Chianti Memories

“We’re trying to make good wines, and to some extent we’re succeeding, but what we’ll always be missing (and which you lucky ones have), is that drop of terroir!” exclaimed a Californian vigneron, a producer of quality wines, during an animated discussion on the origins of and reasons for wine quality. We were in effect wondering what it is that is truly decisive in establishing the quality of a wine. The variety, the place, the producer’s hand, the vintage? These discussions are still highly topical and the criteria for evaluating wine quality have long been a subject for consideration by professionals and wine lovers of every era. It seems that Cosimo III de’ Medici, Grand Duke of Tuscany, had fairly clear ideas in this regard when he published an edict in 1716 which defined the boundaries of the production and denomination area for Chianti wines:

[…] tutti quei vini, che non saranno prodotti, e fatti nelle regioni come sopra Confinate, non si possano, né devano sotto qualsiasi pretesto, o quesito […] Contrattare per navigare, per vino del Chianti, Pomino, Carmignano, e Vald’Arno di Sopra.

([…] all those wines that are not produced and made in the regions as mentioned above, cannot and must not under any pretext, or question […] be contracted for export as wine from Chianti, Pomino, Carmignano and Val d’Arno di Sopra.)

It does not take too much effort to consider this a kind of pioneering designation of origin, formalized 300 years ago, and which still lives on today in the current Chianti Classico DOCG. All of this took place before the French AOCs at the start of the 20th century and even longer before the late-arriving Italian DOCs, which began to be introduced in 1966. Of course, we should always be careful not to turn history into a marketing slogan, not to fall into the “illusion of origins.” Dom Perignon did not invent Champagne, just as Cosimo III was not the hero of DOCGs: History cannot be reduced to simple Olympic competitions in which someone always gets there first, because history is always more complicated than that—and also more beautiful.

Contrary to what continues to be claimed, the search for wine quality has a long history in Europe. The wines were different in the past: We know that Chianti (at least from the 19th century) could also be made with the addition of white grapes like Trebbiano and Malvasia, even though now the regulations ban them, allowing instead a percentage of international varieties. The drinkers were different too: They had other tastes and the criteria that identified the quality of a wine were different too. The place of origin and its soil, climate and geomorphological characteristics did not always represent the essential condition for making a good wine. For a long time in Italy it was the vine and the highly regarded varieties that were considered the criteria that guaranteed a wine’s quality. The identity of the Italian grands crus in the Middle Ages was based more on the variety than on their places of origin. The sources show a real contrast between a viticulture of quality and a viticulture of quantity. It was the choice of grape variety that was decisive for winegrowers of the past. Meanwhile, in 17th-century France, we can note how in Bordeaux, for example—which now forcefully asserts the primacy of its terroir—people extolled its merits based on other criteria. It was the prestigious name of a family and the land ownership that determined a wine’s quality. In other words, certain châteaux like that of Pontac produced excellent wines not thanks to the quality of the terroir, but simply because they were produced in those specific châteaux. We could say that connoisseurs like Arnauld de Pontac turned their own name into a terroir.

The concept of a Controlled Designation of Origin is a complex institution from our age and which corresponds to our way of understanding wine. Throughout history there have been various ways of understanding the concept of place. It is interesting to note how much these local identities of wines were primarily linked to human aspects more than natural ones (soil, climate, etc.). A great wine-producing area was great first and foremost because it was “gifted with talented men.” So says, for example, Pope Paul III’s expert cellarman, Sante Lancerio, in what is effectively a treatise written in the first half of the 16th century.

The originality of Cosimo III’s 1716 act, then, lies in the fact that for the first time in Italy, an edict was issued that defined a wine-producing area. The objective was commercial: The names of Chianti, Pomino, Carmignano and Valdarno di Sopra were successful and there were some who wanted to appropriate these prestigious names with which they had no connection. France had already legislated in this regard. In the 13th century, the northern French commune of Saint-Omer prohibited pergola-grown wine (of inferior quality) from being put in tonneau d’Orleans and sold as “wine from Orléans.” In a decree, King Jean le Bon, who ruled from 1350 to 1364, forbade a designation of origin being given to a wine unless it actually came from the cru in question. And in the 15th century other French regal decrees threatened vendors with fines and confiscations if they used false names of origin.

The 1716 edict should be located in its time: A cultural and political process aimed at producing quality wines had been on-going in Tuscany since the Middle Ages. In a virtuous circle, trade had dynamized this search for quality. But, just as it does today, the quest for profits could overshadow the dynamics of the culture of good wine. That’s why wine, “that drop of terroir,” the environment and vignerons must be protected and safeguarded. Cosimo III was one of those wine lovers who understood this.