I’ve thoroughly overhauled the Snuff Typespage on my site, incorporating many of the suggestions and comments made here. Particular thanks to PhilipS of course. As before I’d love to hear everyone’s thoughts on it.
ermtony, That looks very nice and I am sure it will be helpful especailly to newbies. One suggestion: I would combine the Smokey and the Scotch categories/description. You might list it like this: Smokey (American Scotch) Anyway, very nice work mate
Wow Tony, that article is mind blowing. I really have a hard time wraping my head around it all.
Thanks! I had thought to include all the toasts and scotches together as they do have many traits in common. And of course, not all scotches are smoky! The plain and sweet ones usually aren’t. It’s just the strong ones that exhibit that characteristic. I’m certainly open to debate on the issue. I’m still tweaking the wording and layout…
Hi Tony, how’s the leg coming on? It’s summer time on your side of the globe, so I hope you will be able to blast around soon again!
Hi Tony, it looks good. Some thoughts: Florals are classed as scented? It may be good to mention that if so since there are so many. Also as before I know you are not a fan of mint snuff, but are they herbal (making them gourmand) or medicated? I’m tending to agree with Snifs, that smokey is a subdivision under Scotch, or a description thereof, rather than strong scotches being a type of smokey. Smokey doesn’t seem like a “type” or a “class” on its own. It seems more of a trait of a class or type. The national section is good (as the system is a little anglo-centric), since there are many international styles that don’t fall readily into the established parameters. You might make an entry for South African styles, as those such as Ntsu and Taxi seem far more course than “gros” to me. Magnet on the other hand seems to imitate English styles. Indian styles seem to have a distinct character as well, but they can be classed within the existing parameters. I’ve not had any Brazilian styles or some of the more obsure ones so I can’t suggest anything there. Also more info on schmalzlers,please! Some are “Fresco” or “Fresko” some are double fermented some say double aroma, etc. What’s that all about? Don’t want to ruffle too many feathers, but I think you were on the right track by expanding the mill classing into 5 rather than keeping the tradtional 3 on your previous page. I don’t think the French guys who created the classes hundreds of years ago had ever had snuffed Ntsu or Bruton Scotch! No doubt these are the exceptions not the rule, but they could be named “maxi-gros” and “maxi-fin” or “plus-gros” or whatever you like to keep with the French traditon. Please also take everything I say with a grain of salt and knowing that I really only know what I read on here. Its just suggestions or clarifications from my limited personal experience. I love what you are doing! I’m sure creating a new snuff encyclopedia is no easy task.
Thanks for the comments Alex. Much appreciated. I do agree that it looks rather Anglo-centric so far. Hard to avoid, being English of course! Florals are indeed scented so I’d better make that clear. Regarding grind, initially I had thought it useful to expand on the the three divisions but now I am not so sure. What I am trying to do is to avoid over-complication. I need to give it more thought needed I reckon. I’m still pondering on the US scotches and how best to fit them in. I have concluded that there are so few non-scotch smoky snuffs that I need to revised that bit. I’ll talk it over with John in the pub this evening (I’m determined to get there even if I have to take a taxi!). I also agree that I need to add more on national snuff types and Indian and South African snuffs need that detail sooner rather than later. Mt experience of both is limited so input from others will be very welcome. Likewise I need to add more about the Schmalzlers. I’ll need to do some more reading and thinking before I plunge into writing though.
I’m now starting to think that SP as a style is as distinctly national (in England) as Schmalzler is in Germany and scotch snuff is in the US… I can feel a spot of page editing coming on!
I look forward to reading it.
"I’m now starting to think that SP as a style is as distinctly national (in England) as Schmalzler is in Germany and scotch snuff is in the US… I can feel a spot of page editing coming on! " You are obviously making the most of your temporary physical disability and are enjoying life to the full. As well as SPs the varieties of Princes are also British - as are Kendal Browns, Jockey Clubs and arguably several others. Doubtless there are certain Indian snuffs unique in name, consistency and flavour to that continent - or South African snuffs equally deserving of national style. Further to expanding classification along national lines, some readers might wonder why Burgundy, Bordeaux, Morlaix or French Carotte are not classified as French, Seville as Spanish or Irish varieties as the snuff of Ireland (when no snuff is made in Ireland). I’d treat the national classification of snuff with caution - avoiding it completely if possible. You could, after all, simply state the country of manufacture for each snuff. Another reader suggested that snuffs more coarse than "gros"should be ‘nationalised‘. It might be better to include the now rarely used term Carotte (the coarsest snuff) in the classic French designation to include these and certain others that are extra coarse.
I’m not suggesting to nationalise everything. Merely that the existing terms don’t accomodate all of the snuffs that English people are used to seeing. If the term “carotte” has this use (more course than gros) historically, then we should use it. It may become confused with the normal use of the word which, as I understand, is the rolled tobacco prior to it being ground in certain styles. And indeed Clearly there are “styles” of snuff that can be described in terms of courseness and moisture. “Rapee”, though it literally translates as “snuff” is a term used for certain styles. Are the Princes family, Brunswick, Santo Domingo and those which have a that certain similar combination of courseness and moistness all Rapees? Historically there were American rapees but all are gone now, unless Checkerberry is one. I suspect the Brazillian ones are rapee in nature. Perhaps AP can fill us in. Maccoboy/Macouba have a distant historcal kinship too, even though the existing ones bear little resemblence to one another. Do they constitute a style? Also without a doubt, schmalzler is a style which is distinct. As for Burgundy being French etc, I had always presumed it was named for a snuff from the region in some historical aspect. Just as I eat French bread that is baked locally; I don’t confuse myself wondering how French bread can possibly be not baked in France and still be called French bread. I agree we need to be careful not to overdo it. Re-inventing the wheel is too hard to do.
excellent article, cleared up a couple of questions i had
Yes, to me 
whoops. sorry!
No worries!
Nice site Tony, I read it ages ago when you first started it and its come on in leaps and bounds. There should be an easy link from this site.
Thanks for the kind words, Nigel. Actually I need to revise the Snuff Types page in the light of more recent thoughts expressed here. I have concluded that national types of snuff need to be excluded from the main set of classifications as one could follow that path endlessly. There is still a place for those of course, but as a set of separate descriptions, as I have already started for SPs, Schmalzlers and US scotches. I feel that including any of those as part of the main classifications only serves to confuse and add to the Anglo-centric nature.
I agree, in any case there are often quite blurred lines, the SP debate being one - all part of the diversity of this fascinating subject - which you have added to with some distinction.
Steady on! You’ll make me blush!
Lol!!