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…

Assessing the climate change vulnerability of European winegrowing regions by combining exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity indicators

Winegrowing regions recognized as protected designations of origin (PDOs) are closely tied to well defined geographic locations with a specific set of pedoclimatic attributes and strictly regulated by legal specifications. However, climate change is increasingly threatening these regions by changing local conditions and altering winegrowing processes. The vulnerability to these changes is largely heterogenous across different winegrowing regions because it is determined by individual characteristics of each region, including the capacity to adapt to new climatic conditions and the sensitivity to climate change, which depend not only on natural, but also socioeconomic and legal factors. Accurate vulnerability assessments therefore need to combine information about adaptive capacity and climate change sensitivity with projected exposure to new climatic conditions. However, most existing studies focus on specific impacts neglecting important interactions between the different factors that determine climate change vulnerability. Here, we present the first comprehensive vulnerability assessment of European wine PDOs that spatially combines multiple indicators of adaptive capacity and climate change sensitivity with high-resolution climate projections. We found that the climate change vulnerability of PDO areas largely depends on the complex interactions between physical and socioeconomic factors. Homogenous topographic conditions and a narrow varietal spectrum increase climate change vulnerability, while the skills and education of farmers, together with a good economic situation, decrease their vulnerability. Assessments of climate change consequences therefore need to consider multiple variables as well as their interrelations to provide a comprehensive understanding of the expected impacts of climate change on European PDOs. Our results provide the first vulnerability assessment for European winegrowing regions at high spatiotemporal resolution that includes multiple factors related to climate exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity on the level of single winegrowing regions. They will therefore help to identify hot spots of climate change vulnerability among European PDOs and efficiently direct adaptation strategies.

A predictive model of spatial Eca variability in the vineyard to support the monitoring of plant status

[lwp_divi_breadcrumbs home_text="IVES" use_before_icon="on" before_icon="||divi||400" module_id="publication-ariane" _builder_version="4.19.4" _module_preset="default" module_text_align="center" module_font_size="16px" text_orientation="center"...

Influence of agronomic practices in soil water content in mid-mountain vineyards

In the context of LIFE project MIDMACC (LIFE18 CCA/ES/001099), several pilots have been installed in vineyards in mid mountain areas of Catalonia (NE Spain) to test well stablished agronomic practices to increase the adaptation of Mediterranean mid mountain to climate change. Soil water content (SWC) at three different depths (15, 30 and 45cm) was measured in continuum from August 2020. One pilot (WC) included a well-established green cover (GC), a new GC (NC) and a conventional soil management (CM, tilling+herbicides). NC presented an intermediate state between WC and CM, responding similarly to CM in autumn but quickly reaching similar SWC to WC, then following the same evolution till next spring, with CM presenting lower values along autumn and winter. Then vegetation activation decreased SWC in all plots, (much slower in CM, lacking GC). Sensibility to spring rains is again intermediate for NC, which joins SWC evolution of CM by the end of spring till next autumn. It is expected that NC will resemble WC more and more as its GC develops. In the pilot combining vine training (VSP vs Gobelet) and hillside management (slope vs terrace), no clear pattern could be related with these conditions. However, both terraces seem to be more sensitive to spring rains. A third pilot included new vineyards (7 and 1 year old). In the new vineyard (N), higher canopy development, a spontaneous green cover and row straw resulted in a slower SWC dynamic, not so sensitive to rains but conserving more soil water in spring and most of summer, even with presumably a higher water extraction by vines. In the newest vineyard (VN) the deepest sensor is still sensitive to rain events all over the year and SWC is always highest at this depth, revealing small water capture by vines.

Climate ethnography and wine environmental futures

Globalisation and climate change have radically transformed world wine production upsetting the established order of wine ecologies. Ecological risks and the future of traditional agricultural systems are widely debated in anthropology, but very little is understood of the particular challenges posed by climate change to viticulture which is seen by many as the canary in the coalmine of global agriculture. Moreover, wine as a globalised embedded commodity provides a particularly telling example for the study of climate change having already attracted early scientific attention. Studies of climate change in viticulture have focused primarily on the production of systematic models of adaptation and vulnerability, while the human and cultural factors, which are key to adaptation and sustainable futures, are largely missing. Climate experts have been unanimous in recognising the urgent need for a better understanding of the complex dynamics that shape how climate change is experienced and responded to by human systems. Yet this call has not yet been addressed. Climate ethnography, coined by the anthropologist Susan Crate (2011), aims to bridge this growing disjuncture between climate science and everyday life through the exploration of the social meaning of climate change. It seeks to investigate the confrontation of its social salience in different locations and under different environmental guises (Goodman 2018: 340). By understanding how wine producers make sense of the world (and the environment) and act in it, it proposes to focus on the co-production of interdisciplinary knowledge by identifying and foreshadowing problems (Goodman 2018: 342; Goodman & Marshall 2018). It seeks to offer an original, transformative and contrasted perspective to climate change scenarios by investigating human agency -individual or collective- in all its social, political and cultural diversity. An anthropological approach founded on detailed ethnographies of wine production is ideally placed to address economic, social and cultural disruptions caused by the emergence of these new environmental challenges. Indeed, the community of experts in environmental change have recently called for research that will encompass the human dimension and for more broad-based, integrated through interdisciplinarity, useful knowledge (Castree & al 2014). My paper seeks to engage with climate ethnography and discuss what it brings to the study of wine environmental futures while exploring the limitations of the anthropological environmental approach.

Geospatial trends of bioclimatic indexes in the topographically complex region of Barolo DOCG

Barolo DOCG is an economically important wine producing region in Northwest Italy. It is a small region of approximately 70 km2 gross area. The topography is very complex with steep sloped hills ranging in elevation from below 200 m to 550 m. Barolo DOCG wine is made exclusively from the Nebbiolo grape. Bioclimatic indexes are often used in viticulture to gain a better understanding of broader climate trends which can be compared temporally and geographically. These indexes are also used for identifying potential phenological timing, growing region suitability, and potential risks associated with expected climatic changes. Understanding how topography influences bioclimatic indexes can help with understanding of mesoscale climate behaviour leading to improved decision making and risk management strategies. The average monthly maximum and minimum temperatures, the Cool Night Index, the Huglin Index, and the monthly diurnal range (from July to October) were calculated using data from 45 weather stations within a 40 km radius of the Barolo DOCG growing area between the years 1996 and 2019. Linear and multiple regression models were developed using independent variables (elevation, aspect, slope) extracted from a digital elevation model to identify significant relationships. Bioclimatic indexes were then kriged with external drift using independent variables that showed significant relationships with the bioclimatic index using a 100 m resolution grid. The maximum monthly temperatures and the Huglin Index showed consistent significant negative relationships with elevation in all years. The minimum monthly temperatures showed no relationship with elevation but in some months a small but significant relationship was observed with aspect. Due to the lack of a relationship between minimum monthly temperatures and elevation compared to the significant relationship between maximum monthly temperatures and elevation, monthly diurnal range had a negative relationship with elevation.