Talk:Sack (wine)

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and careful attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 06:14, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Nomenclature

i think you might find that in the u.k. the term is not as antiquated as you indicate, and that dry sherry is often referred to as sack.Toyokuni3 (talk) 14:03, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, I added a sentence to that effect; I've also seen it on some bottles as part of a name. An important point, though, is that historically, sack was not just sherry. Tomas e (talk) 11:42, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

point taken.Toyokuni3 (talk) 14:42, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

I come from the UK, know lots of Sherry lovers, and have NEVER heard dry Sherry referred to as sack (apart from in Shakespeare plays!). Dry Sack is, however, a well-known brand of Sherry. But for a reason I do not understand it is also applied to Sherries that are not dry. The reference [2] was actually for a medium (i.e. sweetish) Sherry; not a dry one. I have edited the text appropriately. (Steve.slatcher (talk) 23:00, 16 February 2016 (UTC))

Canary Islands

"Sack is an antiquated wine term referring to white fortified wine imported from Spain or the Canary Islands.". Excuse me, the Canary Islands are Spain.--194.179.126.153 (talk) 07:29, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

This was the expression in the source, which must have meant Spain as "mainland Spain". Tomas e (talk) 16:53, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Although the production of Canary Sack does appear to have died out, it appears that the Lanzaroti vineyard of "El Grifo" is now attempting to recreate it, under the name "Malvasia Canari" https://elgrifo.com/tienda/gb/dulces-antiguos/88-malvasia-canari-50-cl.html82.40.90.107 (talk) 12:34, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Origin of the term

In 1587 Martin Frobisher, the fleet of Francis Drake attacked Cadiz and Jerez, 3000 boots carrying these wines. This booty sherry became fashionable in the English court. The origin of the term sack is from the English word sack, meaning "pillage".--Nº9 (talk) 09:16, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Where does this come from, and is it a reliable source? The present possible ethymologies are clearly referenced, as you can see. (And by the way, the verb "sack" in this meaning is surely a short form of "ransack", so unless the short form was established in the 16th century, it's unlikely to be the explanation.) Tomas e (talk) 09:38, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok, Hugh Johnson in his book The Story of Wine (1989) defends the version of pillage in 1587.--Nº9 (talk) 11:46, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Then I will definitely have a look, since I have that book laying around somewhere! Tomas e (talk) 15:19, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok, i don´t write anything in the article because you know the wine better and my english is very poor. Thank you Tomas.--Nº9 (talk) 14:29, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

In the "New illustrated edition" of 2005, "sack" is explained on p. 92-93, with saca its word root. On p. 94 Francis Drakes 1587 raid is mentioned. But please notice that the word "sack" (p. 93, just as already stated in this article) in English goes back to around 1530, so it predates the raid by several decades. So the booty from the raid seems to have added to the popularity of sack rather than creating the term. Tomas e (talk) 14:46, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, after your explanation no doubt about the origin of the term, thank by the attention. Good evenight. --Nº9 (talk) 15:36, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

What about this one? "The first shipment to England of what would become Spain's most famous wine was labelled "Vino de Jerez, Seco." In London, "Jerez" was Anglicized to "sherry," and "seco" became "Sack." By Shakespeare's time, "sack" was a synonym for "sherry." Williams & Humbert have the sole rights to use "sack" commercially in the name "Dry Sack." (Grossman's Guide, 1964) (quoted from http://www.globalgourmet.com/food/wineday/2000/wd0100/wd011900.html) Samogon (talk) 17:12, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

The statement about "Shakespeare's time" is obviously not fully correct, since Falstaff speficially calls it Sherris sack, rather than just sack. So it doesn't come across as a 100% well-researched source. Tomas e (talk) 22:18, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Etymology

Further to the above, I revamped the section on the etymology. Precedence must be given to the OED, though I have kept the reference to the Oxford Companion to Wine.

The derivation from "sake" is almost certainly nonsense, and the 1911 EB's entry on "Sake" directly contradicts its one on "Sack". Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and a 99-year-old encyclopaedia doesn't cut it. Wereon (talk) 16:04, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I disagree that preference must be given to OED in comparison to a specialised subject matter source. There is no logical connection between the style of Sack and "dry" as commonly applied to wine; that would more be the style of "thin potations". Tomas e (talk) 18:22, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I disagree with your disagreement. The OED is a scholarly work, which reflects academic consensus. The OCW article attributes the sacar derivation to one particular person, Julian Jeffs, implying that even they think he's out on a limb. By all means mention his theory, but don't pretend that his is seen as the most likely. See WP:OR.

The 1911 EB does the same with Morewood, whoever he is, but his proposal is even more nonsensical. The EB derives the word sake from the name of the city Osaka, which betrays its ignorance of such matters.

Regardless, the fields of oenology and philology are rather distinct: being able to appreciate sack is an entirely different skill to knowing where its name comes from. Wikipedia should therefore defer to a philological rather than oenological source when it comes to a wine's etymology, and your version of the paragraph violates WP:OR by allocating undue weight to fringe theories. Wereon (talk) 20:18, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Furthermore, it is customary only to trace a word back if it has changed in meaning. There's no value in saying that French sec comes from Latin siccus here, any more than there is in saying English "wine" comes from Proto-Germanic *winam. Wereon (talk) 20:23, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

The Oxford Companion to Wine is not a fringe theory or nonsense, and is the reliable source with the widest coverage of wine-related material including history. It is very strange that you use the term "original research" and while not providing any inline references to your claims - which edition, which page and so on? Wikipedia:Citing sources provides good advise if needed. You have obviously read the OCW article though (which only mentions OED but not the other dictionaries you mention), so you clearly have seen that OCW and wine historians disbelieve the proposal put forward by the dictionary writers of OED who somewhat inexplicably attach the name of a Spanish sweet wine to the French word for dry. I attach more weight to OCW, for the simple reason that this article is written in full knowledge of the OED entry (the reverse doesn't hold true), and by people who understand the subject matter. Tomas e (talk) 21:53, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

A reference to what? The OED? Insert one if you like, but it doesn't really need one. Second edition - the third hasn't been prepared for that entry yet. I appreciate it's behind a paywall, and I can send you a copy of the relevant page if you'd like.

The OCW doesn't actually favour the sacar derivation; it mentions the OED first, says that it is slightly sceptical of it, then mentions the theory of a particular scholar. That's hardly "historians of wine" - at best, it's one historian of wine. And I can't see how a sacar derivation is an improvement - put out from what? And why is it from the infinitive, rather than the past participle, sacado? And why do some of the earliest citations treat it is an adjective (as one would expect from sec) rather than a noun? I don't have access to Jeffs' book, but if you do, perhaps you could let me know.

The "subject matter" here is linguistics. Is there anything else oenological one needs to know, save for the fact it's not actually dry? Wereon (talk) 22:32, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Ah, just answered some of my own questions. See the last entry on [1] - the etymology is pretty much what we have now. Though Webster's seem to have dodged the etymological question by misdefining the noun... Wereon (talk) 22:40, 13 April 2010 (UTC)