Yes. Whiskey doesn't age in the bottle like wine does. It does undergo small changes over very long periods of time, but essentially retains the same profile as the day it was bottled. (This presumes no infection, mold, or other unwanted intruders). The whiskey in this bottle is clear and and uncontaminated.

What would this whiskey taste like?
Based on everything we can gather from history, expert opinions, modern chemical analysis, and nosing during sample extraction, the whiskey has similarities to high quality bourbons and ryes of today, but with unusually rich and deep aspects. The nose is unmistakeable as a bourbon or rye, and surprisingly vibrant. We found it heavily fruity, with things like figs and orange marmalade. We may also have treated ourselves the tiniest taste of tastes, and while that wouldn't be fair to base tasting notes on, we may have found it to be shockingly good, unexpectedly mouth-puckering, and having weathered the centuries very well. We discussed sandalwood flavors, black cherries, and a bright sweetness, with a great, dry finish. I remarked that it had none of the "sh***y basement quality" that can sometimes turn up in poorly-kept dusties. And we all agreed it definitely tasted like a rye, and one that we'd want to buy a bottle of were it on shelves.

Is this related to the current Baker's bourbon?
No. Baker's bourbon was introduced in 1992 and is named after the grand-nephew of Jim Beam, Baker Beam.

There's been discussion of partnering with whiskey historians and distillation experts to analyze the spirit in depth and place it in a historical perspective, via organic chemistry, with the eventual goal of replicating it.

 

What is it worth? 

Given today's whiskey climate, it is certainly very valuable, but any price would be speculative unless it were actually sold at auction to the highest bidder. (For those who are saying, "But you guys appraise whiskey! Tell us a number!" Yes, we do, but pegging a number on this publicly would serve no purpose).

What was the market for this whiskey, in its time? What would it have cost?

 

Shouldn't this be in a museum? 

Probably.

Not that can be proven. The few attempts to claim something older have been fraught with problems, especially blatant misuses of scientific data.

 

Regarding the Blair Castle Whisky claimed by WhiskyAuctioneer in September 2023 to be authenticated and carbon dated to 1833, see our detailed report exposing their misleading press release and publicity as well as dubious "authentication" methodology.

 

Regarding the "Old Ingledew" whisky that Skinner Auctioneers called "late 1700s" and tried to sell in June 2021, a thorough debunking of the Ingledew claim is here. The bottle was reportedly rejected and returned by the auction winner.

 

The "Unseen Collection" in the Netherlands has a bottle they say "is thought" to hold whiskey from 1843, based on a handwritten note on the bottle. But there are many reasons the contents may not be what the note claims, and those experienced with vintage whiskeys know that old notes accompanying bottles are notoriously unreliable. There is no known way to verify when the liquid inside specifically dates from, but the firm likes to refer to it as "presumably the oldest unopened bottle of whiskey," and of course, anyone is free to presume whatever they wish.

I have more questions and/or info for you.
Contact us.