Napoleon III needed Bordeaux ranked for the 1855 Paris Universal Exhibition.

Preferably quickly.

So Bordeaux’s wine brokers turned to two things they understood rather well: reputation and price.

No blind tasting. No geological survey. No committee spending three years discussing whether the gravel at Margaux possessed sufficient typicité.

They looked at reputations, looked at market prices, and ranked the estates.

Five growths. Done.

The remarkable part is what happened next.

Almost nothing.

The famous exception is Château Mouton Rothschild, promoted from Second to First Growth in 1973 after decades of campaigning by Baron Philippe de Rothschild.

Meanwhile, Bordeaux changed. Estates changed hands. Vineyards changed. Winemaking changed. The climate changed. The market became global.

The hierarchy proved rather less interested in current affairs.

And so we arrive at the beautiful circularity of it all:

Price helped create the hierarchy.

The hierarchy now helps create the price.

Then, in 2026, Michelin arrived with a new Bordeaux wine selection, awarding estates one, two or three Grapes.

The company that gave restaurants Stars and hotels Keys has now given vineyards Grapes.

Because apparently what Bordeaux was missing was another classification.

Perhaps the interesting question is not which ranking is right.

It is how much rankings decide what we believe “best” means in the first place.

After 171 years, Bordeaux has proved one thing rather convincingly: Once you create a hierarchy, it is remarkably difficult to get rid of it.