Review by: Raygun

On a few occasions, I’ve bought a bottle of something I previously reviewed as a sample or bar pour. My method is to write notes and score independently. I know I liked it enough to buy a bottle, but I don’t look back at my initial review until I’ve written everything out for this one.

This is one of the early bottles of Victoriana, which debuted in 2018. It seems like these first releases were all at 51.5%. The tube says it’s bottled straight from the cask, but seems pretty unlikely they all worked out to be 51.5%. Subsequent labels state cask strength, but not this one. Victoriana’s selling point is a finish in deep charred casks. That plus a reference to smoky notes on the tube may create the misapprehension that it’s peated. It’s not, as I confirmed by asking the distillery. Rested about 15 minutes.  

---

Distillery: Glen Scotia 

Bottler: Glen Scotia

Region/style: Campbeltown single malt Scotch

ABV: 51.5%. Likely not cask strength, even though the tube says it is. 

Age: NAS. Bottled March 27, 2018. 

Cask type: Probably a mix of casks initially, then “finished in the finest deep charred oak casks.”

Color: 1.6 mahogany. Natural color and non-chill-filtered.

Price: $70

---

NNose: Caramel and vanilla, along with a strong woodshop smell. A candy scent, like taffy. Not exactly smoky, but something like soot. An effect of the charred casks, likely.     

Palate: I wasn’t anticipating pruney sweetness, but there it is. Cherry syrup, too. There are some PX casks in the blend and that comes out here. Slightly burnt caramel. The cask char comes through. Strong on the vanilla, and similar woodshop flavor.    

Finish: The woody notes continue, taking on a spicy aspect. Less vanilla, but there’s the prunes still. There’s a taffy sweetness to it. Cherry chewy candy.      

---

Re-review comparison: I can see why earlier me thought it was peated; that charred, sooty flavor is easily taken for peat. Vanilla and caramel were common notes, but that was about it. Came across much sweeter to me now, and I didn’t like it as much as I had in my original review. Probably more due to my changing tastes than anything else. 

Conclusion: I’ve heard more recent versions of Victoriana aren’t as good, but I wouldn’t know. I find it reasonably complex and free of young notes. The sweetness is a little distracting somehow; it doesn’t seem to meld well with the other flavors. It ends up a little incoherent. Won’t be any trouble to finish this bottle, but I don’t think I’d buy another. Not what I currently look for.

Score: 77

Scoring Legend:

• 95-100: As good as it gets. Jaw-dropping, eye-widening, unforgettable whisky. (Convalmore 36)
• 90-94: Sublime, a personal favorite in its category. (Bruichladdich Black Art 4.1)
• 85-89: Excellent, a standout dram. (Ledaig 13 Amontillado)
• 80-84: Quite good. Quality stuff. (Tomatin 18)
• 75-79: Decent whisky worth tasting. (Glen Scotia 15)
• 70-74: Meh. It’s definitely drinkable, but it can do better. (Aultmore 12)
• 60-69: Not so good. I might not turn down a glass if I needed a drink. (Glenmorangie 10)
• 50-59: Save it for mixing. (Old Pulteney 12)
• 0-49: Blech. (Muirhead’s Silver Seal 16)