by Mike Supple
Wine comes in many different bottle sizes. Fortunately, these sizes are fairly uniform worldwide (largely due to US and EU government regulations). However, different world regions like to use different names for the various bottles. So next time you’re at a party and some guy is bragging about the Imperial of Champagne he drank, you can call him out on it. For this size bottle (6000ml), Champagne (the region) uses the much cooler name, Methuselah. Here’s a quick chart below for your reference.
The standard measurement worldwide is in milliliters (ml), and the “standard bottle” of wine is 750ml. This standard was set after decades of testing, when it was finally decided by Alexander the Great that 750ml was “the amount of wine needed by one man in one sitting to hear the voices of the gods.” (I am, of course, lying to you. Everyone knows Alexander the Great preferred Magnums.) Before machines took over, bottles were all hand blown, and a trained glass blower had the lung capacity to blow one 750ml bottle in one breath. Once machines came about, it only made sense to standardize this measurement and take the bottle from “about 750ml” to exactly that.
To make sure we’re all on the same page, 1000ml = 100cl = 1.0L. These are generally the only ways you will see bottles labeled. Rarely does anyone use cl, but some EU regions like using 75cl instead of 750ml, so you may see it now and then.
I would list the key regions alphabetically, but honestly, do you really need a 9.0L bottle of Bordeaux? Probably not. However, a full case of Champagne being poured from one bottle is bad-ass.
| Number of Glasses (Sparkling)* | Number of Glasses (Still)** | Capacity | Champagne/Burgundy/Rhone Name | Bordeaux Name | Standard 750ml Bottle Equivalent |
| 3 | 2.5 | 375ml | Half | Half | 1/2 bottle |
| 5.5 | 5 | 750ml | Bottle | Bottle | 1 bottle (get the math here?) |
| 12.5 | 10 | 1500ml | Magnum | Magnum | 2 bottles |
| – | 15 | 2250ml | – | Marie-Jeanne (no longer made) | 3 bottles |
| 25 | 20 | 3000ml | Jeroboam | Double Magnum | 4 bottles |
| 38 | 30 | 4500ml | Rehoboam | Jeroboam*** | 6 bottles |
| – | 33.5 | 5000ml | – | Jeroboam*** | 6.6 bottles |
| 50.5 | 40 | 6000ml | Methuselah | Imperiale | 8 bottles |
| 76 | 50.5 | 9000ml | Salmanazar | Salmanazar (rare) | 12 bottles |
| 101 | 81 | 12000ml | Balthazar | Double Imperiale | 16 bottles |
| 126.5 | 101 | 15000ml | Nebuchadnezzar | – | 20 bottles |
| 152 | 121.5 | 18000ml | Melchior | – | 24 bottles |
* Based on a 4oz glass for sparkling wine.
** Based on a 5oz glass for red/white wine.
*** Jeroboam in Bordeaux was 4500ml prior to 1978, and 5000ml after.
Tags: Article, balthazar, bottle, capacity, double imperiale, double magnum, glasses, half bottle, imperiale, jeroboam, magnum, marie jeanne, melchior, methuselah, nebuchadnezzar, salmanazar, sizes, wine
I was surprised to read the assertion that, “a trained glass blower had the lung capacity to blow one 750ml bottle in one breath.”
This happened to coincide with an argument my girlfriend and I were having. She stated the same bit of trivia, the wine bottle got its current size because that is how big a bottle an average glass blowers could make with one breath. Upon hearing this I was incredulous and would like to share my objections with you as well.
To me the explaination seems too convenient, too coincidental and I could find no empirical evidence stating this was the case. According to my research the tidal volume of air usually taken into the lungs in a single adult breath is approximately 500 ml. However, male adult lungs can hold approximately ten times this amount on a full, deep breath (4,800 ml) whereas several athletes have been measured with a lung capacity of greater than 5,700 ml.
I would venture to guess that an experienced glass blower even in those dark times would have had an above average lung capacity.
Also, the breath would be going into a super heated ball of molten glass. The heat of the material would cause the air to expand in the closed space. Even if the glass blower’s breath capacity was HALF of a modern adult males full breath the volume of air would still be in the 2,400 ml range.
Supporting my position is the work of artist Roberta Silva. In her series “Basta Un Soffio” she displays several large, elongated and flattened glass vessels made of a single breath These works average size is 53×30x33 cm. Assuming them to be more cubical than spheroid the volume of such a piece would be approximately 52470 cm or 524,700 ml.
Granted, her work is for display only and no doubt very fragile. Regardless that 524,700 ml figure is large enough to hold over 10 gallons of liquid.
So, my question to you, what is your reference for the statement made about the 750 ml bottle being a product of the glass maker’s single breath?
I eagerly and respectfully await your answer,
Best regards,
D. Chris Ferguson, Ph.B.
Thank you for this comment. I appreciate your research on this matter. I have been given this answer by several local glassblowers (living near Berkeley there are many artists) but I have no personal experience, nor have I seen it done myself. Your research has given me pause for thought, and I will see if I can find more empirical evidence to back this theory.
While this evidence is far from empirical, there are many others who have made this similar statement:
- “the volume of a 750ml bottle is equivalent to the lung capacity of the average 19th Century French glass blower” - http://backsberg.blogspot.com/2008/04/reason-why-wine-bottle-is-750ml.html
- “This is the average capacity of a glass-blower’s lungs, and thus the approximate size of a bottle created in one blow.” - http://www.wineloverspage.com/wineadvisor2/tswa20080616.php (this site also offers a couple of other possible suggestions)
According to Wikipedia, that actual lung capacity of the average adult male is 6.0 liters - far more than a 750ml bottle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lung_volumes). It is very important to note however that many factors preclude someone from actually being able to use their full lung capacity. This 6.0L volume would also only be able to be achieved by exhaling into an object that gave no measure of resistance against the air leaving the lungs.
Think for a moment about trying to inflate a balloon. In one breath of air I have produced balloons of incredibly varying sizes. Getting the balloon started always seems to be the hardest part, and takes more pressure. Once a full breath is in the balloon, the second breath makes it expand at an exponentially greater rate than the first. This is because the hard rubber was initially resistant to the expansion, yet once begun it was easier and took less effort.
While used centuries ago, glass bottles were not fashionable until recent history (in about the 17th century). Without standards and mechanization, glass is very fragile. To be able to successfully use it as a vessel for wine the glass had to be thick and sturdy, and made of more rugged materials. Your artist was no doubt intending to produce very fragile and beautiful works of art in her single breath, while bottle makers were more intent upon making and object that could stand up to the rugged treatment of shipping without breaking and spilling its contents.
Although this explanation may seem convenient, I don’t find it coincidental. It is much more likely that bottles were made in a size that was easy to reproduce by many different glass blowers due to the fact that they could produce it in one breath rather than having some random size just sort of “catch on” prior to mechanization. I’m not saying that every bottle was 750ml - I’m sure there was quite a bit of variation, and I’ve seen many older bottles in the 700 - 730 ml range.
I am now intrigued, and I will if any local glass blowers are interested in taking on this idea.
Cheers,
Mike