Terroir 1996 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 The origin and the discovery of “terroir”

The origin and the discovery of “terroir”

Abstract

Le mot “terroir” dérive du latin “terra”, mais déjà les Romains l’indiquaient comme “locus” ou”loci”, c’est-à-dire un lieu ayant le “genius”destiné à la production d’un produit d’excellente qualité. Les Égyptiens, les Juifs, les Grecs et les Romains employèrent les premiers le nom du lieu d’origine pour indiquer le vin sur le “pittacium” en argile qui était apposé sur les amphores en terre cuite qui contenaient le vin. De cette façon naquit la dénomination d’origine. Les peuples anciens de la Méditerranée n’ont pas utilisé le nom des variétés de vigne pour distinguer les différentes typologies de vin, mais leur lieu d’origine.
Les Grecs anciens, déjà à l’époque de Homère, choisissaient pour les vignes les terroirs qui permettaient la vie aux plantes du maquis méditerranéen, puisqu’ils étaient surs que le climat de ces lieux permettraient aux baies de mûrir parfaitement et de fournir des vins très corsés, fort structurés, riches en sucre et en alcool, mais pauvres en acides et en arômes facilement oxydables. Ce furent les anciens Romains qui en partant de la ”Provincia” de la Gaule transalpine remontèrent le Rhône, le Rhin, la Moselle, le Danube, et d’autres fleuves, en rependant la vigne dans le nord de l’Europe et en créant ce que l’on peut appeler la “viticulture fluviale”, qui s’oppose à la viticulture méditerranéenne pour la production de vins plus légers de corps, moins alcooliques, plus aromatiques, plus acides etc … Les Romains démontrèrent que la vigne peut mûrir même dans des climats plus septentrionaux, où les Grecs n’osèrent pas s’engager, en atteignant la limite septentrionale de culture du vignoble dans l’hémisphère Nord, c’est à dire jusqu’à 50° de latitude Nord.
Le premier exemple de délimitation géographique et territoriale nous vient de Pline (N.H., livre 14, chapitre V) qui avait étudié de façon approfondie le plus ancien cru Romain, c’est-à­-dire le Falernum.
Dans le premier siècle après J.-C., Pline décrit ainsi la zone de production du Falernum : “toute cette zone de la Campania qui s’étend en rive gauche du pont Campanus à la colonie urbaine de Silla est pleine de collines à vignobles très renommés à cause du très généreux vin qui prend le nom du village Falerne.”
C’est encore Plinius qui précise “à la gauche du pont commence la campagne de Falerne”.
Le pont cité existe encore sur le fleuve Liri et il lie l’ancienne Sineussa à la mer.
Son nom comme le dit Pline dérive du pays Falernum.
Le “genius loci” a été encore confirmé pendant le moyen-âge et pendant les époques historiques suivantes, jusqu’au moment où des règlements et des lois ont établi les premières délimitations de ces lieux. Plus tard, après la découverte de l’Amérique, la viticulture du nouveau Monde se développa, comprenant les Etats Unis, le Canada, l’Australie, la Nouvelle Zélande, l’Afrique du Sud et toute l’Amérique Latine, des pays qui, récemment, ont découvert l’importance du terroir.
Dans l’hémisphère sud, la vigne trouve sa limite de culture à 45° environ de latitude sud.
En 1700 fut délimitée par un document officiel (décret) la zone de production du Tokay Hongrois, suivie par celle du Chianti (1716) et celle du Porto (1755).
L’essence du terroir fut toutefois amplifiée en 1855 à Bordeaux avec la publication de la liste des “crus”. En effet, le “cru” est produit par un terroir ayant le “genius loci ” pour un vin d’excellente qualité. On fait remonter l’origine du terme “cru” à deux mots différents. Normalement on le définit comme participe passé du verbe “croître”, c’est-à-dire crû sur un terroir spécifique, mais, selon l’interprétation de certains latinistes d’anciennes abbayes françaises, cela signifie également “cru”, c’est-à-dire considéré comme “célèbre”, ayant une renommée auprès des consommateurs. C’est justement à travers les “crus” que les Français ont inventé le terme terroir, désormais utilisé dans tout le monde de la viticulture.

DOI:

Publication date: February 16, 2022

Issue: Terroir 2002 

Type: Article

Authors

M.FREGONI

Université Catholique – Piacenza (Italie)
Via E. Parmense, 84
29100 PIACENZA – Italie

Keywords

Histoire, Terroir, Appellation d’origine contrôlé

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 2002

Citation

Related articles…

Mesoclimate impact on Tannat in the Atlantic terroir of Uruguay

The study of climate is relevant as an element conditioning the typicity of a product, its quality and sustainability over the years. The grapevine development and growth and the final grape and wine composition are closely related to temperature, while climate components vary at mesoscale according to topography and/or proximity to large bodies of water. The objective of this work is to assess the mesoclimate of the Atlantic region of Uruguay and to determine the effect of topography and the ocean on temperature and consequently on Tannat grapevine behavior.

Mapping and tracking canopy size with VitiCanopy

Understanding vineyard variability to target management strategies, apply inputs efficiently and deliver consistent grape quality to the winery is essential. However, despite inherent vineyard variability, the majority are managed as if they are uniform. VitiCanopy is a simple, grower-friendly tool for precision/digital viticulture that allows users to collect and interpret objective spatial information about vineyard performance. After four years of field and market research, an upgraded VitiCanopy has been created to achieve a more streamlined, technology-assisted vine monitoring tool that provides users with a set of superior new features, which could significantly improve the way users monitor their grapevines. These new features include:
• New user interface
• User authentication
• Batch analysis of multiple images
• Ease the learning curve through enhanced help features
• Reporting via the creation of colour maps that will allow users to assess the spatial differences in canopies within a vineyard.
Use-case examples are presented to demonstrate the quantification and mapping of vineyard variability through objective canopy measurements, ground-truthing of remotely sensed measurements, monitoring of crop conditions, implementation of disease and water management decisions as well as creating a history of each site to forecast quality. This intelligent tool allows users to manage grapevines and make informed management choices to achieve the desired production targets and remain profitable.

The impact of sustainable management regimes on amino acid profiles in grape juice, grape skin flavonoids, and hydroxycinnamic acids

One of the biggest challenges of agriculture today is maintaining food safety and food quality while providing ecosystem services such as biodiversity conservation, pest and disease control, ensuring water quality and supply, and climate regulation. Organic farming was shown to promote biodiversity and carbon sequestration, and is therefore seen as one possibility of environmentally friendly production. Consumers expect organically grown crops to be free from chemical pesticides and mineral fertilizers and often presume that the quality of organically grown crops is different or higher compared to conventionally grown crops. Integrated, organic, and biodynamic viticulture were compared in a replicated field trial in Geisenheim, Germany (Vitis vinifera L. cv. Riesling). Amino acid profiles in juice, grape skin flavonoids, and hydroxycinnamic acids were monitored over three consecutive seasons beginning 7 years after conversion to organic and biodynamic viticulture, respectively. In addition, parameters such as soil nutrient status, yield, vigor, canopy temperature, and water stress were monitored to draw conclusions on reasons for the observed changes. Results revealed that the different sustainable management regimes highly differed in their amino acid profiles in juice and also in their skin flavonol content, whereas differences in the flavanol and hydroxycinnamic acid content were less pronounced. It is very likely that differences in nutrient status and yield determined amino acid profiles in juice, although all three systems showed similar amounts of mineralized nitrogen in the soil. Canopy structure and temperature in the bunch zone did not differ among treatments and therefore cannot account for the observed differences in favonols. A different light exposure of the bunches in the respective systems due to differences in vigor together with differences in berry size and a different water status of the vines might rather be responsible for the increase in flavonol content under organic and biodynamic viticulture.

Leaf vine content in nutrients and trace elements in La Mancha (Spain) soils: influence of the rootstock

The use of rootstock of American origin has been the classic method of fighting against Phylloxera for more than 100 years. For this reason, it is interesting to establish if different rootstock modifies nutrient composition as well as trace elements content that could be important for determining the traceability of the vine products. A survey of four classic rootstocks (110-Richter, SO4, FERCAL and 1103-Paulsen) and four new ones (M1, M2, M3 and M4) provided by Agromillora Iberia. S.L.U., all of them grafted with the Tempranillo variety, has been carried out during 2019. The eight rootstocks were planted in pots of 500 cc, on three soils with very different characteristics from Castilla-La Mancha (Spain). In the month of July, the leaves were collected and dried in a forced air oven for seven days at 40ºC. Then, the samples were prepared for the analysis determination, carried out by X-Ray fluorescence spectrometry. The results obtained showed that in the case of content in mineral elements in leaf, separated by soil type, we can report the importance of few elements such as Si, Fe, Pb and, especially, Sr. The rootstock does not influence the composition of the vine leaf for the studied elements that are the most important in determining the geochemical footprint of the soil. The influence of the soil can be discriminated according to some elements such as Fe, Pb, Si and, especially, Sr.

Optimizing stomatal traits for future climates

Stomatal traits determine grapevine water use, carbon supply, and water stress, which directly impact yield and berry chemistry. Breeding for stomatal traits has the strong potential to improve grapevine performance under future, drier conditions, but the trait values that breeders should target are unknown. We used a functional-structural plant model developed for grapevine (HydroShoot) to determine how stomatal traits impact canopy gas exchange, water potential, and temperature under historical and future conditions in high-quality and hot-climate California wine regions (Napa and the Central Valley). Historical climate (1990-2010) was collected from weather stations and future climate (2079-99) was projected from 4 representative climate models for California, assuming medium- and high-emissions (RCP 4.5 and 8.5). Five trait parameterizations, representing mean and extreme values for the maximum stomatal conductance (gmax) and leaf water potential threshold for stomatal closure (Ψsc), were defined from meta-analyses. Compared to mean trait values, the water-spending extremes (highest gmax or most negative Ysc) had negligible benefits for carbon gain and canopy cooling, but exacerbated vine water use and stress, for both sites and climate scenarios. These traits increased cumulative transpiration by 8 – 17%, changed cumulative carbon gain by -4 – 3%, and reduced minimum water potentials by 10 – 18%. Conversely, the water-saving extremes (lowest gmax or least negative Ψsc) strongly reduced water use and stress, but potentially compromised the carbon supply for ripening. Under RCP 8.5 conditions, these traits reduced transpiration by 22 – 35% and carbon gain by 9 – 16% and increased minimum water potentials by 20 – 28%, compared to mean values. Overall, selecting for more water-saving stomatal traits could improve water-use efficiency and avoid the detrimental effects of highly negative canopy water potentials on yield and quality, but more work is needed to evaluate whether these benefits outweigh the consequences of minor declines in carbon gain for fruit production.