential to its reputation, and researchers were tasked with setting up a true clonal program for Meunier as well. When grading Champagne clones, top Burgundian clones are seldom recommended, as the characteristics required are almost the opposite of those for still wines. This applies to Chardonnay as well as Pinot Noir, although the margins of difference for the latter are much greater. All sparkling wine clones require significantly higher acids and lower potential alcohol than clones used for still wines, but, in the case of Pinot Noir, a sparkling wine clone must also have the lowest possible phenolics and minimal color. Even a Pinot Noir clone used to color a rosé Champagne through blending would not rate highly as a red wine clone, because, although the color for both styles of wine should be deep, any noticeable tannins should be avoided in the latter. Chardonnay: The Missing Grape The law of July 27, 1927, authorized only “les diverses variétés de pinot, l’arbanne, le petit meslier” for the production of Champagne, with no reference to Chardonnay, yet with Arbanne and Petit Meslier singled out. This was still the case when the law of January 17, 1978, became the first Champagne legislation to mention Chardonnay, slipping it into rules that modified the methods of pruning. Chardonnay was not listed as an authorized variety until 2010, when every AOC had to submit a new cahier des charges . So why was Chardonnay missing in the first place? Although Chardonnay was known to be a distinct variety as long ago as 1868, it was commonly referred to in Champagne as Pinot Chardonnay as recently as the 1980s. In 1927, “diverses variétés de pinot” would have been understood to include Chardonnay. Interestingly, in 1999, the parentage of Chardonnay was established as Gouais Blanc and Pinot Noir, making it a Pinot variety. In 2018, Chardonnay was determined to have 49% DNA from Pinot Noir and 17% DNA from the Gouais grape. There is no such thing as the perfect clone for any style of wine. The best clone found on one site will always behave differently on other sites, because a vine’s performance is modified by factors such as soil, climate, rootstock, and viticultural practices. However supposedly superior any individual clone might be, it would be irresponsible to plant any vineyard block with a single clone. Its lack of genetic variation would render the entire block susceptible to disease and provide no insurance against any natural fluctuations in yield or fruit quality. Chardonnay 10,414 hectares (30.3%) Chardonnay was historically misleadingly referred to as Pinot Chardonnay or Pineau Chardonnet, which is why the morphologically similar (but genetically and genealogically different) Pinot Blanc became known as Pinot Blanc Vrai or Pineau Blanc Vrai (True Pinot Blanc). Chardonnay has the earliest bud burst of all Champagne grape varieties and is easily recognized in the vineyards at this stage by its fluffy buds, which are white with a gold edging. The classic area for Chardonnay is the Côte des Blancs, where the style ranges from floral in Cramant to intensely mineral in Le Mesnil. Running a close second is the eastern Montagne de Reims, where the villages of Trépail and Villers-Marmery can rival the greatest of the Côte des Blancs. Montagne Chardonnay has an emphatic minerality but is less chalky, with fruit that has more body and structure without any appreciable gain in weight. Chardonnay from the Côte de Sézanne is more overt but, with careful selection, can be very fine, while that from the Monts de Berru, north of the Montagne de Reims, is light and delicate, and that of Vitryat shares both lightness and minerality. Chardonnay maintains freshness in the bottle, is typically the last to exert itself in a blend, and has a natural tendency to show toasty aromas. Typically the longest lived of Champagne’s grape varieties, Chardonnay in classic examples has a linear structure with a very long, tapering, creamy finish. There are 31 Chardonnay clones allowed in Champagne. Pinot Noir 13,163 hectares (38.3%) Known in Champagne as Plant Doré, Morillon, Noirien, and Auvernat long before the emergence of Pinot or Pineau, the Pinot Noir of Burgundy fame has a slight oxidative tendency in the production of sparkling wine. In purely relative terms, Pinot Noir does not age quite as well or maintain as much freshness in bottle as Chardonnay, but, arguably, it provides a more complex, highly mineral-driven wine. Because it is more difficult to ripen than Chardonnay, growers will refer to a Pinot Noir vintage only in the greatest years, while every year may be described as a Chardonnay vintage. Blanc de noirs are rare compared with blanc de blancs, and not all blanc de noirs are pure Pinot Noir. Most are a blend of Pinot Noir and Meunier. There are almost 800 clones of Pinot Noir cataloged in France, all of which are conserved in collections in Alsace, Burgundy, and Champagne. In Champagne, 43 Pinot Noir clones are allowed. Meunier 10,688 hectares (31.1%) Meunier, like Pinot Blanc and Pinot Gris, is a mutation of Pinot Noir. It dates to at least the 16 th century. By the mid-19 th century, it accounted for three-quarters of all the vineyards in the Aisne. Meunier is easily recognized in the vineyard by its leaves, the undersides of which are white as if dusted with flour, hence its name ( meunier is French for “miller,” as in a miller of flour). It grows easily and is significantly hardier than Pinot Noir, with slightly larger yet still quite small berries that form looser clusters, making it more resistant, though not immune, to rot. Generally, the wines from Meunier lack the depth, elegance, and persistence of Pinot Noir, yet they typically produce fruity wines that are attractive and easy to drink. Because the Meunier component of a blend usually peaks earlier and recedes relatively quickly, many producers prefer to use Meunier for nonvintage cuvées. But when grown at reasonably modest yields in villages such as Sainte-Gemme, Leuvrigny, and Hautvillers, in the central Marne Valley, Meunier can be outstanding in both its immediate appeal and potential longevity. Few blanc de noirs are pure Meunier. There are 14 Meunier clones allowed in Champagne. Ancient Survivors For six varieties that in total represent a tiny proportion of all the vines growing in Champagne today, Arbanne, Fromenteau, Petit Meslier, Chardonnay Rosé, Voltis, and Pinot Blanc receive a disproportionate amount of attention. Together, these grapes account for 103 planted hectares, or just 0.3% of the Champagne vineyard. Arbanne The earliest references to Arbanne date to the 14 th century in Les Riceys, and by 1801 it was sufficiently well regarded to be mentioned by Jean-Antoine Chaptal, who singled out the Aubois vineyards of Morveaux, in Baroville. Two people are responsible for the revival of Arbanne: Lucien Moutard, who replanted it in 1952, and his grandfather Henry Maréchaux, who had maintained the variety in his nursery since 1900. According to 19 th -century accounts, Arbanne has such a distinctive aroma that even in a blend, local growers would immediately exclaim, “Ah, Arbanne!” when entering a cuverie. The variety crops at very low yields. Where It Is Grown: Bligny, Buxeuil, Chamery, Charly-sur-Marne, Chavot-Courcourt, Jouy-lès-Reims, Les Riceys, Oeuilly, Urville, Venteuil Who Grows It: Aubry, Château de Bligny, Drappier, Jean-François Launay, Laherte Frères, Léguillette-Romelot, Moutard, Olivier Horiot, Perseval-Farge, Tarlant, Thomas Perseval Pure Arbanne Cuvées: Arbane Pure (Olivier Horiot), Cépage Arbane (Moutard) Fromenteau Fromenteau ( Pinot Gris ) is a direct mutation of Pinot Noir. The wines of Sillery became famous in the 17 th century thanks to Fromenteau, under the care of Nicolas Brûlart. From there the variety spread, becoming one of the most prolific in Champagne until the 19 th century. By the 20 th century, what was left of Fromenteau, mostly in the Aube, was usually mixed in with other grapes at the press house. Where It Is Grown: Chamery, Chavot-Courcourt, Crouttes-sur-Marne, Jouy-lès-Reims, Les Riceys, Urville, Verzy Who Grows It: Aubry, Dérot-Delugny, Drappier, Laherte Frères, Mouzon-Leroux, Olivier Horiot, Perseval-Farge Pure Fromenteau Cuvées : Cuvée des Fondateurs (Dérot-Delugny), Trop M’en Faut (Drappier) Petit Meslier Another ancient white Champagne variety, Petit Meslier is a spontaneous cross of Gouais Blanc and Savagnin Blanc. Its traditional home is the Aube, where it once accounted for 4.5% of the vineyards (10 times the amount of Arbanne). It was also found in the Marne department, where the Petit Meslier of Venteuil enjoyed some repute. Plantings had dwindled to almost nothing by 1959, when it was revived—not in the Aube or Venteuil but in the lieu-dit of Corne Bautray, in Dizy, by the Chiquet family, who would later come to own Jacquesson. Because the variety struggles to ripen in Champagne’s climate, its contribution to any cuvée was initially to increase the acidity and reduce the alcohol. Its berries are very small, round, and dark yellow in color. In climates where it ripens well, it can show a resinous flavor. Where It Is Grown: Bligny, Buxeuil, Chamery, Charly-sur-Marne, Chavot-Courcourt, Gyé-sur-Seine, Jouy-lès-Reims, Les Riceys, Oeuilly, Urville, Venteuil Who Grows It: Aubry, Château de Bligny, Drappier, Duval-Leroy, Jacquesson, Jean-François Launay, Laherte Frères, Léguillette-Romelot, Mignon-Boulard, Moutard, Olivier Horiot, Perseval-Farge, Robert Barbichon, Tarlant, Thomas Perseval Pure Petit Meslier Cuvées: Duval-Leroy Petit Meslier (formerly Authentis), Laherte Frères Petit Meslier Pinot Blanc Pinot Blanc’s cultivation was historically concentrated in the Côte des Blancs. There, Le Mesnil and Chouilly built their reputations on this grape—not on Chardonnay. Producers have struggled to work successfully with Pinot Blanc, as it can easily be overwhelmed by oak and bâtonnage , but that is perhaps a reflection less of the quality of the variety than of the skill of the winemaking. Where It Is Grown: Bligny, Buxeuil, Celles-sur-Ource, Charly-sur-Marne, Chavot-Courcourt, Landreville, Les Riceys, Oeuilly, Polisot, Urville Who Grows It: Cédric Bouchard, Château de Bligny, Drappier, François Gautherot, Laherte Frères, Léguillette-Romelot, Moutard, Olivier Horiot, Piollot, Tarlant, Thomas Perseval Pure Pinot Blanc Cuvées: Colas Robin (Piollot), Cuvée des Lys (Philippe Fontaine), Cuvée Heritage (Emmanuel Tassin), Le Champ du Clos (Charles Dufour), L’Originale (Pierre Gerbais), Pinot Blanc Extra Brut (Chassenay d’Arce), Roses de Jeanne La Bolorée (Cédric Bouchard) Champagne Districts Click to enlarge and zoom in Champagne AOC in 1927: 46,000 hectares (407 villages) Champagne AOC in 1951: 34,000 hectares (302 villages) Champagne AOC in 2019: 34,267 hectares (319 villages) While there are various ways to delimit the regions of Champagne, this guide will consider eight districts, each with its own aspect, dominant grape variety, and different expression of chalk and limestone. In the heart of the region, the Montagne de Reims, Côte des Blancs, and Marne Valley are home to Champagne’s larger negociants and most famous growers. Farther south, the Côte des Bar is a classic but less-famous region of production that has been gaining more steam each vintage as young growers push the quality of the region higher. Outside of these four major producing areas are four other districts: the Coteaux du Morin, Côte de Sézanne, Vitryat, and Montgueux. Some of the districts are subdivided (as indicated below) into officially designated, albeit informally delimited, component parts for reference purposes and data analysis. Montagne de Reims Champagne AOC in 2018: 7,989 hectares (94 villages) Subdistricts: Grande Montagne; Massif de Saint-Thierry; Monts de Berru; Ardre Valley, Vesle Valley, and City of Reims The Montagne de Reims is usually taken to be synonymous with the Grande Montagne: the hilly, vine-clad outcrop with a densely forested top that rises to about 270 meters (885 feet) above the surrounding plains between Reims (in the north) and Épernay (in the south). By its broadest definition, however, the Montagne de Reims is S-shaped, the top loop curling around the northern edge of Reims itself, from the Monts de Berru (east of the city), to the Massif de Saint-Thierry, into the Vesle and Ardre valleys, an area formerly referred to as the Petite Montagne. The bottom loop forms a broad curve between Reims and Épernay to the south, ending with the vineyards of Bouzy, northeast of Aÿ. Grande Montagne Champagne AOC in 2018: 4,055 hectares (21 villages) Restricted to the bottom curve of the Montagne de Reims, the Grande Montagne is Champagne’s preeminent area for Pinot Noir, containing 10 grand cru villages (Ambonnay, Beaumont-sur-Vesle, Bouzy, Louvois, Mailly-Champagne, Puisieulx, Sillery, Tours-sur-Marne, Verzenay, and Verzy) and 12 premiers crus (Billy-le-Grand, Chigny-les-Roses, Ludes, Montbré, Rilly-la-Montagne, Taissy, Tauxières-Mutry, Trépail, Trois Puits, Vaudemanges, Villers-Allerand, and Villers-Marmery). The Grande Montagne comprises three distinct microzones: the Northern Montagne, the Eastern Montagne, and the Southern Montagne. At first glance, it seems counterintuitive that the Northern Montagne, which extends from Villers-Allerand to Verzenay, should be regarded as one of the most sought-after areas of any classic wine region. Yet the vines thrive on the region’s north-facing slopes thanks to the protection offered by the Montagne’s famed thermal blanket. Because the Grande Montagne is a freestanding formation, the chilled night air slips away, down the slopes onto the plain. As it does so, it draws warmer air from a thermal zone that builds up above the forested Montagne during the day. The effect of this is plainly demonstrated, especially when autumnal frost strikes. As the cold air moves down the slopes each night, it collects in dips on the lower slopes. These pools of dense cold air and fog slow the ripening process, shut down the vine, and advance the autumnal browning of the leaves. With this change of color, it is easy to spot the dips in the landscape that would otherwise be covered by the panoramic sweep of vines on the Grande Montagne. The resulting grapes are less sweet than those of surrounding vines that are still vivid green. When frost strikes, these cold pockets of vines are hit first and hardest, whereas the vines on the free-draining slopes are hit last and lightest, as they are protected by the convection of warm air. Moulin de Verzenay and Pinot Noir vineyards near Verzenay (Photo credit: Adobe Stock) The Eastern Montagne starts at Verzy, although the village has diverse soils and a combination of opposing aspects that make it more of a transitional area than a true Eastern Montagne village. The vineyards of neighboring Trépail (91% Chardonnay) and Villers-Marmery (98% Chardonnay), however, are definitive expressions of this microzone. Viewed from the D26 road of the Northern Montagne during the early months of the year, the leafless vines look like columns of gnarled old men in perfect formation, bent almost double. This is the cordon de Royat, the preferred vine-training system for Pinot Noir. But southward, viewed from the D26 of the Eastern Montagne, the vines suddenly change to the more bush-like Chablis system, announcing that this is Chardonnay country. The villages of Billy-le-Grand (66% Chardonnay) and Vaudemanges (83% Chardonnay) are less intensively cultivated and are physically disconnected at the foot of the Montagne. The Chardonnay of the Eastern Montagne differs from that of the Côte des Blancs. Some might say it is less classic, but it is arguably a different sort of classic—and just as ageworthy, as anyone who has tasted mature vintages of Palmer blanc de blancs will testify. The Southern Montagne is dominated by impressive swaths of vines on beautiful, sun-drenched, south-facing slopes centering on Bouzy and Ambonnay. There are also a few scattered vineyards that are less well regarded. Generally the fruit from the Southern Montagne is more complex than that of the Northern Montagne, which is more linear, with greater minerality, despite the Southern Montagne's higher chalk content (93% compared with 59% in Verzenay). Tours-sur-Marne’s vineyards are continuous with those of the Southern Montagne; even though the village touches the Marne River, the grand cru is considered part of the Montagne de Reims by the Union des m aisons de Champagne (UMC). Soils of the Grande Montagne The topsoil of the Grande Montagne consists primarily of a loess drift that has been derived from sandy and clayey lignite (a soft, dark brown, sedimentary rock), chalk rubble, and clayey colluvium. Topsoil on the upper slopes can be sparse, but elsewhere it can be deep and heavy, particularly on the middle slopes where boulder clay dominates. On the lower slopes, it is crumblier and composed mostly of chalk rubble. The subsoil is essentially chalk. In the Northern Montagne, micraster chalk sometimes encroaches on the customary realm of belemnite chalk. Occasionally, there are areas of sand, sandy limestone, and sandstone, both as outcrops and as strata within the chalk subsoil itself. The Moulin de Verzenay, for example, stands not on chalk but on a vast outcrop of sandy limestone. Marlstone can be found on some of the highest slopes, where there are also isolated strata of fine calcareous sand up to 15 meters (50 feet) thick. Important lignite deposits are common, as the Montagne is littered with cendrières (lignite mines). Massif de Saint-Thierry Champagne AOC in 2018: 1,002 hectares (17 villages) Often considered part of the Petite Montagne, the Massif de Saint-Thierry is a completely different geological formation, with significant variation in soil types, aspect, and elevation. It is not a continuation of the series of hills that define the Petite Montagne to the south but, rather, a detached cuesta, with beds of fine yellowish and greenish-white calcareous sand, up to 15 meters (50 feet) deep and interbedded in strata of Lutetian limestone—not chalk. Locals say that the fame of Saint-Thierry dates to at least the early 19 th century, but this reputation was built on a single, walled vineyard called Clos de Saint-Thierry, not on the entire village, and the wine that achieved this renown was not a Champagne but a vin rouge . Monts de Berru Champagne AOC in 2018: 373 hectares (5 villages) Monts de Berru is an isolated outcrop of vines a few kilometers east of Reims. The vines grow in three villages perched on the corners of a pure chalk triangular elevation. The southeast-facing slopes at Nogent-l’Abbesse have the best aspect and, quite extraordinarily for vineyards north of the Northern Montagne, are planted almost entirely with Chardonnay. It was from Mont Berru that the German artillery rained down on Reims in World War II. An even smaller and more isolated outcrop of vines to the east of Monts de Berru is an area known as Moronvilliers, where the vines are confined to the villages of Selles and Pontfaverger-Moronvilliers, which for bureaucratic purposes have been added to the Monts de Berru subdistrict. Pontfaverger-Moronvilliers is planted exclusively to Chardonnay, whereas Selles is planted almost entirely with Meunier. Moët & Chandon, the solitary owner of all the vineyards in both villages, has a small trial plot of Chardonnay in Selles. Ardre Valley, Vesle Valley, and City of Reims Champagne AOC in 2018: 2,558 hectares (51 villages) While there has been very little historical mention of vineyards in the city of Reims, the Vesle and Ardre valleys are well established and should be regarded as separate subdistricts. Ardre Valley The vineyards of the Ardre valley run diagonally from Saint-Gilles, just south of Fismes, to Courtagnon and Nanteuil-la-Forêt. This is Meunier country, although many of the vineyards are broken up into small plots scattered on either side of the valley. The best sites are all south facing to some degree. There is, for example, a cluster of southwest-facing vineyards between Serzy-et-Prin and Faverolles, on the right bank of the Ardre. A little farther south, two hillsides of excellent exposure face each other between the villages of Brouillet and Lagery. To the east, the vines of Saint-Euphraise-et-Clairizet have full south exposure, but the finest of all Ardre valley sites is the southwest-facing slope of Courmas, just over the hill from Villedommange, in the Petite Montagne. The most important vineyards of this composite subdistrict are collectively known as the Petite Montagne. It is hard to define where the Petite Montagne starts and stops, but its core forms an unbroken stretch of vineyards from Vrigny to Sermiers. Here, there is a significant divergence from Meunier to Pinot Noir and Chardonnay—although the center of the Petite Montagne has historically been as much Meunier country as its outlying areas. There, vast swaths of Meunier remain in villages such as Sermiers and Villedommange. View of the Notre-Dame de Reims cathedral in Reims (Photo credit: Adobe Stock) Vesle Valley Even more so than the Ardre, the Vesle valley is a disparate collection of growths, and it has always been difficult to unstitch these vineyards from those of the southern section of the Massif de Saint-Thierry. City of Reims The city of Reims should be considered separately from the region of Reims, which might consist of villages on the periphery of Reims but with vineyards in the Vesle valley, Massif de Saint-Thierry, and lower slopes of the Montagne de Reims itself. Within the city limits there are no fewer than 54 hectares, just over 22 hectares of which belong to Pommery: the famous Clos Pompadour. Just under 1.5 kilometers (1 mile) west of Clos Pompadour is Clos Lanson. Both of these properties are true clos in true city locations, thus doubly protected by their walls and the surrounding buildings. Marne Valley (Vallée de la Marne) Champagne AOC in 2018: 12,131 hectares (104 villages) Subdistricts: Grande Vallée, Région d’Épernay, Terroir de Condé, Western Marne Valley, Right Bank, Left Bank The Marne River enters Champagne AOC at Vitryat, in the east of the region, flowing northward to Châlons-en-Champagne, then west through the heart of the Champagne region before exiting at Saâcy-sur-Marne, just 36 kilometers (22 miles) from the outskirts of Paris. The Marne Valley is generally considered to be the home of Meunier, which, compared with Pinot Noir, has hardier attributes and a greater propensity for heavier soils. The vineyards directly facing the Marne have a southern aspect on the right bank and northern on the left. Soils of the Marne Valley The topsoil here is a colluvial mix of marl, lignite, sandy loam, and clay and tends to be thick and heavy. No vines are planted on the alluvial soils close to the river, but there are vines on nearby higher ground where belemnite chalk can be seen as the major subsoil. West of Vauciennes (on the south bank) and Damery (on the north bank), the chalk outcrop narrows to an ever-thinner strip, eventually fading away just before Troissy and Châtillon-sur-Marne, while the topsoil becomes deeper and heavier. Grande Vallée Champagne AOC in 2018: 1,945 hectares (12 villages) The Grande Vallée starts at Bisseuil and stretches as far west as Cumières. The right bank vineyards contain the Aÿ-Champagne grand cru. The Grand Vallée also boasts eight premiers crus , all of which deserve the distinction, particularly Mareuil-sur-Aÿ, which earned 99 points in the échelle des crus and many believe is of grand cru quality. Mareuil-sur-Aÿ was also the source of the first-ever single-vineyard Champagne, Philipponnat Clos de Goisses. Hautvillers in the Grande Vallée (Photo credit: Ashley Hausman) Région d’Épernay (Coteaux Sud d’Épernay) Champagne AOC in 2018: 1,269 hectares (11 villages) The most famous property in the Région d’Épernay is Taittinger’s Château de la Marquetterie, at Pierry. La Marquetterie (“marquetry”) is named for the alternating plots of black and white grapes cultivated in response to the differences in soil composition. This has led to the notion that the entire Région d’Épernay displays an equally complex geology, but La Marquetterie is an anomaly. The soils found in the rest of this subdistrict are similar to those of the Côte des Blancs but with sand and clay mixed in. Terroir de Condé Champagne AOC in 2018: 732 hectares (4 villages) Terroir de Condé may be the most confusing of all subdistricts. Even local growers do not understand why some villages are included while others are not. The Terroir de Condé consists of Barzy-sur-Marne, Passy-sur-Marne, Trélou-sur-Marne, and Baulne-en-Brie, yet only the last of these is legitimately part of the canton of Condé-en-Brie (the former name of this subdistrict). The first three villages are not only kilometers apart, but they are located on the right bank of the Marne River, whereas Baulne-en-Brie is on the left bank. Western Marne Valley (Vallée de la Marne Ouest) Champagne AOC in 2018: 2,682 hectares (38 villages) The Western Marne Valley comprises all the vines of the Aisne (Champagne Axonais). It also encompasses vines in the Seine-et-Marne, the most westerly of all Champagne vineyards. This is Meunier country. Although Chardonnay and Pinot Noir plantings are increasing, there are very few instances where they are more successful than Meunier, which has the strongest affinity for the soil here, composed almost entirely of equal amounts of calcareous clay and sand. Right Bank (Rive Droite) Champagne AOC in 2018: 3,063 hectares (24 villages) The right bank is widely considered the second-best area of the Marne Valley (after the Grande Vallée), and some would claim that specific villages, such as Sainte-Gemme, produce the best Meunier. The region is composed of just 8% chalk, with sand, marl, and clay predominating. Left Bank (Rive Gauche) Champagne AOC in 2018: 2,440 hectares (15 villages) The left bank of the Marne stretches as far southward as the upper reaches of the Surmelin. The vineyards on the much-extended left bank have twice the chalk content of those on the sunnier, south-facing right bank and are far stonier, with less marl (21% compared with 30%). Leuvrigny has a strong reputation for Meunier. The Surmelin River is a tributary of the Marne that flows on a northwesterly course through the Marne department, then the Aisne, before flowing into the Marne River at Mézy-Moulins. The Surmelin valley is one of the most important Meunier zones. Among its key villages are Celles-lés-Condé, Connigis, and Le Breuil. Oeuilly in the Left Bank (Credit: Shutterstock) Côte des Blancs Champagne AOC in 2018: 3,187 hectares (10 villages) Oger in the Côte des Blancs (Credit: Shutterstock) Côte des Blancs refers both to the world-famous district discussed below and an overarching area that comprises five different and widespread regions: Côte des Blancs, Montgueux, Côte de Sézanne, Coteaux du Morin, and Vitryat. The name of the Côte des Blancs district is derived from the almost exclusive cultivation of Chardonnay grapes here. More than in any other area of Champagne, it is noticeable that the tops of hills and spurs are cultivated with vines, whereas elsewhere these areas are usually left with forest or scrub to prevent erosion. But it is the vines on the midslopes that always produce the finest wines, followed by the top and lower slopes, then the brow, and finally the plains below, particularly those vineyards that have crept onto the “wrong side” of the D9. Geographically rather than topographically, the vines growing between and including Cramant and Le Mesnil-sur-Oger produce the cream of Côte des Blancs Chardonnay, and within this area there are distinct style differences. At the northern end, the wines of Cramant and Avize are aromatically the most floral of all Côte des Blancs, with intrinsically citrus fruit, whereas those of the middle section, at Oger and, particularly, Le Mesnil-sur-Oger, have the greatest minerality and potential longevity. Although it is the best single district for Chardonnay in Champagne, the Côte des Blancs is also notorious for its spectacularly high—and even illegal—yields. Chardonnay grown in this district has a greater sugar content and level of acidity than most Pinot Noir of the same harvest in Champagne, despite the high yields. The Côte des Blancs contains 6 of Champagne’s 17 grands crus (Avize, Chouilly, Cramant, Le Mesnil-sur-Oger, Oger, and Oiry) and 4 of its 42 premiers crus (Bergères-lès-Vertus, Cuis, Grauves, and Vertus). Soils of the Côte des Blancs The sandy-clay topsoil of the Côte des Blancs is thin but rich in lignite. The chalk subsoil is belemnite but less dense than the belemnite quadrata of the Montagne de Reims. It turns sandy toward the bottom, with some micraster chalk at the edge of the lower slopes, and extends out across the plains beneath. Côte de Sézanne (Sézannais) Champagne AOC in 2018: 1,418 hectares (12 villages) All the villages of the Côte de Sézanne are located within the Marne department except for Villenauxe-la-Grande, which is in the Aube. Unlike the Côte des Blancs, small amounts of Meunier are planted everywhere in the Côte de Sézanne, while Pinot Noir represents a significant minority in all but one village (Chantemerle). This district has been a largely unknown corner of Champagne, even with the rise in production of blanc de blancs and its more opulent style. Sézannais Chardonnay is extremely aromatic, with lush tropical fruit that can be almost musky, yet still shows great typicity. Soils of the Côte de Sézanne The topsoil in this area consists of marl, clay, and sand. East and northeast of Sézanne, the subsoil is substantially chalk, both belemnite and micraster. This is the eroded edge of the Île-de-France (part of the Franco-British basin), where the thickness of chalk diminishes and the clays have little or no lignite, making them more plastic and heavier. There are, however, seams of lignite, as it is quarried at Sans-Souci, just two kilometers (1.25 miles) north of Sézanne. South and southwest of Sézanne, there is chalk subsoil in fairly large pockets, occasionally broken up by marl, clay, sandstone, sandy clay, and sand. Yellow and red sand north of Sézanne indicates ferrous sandstone (good for combating chlorosis), which increases farther south. Overall, the Sézannais is more clays and argillaceous alluvium than chalk. Coteaux du Morin (Val du Petit Morin) Champagne AOC in 2018: 1,030 hectares (20 villages) The Coteaux du Morin is not a truly specialist Chardonnay district. Indeed, many more of these vineyards were planted with Meunier as recently as the 1990s. Formerly known as the Région de Congy, or Région de Congy-Villevenard, the Coteaux du Morin comprises 20 villages between the Côte des Blancs and the Côte de Sézanne. It includes two premier cru growths east of Vertus (Voipreux and Villeneuve-Renneville-Chevigny), the vines of which are contiguous with the Côte des Blancs. Coligny (Val-des-Marais) and Étréchy are also classified as premiers crus . Apart from Voipreux and Villeneuve-Renneville-Chevigny, clays and argillaceous alluvium dominate the Coteaux du Morin, and there are relatively few outcrops of chalk. Vitryat (Vitry-le-François/Coteaux du Vitryat) Champagne AOC in 2018: 457 hectares (15 villages) Located about 50 kilometers (30 miles) southeast of Vertus, Vitryat is situated where the Marne-Rhine Canal joins the Marne River. Yet its remoteness on the eastern periphery of the Champagne region, pure chalk soil, and production of almost exclusively Chardonnay grapes are all good reasons not to classify it as part of the Meunier-dominated, clay-soil Marne Valley. First a popular region in the late 18 th century, Vitryat is now a rapidly expanding district. Having shrunk to just 3 hectares by 1970, the vineyards grew to 170 hectares by the 1990s and now exceed 457 hectares. The wines produced here are increasingly highly regarded by the region’s biggest blenders, although Vitryat has yet to produce singular Champagnes of truly exceptional quality. Montgueux (Troyes) Champagne AOC in 2018: 209 hectares (1 village) A stone’s throw west of Troyes, the ancient capital of Champagne, is the small hill of Montgueux. On the south-facing slope, there is a substantial area planted to Chardonnay vines. The Lassaigne family led the charge to plant this elevated Turonian-era chalk outcropping in the 1960s. Côte des Bar Champagne AOC in 2018: 7,900 hectares (64 villages) Subdistricts: Bar-sur-Aube (Barsuraubois), Bar-sur-Seine (Barséquanais) The Côte des Bar is the primary area of viticulture in the Aube department. In addition to the Bar-sur-Seine and most of the Bar-sur-Aube, the Aube department also includes the most southerly village of the Côte de Sézanne (Villenauxe-la-Grande) and the entire Montgueux subdistrict. Generally, the climate of the Aube is warmer and sunnier than that of the rest of Champagne, shown in the plump fruit character of the wines, and these conditions can be beneficial in cooler vintages but disadvantageous in years like 2003. Despite its more southerly location, the Aube is still farther north than Chablis and in a relatively northern zone of France, where crisp whites are the norm and reds can be difficult to produce. Most Aubois vineyards are scattered among various other agricultural crops on a series of wooded hills that run between and around the towns of Bar-sur-Aube and Bar-sur-Seine, where the best sites face southeast on steep slopes, at a height of between 200 and 300 meters (660 and 980 feet). Although planted primarily with Pinot Noir, this district is more suited to Chardonnay. It used to be extensively planted with Gamay, until a law was passed requiring that variety to be pulled up. Local growers opted to replant the district with Pinot Noir, a logical black-grape upgrade, but the area’s geology is Kimmeridgian, just like that of nearby Chablis. Soils of the Côte des Bar The topsoils of the Côte des Bar are essentially a gravelly limestone scree, either weathered or oolitic. Subsoils consist of gray and beige limestone strata, usually fossil rich and sometimes with a high active lime content. Gray marl or gray marly limestone beds are also found. The subsoil can be interlayered, although there are pure limestone or marl slopes. Whether limestone, marl, or marly limestone, the soils are nearly all Kimmeridgian and, like those of Chablis, mostly Upper Kimmeridgian, although Upper Oxfordian and Portlandian slopes can be found. A few tiny, scattered outcrops of chalk exist, even more rare in the Bar-sur-Aube than in the Bar-sur-Seine. Bar-sur-Aube (Barsuraubois) Champagne AOC in 2018: 2,422 hectares (31 villages) The Bar-sur-Aube is the smaller of the Côte des Bar’s two subdistricts, and the vineyards here are more scattered than they are in the Bar-sur-Seine. The northeastern corner of the subdistrict is located in the Haut-Marne department. The Urville region is the heart of winemaking, driven by the forward-thinking negociant Drappier. Bar-sur-Seine (Barséquanais) Champagne AOC in 2018: 5,479 hectares (33 villages) The larger of the Côte des Bar’s two subdistricts, the Bar-sur-Seine has 50% more vineyards than the Bar-sur-Aube. It also has a greater concentration of more contiguous vineyards and houses the Union des coopératives auboises de vin de Champagne (UCAVIC), the massive but dynamic co-operative that is better known by its primary brand, Devaux. Trailblazing producers Cédric Bouchard, Vouette et Sorbée, and Marie Courtin are also located here. The vines are generally more protected here than they are in the Bar-sur-Aube, with slightly cooler summers and milder winters. The subdistrict also encompasses a third and separate AOC, Rosé des Riceys, for a dark-colored still rosé made exclusively from Pinot Noir. Grands and Premiers Crus Map of grands and premiers crus of Champagne (Credit: “Christie’s World Encyclopedia of Champagne & Sparkling Wine” (2019); copyright Tom Stevenson, Martin von Wyss, Essi Avellan, Bloomsbury Absolute) Pre-Échelle Classifications and the Échelle des Crus The échelle des crus was the de facto classification of Champagne for almost 100 years. The system was created in the 18 th century to formalize the price of grapes for negociants. Grapes from grand cru sites earned 100% of the price that was set by the houses and negociants. Grapes from premier cru sites earned 90% to 99% of that amount, and those from any of the other communes earned between 80% and 89%. The Champenois put an end to the fixed prices in 1990, and negociants began working directly with growers to set pricing. Over time, it became clear that the original system was obsolete, so in 2010 the échelle des crus was officially abolished. The designations of grand cru and premier cru can still appear on labels to show the historic classification of villages. Grands Crus Since the INAO reform of 2010, which abolished the échelle des crus ratings, grand and premier cru designations have been equalized. Prior to 2010, Chouilly, for example, held grand cru status for white grapes only, whereas Tours-sur-Marne was grand cru for black grapes only. Such discriminations are no longer permissible, thus both villages are classified as grand cru , regardless of which permitted variety is cultivated. There are 17 villages with grand cru status (increased from 11 in 1985), and all are located within the Marne department. Premiers Crus There were 44 premier cru villages when the last échelle des crus was published, in 2003, but there are just 42 premier cru villages today . This, too, is because of the INAO reform of 2007. It removed the premier cru status for black grapes in Chouilly and white grapes in Tours-sur-Marne, authorizing all varieties growing in grands crus to have full grand cru status and all varieties growing in premiers crus to have full premier cru status. This departs from the original 1911 échelle , whose authors meticulously researched the potential of each grape variety growing in every village, setting the lowest rated growth at a realistic 22.55%, and with the difference between the ranking of some villages as negligible as 0.02% Champagne Categories Champagne can be categorized by pressure, chronology, prestige, origin, style, and sweetness. By Pressure Fully Sparkling (Grand Mousseux) The term grand mousseux (fully sparkling) rarely appears on a bottle because almost all Champagne is grand mousseux , but it is widely used conversationally in Champagne, where it is defined as having five to six atmospheres of pressure. The term grand mousseux has been in use since 1736. That was just 12 years after the first documented mention of any sparkling Champagne in the French language, in the 1724 edition of Dictionnaire Universel , referring to the strongest fizz of its day, at just three atmospheres. A grand mousseux Champagne did not approach the strength it is associated with today until the end of the 19 th century. Crémant Crémant disappeared from Champagne labels in the early 1990s by voluntary agreement after the term was adopted for various French sparkling wine appellations, such as Crémant d’Alsace and Crémant de Bourgogne, following the EU ban on using the term méthode champenoise for any wine other than Champagne. Since only a small number of Champagne producers were using the term crémant at the time, dropping all rights to it was of little commercial consequence to the industry. The few Champagne crémants that did exist are still made in the same style and have been renamed. The most famous, Mumm’s Crémant de Cramant, for example, is now sold as Mumm de Cramant. The old Champagne regulations defined a crémant as having a pressure of 3.6 atmospheres, giving the wine a softer mousse . The word crémant means “creaming,” inferring a mousse that unfolds slowly, leaving a soft, creamy texture in the mouth. Many examples, however, were and still are fully sparkling. By Chronology Nonvintage Nonvintage brut accounts for 80% of all Champagne sold. Nonvintage is not usually the finest cuvée in any Champagne producer’s range, and it is technically easier to produce great nonvintage Champagne than it is to produce a great vintage Champagne, as the former has the advantage of including reserve wines. No Champagne may be bottled before January 1 following harvest, and no nonvintage Champagne can be sold until 15 months after the date of bottling for tirage, with at least 12 months on yeast. Multivintage The term multivintage has slowly crept into widespread use throughout Champagne. If applied correctly, it is a very precise and clever term that distinguishes between a regular nonvintage cuvée and a genuine prestige blend of vintage years, but it is so abused that currently it has no validity. The most modest nonvintage Champagnes are routinely described as multivintage blends because, producers claim, the non in nonvintage has a negative connotation. Multivintage is not currently regulated by the AOC’s rules. Ideally, it would be defined as a blend of two or more years that have been (or are scheduled to be) released as a vintage by the producer in question. Some argue that the use of the term is deliberately misleading. Vintage There is a law that prohibits producers from making or selling more than 80% of any year’s harvest as vintage Champagne. This is to ensure that at least 20% is conserved for the future blending of nonvintage cuvées, the foundation of the entire industry. In truth, there is no danger of any producer selling more than a tiny fraction of 80% as vintage Champagne, as this category represents less than 2% of Champagne sales year on year. Few Champagne houses stick rigidly to the old practice of declaring a vintage only in the greatest years, which is why vintage Champagnes from almost every year can be found. At one time, a true vintage would occur perhaps 3 years out of 10, but now it occurs 5 or 6 years out of 10. This has caused a decline in sales of vintage Champagne, while the market has focused increasingly on nonvintage (as always) and prestige cuvées (a relatively recent phenomenon). Cellar in Reims (Photo credit: Adobe Stock) Even in the greatest years, however, vintage Champagne has always been more the result of careful selection of wines than a reflection of the year in question, contributing to what makes vintage Champagne such an exceptional value. This selection process also eliminates, or almost eliminates, the need for chaptalization in vintage Champagne, which is richer than a nonvintage cuvée of the same age. Because vintage Champagnes are made solely from base wines from the designated vintage, and because base wines contain more protein than reserve wines (protein drops out as reserve wines age), the autolytic process is enhanced in vintage Champagne. No vintage Champagne may be sold until at least 36 months after the date of bottling for tirage, and this longer aging as compared with nonvintage cuvées, along with the absence of myriad reserve wine components aging at different rates, results in a significantly slower evolution for vintage cuvées. By Prestige Prestige (Deluxe) Cuvée Although Louis Roederer’s Cristal was first produced as early as 1876, it was initially made as a private bottling exclusively for Czar Alexander II and was not sold to the public until 1945. Dom Pérignon, launched in 1936, was the very first commercially available prestige cuvée. The prestige cuvée concept was conceived by Laurence Venn, an English journalist and the UK marketing consultant to the Syndicat de grandes marques de Champagne. The Great Depression hit Champagne sales in 1929. Houses went broke or sold off vineyards in a desperate bid to retain their businesses, and some blamed their London agents, as the UK had been Champagne’s largest and most lucrative market since the mid-19 th century. At a meeting of the syndicate in 1932, Venn was asked how Champagne houses could revitalize sales in the UK, and he proposed the unthinkable: the production of a new, ultraexpensive luxury cuvée. He said it must be of exceptional quality and sold in a replica of an original 18 th -century Champagne bottle, and it should cost more than twice the price of the most expensive vintage Champagne ever sold. Venn suggested targeting the British aristocracy, one of the few sectors of the market that could afford such extravagances during hard times. This advice was soundly rejected by the syndicate, but Robert-Jean de Vogüé, who worked at Moët & Chandon, was intrigued by the idea. Less than three years later, replica 18 th -century bottles of 1926 Champagne were on their way to 150 of Simon Brothers’s best customers. The bottle and label were almost identical to those of Dom Pérignon today; the difference was that, instead of that name, “Champagne specially shipped for Simon Brothers & Co’s Centenary 1835–1935” was stated. A few rich Americans who had friends among Britain’s aristocracy and were living in or visiting England tasted the wine, and word quickly filtered through the upper echelons of American society. This generated requests from across the Atlantic, and, a year later, 100 cases of the very first Dom Pérignon cuvée, bearing the older and greater 1921 vintage, were shipped to New York. Dom Pérignon and Cristal stand out in the world of prestige (or deluxe) cuvée Champagnes, as do releases from Krug, Perrier-Jouët’s Belle Époque (the production of which was boosted when regular vintage production ceased after the 1998 vintage), and Taittinger’s Comtes de Champagne. As with regular vintage Champagne, selection is the key factor that defines the quality of a prestige cuvée, and the selection process for a prestige cuvée is even more rigorous than that for a vintage cuvée. As a result, most prestige cuvées are produced in relatively tiny quantities, with their rarity in part determining the high price. The more selection involved, the more likely that the Champagne will be made from the producer’s own vineyards (over which the producer has total control of pruning and yield). Greater selection also usually results in a higher proportion of grand cru grapes, although select sites within some premier cru villages are often vital for balance. Selection for selection’s sake, however, can lead to cuvées that are so rich they can be cumbersome and lacking in finesse, freshness, and linearity. A great prestige cuvée also requires a great winemaker and a valid reason for the selection process. Special Club The Club Trésors de Champagne (originally Club de Viticulteurs Champenois) was established in 1971 as a collection of growers marketing their wines together to compete with the larger negociants. The initial group included just 12 producers, 3 of them remaining today : Pierre Gimonnet, Gaston Chiquet, and Paul Bara. The Club Trésors now includes 25 mem bers, who have joined via an invitation-only process. Wines bottled as Special Club can be made from any site or variety but must pass a notoriously stringent panel, which tastes the wine twice, first as a vin clair and again after three years of aging. Special Club wines are packaged in a uniquely shaped bottle from the 1700s. Previously, all wines shared the same label, but today growers can use their own labels on the iconic bottle. By Origin Single Vineyard The first single vineyard to be commercialized was Clos de la Chapitre, in the 1860s, when it was sold by Amédée Tarin as both Clos du Chapitre and Clos du Mesnil in two different styles, a blanc de blancs and a rosé. This property, however, was not well known until well after it was purchased by Krug in 1972. After the acquisition, Krug immediately replanted the vineyard and, in 1986, launched the 1979 blanc de blancs as its first vintage. Philipponnat had been producing its now famous Clos des Goisses since 1935, Pierre Péters began bottling Cuvée Spéciale from Les Chetillons in 1971, and Drappier’s Grande Sendrée was launched with the 1975 vintage. But the market had been slow to grasp what a single-vineyard Champagne was; most consumers did not even realize that Grande Sendrée was a single vineyard. It took the fame and price of a great producer such as Krug to promote the concept. This was followed by Leclerc-Briant’s announcement of its trio of wines under the collection Les Authentiques, in 1994, and the fanfare of Moët’s ill-fated Trilogie des Grands Crus, in 2001, which helped put single-vineyard Champagnes on the map. Taittinger quietly vinified Les Folies de la Marquetterie in 2002, and Billecart-Salmon launched the 1995 vintage of Clos Saint-Hilaire in 2003. Pommery harvested its first Clos Pompadour in 2002, although it would not be launched until 2011. The houses had woken up to the concept of single-vineyard cuvées by the turn of the millennium, yet the growers, who were ideally placed to exploit Champagne’s fragmented terroir, had not. Today, however, the growers have caught on. By 2019, they had marketed well over 250 single-vineyard Champagnes, and the number is climbing. By Style It is possible to produce any of the above categories in blanc de blancs, blanc de noirs, and rosé styles. Blanc de Blancs Literally “white of whites,” blanc de blancs is typically produced from Chardonnay grapes. Producers are legally allowed to feature Arbane, Petit Meslier, Pinot Blanc, and Pinot Gris as well. A blanc de blancs may be made in any district, but most of the best come from a small part of the Côte des Blancs between Cramant and Le Mesnil-sur-Oger, with those in Le Mesnil itself having the greatest linearity, minerality, and longevity, while closer to Cramant, the wines exhibit more elegance and floral finesse. The eastern Montagne de Reims villages of Trépail and Villers-Marmery can also produce first-class blanc de blancs. If consumed too early, a classic blanc de blancs might be austere and seem to lack fruit and generosity, yet with a long, slow evolution, it becomes the most succulent of Champagnes. Blanc de Noirs Literally “white of blacks,” blanc de noirs can be produced only from black grapes in Champagne, and the whiter the wine, the more impressive it is perceived to be. A blanc de noirs can be made from Pinot Noir, Meunier, or both. The most famous blanc de noirs is Bollinger’s Vieilles Vignes Françaises, which for years was the only Champagne with blanc de noirs on the label, and, until Krug launched Clos d’Ambonnay in 2007 with the 1995 vintage, it was by far the most expensive. Blanc de noirs was historically produced in a minuscule volume from overripe grapes that were sold at a very high price, leading to a misconception of the style. Only recently, in the past 10 to 15 years, has blanc de noirs become the focus of quality-minded houses, growers, and co-operatives. More producers are using grapes from their best plots, aiming to produce examples of blanc de noirs that are intensely expressive. Rosé The first known rosé Champagne was Ruinart’s Oeil de Perdrix Mousseux, produced by macerating the juice on the grape skins, and shipped on March 14, 1764. This was three years before Veuve Clicquot produced the first rosé to be colored by the addition of red wine, which became the preferred method in Champagne. Later, sparkling rosé became an anomaly in EU wine law as one of the only pink examples that may be made by blending. Until the late 1990s, rosé Champagne was highly cyclical, with short bursts of popularity between decades of minimal interest. Under such circumstances, there was no motivation to fine-tune the production of red wines best suited to color a rosé, and most rosé Champagne relied on Coteaux Champenois purchased on the internal market. But demand for the rosé style has been consistent since 1997, enabling the Champenois to select the most appropriate plots and perfect techniques to craft deeply colored red wines suited to sparkling rosé production. According to the numbers, most of the best rosé Champagnes are made by blending, but by which variety the base should be dominated is a matter of taste. For example, Louis Roederer’s Cristal is consistently the palest rosé, yet it contains on average 70% Pinot Noir, while Ruinart’s Dom Ruinart rosé, which has a pronounced color and one of the most distinctive Pinot aromas, is pure Dom Ruinart blanc de blancs to which some red wine has been added. Another aspect of blending that is disputed among chefs de caves is whether it is better to add more of a lighter-colored red wine (a practice that is as old as the method itself) or less of a deeper-colored red wine. Most of the rest of the rosé produced in Champagne undergoes maceration, where the grapes are crushed before steeping in their own juice (for any other style of Champagne, the grapes are whole-bunch pressed). This either takes place, chilled, before fermentation or extends into the beginning of the fermentation phase. Another method is saignée (the French verb saigner means “to bleed”). True saignée , as the name suggests, is the colored, free-run juice that naturally bleeds from black grapes before they are pressed—no maceration is involved, other than that passively caused by bunches weighing down on one another in the press. Yet plenty of Champagnes made with some amount of maceration are also labeled rosé de saignée. One unique method is responsible for arguably the greatest rosé Champagne of all, Cristal rosé. Louis Roederer uses a hybrid maceration process: Pinot Noir grapes are cold-soaked in Chardonnay juice for one week, with no crushing of the black berries and no fermentation. Colored Chardonnay juice is drained off, the Pinot Noir grapes are pressed, and the juice from the two grapes is combined. Then, depending on the depth of color, 20% to 50% acidic Chardonnay juice is added, because the Pinot Noir has been picked for ripeness and needs the acidity for balance, and the Chardonnay juice helps stabilize the color. The temperature is gently increased to encourage the first fermentation, with approximately 20% fermented in 9,000-liter used French oak foudres. For all these methods, the wine must be bottled at a color that is deeper than that required in the finished product, because color pigments (anthocyanins) form long chains and drop out as sediment during the second fermentation and while the wine ages on yeast (shown by the distinctly colored deposit in a rosé Champagne). This loss can be mitigated by the addition of gum arabic in the liqueur d’expédition . By Sweetness The sweetness of a Champagne can be indicated by its residual sugar level, measured in grams per liter. It is possible to produce any of the above categories at all of the following sweetness levels. It is worth noting that the regulations in Champagne allow for three grams of variation between the stated and actual RS. This is because of the margin of error in different types of analysis. Further, producers indicating dosage rather than RS are not identifying the one to two grams of RS typically left after the second fermentation. Credit: Brandon Lee Wise Brut Nature The brut nature style, with less than three grams of residual sugar, with no margin of error, has been commercially labeled as brut zero, brut sauvage, ultra brut, and sans sucre. The non-dosé style is very difficult to achieve with finesse, but, when it works in Champagne, it can be mesmerizing in an instant-drinking style. It is best drunk as young and fresh as possible, as the aging potential of a brut nature differs from that of other Champagnes (without residual sugar, or only a very small amount, it cannot benefit from the potentially complex aromas created by the Maillard reactions that generally take place between amino acids created during autolysis and fructose from dosage ). A brut nature may also be legally labeled as brut. Extra Brut The best Champagnes in this category can be wonderfully bracing, with up to six grams of residual sugar. The top end of the extra brut scale (four to six grams of residual sugar) represents a good dosage for late-released mature vintages. Extra brut may also be legally labeled as brut. Brut Almost 95% of all Champagne is sold as brut, making it the classic style. But the popularity of brut is a relatively recent phenomenon. According to data compiled by André Simon, just 25% of Champagne was sold as brut as recently as 1960. A brut style may contain up to 12 grams of residual sugar (up to 15 grams including the 3-gram margin of error), thus the category technically comprises brut nature and extra brut as well. Extra Sec Extra sec (“extra dry”) is rarely encountered, and with 12 to 17 grams of residual sugar per liter (up to 20 grams with the margin of error), the term can be misleading to consumers. Serious-quality cuvées can be very useful to accompany savory dishes with a distinct hint of sweetness, or those with any fruit content or garnish. Sec Few Champagne houses specialize in the sec style, but with a residual sugar level greater than 17 but less than 32 grams per liter, high-quality cuvées can be, like extra sec, very useful in matching dishes with a certain sweetness. The best examples are marketed as upscale gastronomic Champagnes like Selosse's Exquise. Riche (Rich) Under the old Champagne laws, the term riche was used strictly as an official alternative designation for demi-sec, but it currently has no legal definition and is used for wines between sec and doux. Demi-Sec Although the demi-sec style can have between 32 and 50 grams of residual sugar per liter, most examples today are closer to the minimum. As such, they are too sweet for conventional use yet not sweet enough to compete with true dessert-style wines. Demi-sec cuvées have traditionally been used to dispose of poor-quality Champagnes, as it is easy to hide flawed wines beneath a veneer of sugar. But high-quality demi-sec does exist. A vintage wine at this sweetness level should be seen as an overt signal that its producer is serious about its quality—although serious-quality nonvintage demi-sec also exists (examples include Pol Roger Rich and Roederer Carte Blanche). The best demi-sec can be kept for 10 or more years after purchase, and such wines will often become sumptuously rich and complex, particularly at the table with soft, blue-veined cheeses. Doux According to André Simon, doux represented as much as 60% of all Champagne shipments until 1960, and half of that had 100 grams of residual sugar. But then brut caught on, and, within 20 years, sweet Champagnes had disappeared. Only in recent years have doux bottlings, with 50 or more grams per liter of residual sugar, started to make something of a comeback. Thus far, the results have been largely disappointing. Among the best so far are Veuve Clicquot’s Rich and Rich Rosé, both of which contain 60 grams of residual sugar. These are designed for mixology—for adding ice, orange peel, or other garnishes or extras. Yet the effervescence of a doux wine can also bring a refreshing lift to the end of a meal if served by the glass. Storage Champagne offers more potential than most wines from correct storage, but it also suffers more than most from incorrect storage. Under ideal storage conditions, some Champagnes will retain their sparkle, light color, and fruit, without any notes of oxidation, for approximately a century. According to a study by researchers at Reims University, Champagne stored for one year at room temperature will contain 70 times more foul-smelling mercaptans than the same Champagne stored for one year at cellar temperature. For medium-term storage, a constant temperature between 12 and 15 degrees Celsius (54 and 59 degrees Fahrenheit) should suffice. If a constant temperature cannot be guaranteed, either naturally or by an environmentally controlled room or wine cabinet, it is best to buy for fairly immediate consumption. Very long-term storage should be attempted only at a constant temperature between 9 and 11 degrees Celsius (48 and 52 degrees Fahrenheit). Storage in darkness is vital, as Champagne is particularly prone to the damaging effects of light. Unlike still wines, there is no reason why Champagne should be stored horizontally. The CO 2 in the bottle’s neck keeps the cork moist and swollen even when upright—though upright storage is neither efficient nor practical. Serving When Champagne of any style (vintage or otherwise) is released, it should be ready to drink, but an additional three to six months of aging is advisable, as very few producers provide optimal aging between disgorgement and shipping. This applies particularly to bottles from less expensive brands, which are inevitably younger and for which a few months of aging can make a significant difference. When buying a mature Champagne, experienced consumers should appreciate that there will be a CO 2 loss that gives the wine a silkier mousse . Champagne in flute glasses (Photo credit: Adobe Stock) The most common glassware used for serving Champagne is the flute or the all-purpose glass. To choose proper glassware for Champagne, wine professionals must balance aesthetics and sensory evaluation. The flute’s elongated shape and tight bowl keep the bubbles of the wine on full display for guests to enjoy. But this comes at the expense of interaction with the wine, as there is not enough room in the glass for the consumer to fully appreciate the wine’s volatile aromatic compounds. The all-purpose glass, on the other hand, keeps bubbles in solution while offering enough volume and space for the impact compounds of the wine to shine. As Champagne becomes more mainstream, the all-purpose glass is outpacing the flute as the beverage industry’s glass of choice. On the extreme ends of the spectrum, for aesthetic purposes there is the coupe, and for complete dissection of the wine, the Burgundy glass. Most CO 2 loss that occurs when serving Champagne is through the mechanical action of pouring. While this has a negative effect on the extremely rare bottles of mature Champagnes with low pressure, it enhances the mouthfeel of younger Champagnes, making their mousse softer and silkier without detracting from their fully sparkling style. It is generally advised to pour Champagne from above, not holding the glass at all, aiming to break the fall of the wine by hitting the side of the glass about two-thirds of the way down (exactly where will depend on the shape of the glass). This minimizes the initial release of foam and allows the head to collapse slightly, before pouring continues. After the wine has been poured, loss of CO 2 continues in the glass but on a much smaller scale. At this stage, more CO 2 is lost through the interface between the wine’s surface and the air than by the release of bubbles through nucleation, even when the glasses have been etched to produce nonclassic heterogeneous nucleation. Recent studies have shown that, at the interface between the wine’s surface and the air, there is a progressive CO 2 evaporation that, although invisible to the naked eye, releases significantly more gas (about 80%) than through the streams of rising bubbles that can clearly be seen (20%). Even when combined, however, this CO 2 loss is a fraction of that experienced when pouring, the mechanical action of which removes between 25% and 35% of all dissolved CO 2 , depending on factors such as temperature, glass shape, angle, and height of pour. Selected Resources Bosc, L. A. G. In Nouveau cours complet d’agriculture théorique et pratique . Paris: Deterville, 1809. Chaptal, Jean-Antoine. Traité théorique et pratique sur la culture de la vigne . Paris: Delalain, 1801. https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k5701391v.texteImage . Gerhard Maier, Hans. “Volatile Flavoring Substances in Foodstuffs.” Angewandte Chemie 9, no. 12 (December 1970): 917–988. Jullien, André. Topographie de tous les vignobles connus . Paris: 1816. https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/pdf/b21504660 . Lenoir, B. A. Traité de la culture de la vigne et de la vinification . Paris: Rousselon, 1828. https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k30595118.texteImage . Serigne, N. C. Flore des jardins et des grandes cultures . Paris: 1849. Tessier, H. A., A. Thouin, and L. A. G. Bosc d’Antic. Encyclopédie Méthodique . Paris: Veuve Agasse, 1821. Roach, M. J., D. L. Johnson, J. Bohlmann, H. J. J. van Vuuren, S. J. M. Jones, I. S. Pretorius, et al. “Population sequencing reveals clonal diversity and ancestral inbreeding in the grapevine cultivar Chardonnay.” PLoS Genetics 14, no. 11 (November 2018): e1007807. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1007807 . Vizetelly, Henry. A History of Champagne . London: Vizetelly, 1882. Read the Champagne Part II: Viticulture and Winemaking expert guide . Read the Champagne Part III: History expert guide . Some material in this guide was previously published in The World of Fine Wine . Compiled by Tom Stevenson (2022) Edited by Stacy Ladenburger and Sandra BanPreviewhttps://www.guildsomm.com/public_content/features/articles/b/jens-peter-nebsbjerg/posts/coteaux-champenois-rules-reality-and-new-momentumThu, 02 Jul 2026 15:20:00 GMT8277e151-5ba9-4335-93f0-6f497ffb8dc4:f7cd4ef0-34bf-4a89-947a-48d8c8992e8aJens Peter NebsbjergCoteaux Champenois uniquely expresses its terroir. It carries the name and prestige of Champagne, yet it is made without secondary fermentation, the process that defines the Champagne category. Pale-red still wine was once the central style of Champagne. It became secondary as sparkling wine gradually dominated the region’s identity and business, beginning in the 18 th century. The modern appellation is therefore not a return to an older Champagne style but the emergence of a distinct category inside a sparkling-wine system. It’s expensive to produce, rarely great business, and still inconsistent in quality. Its rules are largely inherited from those of Champagne, and its commercial logic is constrained by the dominant category. But some of the most ambitious bottles of Coteaux Champenois are now among the clearest expressions of site and intent being made in the region. Coteaux Champenois in Context In 1927, Vin Ordinaire de la Champagne Viticole became the first official designation for what is now known as Coteaux Champenois. The designation was created not to celebrate still wine but because sparkling wine had just claimed the name: the law of that year reserved Champagne exclusively for sparkling wines. Changing Names The Coteaux Champenois appellation has carried three names in its relatively short history: 1927–1953 Vin Ordinaire de la Champagne Viticole 1953–1974 Vin Nature de la Champagne 1974–present Coteaux Champenois This first name, Ordinaire , positioned the wine honestly: sparkling was the extraordinary prestige product, and everything else was still wine. In 1953, a new name, Nature , reframed it with a nod toward authenticity, establishing the category as a counterpoint to Champagne and its elaborate process. Coteaux Champenois, the name given in 1974, took this approach further, defining the wine by the hilly terroir where the grapes are grown, rather than in contrast with another category. This most recent name change came during a period of decline. Through the 1960s and 1970s, because of the challenges of climate, economics, or both, many producers stopped producing still wines to focus on Champagne. Coteaux Champenois is no longer included in regional statistics, and the Comité Champagne does not work with the category in its technical or statistical departments. As sparkling wine grew in popularity, defining Champagne’s production and identity, the role of still wines diminished. Yet modern Coteaux Champenois is not a return to the past. Today’s still wines are made in a region shaped economically, culturally, and technically by sparkling wine. With this background, the current regulatory framework becomes easier to understand. The rules governing Coteaux Champenois reflect both the region’s sparkling identity and the marginal place still wines have occupied for decades. The Rules for Coteaux Champenois The regulatory framework of Coteaux Champenois demonstrates that still wine is treated largely as a derivative of Champagne rather than as a category in its own right. The appellation shares its geographic area (approximately 34,000 hectares, or 84,000 acres, of vines), grape varieties, and vine-training systems with Champagne, along with much of the same production logic. Where the two separate, of course, is in their winemaking process: the secondary fermentation is rigorously controlled for Champagne but omitted for Coteaux Champenois. The category’s central constraint is the permitted yield for the vines, at 19,700 kilograms per hectare. With a pressing limit of 12,400 to 15,500 kilograms per hectare, and the usual ratio allowing 2,550 liters from a 4,000-kilogram press, the effective yield is essentially the same as for Champagne, though reserves are excluded for Coteaux Champenois. The regulation permits about 125 hectoliters of must per hectare—more than double what Burgundy allows at its most basic regional level for red wine. For Champagne, this very high yield is justified through a process that, over a long period, creates complexity. But for Coteaux Champenois, a still wine that can be released in October of the year following harvest, it seems unambitious—and, in practice, most producers’ yields are far lower than this limit. Producers may use the name of the cru (village) or vineyard, or both, on labels, which is a very popular practice. Coteaux Champenois must be declared no later than the end of the July following the harvest. This means that producers with an interesting stock of reserve wines cannot bottle them as Coteaux Champenois if the wines were not declared in time. The press used for Coteaux Champenois can be smaller than a 2,000-kilogram press, which is the limit for Champagne. This applies only to rosé and red wines, not to white wine. In practice, growers are already using smaller presses for their Champagne wines and are happy to talk about it. The rules governing Champagne are interpreted as liberally as the framework allows, which results in a very broad category. The same interpretation seems to apply to Coteaux Champenois. This can perhaps be explained by a central concept in the rules called usages locaux , which permits producers to rely on established local tradition, effectively allowing practices that are not explicitly codified in the regulations. Modern Coteaux Champenois Broadly speaking, producers decide to make Coteaux Champenois in two ways. There are producers who work toward Coteaux Champenois in the vineyard, whether through a plot planted specifically for still wine or an old parcel that, over time, has settled naturally into lower yields and higher concentration. But, most often, producers choose to make Coteaux Champenois later in the season. The decision might be shaped by events such as spring frost, hail, or early mildew that reduce the crop, or simply warm, generous vintage conditions, as in 2018. Producers might also pivot toward still wine when tasting the previous year’s vins clairs , the base wines for Champagne, during the blending process for their Champagnes, electing to bottle part of the wine as still wine and part as sparkling. This is possible only because of the low yields of some of the best grower-producers. Not long ago, bottling vin clair as a drinkable wine would have been unlikely. Coteaux Climate? François Huré is the winemaker at Huré Frères, which he runs with his brother Pierre, who is responsible for the vineyards. Located in the northern Montagne de Reims, this is a north‑facing and cool part of Champagne. Yet in the brothers’ parcel in Ludes, temperatures have reached nearly 50 degrees Celsius (120 degrees Fahrenheit) during increasingly frequent heat waves. François explains, “Things that we were doing 15 years ago, we don’t even think about anymore. You need to do something else. From our perspective, it’s changing very quickly.” In this parcel, they have raised the trellis height from 130 centimeters (50 inches) to 170 centimeters (nearly 70 inches), and they also pluck leaves to allow the vines to capture the morning sun. The result is deliberate interrow shading: heat builds through the day, but, once afternoon intensity peaks, the shadows lower vine temperatures. While this is, perhaps, extreme for a north‑facing site, it is a response to a common challenge. Growers and houses alike report that sugar, phenolic ripeness, and aromatic ripeness no longer progress in tandem. Previously, 180 grams of sugar per liter marked the point of balance for Huré Frères. Last year, François waited until levels reached 200 grams of sugar per liter to achieve ripe tannins and phenolics. Viticultural practices must be adapted for each parcel and its use. As Champagne producers struggle to preserve freshness in their wines, an opportunity emerges for Coteaux Champenois. Yet there is a clear risk of wines falling between categories: neither sufficiently fresh for Champagne nor developed enough for still wine. When this affects only a small proportion of wines, such wines can be absorbed into Champagne blends. As that proportion grows, however, it becomes problematic—one reason there is increasing differentiation in vineyard practices. In the Vineyard When producers choose to pursue Coteaux Champenois from the vineyard, they tend to focus on low yields, essential for making convincing still wine in Champagne. Denis Bunner, the former chef de caves for Champagne Bollinger, notes that, in the estate’s historic vineyard for Coteaux Champenois, proper red wine cannot be made with yields over 50 hectoliters per hectare. For La Côte aux Enfants, Bollinger aims for 25 hectoliters per hectare to achieve the necessary concentration. In the part of the vineyard where grapes for Coteaux Champenois grow, leaves are not pulled; they are for Champagne production. Another notable difference is the plant material: Bollinger’s former vineyard manager planted a massal selection of Pinot Moret, a common clone in Champagne, from his family vineyard, which the estate now renews from this parcel. Louis Roederer, which planted specifically for Coteaux Champenois in the early 2000s, selected material from Alsace and Burgundy for its lower yields and suitability for red wine. The vines are planted at a density of 10,000 to 12,000 vines per hectare, which is extreme for Champagne. Jean‑Baptiste Lécaillon, the winemaker at Louis Roederer, aims to grow vines in the style of bonsai trees, with each vine pruned short so it carries fewer buds, reducing vigor and yields. The canopies are trained high, and tressage is used to control growth without cutting to maintain aeration and a larger leaf area for ripening. The aim is to push ripening and concentration for still-wine production. Both Lécaillon and Benoît Marguet, the winegrower at Champagne Marguet, emphasize clay as an important feature in site selection for red Coteaux Champenois wines. If they are right, parcels that Champagne producers have long overlooked may quietly be revalued. In the Cellar There is not yet a defined style for Coteaux Champenois. The absence of a fixed model gives producers flexibility, and the result is a wide range of expressions rather than one recognized approach. What is clear is the recent surge in quality. Even large houses, such as Bollinger, which has been making La Côte aux Enfants since 1861, have demonstrated a jump in quality. The Bollinger Group’s acquisition in 1999 of Domaine Chanson, in Burgundy, likely contributed to this improvement, bringing greater in-house expertise to still winemaking. White: In the Shadow of Vin Clair The inspiration for white Coteaux Champenois largely comes from Burgundy—from the Côte de Beaune, with its imprint of new wood and weight, all the way north to Chablis, whose styles show the impact of lees and stainless steel. Continuing this stylistic (and geographic) trajectory, some Coteaux Champenois wines retain the raw, steely profile of vin clair . Used barrels, typically 205-liter Champagne barrels or 228-liter Burgundy barrels, are the standard, offering slow evolution with moderate impact from wood. Prolonged barrel aging is the main technique for shaping white Coteaux Champenois. For those who choose Coteaux Champenois from their vin clair selection, the wine is typically kept just short of an extra year on the fine lees in barrel before release; the timeline is similar for wines that have been destined to become Coteaux Champenois from the beginning. One notable exception is Roederer, where Lécaillon ages most of the wine for his Le Mesnil-sur-Oger in sandstone vessels, with new and old wood and steel for the remainder. While Champagne winemaking focuses on the juice, still winemaking can benefit from grape skins, which add texture and aromas that Lécaillon has experimented with to increase complexity and balance the wine. Other producers, including Legrand-Latour, take maceration further. Legrand-Latour bottles a Chardonnay called Macération that most would regard as an orange wine. The wine is released late, showcasing a previously unexplored style for Coteaux Champenois, albeit in minute quantities. Piper-Heidsieck recently launched two single‑ cru wines from Aÿ and Ambonnay, both Pinot Noir strongholds. In both wines, the house leans into its strength: making white wine from red grapes. The wines are fermented and aged in stainless steel, in line with Piper-Heidsieck’s Champagne style. Rosé: The Rarest Style Rosé is by far the smallest category, with very little produced, making broad conclusions difficult. A wine can be made as rosé only if that decision is made from the outset, since blending is restricted to sparkling wines. Maceration and saignée are therefore the only permitted methods. Changing the regulations to allow blending could be an interesting way to apply the Champenois strengths. The finished wine’s color must range from pale pink to deep salmon, and the use of activated charcoal for color correction is notably forbidden. (Rosé is also made in Rosé des Riceys , an appellation for rosé around the village of Les Riceys, in the Aube.) Red: Beyond the Building Block To make red Coteaux Champenois, winemakers face several decisions. Among the most significant are whether stem inclusion is viable, how extraction should be handled, and which wood regime is best, in terms of format, age, and time in barrel. Stem inclusion is challenging at this latitude. Most wines are based on Burgundy clones of Pinot Noir, as they lignify in the climate of Champagne and make more successful stem-inclusion wines here. Some Champagne clones simply do not lignify, preserving a high portion of unwanted chlorophyll. The standard method is to destem the fruit and then add back only the fully mature stems. This gives the winemaker full control over the stems and prevents unripe stems from influencing the wine. Some producers opt for carbonic maceration, using whole bunches with stems so that fermentation begins inside the intact berries. Extraction is done in other ways and to different degrees. Both pumpover and punchdown are practiced. Producers differ widely in how long, how often, and how firmly they extract. Barrels remain the standard vessel for red Coteaux Champenois. Producers use a range of ages, and the time the wines spend in wood varies considerably. Barrel volumes are, for now, greatly limited by production size, making 205 liters and 228 liters the most common. Occasionally, different barrel types are combined for the same wine, allowing the producer to fine‑tune the wine’s expression. Key Production Challenges For wines that are not initially fermented expressly for Coteaux Champenois, the origins of white examples versus red are distinct. White wine can be a continuation of vin clair , a building block for an unfinished wine. Red wine, however, comes from a building block for rosé Champagne: a wine that must make an impact at about 5% to 15% of the blend. This leads to two different challenges. Coteaux Champenois blanc can be too similar to vin clair . Poorer examples are raw and unfinished, lacking both body and fruit to balance their high acidity. For Coteaux Champenois rouge , the primary challenge is avoiding overly heavy extraction and excessive use of new oak, which overpower fruit flavors. A Category in Motion It is still too early to ascertain what Coteaux Champenois will become. Each vintage brings new attempts, adjustments, and directions, and the category remains in flux. Production figures for Coteaux Champenois are often cited at around 75,000 bottles. Today, this small volume is distributed across many very limited bottlings, often single‑vineyard or even single‑barrel wines, frequently in runs of fewer than 1,000 bottles per cuvée. It is also common for producers to bottle more than one still wine in the same vintage. This suggests a category in development, marked by experimentation rather than stylistic consolidation. While red wines clearly dominated the category only a few years ago, production volumes of red and white Coteaux Champenois have become more equal in recent years. There are several factors behind the current boom in Coteaux Champenois. Many young producers are beginning their Champagne businesses, and Coteaux Champenois is one way to expand their portfolios and maintain cash flow. It can also be a welcome challenge to produce a wine that is marginal, a lab for creativity or a way of preparing for the future. Finally, advances in the vineyard and climate change have encouraged more producers to make Coteaux Champenois. But, as Bertrand Gautherot, the owner and winemaker of Champagne Vouette & Sorbée, notes, “The quality is not in relation to the price.” It is an accurate critique: some of the world’s most expensive agricultural land is being used for a category in which most wines do not yet live up to the price tag. Land prices can be sustained by Champagne yields and Champagne prices, but Coteaux Champenois requires lower yields to reach a convincing level of quality. Coteaux Champenois is simply not great business. Yet Coteaux Champenois wines are arguably closer to terroir than most Champagnes—made without secondary fermentation and often from single vineyards. This seems to be part of the appeal, both for producers and consumers. While scarcity cannot remain a selling point, marginality and terroir are compelling to consumers today. Future Coteaux Coteaux Champenois benefits from the global prestige of Champagne, yet the same prestige suppresses its expansion. Economically, Champagne remains far more profitable per hectare. As long as this is the case, still-wine production will remain niche. The industry, led by the Comité Champagne, must act if changes are to happen. The Comité Champagne could, for example, include Coteaux Champenois in its research and advise producers to improve the overall quality. In the existing regulatory framework, the system rewards volume and supports the objectives of sparkling-wine production rather than encouraging the growth of the Coteaux Champenois category. With most Coteaux Champenois harvested at far lower levels than those required, the current rules do not reflect actual practice. Likewise, the limit for potential alcohol at harvest is 9%, which legally can be chaptalized to 13%. Updated rules could, instead, encourage ambitious still-wine production, aligning with the serious approach winemakers are increasingly adopting. Says Lécaillon, “If [we] want Coteaux to reach the next level, we need to focus on making Coteaux every year, and we need to do it in a different way.” This article does not ask the obvious question: would it be better with bubbles? Today, it seems best to enjoy Coteaux Champenois as an insight into Champagne and its producers. But in the future, that is the test that all Coteaux Champenois should be able to pass. You Might Also Like Champagne Viticulture and Winemaking Expert Guide Champagne Classifications and Pricing , by Tom Stevenson Colares: Wines by the Waves , by Jens Peter Nebsbjerg Bibliography Avellan, Essi. “Bollinger La Côte aux Enfants.” The World of Fine Wine  73 (September 2021). Avellan, Essi. “Coteaux Champenois.” Champagne Masters (certification program), Wine Scholar Guild. Liem, Peter. “Coteaux Champenois.” Champagne Masters (certification program), Wine Scholar Guild. Marsh, Sarah. “Reviewed: Louis Roederer’s New Still Champagne Wines.” Club Oenologique, April 7, 2021. https://cluboenologique.com/story/reviewed-louis-roederers-new-still-champagne-wines/ . Nebsbjerg, Jens Peter, host. The Terroir Tapes , podcast. “Champagne Bollinger with Denis Bunner.” April 25, 2025. https://www.spreaker.com/episode/champagne-bollinger-with-denis-bunner--65723141 . Nebsbjerg, Jens Peter, host. The Terroir Tapes , podcast. “Champagne Huré Frères with François Huré.” March 16, 2026. https://www.spreaker.com/episode/champagne-hure-freres-with-francois-hure--70664795 .PreviewChampagne-Featurehttps://www.guildsomm.com/learn/study/w/study-wiki/209/champagne-and-sparkling-wineThu, 02 Jul 2026 03:31:00 GMT8277e151-5ba9-4335-93f0-6f497ffb8dc4:82f197b3-eee7-42a5-8b7b-f72852f9a23dJonathan EichholzTable of Contents From Still to Sparkling Wine in Champagne Viticulture and Climate in Champagne The Regions of Champagne The CIVC and Échelle de Crus Types of Champagne Producers The Méthode Champenoise Styles of Champagne Still wines of Champagne Other Traditional Method Sparkling Wines Other Sparkling Winemaking Methods From Still to Sparkling Wine in Champagne The techniques of sparkling winemaking did not originate with the Benedictine monk Dom Pérignon, nor was the first purposely sparkling wine produced in the region of Champagne. Regardless, through centuries of refinement Champagne has become the world’s leading sparkling wine and the vinous embodiment of luxury and celebration. The méthode Champenoise , a complicated process involving secondary fermentation in the bottle, is at the heart of Champagne’s character and has been adopted by sparkling winemakers worldwide. The term, like “Champagne” itself, is protected by the EU, and may only be applied to sparkling wines produced according to the prescribed method within the Champagne AOP. Wines made in the fashion of Champagne but produced elsewhere may be labeled as traditional method ( méthode traditionnelle ) or classic method ( méthode classique ). Some producers, particularly in the US, continue to label their sparkling wines as Champagne, but such wines are banned from the EU. Dom Pérignon’s lasting contributions to modern Champagne lie in the techniques of assemblage (blending) and viticulture, despite the persistent myth that anoints him as the inventor of sparkling winemaking. As cellar master at the Abbey of Hautvillers from 1668 until his death in 1715, Pérignon struggled with the problem of natural refermentation. The irrepressibly cold winters of the region created a danger: as the weather cooled off in the autumn and the yeasts became dormant, fermentation would sometimes prematurely stop, and the wines would be bottled with fermentable sugars still present. With the spring thaw and rising temperatures, yeasts would awaken inside the bottle, and refermentation occurred. The resulting sparkle was a fatal flaw, as the weak, wood-fired French glass of the past could not withstand the mounting gas pressure, and bottles would explode, often causing a chain reaction throughout the cellar. In the late 17th century, the English transferred Champagne from cask to stronger, coal-fired glass that could contain the pressure, and were likely the first to enjoy true sparkling Champagne—the merits of effervescence are praised in English literary works whose publication predates Pérignon’s tenure. Pérignon and his contemporaries endeavored to lessen the probability of refermentation, rather than encourage it. Throughout the 18th century most serious producers labored to make still red and white wines that could compete with the wines of Burgundy. However, in 1724 the word mousseux— implying effervescence—appeared in connotation with the wines of Champagne, although the Champenoise may have enjoyed intentionally sparkling wines as early as 1700. With the introduction of stronger glass, some vintners purposefully produced sparkling wines, but results were mixed—many bottles continued to explode, others displayed no foam whatsoever—and the fundamental logic of the process remained mysterious. Some attributed the sparkle to the phases of the moon, and this early unpredictability created a need for additional terminology— pétillant, demi-mousseux (crémant), and grand mousseux —to define the level of effervescence, which survive today in other sparkling wine appellations. Champagne made as a still wine has enjoyed a royal reputation for a long time—Louis, son of Charlemagne, was crowned at Reims in 816, establishing a precedent for future French monarchs and a reputation for the wines of the area. Vineyards date to at least the 5th century. Gosset, the oldest Champagne house still in operation today, was founded in 1584 as a still wine producer (Ruinart, established in 1729, can claim to be the oldest sparkling Champagne house). Before bubbles became common in Champagne, producers began to produce white wines from red grapes in an effort to improve quality and their competitiveness with the wines of Burgundy—an important stylistic innovation that required exacting pressing and harvest procedures to retain a purely white must. Vestiges of vin gris Champagne production would inform sparkling winemaking: a 1718 winemaking treatise highlights the division in quality between vin de cuvée and vin de taille when pressing red grapes for white wine. Nonetheless, producers strove to produce good red wines. Throughout the 18th century, the red wines of Burgundy were generally superior to the red wines of Champagne, and—in a form of paid advertisement—doctors called into question the health benefits of pale, pinkish Champagne in comparison to the more robust and vigorous red Burgundy. The Champenoise even colored their wines with elderberry, in an attempt to achieve the deeper hues of Burgundy. The sparkling wines of Champagne, however, earned praise and, in light of their capriciousness and rarity at the time, high prices. The houses of Ruinart, Taittinger, Moët et Chandon, Delamotte and Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin were founded in the 18th century, yet sparkling Champagne production would remain problematic and imprecise until the early 1800s, when several key developments in both method and science provided a great leap forward for sparkling wines. Madame Barbe-Nicole Ponsardin, the Veuve (“widow”) Clicquot, assumed control of the house that bears her name after her husband’s death shortly after the turn of the 19th century. Under her leadership, the house pioneered the process of remuage , or riddling—a procedure that allows sediment to be easily removed from a bottle during dégorgement (disgorgement). Jean-Antoine Chaptal, the French chemist and statesman for whom the process of chaptalization is named, identified the relationship between sugar and fermentation in a seminal 1801 work. A fundamental understanding of the connection between sugar and the second fermentation, coupled with the pharmacist André François’ measurement of the precise amount of sugar required to induce it without breaking the bottle, allowed Champagne houses to produce sparkling wines with greater confidence. Improvements in both cork and glass paralleled the advancing science, and Champagne quickly evolved into a huge industry; its major brands developed international reputations. Individual growers could simply not afford the expensive process of sparkling winemaking—they would sell fruit to the larger houses, which could manage the costs of both production and marketing. Champagne production jumped from 300,000 bottles in 1800 to 20 million bottles by the 1880s. Pommery put the first brut Champagne, Pommery “Nature,” on the market in 1874. Champagne counted the royal Tsars of Russia, the kings of Belgium and Greece, and most of the English aristocracy as regular customers, and a longstanding association with French royalty served to buttress the new status of sparkling wine as a luxury product worthy of conspicuous consumption. Marketing materials in the age of poster advertising were especially flamboyant for Champagne—the wines were linked to women, leisure, sport, history, and all things celebratory. Champagne and the image of Champagne were, and still are, inseparable. Despite provocative, modern advertising imagery, many in Champagne were eager to emphasize the region’s traditions and history. In 1908, the French government delimited the Champagne region, further defining the region and its means of production and viticulture in 1927—but not without controversy. Vignerons from the southern Aube region, who had long supplied Champagne houses with base white wine, protested and nearly rioted in 1911 after being excluded from the region. The Aube was reinstated as a full region of the appellation in 1927. In 1935 the Commission de Châlons, a consortium of growers and merchants, was formed to develop quality standards and regulate pricing. In 1936, Champagne was enshrined in the new Appellation d’Origine Contrôlée system. Champagne remains the only AOC/AOP that does not need to include Appellation Contrôlée (or Protégée) on the label. A century of nearly uninterrupted growth and prestige for Champagne ended as phylloxera, fraud, and war loomed. Phylloxera struck in the 1890s, leading unscrupulous producers to import other sparkling wines and pass the product off as true Champagne. The repression of fraud became a key component of the initial delimitation of the region in 1908, and a source of great friction between merchants and growers. Collusion amongst producers to drive down Champagne grape prices was common at the turn of the century, even as they sourced fruit from the Loire, the Languedoc, and other countries. The growers finally revolted in 1911, ransacking houses and rioting in the streets until the French military stepped in to secure order. Negotiations between the parties were still underway in 1914 when the German army entered Reims. War had threatened the region before—Champagne’s vineyards were devastated in the Hundred Years’ War, 16th century religious conflicts, and the Thirty Years’ War—but the bloody, nearly immovable Western Front of World War I cut right through the region. Reims suffered constant bombardment for nearly four years; the wives, children, and those too infirm or old to fight risked life and limb to haul in the harvests. Braving artillery explosions and suffering from a lack of manpower, horses and fertilizer, the Champenoise delivered one of the finest vintages of the 20th century in 1914. After the First World War ended, stocks built up as prices rose and the lucrative German, American, and Russian export markets closed in the face of depression, Prohibition, and revolution, respectively. Champagne found itself under Nazi occupation during World War II, and producers walled up millions of bottles in their cellar networks to hide them from looting soldiers and the Nazi-appointed agent Otto Klaebisch—nicknamed the “Weinführer”—who had taken up residence at the Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin estate. Despite hidden stores and sleight of hand—such as passing off inferior wines as “Reserved for the Wehrmacht,” a stunt that landed François Taittinger in jail—Klaebisch demanded huge sums of Champagne’s wines for Germany, and the Champenoise feared for their survival. From the existing but limited framework of the Commission de Châlons, Count Robert-Jean de Vogüé of Moët et Chandon in 1941 organized a new, broader consortium of growers, producers and shippers to represent the Champagne industry and protect its interests in the face of Nazi occupation. That organization, the Comité interprofessionnel du vin de Champagne (CIVC), remains a powerful force in the complex mediation between the large Champagne houses and the numerous smaller growers from whom they source grapes. Today, merchant houses own just over 10% of Champagne’s vineyards, as the Contrôle des Structures prohibits any firm from farming more than fifteen owned or rented hectares. As a collective, the approximately 20,000 growers have a very powerful voice, despite selling under a quarter of all wine produced. In the second half of the 20th century, the popularity of Champagne propelled forward. Co-operatives, the first of which were founded in Champagne before World War I, became major suppliers to the domestic market in France. The largest houses expanded in exponential fashion, through a boom in sales, incorporation, merger, and acquisition. Following the inaugural 1921 vintage of Moët et Chandon’s “Dom Pérignon," many houses released a tête de cuvée , or prestige cuvée—a premier bottling often carrying a vintage date. From the 1970s forward, Champagne’s biggest names began establishing sparkling winemaking operations in other countries, as the limits of finite production in Champagne itself could not satisfy the world’s appetite for the wines. Champagne now accounts for only one in 12 bottles of sparkling wine produced worldwide, a statistic that supports the INAO’s decision in 2009 to meet the burden of demand and broaden the appellation’s area—the first major change since 1927. The number of villages that can grow grapes for the appellation increased from 319 to 357, although the additional acreage is not forecast to have an effect on sales until at least 2021. In 2018, there were 16,000 growers and 340 houses, which shipped 362 million bottles worldwide, up 55 million from just the year before. Of these markets, the largest are the UK, USA, Germany, and Japan, which account for half of all Champagne exports. BACK TO TOP Viticulture and Climate in Champagne The region of Champagne is located between the 48th and 49th parallels. With a mean annual temperature of only 50°F, ripening is extremely variable, and quality can differ greatly from year to year, requiring the houses of Champagne to blend between vintages to achieve a consistency in their house styles. Grape acidity usually remains markedly high—an important attribute for sparkling wines. Frost, rain, fungal disease and hail are serious concerns for growers in the cold, Atlantic-influenced climate. Rain often interrupts flowering, resulting in a bouvreux , or second crop, that rarely ripens and is left on the vine. Porous, belemnite chalk subsoil is pushed to the surface on the appellation’s slopes, absorbing heat to protect the vines at night and providing excellent drainage in the wet climate. Belemnite chalk, derived from the fossilized remains of millions of extinct cephalopods, has a high limestone content, which allows vine roots to dig deeply and is linked to increased acidity. A second layer of micraster chalk, named for an extinct sea urchin, characterizes the valley vineyards. The Champagne region is renowned for its huge network of cellars carved out of the chalk and limestone subsoil, which provides a perfect natural storage environment of 53-54° F for millions of bottles. A thin layer of clay and sand covers much of the chalk in Champagne; in the Aube to the south clay is the dominant soil type. The houses of Champagne are quick to assert the importance of the region’s soil, but slower overall to embrace the tenets of modern organic and sustainable viticulture. Visitors to the region will no doubt notice shreds of blue plastic scattered throughout many of the vineyards—remnants of bags used to ship composted trash. The Champenoise have a long history of relying on recycled Parisian garbage to fertilize their vineyards. Composting is admirable, but the portion of inorganic and toxic waste grew over time, and the practice was outlawed in 1998. Les bleus de ville remain, a reminder to a new generation of growers and caretakers. The three principal grapes authorized for the production of Champagne are Pinot Noir, Chardonnay, and the black grape Meunier (formerly Pinot Meunier—“miller’s” Pinot—named for the dusty appearance of its leaves). In 2018, Pinot Noir accounted for 38% of total plantings, Chardonnay accounted for 31%, and Meunier accounted for 31%. Larger houses will often blend Pinot Noir and Chardonnay, or all three varieties, in order to create a consistent non-vintage house style. Each grape contributes a different element: Chardonnay provides elegance and longevity, Pinot Noir supports the wine’s structure, richness and body, and Meunier lends a youthful fruitiness and approachability. In select areas, Pinot Blanc Vrai (“true” Pinot Blanc, a white form of Pinot Noir), Arbane, Pinot Gris, Chardonnay Rosé, and Petit Meslier are authorized for Champagne AOP production, but they are rare, totaling less than 0.3% of plantings. As in all French appellations, viticulture is regulated. Yields, which are often adjusted on a yearly basis, are quite high in comparison with other appellations. During the 2016 harvest, yields surpassed 100 hl/ha. Yields remain high because of the limits set to juice extraction. In 1992, the CIVC set a limit of 102 liters of must for every 160 kg of grapes, or 2,550 liters per 4,000 kg—a marc of grapes, the amount held in a traditional Coquard basket press. This restriction brings the final yield to 66 hl/ha. Only four pruning methods are permitted: Cordon de Royat, Chablis, Vallée de la Marne, and Guyot (double and simple). Average vine age hovers around twenty years, as the lowered productivity of old vines is undesirable to most houses in Champagne. BACK TO TOP The Regions of Champagne Vineyards in the village of Epernay. Many of the major commercial houses of Champagne are located in the city of Reims and the smaller towns of Épernay and Aÿ. The 357 villages authorized to grow grapes for Champagne are split between five districts: the Montagne de Reims, Vallée de la Marne, Côte des Blancs, Côte de Sézanne, and the Côte des Bar in the Aube département . Pinot Noir is the prominent grape in both Montagne de Reims and the Aube, whereas Chardonnay is dominant in the Côte de Sézanne and almost exclusively planted, as its name indicates, on the southeast- and east-facing slopes of the Côte des Blancs. Meunier is heavily cultivated in the sheltered vineyards of the frost-prone Vallée de la Marne, where its tendency to bud late and ripen early is prized by growers. The vineyards of the Montagne de Reims are, surprisingly, divided between south- and north-facing slopes. The plain beneath the northern Montagne de Reims is too cold for viticulture, but the higher slopes of the region’s plateau enjoy a pocket of warm air that allows the grapes to ripen. Cru status is awarded to entire villages in Champagne, rather than individual vineyards or properties. However, the areas authorized for cultivation within each commune are strictly defined. 17 villages have grand cru status and 42 are classified as premier cru according to their rankings in the Échelle de Crus . BACK TO TOP The CIVC and Échelle de Crus The CIVC, the regulatory body responsible for mediating relations between growers and producers, oversees the production methods and promotion of Champagne. The CIVC regulates the size of harvests, authorizes blocage and deblocage —respectively the reserve and release of wine stocks for use in future vintages—and safeguards the protected designation of Champagne. Until 1990, the CIVC set the price of grapes through the Échelle de Crus , a percentile system by which the villages, or crus, of the Champagne appellation are rated. Villages that achieved the maximum échelle (“scale”) of 100 were classified as grands crus ; villages that achieved an échelle of 90 through 99 were classified as premier cru . Mareuil-sur-Ay in the Vallée de la Marne and Tauxières in Montagne de Reims were the only premier cru villages with a 99% ranking. Villages with a rating below 90 were simply crus . Originally, the Échelle de Crus was a true percentile system; in 1985 a revision set the minimum rating of the scale at 80. Until 1990, a village’s échelle rating represented the set percentage of price that a grower could receive for fruit. Thus, growers in grand cru villages would receive the full price set by the CIVC, and other villages would receive a percentage equivalent to their échelle rating. Today, the CIVC recommends, rather than regulates pricing, and supervises the exchange between growers and Champagne houses in order to promote fairness. In the early 2000s, the CIVC abolished the system entirely, but the premier and grand cru villages retain their titles, and producers may continue to label wines from these villages as such. BACK TO TOP Types of Champagne Producers Every bottle of Champagne bears a series of digits—the matriculation number—a code assigned to each producer by the CIVC. A set of initials precedes the number, denoting the type of producer who made the wine. NM (Négociant Manipulant) : A house that purchases grapes and or base wines from growers and other smaller houses. Some NM houses own a significant portion of their own vineyards; others own none at all. Large Champagne houses with the most international presence are invariably in this category: Moët et Chandon, Louis Roederer, Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin, Billecart-Salmon, Lanson, Taittinger, Pol Roger, Perrier-Jouët, Mumm, and Laurent-Perrier. Quality varies widely, although prices are uniformly high. Many houses often fall under the same corporate parentage; for example, Moët et Chandon, Krug, Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin, and Mercier fall under the umbrella of the luxury conglomerate LVMH. RM (Récoltant Manipulant) : A grower-producer who makes Champagne from estate-grown fruit. 95% of the grapes must originate in the producer’s own vineyards. CM (Coopérative Manipulant) : A growers’ co-operative that produces the wine under a single brand. RC (Récoltant Coopérateur) : A grower whose grapes are vinified at a co-operative, but whose wines are sold under the grower's own label. SR (Société de Récoltants) : A firm, not a co-operative, set up by a union of often related growers, who share resources to make their wines and collectively market several brands. ND (Négociant Distributeur) : A middleman company that distributes Champagne it did not make. MA (Marque d’Acheteur) : A buyer’s own brand, often a large supermarket chain or restaurant, that purchases Champagne and sells it under its own label. BACK TO TOP The Méthode Champenoise Although certain standards of viticulture must be met, the méthode Champenoise truly begins in the press house. Black grapes must be pressed especially quickly after harvest, lest they color the must. As previously mentioned, extraction is limited to 102 liters from 160 kg of grapes, or 2,550 liters from 4,000 kg. The extracted juice is then divided into the vin de cuvée (the first 2,050 liters) and the vin de taille (the following 500 liters). The vin de taille is usually richer in pigment and tannin, and many producers sell off this lesser component of the must or include it in a minor proportion as a structural element in a blend. A third extraction, the rebêche , is required by law and must comprise 1-10% of the total. The rebêche is used for distillate, not Champagne. After pressing, the juice is allowed to settle ( débourbage ) at a cool temperature for eight to fifteen hours, so that remaining solids ( bourbes ) in the must can be removed by racking prior to fermentation. The must, which is often chaptalized, will then undergo primary fermentation, resulting in high-acid base wines ( vins clairs ) with an approximate alcohol content of 11%. Primary fermentation may occur in either stainless steel or oak—typically used barrels, although some producers do use a percentage of new wood. The base wines often undergo malolactic fermentation, although this is not a universal practice. After both the primary and malolactic fermentations have concluded, the base wines will generally be clarified, through fining, filtering, or centrifuge. The clarified base wines remain in either stainless steel or barrel (or, in rare cases, bottles) until late February or March of the year following the harvest. The most classic representation of Champagne is a blend, utilizing a number of grapes, growing areas, and vintages. At this stage the blender will taste the lots of base wine, and determine a house’s hallmark blend, drawing on reserve stocks from previous years to provide complexity and richness. A certain consistency in style from year to year is highly desired. For rosé wines, a small proportion of base red wine is generally added. After the assemblage and cold stabilization, the blend will be racked and bottled with the addition of liqueur de tirage , a mixture of still wine, yeasts, sugar, and fining agents that will serve to ignite the second fermentation. The second fermentation, or prise de mousse , is the heart of the méthode Champenoise . Each bottle is affixed with a crown cap (equipped with a bidule , a plastic capsule that will serve to capture the sediment during remuage ) or a cork after the liqueur de tirage is added, and yeast begins its work. The secondary fermentation lasts up to eight weeks, as the yeast slowly converts the additional sugar to alcohol and carbon dioxide. The alcohol content of the wine rises approximately 1.2-1.3%, and the carbon dioxide creates a pressure inside the bottle of five to six atmospheres. During the second fermentation, the bottles are usually stored horizontally (“ sur latte” ). Autolysis, the breakdown of dead yeast cells, forms sediment, or lees, in the bottle as second fermentation occurs. The wine will be aged on the lees for an appropriate period—a minimum of 12 months is required for non-vintage wines—prior to their removal from the bottle through dégorgement. In preparation for dégorgement , the sediment must first be trapped in the neck of the bottle. Historically, producers performed an operation called pointage , in which each bottle would be briskly shaken in order to prevent the sediment from sticking to the sides of the bottle. Newer strains of yeast generally preclude the need for pointage , and most houses have abandoned the practice. Instead, producers proceed directly to remuage , or riddling, which manipulates the sediment into the neck and bidule through sharp twists and inversion of the bottle. The widow Clicquot’s breakthrough involved the development of the pupitre : two large wooden planks fastened together in an upright “A” shape, with sixty angled holes cut into each plank of wood. A remuer would fractionally turn and tilt each bottle over a period of about eight weeks, slowly inverting the bottles with the neck pointing downward. Despite the fact that a top remuer is rumored to handle upwards of 70,000 bottles a day, Champagne is an industry, and more efficient methods are required. The modern remuage operation is shortened to a week or less through the use of the gyropalette, an automated device that holds 504 bottles. The gyropalette has replaced hand-riddling at all of the major houses, although some prestige cuvée bottlings are still handled manually. Once the sediment is successfully collected in the neck of the bottle, the bottles remain in the upside-down vertical position (“ sur pointe ”) for a short period of time prior to dégorgement , although some houses will age the wine in this position for a number of years—Bollinger’s “RD” (“ Récemment Dégorgé ”) is kept sur pointe for a number of years, and only disgorged upon order. The modern method of dégorgement à la glace involves dipping the neck of the bottle in a freezing brine solution. The bottle can then be turned upright. The force of internal pressure will expel the semi-frozen sediment (and a small portion of wine) as the crown cap is removed. An older method, dégorgement à la volée, utilizes the same principle; however, without freezing the sediment excess wine is invariably lost along with it. As the wines are fully fermented to total dryness, the bottles are then topped off with dosage , or liqueur d’expédition , a liquid mixture of sugar syrup and wine. Rarely, bone-dry non-dosage styles are produced. The amount of sugar in the dosage is determined by the desired style of the wine. Brut is the most common sweetness level and the level at which most houses bottle vintage and prestige cuvées. Sweetness Levels for Champagne Designation Residual Sugar Brut Nature/Non-Dosé 0-3 grams per liter, no added dosage Extra Brut 0-6 grams per liter Brut 0-12 grams per liter Extra Dry 12-17 grams per liter Sec 17-32 grams per liter Demi-Sec 32-50 grams per liter Doux 50+ grams per liter After the addition of dosage , the bottle is secured with a cork and six half-twists of a muselet , or wire cage. The Champagne is then aged in bottle prior to release. Non-vintage styles must remain in the cellar for a total minimum of 15 months (including the period of lees aging), whereas vintage wines require 36 months in the cellar. In reality, many top vintage wines and prestige cuvées slumber in the caves of Champagne for much longer prior to appearing on the market. Some bottle aging, whether in one’s personal cellar or the cellars of a producer, is usually critical: apparent sulfur and youthful austerity can make recently bottled Champagne less rewarding. Champagne is bottled in a range of bottle sizes. The names of large bottles, from Jeroboam forward, have Biblical connotations. Bottle sizes larger than a Jeroboam and smaller than a half bottle may be filled by transversage or by the transfer method, from a tank or through the process of decanting multiple smaller bottles. Champagne Bottle Sizes Bottle Size Quarter Bottle (Piccolo) 187 ml Half Bottle (Demi) 375 ml Bottle 750 ml Magnum 1.5 L (2 bottles) Jeroboam 3 L (4 bottles) Rehoboam (discontinued in 1983) 4.5 L (6 bottles) Methuselah 6 L (8 bottles) Salmanazar 9 L (12 bottles) Balthazar 12 L (16 bottles) Nebuchadnezzar 15 L (20 bottles) Solomon 18 L (24 bottles) * Larger sizes, including the Sovereign, Primat, and Melchizedek are extraordinarily rare. Many sources cite the 18 L bottle as a Melchior, as it is called in Bordeaux. BACK TO TOP Styles of Champagne Non-Vintage (NV) : Generally brut in style, the NV cuvée represents a house’s signature style, and the blender’s job is to ensure its consistency from year to year. Non-vintage Champagne makes up at least three-quarters of the market. Vintage : 100% of the blend must come from the stated vintage, yet a maximum 80% of a year’s harvest may be sold as vintage Champagne. The better houses declare a vintage only in exceptional years. These are usually brut in style, and good examples can age for a decade or more. Blanc de Blancs : Only white grapes are permitted, but they are not always sourced from the Côte des Blancs. They may be vintage-dated or NV. The Blanc de Blancs category represents some of Champagne’s most ageworthy bottlings; while austere and often steely in youth, better examples develop an intense bouquet with maturity. Blanc de Noirs : White wine produced solely from black grapes. The wine usually displays richness, intensity, and weight, although it can lack the supreme elegance and finesse of Blanc de Blancs . Prestige Cuvée (Tête de Cuvée) : Usually the finest and most expensive bottling that a house offers, the prestige cuvée is typically (but not always) vintage-dated and aged for a number of years prior to release. Prestige Cuvées are usually only released in superior vintages, and may undergo more traditional vinification procedures, such as barrel fermentation, riddling by hand, and cork-finishing during the second fermentation. Many of the large houses produce prestige cuvées from their own vineyards—even single vineyards in exceptional cases. Prestige cuvées may be Blanc de Blancs, Blanc de Noirs or rosé in style. Not all houses produce a prestige cuvée, and some produce several. Classic examples include Moët et Chandon "Dom Pérignon," Taittinger "Comtes de Champagne," Louis Roederer "Cristal," Laurent-Perrier "Grande Siècle," Perrier-Jouët "Belle Époque" (previously bottled as "Fleur de Champagne" for the US market), Pol Roger "Cuvée Sir Winston Churchill," Ruinart "Dom Ruinart," and Veuve Clicquot-Ponsardin "La Grande Dame." For an exhaustive list, click here . Single Vineyard Champagne : Single Vineyard Champagne bottlings may be produced by a large house or a smaller grower-producer, and may or may not be advertised as a prestige cuvée. Single Vineyard wines are not required to carry a vintage date, although they invariably do, and the style represents a stark departure from the blending philosophy of the region. Philipponnat’s “Clos de Goisses,” originally released for the 1935 vintage from one of the few walled vineyards of the region, remains a benchmark bottling. Special Club Prestige Cuvée: The “Special Club” concept originated in 1971, with a dozen grower-producers. Lacking the marketing budgets of larger houses, these producers banded together to promote their prestige cuvées through identical packaging. The Club Trésors comprises 28 RM producers as members. The Special Club bottlings are estate-bottled, vintage-dated wines that represent the pinnacle of each individual grower’s style and production. Special Club bottles and labels share identical design. Current members include Marc Hébrart, Pierre Gimonnet, Paul Bara, J. Lassalle and Gaston Chiquet. For a complete membership, click here . Rosé Champagne : Vintage, NV, and prestige cuvées may also be produced in pink versions. The traditional saignée method, in which the wine gains its hue through extended skin contact, is less common than blending. Champagne is the only AOP in France that allows a rosé to be produced by blending red and white wine. A rosé prestige cuvée, a novelty in years past, is usually the most expensive and rare product a house offers. BACK TO TOP Still wines of Champagne Coteaux Champenois and Rosé de Riceys are still wine appellations within the region of Champagne. Coteaux Champenois covers still red, white, and rosé wines from the entire appellation; Rosé de Riceys is reserved for 100% Pinot Noir rosé wines produced in Les Riceys, a cru village in the Aube. BACK TO TOP Other Traditional Method Sparkling Wines While the exact aging requirements and grape varieties may change, the traditional method mirrors the méthode Champenoise and has at its heart the principle of a second fermentation in the bottle. The méthode traditionnelle has been adopted throughout France and worldwide as the most successful approach to quality, ageworthy sparkling wine production. In France, there are eight AOP regions for crémant wines produced by the traditional method: Crémant de Bordeaux , Crémant de Bourgogne , Crémant de Loire , Crémant de Limoux , Crémant de Die , Crémant du Jura , Crémant d’Alsace , and Vin de Savoie , which produces crémant under the designation Crémant de Savoie . The encépagement varies widely according to the appellation, and the limit on pressing is less strict (100 liters from 150 kg, or 2,666 liters from 4,000 kg) but otherwise the wines are produced by the method prescribed for Champagne. Other appellations in France producing traditional method sparkling wines include Vouvray , Montlouis-sur-Loire , and Saumur in the Loire; and Seyssel in Savoie. Fully sparkling wines from the aforementioned appellations will be labeled mousseux (or "crémant" in Savoie), whereas lightly sparkling wines are labeled pétillant . Blanquette de Limoux wines from the Limoux AOP in the Languedoc region are also produced by the traditional method, from a minimum 90% Mauzac that may be blended with Chardonnay and Chenin Blanc. In Italy, the best traditional method sparkling wines are produced in Lombardy, within the DOCGs of Franciacorta and Oltrepò Pavese Metodo Classico . All Spanish Cava and the highest quality German Sekt are produced by the traditional method. England is a new frontier for traditional method sparkling wines: the White Cliffs of Dover (and much of southeastern England’s subsoil) represent a natural continuation of the chalk of Champagne. Nyetimber and Ridgeview Estate, both located in Sussex, lead the way. Quality sparkling wines are made on America’s West Coast—in Carneros, Napa Valley, Anderson Valley, Willamette Valley, and Washington. Roederer established operations in Anderson Valley in Mendocino, whereas Taittinger and Moët et Chandon founded American projects in Carneros and Yountville, respectively. Traditional method sparkling wines are made in New York, Canada, and even New Mexico. Graham Beck is at the forefront of traditional method “Cap Classique” sparkling wines in South Africa. Major Champagne houses have established outposts in Australia, New Zealand, Argentina, Ukraine, and even Brazil. BACK TO TOP Other Sparkling Winemaking Methods Méthode Ancestrale : Also known as the méthode rurale, this is the oldest and most rudimentary of sparkling winemaking procedures. A single fermentation begins in tank, but the wine is transferred to bottles before the process is complete— liqueur de tirage is unnecessary. Yeasts continue to ferment the remaining sugars in the bottle, giving the wine its sparkle. The residual sweetness of the finished wines varies by appellation, but dosage is not allowed. The wine may be disgorged, filtered and rebottled in clean glass prior to sale. Bugey Cerdon , Clairette de Die Méthode Dioise Ancestrale , and Gaillac Mousseux Méthode Gaillaçoise are examples of the style. The Charmat Process/Cuve Close/Tank Method: Developed by Eugene Charmat in the early 20th century, the Tank Method is quicker, cheaper, and less labor-intensive than the traditional method. After the wine undergoes primary fermentation, liqueur de tirage is added to the wine, provoking a second fermentation, which occurs in a pressurized enamel-lined tank, or autoclave, over a matter of days. Once the appropriate pressure is reached (usually 5 atmospheres), the wine is chilled to arrest fermentation. Some appellations require the wine to remain in tank for a minimum period of time, such as one month for Asti DOCG. The wine is then filtered and bottled, usually with a dosage. The lack of extended lees contact in the tank method is not suitable for making quality wines in the style of Champagne. The bubbles, or bead, in tank method wines will be larger and coarser, and the wine will have a less uniform texture than wines made by the traditional method. However, this method is appropriate and even preferred for sparkling wines emphasizing fruit and varietal aromatics rather than the flavors derived from autolysis. Most Asti DOCG and Prosecco bottlings are produced in this method. Continuous Method/Russian Continuous Method: Developed in the USSR, this method is similar to the tank method, but the base wine is pumped through a series of interconnected (continuous) tanks while undergoing the second fermentation. Liqueur de tirage is constantly added to the wine, and lees accumulate in the first several tanks, offering a higher degree of autolyzed flavors than the standard tank method. The majority of German Sekt is produced by either the tank method or the continuous method. Carbonation: The cheapest method of sparkling winemaking involves a simple injection of carbon dioxide into still wine. The bubbles do not integrate into the texture of the wine at all, and fade quickly upon opening. This method is not used for quality wines. Alternative methods of sparkling winemaking cannot compete with the wines of Champagne in complexity, but they may be perfectly suited to less serious (and sometimes more exuberant) styles. However, traditional method sparkling wines from all over the world are approaching and in some cases surpassing basic Champagne bottlings in character and refinement. Differences between well-made traditional method wines and basic méthode Champenoise wines are sometimes very difficult to detect. However, at its top echelon of quality there is no substitute for Champagne—its finesse, longevity, and price are incomparable in the world of sparkling wine. BACK TO TOP Updated June 2024Preview