WHINE # 52
PHYLLOXERA: After
centuries of success the wine industry in France faced a huge crisis in the
1850’s. Vines were dying in
ever-increasing numbers. The plague that
struck the French growers rapidly spread not only throughout France but to most
of the world. Eventually 4/5 of the
world’s vines either succumbed to disease or were ripped from the earth by the
growers in an attempt to save adjacent vines.
The culprit was a tiny
organism that attacked the roots of the vines, preventing them from absorbing
water from the soil. Eventually the
roots of the vine would all but disappear. Wine produced from the diseased vines was
undrinkable. The crisis was so
great that Emperor Louis-Napoleon
invited the eminent French scientist of the day, Louis Pasteur, to the palace
at Tuileries to discuss the problem.
Pasteur, however, was not to repeat his success of giving us safe milk
to drink. Although he was able to see
the tiny louse by using a microscope, he was unable to suggest a way to prevent
the spread from vineyard to vineyard.
The Phylloxera louse probably
came to France from the United States where it had attacked vines in New York
State and along the East Coast. In the
days of sailing ships the louse could not survive the long voyage but by the
mid 19th century potted plants (mostly ornamental) were being sent
to Europe from North America in steam ships.
Every effort was made to
combat the widening plague and wine producers spent fortunes first infusing the
soil with carbon bisulfurate and later vines were watered with sulphocarbonate
of potassium. These poisons killed some
of the organisms. However, they also
caused great sickness in the field workers and ultimately failed to eradicate
the phylloxera louse. Nonetheless, chemical
treatments continued to be used well into the twentieth century.
In many ways this bit of
history reminds me of the Dutch Elm disease that killed 160 two-century old
trees on my beloved Antigonish Golf Course.
Chemical injections made profits for some manufacturers but ultimately
failed to save the trees from being cut down and burned.
During the 20th
century growers gave up on chemicals and began the gargantuan task of grafting
European vines (most of the world’s vines originated in Europe) on
phylloxera-resistant roots from America.
Vitis labrusca and hybrids from that vine evolved in the United States
to be resistant to the louse. Now most
of the world’s wines come from grafted vines.
In the late 1800’s French growers hand grafted 230,000 tonnes of
bud-wood onto American rootstock.
Despite the spread of the
disease throughout the world there remains to this day a few areas that are
unaffected and where ungrafted vines are still grown. The biggest area is, of course, South
America. Almost all vines in Chile and
Argentina are ungrafted. Many believe
that the isolation of South American vineyards (ocean barrier) has been the
protection. This doesn’t explain the
fact that wines in Jumilla (Spain), which is not isolated, made from Monastrell
grapes come from ungrafted vines. Also
the vines of Washington State are almost all ungrafted. Arguably the sandy soil is the real reason
that these vines survive.
There are differences between
ungrafted and grafted vines. Grafted
vines tend to produce more foliage and also larger grapes making them generally
more productive. On the other hand,
ungrafted vines live and produce 3-4 times as long as grafted vines. Ungrafted grapes tend not only to be smaller but
have thicker skins, thus being more tannic.
Some argue that wines made from grapes from ungrafted vines have a
purer, more interesting flavour.
However, to do true tasting tests one would have to have both grafted
and ungrafted vines in the same vineyard, and for the vines to be the same
age. I certainly have never had an
opportunity for that kind of comparison.
On the other hand, many of my favorite wines come from Argentina, Chile,
Washington State and to a lesser extent Jumilla, the very areas with ungrafted
vines.
Finally, even a few areas of
France escaped plylloxera. There are a
few vineyards in Champagne where grapes are grown on ungrafted vines.
BLENDING WINE ACROSS VINTAGES: Although most
bottles of wines are sold with the vintage clearly indicated on the label a few
wines are blended across vintages; that is wines from different years are mixed
together. This is quite common in
Champagne where wines from lesser and greater vintages are blended together to
produce a consistent product. That way
the consumer knows that a particular bubbly will always taste the same. Even in Champagne, however, the best vintages
are not blended but are sold by the vintage.
BLENDING ACROSS VARIETALS: Mixing wines
from different varietals has, for centuries, been the hallmark of European
producers. These blends have produced wines
that are perhaps more subtle, more interesting, and generally tasting better
than wines that could have been produced from a single type of grape. For example mixing a soft Merlot with a harsh
or tannic Cabernet gives a smoothness and a flavour that couldn’t have been
found in either varietal.
In countries such as France
the particular grapes that can be blended together in a village or area are
carefully controlled by law. Thus,
Bordeaux contains Merlot, Cabernet Sauvignon, Cabernet Franc, Petit Verdot,
Carignon and Malbec. Cote du Rhone will
have Grenache Noir, Syrah, Cinsault, and Mouvedre. Saint Emilion will have Cabernet Franc and
Cabernet Sauvignon blended into the dominant Merlot. Chateauneuf-du-Pape has 10 different
varietals added to the Grenache.
For most of wine history
European wines were labelled by the village or area where the grapes were
grown. So, for example, if you bought a
bottle of Chianti you knew that the grape is Sangiovese and that a bottle of
Beaujolais is made exclusively from the Gamay grape, an exception to the
blending preference. It was always
assumed that the consumer just knew what was in the bottle so long as the
village or area of origin was listed.
In the New World, however,
producers needed to make their wines more accessible to their less
sophisticated consumers. The vintners
recognized that labelling their bottles by the name of the grape made it easier
to remember what was liked and what wasn’t.
New drinkers quickly learned that Pinot Noir is light and thin, and that
Cabernet Sauvignon is heavier and even a little bitter tasting. For those who were a little more
sophisticated the valley or area where the grapes were grown might be listed in
the fine print on the back of the label.
While labelling wine by the varietal
may be easier for the consumer, much is sacrified by not blending. Recognizing this fact Californian and
Australian producers have had recent success in producing a Bordeaux-type blend
for which they have invented a special name (Meritage). The consumer only has to remember one name
for the blend of Merlot, Cabernet Sauvignon, Cabernet Franc, and a few
miniscule other grapes.
In fact, vintners may add a
small amount of a second or third varietal but only name the dominant grape on
the front label. Thus, you may think
that wine is 100 % Cabernet when in fact it contains 5 or 10% of another varietal. This minor deception is not bad, however, as
the blend is most likely superior. On
the other hand, I do find that I don’t like to be talked (or labelled) down to
just because the North American producers think I don’t understand the skill of
an expert blender.
A final word of caution, however. Sometimes producers with poor wines will make
a blend them together and simply label them “Red Wine” or “Red Blend”. Although this is not a hard rule my
suggestion is to avoid wines so labelled.
OPIMIAN OFFERING 226:
7675: Beaune, Les Bons Feuvres. If you like a very light, but flavourful
wine, this Pinot Noir might be for you.
7695: Chateau Canet Minervois. Less expensive than the Pinot above this
Syrah Grenache blend has a little more body and more fruit flavours.
7704: Tortoise Creek Viognier. This white wine is for those who like but
can’t afford Chablis.
7708: Chateau Salitis Cabardes. Another affordable, medium bodied red with
lots of flavour.
